DaveScot says "I can’t blame Nazi eugenics entirely on Darwin." Mixing up a science batter.

Well, that's a relief. Cant blame it entirely on the Nazis. Blames it almost completely then? Or what?

DaveScot opens it and this gem flows out:

"I can’t blame Nazi eugenics entirely on Darwin. The observation that superior parents tend to produce superior offspring is ancient and that is the principle behind the science of eugenics. The problem comes about when we apply scientific principles unleavened by compassion".
Comment by DaveScot — September 15, 2006 @ 10:28 am

So, when we apply scientific priciples "unleavened" by compassion we get Nazi eugenics?
Wikipedia says this about unleavened

A leavening agent (sometimes called just leavening or leaven) is a substance used in doughs and batters that causes them to rise. In the presence of moisture, heat, acidity, or other triggers the leavening agent reacts to produce gas (often carbon dioxide) that becomes trapped as bubbles within the dough. When a dough or batter is baked, it "sets" and the holes left by the gas bubbles remain. This is what gives breads, cakes, and other baked goods their soft, sponge-like textures.

Ok, so now we're getting somewhere. Bubbles eh? Not the Chimp, i must add!
So If we distribute bubbles of compassion through our science batter (mmm, batter), we will avoid Nazi Eugenics? Sounds great.
Phew. I knew i could see Nazi's in the bottom of my batter bowl. Nobody believed me, but i'd forgotten to add the compassion and they were in straight away. Nuthin worse then lill nazis all covered in science cake mix.
I just was not getting the soft, sponge-like textures the ID'ers have been getting all along in their mixes! Damm them, what are they doing different?

So if I were to have mixed up a pudding according to ID principles, I may have done the following:

1. Hire empty room
2. Make no effort whatsoever to create conditions suitable for batter creation
3. Watch as no batter is created.
4. ??
5. Proclaim Victory - no batter was created!

or, to put it another way:

A predictionmade by this hypothesis is that no method of abiogenesis absent intelligent intervention can ever be demonstrated in a laboratory
Filed under: Intelligent Design — DaveScot @11:41am

Ironic really, as far as i know Intelligent Design scientists have demonstrated absolutely nothing in the laboratory themselves. I guess that's their area of expertise, talking about things that will not and cannot possibly happen in a laboratory - until they perhaps do happen, and then, well, honestly it was all about something else completely really, honestly....

You know, there's more actual science in the art of cake mixing then there is in Intelligent Design. Read the stuff at that link, it's great!

A better understanding of mixing would benefit many industries, Muzzio says. "Without good powder mixing," he says, "you can't build a road, you can't make a cake, and you can't even kill crabgrass, let alone make high potency
pharmaceuticals." From Science News, Volume 164, No. 4, July 26, 2003, p. 56.

So, people in actual science labs making cakes are doing it with more rigour then the ID'ers. Wow. And contributing along the way to other aspects of science too. Neat.

They are making science and cakes and whats going to beat that?

Well, perhaps living in a delusional world where invisible spacemen poke sticks into atoms to re-jig them on a whim beats that, but i think i'd rather have the cake. mmm, least you can eat the goddam cake, instead of talk about it endlessly.

"not possible for that cake to exist naturally, nobody could have make that cake, it's more then the sum of it's parts" -
"it's not possible for a hot cake from the oven to contain ice cream without the ice cream melting - a creator must be intervening". (talking about Baked Alaska).
"nobody saw the cake come into being, therefore we cannot say that an intelligent agency was not invloved".
"the CSI of this cake is 1.92344823121212...212. If we cut it in half, i get to choose if you get to cut"

Perhaps we should add that last one to the earlier post looking for a value of the Complex Specified Information in any object at all. It's the best answer that's we got so far. And we've now found out that you can alter the CSI of an object by cutting it in half! What does the CSI then become i wonder...
I feel another thread coming on!