Talk:William Dembski

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon creation.svg

This creationism related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be with improvement.

This article is of HIGH importance to the wiki.

See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Copperbrain.png

Contents

[edit] Sweet

Sweet. I'm frontpaging it.-αmεσ (!) 21:15, 19 August 2007 (CDT)

The "Dembski and Baylor" section needs to be updated to include the current flap arising over his attempt to get a foot back in the door. 75.14.212.22 22:15, 4 September 2007 (CDT)

Your right, I have been waiting to see what more commentary pops up around the internet but there is probably enough now to write it. tmtoulouse beleaguer 22:17, 4 September 2007 (CDT)
Do I have google it myself or is someone gonna make some links to "facts"? humanbe in 22:29, 4 September 2007 (CDT)
Chronicals covers it but thats subscription, Dembski's blog covers it from his POV here and here. Pharyngula talks about it too here. tmtoulouse beleaguer 22:35, 4 September 2007 (CDT)
Ah, ok, thanks. I read the phar. one. Looks like the "flap" occurred around dec 06. Deserves a couple of sentences/paragraph/section I'd say. humanbe in 15:19, 5 September 2007 (CDT)

[edit] Silver or gold?

What is this article lacking for higher, even cover, status? - David Gerard (talk) 13:28, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

[edit] New name for the man

I think that Mr Dembski should solicitate a change of name in order for it to be more akin to reality. William Dembski -> Failliam Dumbski. I bet no one thought of that combination. -- RationalSpanish Sí, soy español, ¿y qué? 13:39 CEST 25 April 2011.

[edit] Royal Flushes Impssible?

"But if the cards fit a pattern (such as a royal flush) then it must have been designed and couldn't have happened by chance"

So, what he's saying is that a Royal Flush cannot be due to chance, it has to be designed? So you can only actually get a royal flush by cheating? Interesting Lerjj (talk) 16:49, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
It depends. It depends on you're suspecting of cheating (you, or the dealer, or the card manufacturer, your mother, or space aliens from Epsilon Eridani), whether the suspect has the opportunity, the motive and the means. (Why would the dealer cheat by giving you an unbeatable hand? How could your mother rig the deck?) And, BTW, it depends on what card game you're playing: A-K-Q-J-10 of the same suit is not particularly spectacular if you're playing euchre. TomS TDotO (talk) 21:19, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Community
Tools
support