Daniel Eran Dilger
Random header image... Refresh for more!

Fraud science used to promote Flash performance over web standards

March 11th, 2010

Daniel Eran Dilger

A report purporting to vindicate the performance of Adobe’s Flash plugin in comparison to open standards broke through the weak editorial barriers of the tech community yesterday. It’s wrong, here’s why.
.
The report was created by Jan Ozer, a proponent of Flash who makes his living selling books and seminars about Adobe’s technologies. The original article is even interrupted by an advertisement promoting Ozer’s “Streaming Production and Flash Delivery Workshop.”

After noting Ozer’s bias, one site commenting on it wrote, “we don’t think that [his bias] has any effect on the test outcomes [his report presented].”

The problem wasn’t that Ozer faked data to promote Flash; some of his findings actually indicate that even the early beta implementations of HTML5 beat the latest version of Flash in video playback tests. The real issue is that Ozer framed the debate around an absurd premise to shift the conversation from real issues to contrived garbage.

Flash Player: CPU Hog or Hot Tamale? It Depends.

A press release of fake science

Coverage of Ozer’s press release uncritically reported his findings that certain browsers were no better (or at least not much better) at rendering video from YouTube via Google’s experimental HTML5/H.264 site than via the standard Flash version of YouTube.

Ozer detailed only the reported “CPU Utilization” for his test Mac running Safari, Chrome, and Firefox browsers, and a PC running the same three browsers in addition to Internet Explorer. He compared the performance of Flash 10 with the latest Flash 10.1, and contrasted HTML5 playback on browsers that supported that as an alternative to Flash, not too subtly suggesting that HTML5 and H.264 were riddled with problems that inspire fear, uncertainty and doubt, while Flash simply works everywhere.

However, his results made no comment on the visual quality of Google’s Flash vs raw H.264 implementations. Previous tests I performed indicate that Google’s beta version of YouTube running HTML5 delivers raw H.264 video with remarkably better picture equality compared to the HD version of its Flash video for the same file. You can see for yourself by viewing anything on YouTube in “HD quality” via both Flash and HTML5.

Additionally, Ozer seemed to gloss over the fact that his tests really say next to nothing about the efficiency and performance of the Flash runtime compared to the use of open standards, because he wasn’t testing Flash content rendering, but really only the playback of video data delivered via a Flash wrapper.

To deliver video, Flash really isn’t doing anything special. That’s why browsers supporting HTML5 can do this themselves without needing something like Flash (or its doppelgänger, Microsoft’s Silverlight).

HTML5 savvy browsers like Safari and Chrome can also animate content and even (with a little more work) do the kinds of fancy interactive apps and games that Flash was originally targeted toward, all using open web specifications.

Why Apple is betting on HTML 5: a web history
Flash Wars: Adobe in the History and Future of Flash

The Flash problem

Flash is promoted by Adobe as being a great way to create everything from simple website navigation and interactive content to full-blown Rich Internet Apps. Using Flash is an alternative to using open web standards to build these types of content.

The problem is that when content creators built stuff using Flash, they’re locking up their code in a form that can only be rendered by Adobe’s sanctioned Flash Player plugin. Nobody else can create their own legitimate implementation of Adobe’s Flash Player because Flash isn’t an open specification. It’s a proprietary technology fully owned by Adobe.

That’s a problem for Apple because it wants web-based content to play back well on everything from the Mac to its iPhone platform. If content is created in Flash, that means Apple has to wait powerlessly for Adobe to fix the situation in its Flash Player plugin, something that Adobe (and Macromedia before it) consistently failed to deliver for the Mac platform over the last decade. Apple gave up on Flash in the mobile realm in part to hasten the development of open alternatives.

Flash content also forces Mozilla, Opera, and the other WebKit developers outside of Apple to similarly sit back and idly support Adobe’s poorly performing Flash platform in preference to independently optimizing the rendering of open web standards that were designed to scale better from desktops to mobile devices.

Adobe’s current mobile strategy has literally emerged just over the last year or two, largely in panicked response to the iPhone. Prior to that, Adobe was pushing the joke that is Flash Lite on mobile platforms, and a different version of Flash on PC desktops.

Ten Myth of Apple’s iPad: 2. iPad needs Adobe Flash
An Adobe Flash developer on why the iPad can’t use Flash

Ideological fraud science

Much like Microsoft and its new Windows Phone 7 initiative, Adobe is hoping everyone will forget that it has done an abysmal job in deploying appropriate mobile technology over the past decade, and has its fingers crossed that everyone will abandon the much better options that have become available over the past few years and instead turn back to subservient dependance upon refreshed version of 1990s monoculture instead.

Much of the ignorant tech media is actually cheering on this absurdity, which is a bit like right wingers hailing more Reganomic deregulation even as the economy fell into ruin due to misguided efforts at putting financial institutions (rather than the law) in charge of regulating themselves in the first place.

In both cases, ideologues are quick to leap upon the most ridiculous fraud science in order to support what they’ve been told they should shill. Ozer’s “report” on Flash conveniently ignores the real problems (which include both replacing the open web with a closed plugin architecture owned by Adobe, and Adobe’s terrible performance in building and delivering this).

Instead, he creates a strawman problem (suggesting that Apple is accusing Flash of being really bad at simply delivering H.264 video in comparison to open HTML5, and then attempting to show that’s not the case at all) while launching a conspiracy theory (that Apple is out to get Flash for malicious reasons) and a dramatic morality play (that Apple ought to instead work to invest its efforts into making Flash play slightly better, so Ozer can keep writing books about Flash for his captive audience of Flash creators and users).

HTML5 assault on Adobe Flash heats up with ClickToFlash

The truth is that Flash is irrelevant in the future

What Ozer should do instead is present the plain truth that Flash is a terrible platform for creating web content because it violates everything the web was designed to do: openly share content using openly documented specifications that any vendor can implement in competitive ways that advance the state of the art in hyperlinked, multimedia communications. Flash smothers the web with closed binaries that require Adobe’s interest to play back.

Additionally, Ozer should stop presenting half-truths comparing Google’s currently experimental version of H.264 playback with its refined existing implementation of Flash. Ozer fails to admit that Flash isn’t primarily a video distribution system, nor that video playback is really where Flash really exhibits its “CPU hog” problem. Flash is an interactive content platform that rivals the open web. Trying to subtly suggest there is not really a problem with Flash is the opposite of being honest.

Anyone can open a web page embedding a simple Flash visual and watch their CPU performance tank in real time as Flash Player is called upon to render a simple interactive graphic. Render the same element using JavaScript, and the browser itself can deliver optimizations and enhancements that cause it to play faster or more efficiently.

This is already the case in Safari and Chrome, where much work has been invested into making JavaScript execute many times faster than previous generations of browsers. Flash is really just an alternative version of JavaScript sold by Adobe that nobody else can enhance or accelerate on their own.

By presenting trickery in numbers, Ozer is playing the same role as climate change doubters: creating a distraction that lasts just long enough to turn the conversation away from meaningful changes and toward a false controversy that invents blame where none exists. In Ozer’s case, he deflects real criticism of the terrible performance of Flash (particularly on mobile devices) in order to shift the conversation to one that demonizes Apple for not rescuing Adobe from its own terrible implementation of its Flash platform.

Rather than encouraging developers to use open standards for creating interactive web content, and imploring Adobe to drop its dead end Flash runtime acquired at great cost from Macromedia and instead focus on creating tools for modern and open web standards, Ozer attempts to instead suggest that Apple is a bad company for not focusing most of its efforts into shoring up the performance of a fatally flawed web-alternative so that Adobe can serve as the sole beneficiary of all web development going forward, without actually doing anything but tainting the web with a proprietary binary trap.

Shame on you, Mr. Ozer. … and all of you in the tech media who gobbled up his fraud science while remarking how delicious it was.

←

→

← 
Newer Comments  →
  • JohnWatkins

    Yup, it was pretty obvious from his “Streaming Research” web site (or whatever it was called, sorry it escapes me at the moment) that he was no impartial observer. We’ll see more of this as Flash has its greedy fingers pried away from web video.
    All we need now are some decent tools for easily authoring HTML5 standard compliant content. Remember the good old days when Adobe actually used to make good, useful, tools instead of half-assed strategies for proprietary tweenware?

  • jdb

    Another Flash/Action Script developer doing similar tests but at least on the same hardware.

    http://www.mikechambers.com/blog/2010/03/01/relative-performance-of-rich-media-content-across-browsers-and-operating-systems/

    He tested on very high-end hardware, a dual-quad core 3 GHz Mac Pro. I’m not sure how that affects the tests but it certainly bears little resemblance to how most of us use Flash and HTML5

  • twujr

    I think the discussion needs to be broken down into a few discreet segments (not just Flash is bad or a resource hog).

    1. I run a Flash blocker because I really don’t care to be inundated with dancing things trying to get my attention. I’m not anti-ad, I’m anti-needless animation. Simple interfaces are better. Learn to design well, not just loudly.

    2. I run an ad blocker because I’m tired of waiting for ads to load. The ads ruin the entire experience of visiting a website. The monetizers have become so slow, I don’t care to wait for them.

    3. If I want to play a game, I’ll turn on my Wii or play a discreet game. IMHO, Flash games are mindless time wasters that the world would be better off without… especially the ones on Facebook.

    4. I watch remakes of all the old “classic” scifi movies and TV series like Star Trek, and the modern versions all have madly animated viewscreens on the bridge and overly busy animations on the tablets. When I need to get information in a quick, concise manner (i.e., my life and the life of my crew depends on it), I don’t need my eyes distracted by superfluous noise. Same holds true for the web.

    Maybe I’m just cranky today. Perhaps I’m just cranky everyday, but my mantra holds: “Get off your butt and do something.” We’ve become a society of endless consumers driven by entitlement. This mentality shows itself in the mainstream online and tech community’s insistence that Flash (and needless animation in general) are so important.

  • jdb

    He’s actually an adobe employee. So, yeah I trust his analysis.

  • ulicar

    So the Flash dude falsified the research. Fine, I agree, but to use false information to beat it, that is a bit rich, even for you.

    Safari does not support HTML5. It supports pretty limited subset of HTML5. You don’t trust me, go to apple site and check http://www.apple.com/safari/features.html

    [HTML5 is not an all-or-nothing thing. It’s a specification that, just like previous HTML and CSS specifications, can be implemented to various extents. Today’s Safari supports most of the important elements in HTML5, and is rapidly expanding to increase support for new stuff. To suggest that it does not support HTML5 is a lie exposed by visiting a site like Google’s HTML5-version of YouTube. ]

    Chrome and Safari are using H.264, but Firefox is not and I guess will not, ever http://support.mozilla.com/en-US/forum/1/562286 which makes me wonder if H.264 will survive in the browsers due to Chrome and Safari having combined well less than half the Firefox numbers. Don’t believe me? Fine, visit http://marketshare.hitslink.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=0 or http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp or any other.

    Start telling the truth, it is much better for your health and I will not be here.

    [The fact that Firefox is pursuing a strategy that refuses to acknowledge H.264 is a problem for Mozilla, not the rest of the world. – Dan]

  • SamLowry

    So true. Thanks Daniel.
    “Anyone can open a web page embedding a simple Flash visual and watch their CPU performance tank in real time as Flash Player is called upon to render a simple interactive graphic.”
    An example: open a Flash chart in Google OR Yahoo finance on an iBook 1.2GHz, hover the mouse over that chart, leave it there. Nothing is happening or moving, but:
    CPU usage = 100%, eating a hole in my battery.

  • stormj

    Installing Click2Flash was the best thing I ever did for my web browsing experience. Just like when I started turning Java off a few years back.

  • rufustfirefly

    If there is Fraud Science, I would check with Al Gore. He is an expert. Maybe they just lost the original code and that’s why they can’t update Flash. Maybe they read an article that said Flash was the very best solution and that created “settled science”. In any event, junk science is the coin of the realm. We use it to regulate businesses, we use it to destroy the California economy through air regulations with science from regulators who bought their PhDs at the UPS store. So, junk science is fine. Al Gore is cool with it, EarthFirst is cool with it, so I expect this site to be cool with it.

    [Al Gore has been advocating the consensus of the scientific community for decades now. While there is some discussion about the details of climate change, it is noncontroversial.

    I’ve been to Stockholm and have seen rising tides just as I’ve observed the burning of the rain forests. So I’m not as easily convinced as many ignorant “never leave home” Palin-Americans by the invented controversies about climate change that just so happen to spring from the same kind of people who refuse to believe in biological evolution.

    It’s not exactly curious why both creationists and climate change doubters believe things that are funded by the same pro-oil burning industries who hire quack scientists who have created a livelihood based on telling people what they want to hear. – Dan]

  • fiverone

    Daniel,
    thanks again for setting the record straight. I was thinking (kind of knew) what your response was going to be after seeing this published report.

  • kilroywashere

    hmm.

    Just how much has sea level changed in Stockholm? I’m dying to know.

    [Enough for boats to not be able to navigate under bridges that they used to be able to. Stockholm is built on a series of islands connected by bridges, so its somewhat of a canary in a coal mine. – Dan]

  • kilroywashere

    really? How many feet is that?

    I don’t see any coastal towns in southern california going under water. Are you suggesting that there is this big bulge in the ocean around Sweden that I’m not seeing here?

  • rufustfirefly

    The consensus among computer users is that Microsoft is the best OS. Only a small handful of Microsoft deniers try to ignore the science of numbers, which clearly proves that Microsoft is the superior platform for computing. The vast numbers in its favor show that Microsoft has won the survival of the fittest. Others are just pretenders who will be made extinct by the certainty of Darwinist technological evolution. The “denier” community includes Mac enthusiasts, who exhibit characteristics of religious fundamentalism, they deny the evolutionary certainty that their tiny system can survive against the clearly more successful Microsoft. It is time to stop listening to the “deniers” and to simply force Microsoft on the small percentage of users who don’t have it now. A global tax should be levied on all non-Microsoft systems that would help offset the costs that these “distractionary” technologies place on mankind. The technology is settled, there are no arguments against what I say, anyone who challenges my statements is a lesser species. So, let us make it our goal to bring the benefits of Microsoft to all, whether the masses understand these benefits is not important. It is setttled.

  • twujr

    Biggest isn’t best.

    I used/administered/supported Windows desktops/notebooks/servers for the better part of 20 years. It’s anything but superior.

    I guess I’m happy being a “denier” and “distractionary”. To paraphrase Charlton Heston, “I’ll give you my Mac when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers.”

  • rufustfirefly

    to twujr

    I can appreciate that you like your Mac. I know from that fact that you probably are a religious fundamentalist. You probably worship Steve Jobs. It is sad that people like you, who seem to be nice, get misled and used by this religion of the Mac, which has a clear superstitious fervor. The Apple community plays on the less intelligent and causes them to follow along with this archaic faith. I encourage you to simply accept that the issue is settled. There is no serious debate. Microsoft is the correct answer. Other answers are based on religious arguments that normally appeal to lower intellects, and I mean no offense by this. I am just saying it is all settled. And I say it is settled. So it is settled.

  • scottkrk

    Dan could you please write an article on how Apple could go about expediting the demise of Flash and neutralising SilverLight?

    How about the developers, developers, developers angle?

    To hurt Adobe you would have to offer competition to their CS cash-cow, specifically Dreamweaver.

    Apple could offer a $99 WebKit SDK like their iPhone and Mac OSX SDK’s. The more developers that understand and use Apple’s development tools the better.

    Apple would be attacked for trying to own web authoring tools but unless Adobe is challenged, web developers will continue to use CS and Flash.

    Scott

    PS It would be nice if Apple didn’t have to do the heavy lifting but I can’t see it happening any other way.

  • twujr

    to rufustfirefly

    Careful or I’ll cut you in half with my lightsaber.

    …’archaic faith and religious arguments’.

    Thanks for providing a good laugh. I should invite you to my next party.

    t

  • gus2000

    For Apple to bury Adobe for good:

    1. Create a “Flash to HTML5” converter. About 90% of that content is simple to convert.
    2. Do not feed the trolls.
    3. Give Adobe something bigger to worry about by releasing a “Photoshop” type application that runs under Cocoa, in 64-bit, and with Apple’s famous ease-of-use that doesn’t require taking classes to do anything outside of pasting heads onto supermodel bodies. Sell it for $59 instead of the SEVEN HUNDRED DOLLARS that CS4 costs at Amazon.
    4. Keep ignoring the trolls.

    BTW, I concur that using the Yahoo or Google stock charts spikes my 3GHz Core2Duo to 70% (just hovering the mouse). Playing the “IronMan 2” HD trailer in Quicktime chews up around 17% CPU on average.

    On an unrelated note, I no longer want to be Captain Kirk when I grow up. Tony Stark is my hero.

  • enzos

    twujr,
    Even an infant knows Stockholm is not on an ocean it is on the Baltic Sea. The water level driven in- and outflows through the Danish Straits are the primary forcing in the sea level change. These are seasonal and hence more sensitive to climate change than are ocean levels.

    Regarding which: “A sea-level rise of just 400 mm in the Bay of Bengal would put 11 percent of the Bangladesh’s coastal land underwater, creating 7 to 10 million climate refugees.” -WP

    “The output of five global climate models (GCMs) run under two greenhouse gas scenarios was used in combination with tide gauge observations to project sea-level increases ranging from 200 to 900 mm by 2100, depending on location, GCM and scenario. The range mainly reflects equal contributions of spatial variability (due to subsidence) and GCM uncertainty, with a smaller fraction of the range due to scenario uncertainty.” -J. Climate Change 2009 pp 121-138

    Though on the “fuck you, I’m alright” morality clear from your smug posts,that doesn’t matter coz you’ll be worm food by then and what’s a few million foreigners who don’t even speak good American?

  • ulicar

    Go to apple’s site and you will see how much of HTML5 Safari (and this is “grownup” safari, not cut down version on iPhone) support. If you are interested on how much your iPhone/iPad Safari supports HTML5, go to Google web applications and see what you get http://img202.imageshack.us/img202/3706/newimagen.png

    So, who is telling stuff that are not true?

  • ulicar
  • adrianco

    I think Apple is going to hold out against Adobe, and Flash will gradually disappear. The iPad will accelerate this. However my flash-blocker does highlight several Flash ads on this site, so Dan should clean it up…

    Regarding sea level rise, see this detailed article at Skeptical Science – get their iPhone app as well.

    http://www.skepticalscience.com/news.php?n=150

    The good news for the USA is that seal level rise is not evenly distributed (neither is temperature rise), and the coastal USA has relatively low rise compared to parts of Asia.

  • http://allasloss.com Nick R

    Wait, you write a whole article bashing fraud science, and then you bring up biological evolution? You have to see the irony in that. if you don’t, you should really look into just how much fraud is presented as fact in regards to the “theory of evolution”. Disclaimer: No, I’m not a “Palin-American”, and yes I do think climate change is an issue.

  • Joel

    Nick. Are you for real…? You think there is “fraud” in evolution…? All those damn palaeontologists trying to self-justify there salaries…! But then the USA is the laughing-stock of the world for taking Creationism seriously…

  • Joel

    Obviously “there” should be “their”…

    I think the issue in the USA should be eduction and rational thinking rather blindly believing what you are told…

  • beanie

    Daniel Eran Dilger wrote:
    “Nobody else can create their own legitimate implementation of Adobe’s Flash Player because Flash isn’t an open specification. It’s a proprietary technology fully owned by Adobe.”

    SWF specification was opened up on May 1, 2008 as part of the Open Screen Project. It can be used to make a SWF player or SWF content. So if Apple wants to they can make their own SWF player instead of complaining.

    Safari on Windows 4.0 marketshare is 0.3% according to NetApplications. How come it is such a flop? Chrome on Windows was probably around 4%-5%, before a Mac version was released.

  • enzos

    apologies to twujr, kilroy it was.

  • kilroywashere

    enzos,

    really? So exactly how much has sea-level risen around Stockholm? And exactly How much has the ocean level in general risen? How close is calcutta to being overrun by the ocean?

    Why don’t you educate me in my infancy?

  • kilroywashere

    beanie,

    Do you actually think Apple put Safari on Windows with the intent of competing for browser share? What interest would apple have in giving away browser software to Windows users?

  • Joel

    Google not working for you, kilroywashere…?

  • Per

    Ah, about the Stockholm argument. As the resident Swede here, I can tell you that water levels mostly have to do with rain levels inland as a large system of lakes exit their water into the Baltic Sea through Stockholm. Right now the subway system in Stockholm may be flooded because we had the coldest and snowiest winter in decades, and there are huge quantities of snow melting thus making the water level rise.

  • gctwnl

    I have been trying to have a look at YouTube’s HTML5 stuff, but I have no idea to do this. When I turn off my Safari plugins, I just get a page telling me to click to get Flash.

    So, how do i tell YouTube I do not want flash?

  • gctwnl

    Sorry, found it already: http://www.youtube.com/html5

  • gctwnl

    I just did a small non-scientific test and had a look at

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLTD7G73h5k&feature=PlayList&p=036737129B49FEF7&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=5

    After disabling my plugins and joining the html5 beta. Result:
    – html5 looked better
    – there were strange pauses in the video (not the audio) of the playback. This was not a data speed issue, there was far more data available.

  • Per

    RDM must have gotten the attention of Windows Enthusiasts as the troll count keeps rising in the comments. This used to be a civilized place less than a year ago (except from during the presidential campaign when some republican readers took offense by Daniel comparing them to Microsoft).

    This has been one of the few last blogs and sites where I actually bother to read the comments, please don’t let this turn into YouTube. Enough with the namecalling and flamebaiting. I used to get as much learning and reading pleasure from the comments as from the articles themselves, and I would hate to lose that.

  • rufustfirefly

    Everyone with a brain believes in Evolution. It is settled science. By real scientists, not the ones that have to buy their PdDs at the UPS stores like they employ at the California Air Resources Board. Evolution is demonstrated in the scientific evidence. Haven’t you heard of Piltdown Man. Nebraska Man. You deniers are so stupid you are lucky to have us smarter people around to help you set your VCR clocks. And to help you when your Macs fail. By the way, are you still in denial about Microsoft. It won the evolutionary battle with Apple. So give it up, lay down in a tar pit, and let your bones be found by some smart guy paleontologist as proof of what happens to the weak – like poor old Piltdown Man.

  • http://jonnytilney.com Jon T

    I endorse what Per says. Please may RDM remain a place for intelligent comment.

    And for the trolls, please keep the usual silly insults reserved for Mac users out of here.

    And try for some decent English too please…
    ”
    who is telling stuff that are not true”

    …is NOT good English.

  • Raymond

    @Per

    Unfortunately Apple has embarrassed many industry players over the last decade, who had become comfortable in maintaining the status quo . As a result, we have this rapid influx of trolls that really should be seen as a barometer of how well Apple has been doing of late. Things are only set to get worst with the release of the iPad. The trolls are gearing up to peck away at Apple’s liver for daring to steal the technological fire from the IT gods to give to mortal men.

  • gctwnl

    I would like to suggest that Daniel changes the policy for this blog comments and states that he will remove off topic comments (starting with this one). I agree, we do not come here to discuss evolution, climate change and whatever, unless it is a topic of Daniel’s writings.

  • rufustfirefly

    Raymond – I understand your frustration. It is not easy living in a complex world when you have a lesser intellect. If you were really smart, like I am, and if you weren’t blinded by your religious beliefs (the Apple dogma, the deity of Steve) you would know that Microsoft is the only way. The market has decided. The vast majority of users are a consensus, the science is settled. Your lame attempt to bring up “facts” like the iPhone, iPad, etc. is just a sad indication of your denialism. It is over for Apple. Move on. Stop resisting. Let those of us who know better lead you to a better world through modern science and technology. Windows XXX Excelsior will help you understand this, when it arrives. And I am not telling your stuff that are not true. This are all settled. I say.

  • ShabbaRanks

    I’ve got to agree with Per here. Too many trolls, so little time. I, for one, can’t believe an article about an obviously biased Flash experiment has turned into a long and tiresome discussion about Creationism and Global Warming.

    At least Ulicar keeps his trolling “on topic.”

  • http://allasloss.com Nick R

    @Joel “rather than blindly believing what you are told.”… Um, who would be in that boat? Were you not taught evolution?

    Look, I wasn’t trying to start a flame war, but if you don’t think that evolution was built on fraud science you don’t really know the history of it. I’m not saying there isn’t factual science behind it as well, but a lot of stuff was falsified… and it’s still in most textbooks.

    People are so quick to bash “creationism” (which I didn’t even mention). Rather than show tolerance of views, people revert to calling others stupid. Not sure how that will convince the “creationist” side.

    You’ve been taught evolution your whole life. The only way to get the whole story is to read both sides, then make an informed decision. Evolution is bias in the same way creationism is. If you only look at work that is critical of the othersde, how will you get the full picture?

    You should look at some of the creation or intelligent design scientist’s credentials, before saying they are all stupid.

    Lastly, don’t think that I don’t have friends who subscribe to evolutionary theory – both Christian and non-Christian. I don’t consider you stupid for believing it. I just thought the “fraud science” that is littered through evolution’s past was common knowledge, not that all the science was. In the same way Christianity has the crusades or those nutjobs that protest outside of funerals with “God is judging homosexuality” signs.

  • ShabbaRanks

    PS: Dan, you need to stop feeding Ulicar too. He knows exactly what he’s writing and why. (He says trying to ignore the Creationist and Anti-Global Warming trolls. Calm blue ocean…. Calm blue ocean….)

  • http://allasloss.com Nick R

    @rufustfirefly I hope your kidding.
    Piltdown Man a hoax:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man
    Tooth of Nebraska Man falsely identified:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nebraska_Man

  • Joel

    Please supply links to bona-fide websites indicating the “fraud” behind evolution. Ditto for serious Intelligent Design scientists. I keep trying to search for this Google but I keep getting Creationist whack-job sites. :(

    I made “informed decision” years ago. On one hand we have a theory that’s backed up by examples from the fossil record and other, verifiable bits of evidence. On the other-hand we have a nice story for kindergarten that has convenient hand-waving when we get to the nuts+bolts. Hhmm….

  • Pingback: uberVU - social comments()

  • gctwnl

    @Nick R

    You should look at the evolution scientist’s credentials, before saying they are all fraudulent.

    The first scientist who would be able to prove evolution wrong would become more famous than Darwin. Scientists live for the opportunity to prove another scientist wrong. And you think that world-sized wheelbarrow full of frogs could enact a conspiracy?

  • ShabbaRanks

    DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS.

  • Joel

    @ShabbaRanks: Good point. I will not bother answering his post any more…

  • http://allasloss.com Nick R

    @ShabbaRanks — wait, I’m not trying to be a troll. Dan took a jab at creationism/evolution and I bit. Sorry that has bothered you. I seriously come here for in-depth Apple talk. Joel responded, and I responded back. What’s wrong with two minds meeting on RDM comments and discussing something? Does it really warrant an all caps reply of “DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS”? Dan makes those comments knowing he may get responses to them… just like his articles. I’ll gladly drop the topic now, back to Apple.

  • luisd

    @ShabbaRanks

    you beat me to it! Just to reiterate

    DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS.

←  
Newer Comments  →