RichardTHughes, Failure at Science, Tries Comedy

-
When it comes to not knowing one's place, Richie takes the cupcake. See for yourself. It starts off bad and gets worse:

I’m still trying to push ID forward as science.

LoL! ID is all set as far as science is concerned and Richie has proven that he doesn't know what science entails. Add that to the fact that Richie's position requires quite a bit of work to be pushed forward as science and you see the problem.

 I previously suggest Bendford’s Law might be a fruitful avenue for ID research, but there were no takers I know of. 

Given your poor track record why would anyone listen to  your advice, especially when it comes to subjects that you are totally ignorant of? Of his new discovery Richie sez:

It seems to be able to recreate structured datasets with surprisingly high fidelity from very low samples. Could it be used to find a hallmark of design?

Who cares? We have plenty of methods to do just that. OTOH your position is lacking any methodology, well unless you call bald declarations a methodology. So perhaps you should start with that as ID is all set, especially when compared to what your position has to offer.

So, Barry@UD – time to stop the apologetics wagon and do some science.

Barry is a lawyer. However IDists have done some science. Unfortunately you are too ignorant to grasp any of it.

 Unfortunately you’ve banned the brightest minds at UD but a couple of the regulars might want to have a crack at this?

And Richie finishes off his bloviating with his usual unscientific spewage and stroking of his buddies. Richie is always good for stroking...