|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Professional Debate: Scientific Evidence for/against Evolution… “Any Takers?” | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I found one quote from ESR interesting.
quote: Why would anyone care about some marketplace of ideas? Such polls have nothing to do with anything other than showing that in particular, people in the US are ignorant. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2477 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined: |
jar writes: I found one quote from ESR interesting.
quote: Why would anyone care about some marketplace of ideas? Such polls have nothing to do with anything other than showing that in particular, people in the US are ignorant. Well, that point's been made. That if people believe in a flat earth, it doesn't get any flatter. However, I was explaining that pretty much no-one believed they descended from other animals 150 years ago, so that ESR's phrasing, with the word "losing" was misleading even when applied to mass public opinion, because evolution in general has always been gaining in public acceptance since the mid-nineteenth century (albeit slowly), and even the purely naturalistic view of it is gaining. It's inevitable. History doesn't go backwards.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 284 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
(Dishonest, impertinent, and willfully stupid whining snipped.) I am still ready whenever you are; and I should still like to know what steps you have taken to procure the participation of a creationist. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.5
|
Hi Eye-Squared-R,
I have found this thread quite amussing.
Eye-Squared-R writes: The topic:
I would love to see such a debate as you have proposed. But I am affraid that it will not take place in my lifetime I've got my 3 score and ten + in already and don't know if I will live long enough to see this debate take place. It has been my experience here that when confronted with question or evidence contrary to beliefs held by most here at EvC that they have no answer for the personal attacks begin. But I really don't believe I have encountered anyone here that could take part in a real debate. They have a good sermon they can preach. They can argue. They can insult. They can ignore anything you present. But a real debate. I haven't seen one here yet, and I been here over 4 years. I love the idea of a real debate in a formal format but I am afraid you will not get these guys to commit to such a firm commitment because they don't have big enough of whatever that was that Dr. was talking about. I am a creationist who pastors a small Church. God Bless in your endevor and I hope you succeed, BTW I just don't think any of them have the guts to accept the challenge to back up what they preach by walking the walk instead of talking the talk. I think they are all talk. What if somebody showed them how little they know and blew up their pipe dream? The only hope I see would be for someone to convince somebody to take your challenge. God Bless, "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 284 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
BTW I just don't think any of them have the guts to accept the challenge ... A curious delusion which would have been cured by actually reading the thread. What the thread does not contain is any evidence of a creationist willing to participate; or evidence that Eye-Squared R has been willing to look for one.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 9972 Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
I love the idea of a real debate in a formal format but I am afraid you will not get these guys to commit to such a firm commitment because they don't have big enough of whatever that was that Dr. was talking about. I will have a debate with you if you want. All that I ask is that any claim you make has to be backed by experiments and data from those experiments as they are found in the scientific peer reviewed journals. Are you in?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.5 |
Hi. Dr,
Dr Adequate writes: What the thread does not contain is any evidence of a creationist willing to participate; or evidence that Eye-Squared R has been willing to look for one. I see it a little differently. The first thing for a real debate to take place is a challenge.
Message 1 Subject: Professional Debate: Scientific Evidence for/against Evolution Any Takers? Knowledgeable individuals who have expressed #1 and/or #2 below are the ideal folks to engage the debate.
#1) Neo-Darwinism is essentially proven by the evidence for all practical purposes and/or #2) People who do not believe neo-Darwinism (to be a valid mechanism for universal common descent) are ignorant, stupid, deluded, irrational, insane, or wicked So this thread topic is narrowly defined. The question is:
Are you willing to engage in a professionally moderated publishable debate on behalf of evolution? I’ll end this similar to one of Zenmonkey’s posts:
Any Takers? Gotta Love EVC Forum — What a Resource!
Thanks — and Question Everything! Respectfully, Eye-Squared-R Edited by Eye-Squared-R, 01-16-2011 9:35 AM: Per Dr. Adequate's request in Message 66, revised: #1) Neo-Darwinism is unequivocally true and scientifically verified fact - essentially proven by the evidence for all practical purposes to read #1) Neo-Darwinism is essentially proven by the evidence for all practical purposes Topic amended.
Message 11Eye-Squared-R writes: Unfortunately, we can’t move this process forward without FIRM commitments from folks like yourself. Message 13Eye-Squared-R writes: For now, I must maintain your status as out until you are willing and able to make a FIRM commitment in this thread. In Message 34 caverdiver said:
cavediver writes: Out - I am a theoretical physicist and there are many better qualified and experienced than I to explain evolutionary theory. But if you should want to arrange a similar debate on cosmological issues, let me know. I take that as sincere. In Message 66 you said:
Dr Adequate writes: Frankly, I was expecting more firm commitments among all the folks at EVC Forum ...
You were expecting more people to write a book for you? Without a hint of a flicker of interest from a publisher? Your knowledge of human nature is ... unimpressive. Not very convincing to me that you want to participate.
Message 71Eye-Squared-R writes: I’ve done enough investigation to know the need will arise. The subject matter will likely include several disciplines of science as evidenced by the topical categories listed at EVC Forum. Since I want you to have every opportunity and every possible resource available for a successful outcome, I’ll assist you in securing FIRM commitments in the various likely disciplines to be debated.
List of EVC Forum Members (or any others anywhere) FIRMLY committed to chip in for Dr. Adequate in a professional written publishable debate concerning Evolution Vs. Creation involving the scientific disciplines of: Biology — Insert EVC Forum Evolutionist Name(s) Here:
Cosmology - Insert EVC Forum Evolutionist Name(s) Here (Note: cavediver expressed willingness in Message 34): Dates and Dating - Insert EVC Forum Evolutionist Name(s) Here: Geology - Insert EVC Forum Evolutionist Name(s) Here: Physics - Insert EVC Forum Evolutionist Name(s) Here: Message 78 Eye-Squared-R writes: Tick, tick, tick, tick, tick, tick.
Eye-Squared-R in Message 72 on 22 November writes: Well, doctor, I’ve given you thirteen weeks. Unfortunately, you’ve done nothing but assume others will chip in if needed. Thus, the need to assist you has become evident as detailed in my previous post and repeated here:
List of EVC Forum Members (or any others anywhere) FIRMLY committed to chip in for Dr. Adequate in a professional written publishable debate concerning Evolution Vs. Creation involving the scientific disciplines of: Biology — Insert EVC Forum Evolutionist Name(s) Here:
Cosmology - Insert EVC Forum Evolutionist Name(s) Here (Note: cavediver expressed willingness in Message 34): Dates and Dating - Insert EVC Forum Evolutionist Name(s) Here: Geology - Insert EVC Forum Evolutionist Name(s) Here: Physics - Insert EVC Forum Evolutionist Name(s) Here: Message 86 Eye-Squared-R writes: Dr. Adequate in Message 81 writes: I'm ready when you are. I’m sorry doctor. A FIRM commitment requires someone who can do more than ignore.Those who are unable to negotiate fundamental physics (Exercises 1 & 2 in Message 71) are most definitely not ready for Publishable Prime-Time. It’s really easy to make a FIRM commitment, doctor, if you have confidence in your beliefs and abilities.I’ll repeat the requirements for you:
List of EVC Forum Members (or any others anywhere) FIRMLY committed to chip in with Dr. Adequate in a professional written publishable debate concerning Evolution Vs. Creation involving the scientific disciplines of: Dr, Eye-Square-R is asking you to put a team together of anybody you can get to help you. When that is accomplished from your members and their disciplines he will invite opponets for you. But to get that far he needs a signed commitment from you and your team members to move forward. The challenge has been presented and has been debated.The next step would be a signed commitment to debate. Then the presentation of his team. Then all rules and lengths of post and a bunch of other things would have to be worked out. Once all rules and regulations the scope of the different parts of the debate were settled, the financial arrangments would have to be agreed upon. Once all questions are answered and all rules of the debate are settled then the debate could begin. If you think he is bluffing all you have to do is put a team together sign a commitment to debate calling his bluff. But if he is not bluffing you must be ready to defend your position.As I understand Eye you will be affirming and the opposing team will be refuting. I could be wrong on this but that is how I read it and that is one thing that has to be worked out in the details. As far as his team:
Message 86 Eye-Squared-R writes: You talk about cojones in Message 68 and now you appear to hide behind the couch of literary style in response to Messages 71 and 72.
Dr. Adequate in Message 81 writes:
When you begin ignoring, you don’t mess around! and ask you, once again, what steps you have taken to procure a creationist interested in participating in this project.I’ll answer for the third time doctor You can rest assured - you will have a qualified creationist for a written publishable debate as noted in Message 72 and Message 78 (if you ever do meet the requirements yourself). The steps I’ve taken were also given in Message 78, but you’re apparently not committed enough to read posts addressed to you. We remain in Step 1. Dr. Adequate in Message 81 writes: I'm ready when you are. I’m sorry doctor. A FIRM commitment requires someone who can do more than ignore.Those who are unable to negotiate fundamental physics (Exercises 1 & 2 in Message 71) are most definitely not ready for Publishable Prime-Time. It’s really easy to make a FIRM commitment, doctor, if you have confidence in your beliefs and abilities.I’ll repeat the requirements for you:
List of EVC Forum Members (or any others anywhere) FIRMLY committed to chip in with Dr. Adequate in a professional written publishable debate concerning Evolution Vs. Creation involving the scientific disciplines of: He has put the ball squarely in your court. The challenge has been issued. Do have what it takes to accept. If you do put the ball back in his court by putting a team together and getting a signed committment to debate. He then has to put up or shut up. If you don't accept the challenge after all this debating in this thread I am affraid your arguments in the future will carry much weight. Its your choice. You have been called out. Step up to the plate. Let the debate begin. God Bless, Edited by ICANT, : No reason given. "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 284 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
The challenge has been issued. Do have what it takes to accept. Yes. That is why I have in fact accepted.
Its your choice. You have been called out. Step up to the plate. I'm ready whenever he is. He should now put up or shut up.
Let the debate begin. Indeed. But first he'll have to get a creationist to participate. And since every time I ask him what steps he's taking to do that he starts whining and blubbing and screaming and lying, I don't believe that he's tried, or that he's ever going to. Why can't the coward even try to find one creationist to join in the debate? I haven't seen anyone run so fast and so far from his own challenge since Kent Hovind. If you're so eager to see the debate begin, why don't you find a creationist for him? Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 284 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Eye-Squared-R, in the OP, writes: So this thread topic is narrowly defined. The question is:
Are you willing to engage in a professionally moderated publishable debate on behalf of evolution? The answer is YES. If there any part of "YES" that you don't understand, then creationists ought to make you their king, since that would be incomprehension even beyond the dreams of Gish or Hovind. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.5 |
Hi Dr,
Dr Adequate writes: If you're so eager to see the debate begin, why don't you find a creationist for him? I don't have too find them for him. Did you read Message 78?
Eye-Squared-R writes: I answered your question in Message 72, repeated here:you can rest assured - you will have a qualified creationist for a written publishable debate. The steps I’ve taken are as you might expect
The effort to secure a FIRM commitment from the creationist side has been MUCH easier than I’ve found in this thread. In fact, as it stands now, Messages 71 and 72 reveal there is no demonstrated commitment on your part — only complaints that appear to be potential excuses to quit.This despite your statement in Message 47 of thread Ignorant, stupid or insane? (Or maybe wicked?). According to that he has commitments from the creationist side. Now he needs commitments from your side. He lists 5 disciplines. Biology, Cosmology, Dates and Dating, Geology, and Physics. Until you have a committed team he does not know who to choose to be your opponent. If you only get 3 disicplines and they don't match what he choses from the other side it would not work. Debates don't take place like the threads we have here. This is not debating it is every one preaching his beliefs. He says in point 1. that he has surveyed creationist with Ph.D credentials in science. 2. Contacted qualified creationists. 3. Investigated preferred candidates. He then says he has had better luck getting a FIRM commitment from them than you. THAT TELLS ME HE HAS COMMITMENTS FROM CREATIONIST SCIENTIST. What he does not have is a firm commitment from evolutionist. So all you have to do is put your team together and state their fields and give a FIRM COMMITMENT FROM YOU AND YOUR TEAM. If you think he is bluffing call his bluff. But be prepared to defend your position when you do. The details of the debate will have to be worked out between the two teams once they are chosen. Remember he says you can get ANYBODY to help you. I think you guys have bitten off a big bite to try to chew with the attitude presented in this thread. If you guys can't debate better than you have in the four years I have been here I would advise you to forget it and abandon the thread. I was on the debate team in my High School and you guys don't know how to debate. In a formal debate you will be torn to pieces. But if you believe as strongly as you and others say you do, and if you got the evidence you say you have, it should be no problem putting a team together. After it has gone this far do you think you can walk away and not do the debate without egg on your face? Step up to the plate. Batter up. God Bless, BTW he did give you an out. If you can't put a team together then just say you can't get enough quality commitments, and walk away. "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 284 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
I don't have too find them for him. No, but it would be helpful if you want the debate to begin, since he hasn't produced any.
What he does not have is a firm commitment from evolutionist. Which part of "YES" do you not understand? Is it the consonants that are giving you trouble or the vowel?
After it has gone this far do you think you can walk away and not do the debate without egg on your face? I am not walking away. I am standing here asking him to bring it on. And every time I do so the coward runs away and hides, usually for weeks at a time. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
pfrankinstein Junior Member (Idle past 4446 days) Posts: 5 Joined: |
Richard Dawkins writes: It is absolutely safe to say that, if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane (or wicked, but I'd rather not consider that). Natural selection allowed cognitive selection to emerge. Cognitive selection has applications outside and beyond that of just biology. Science itself and the gathering of knowledge "evolves" by descent with modification and by means of cognitive selection. It is a fact that we pass on down through generations more than just our genes. The process of science evolving and the process of Darwinian/biological evolution are both related, both types of ''evolution'' operating on different levels. Natural selection, nature doing the choosing is largely unconscious subconscious. Cognitive selection, consciously choosing. So. If 'Cognitive selection' is related to 'Natural selection' and selection itself moves, advances, evolves then IMO Darwinian/biological evolution = fact. [albeit through the sidedoor.] Paul. If the bb started a single process, and that single process = "evolution" then "selection" has moved from the non-conscious to the unconscious, subconscious, conscious state. Edited by pfrankinstein, : + some. Edited by pfrankinstein, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.5 |
Hi Dr,
Dr Adequate writes: Which part of "YES" do you not understand? Have you ever participated in a formal debate? From you actions I think not. He issued a challenge. He set the requirements. You saying yes is not a SIGNED FIRM COMMITMENT. You need a team that can cover the 5 disciplines outlined. You have no one committed to help you. You have already said you did not have the ability to cover all the subjects. The way a formal debate is presented is not like we debate here on EvC. We jump all over the place chase rabbits fuss at each other in a formal publishable debate you will not be allowed to do that. First order of business is the challenge.Second the Firm Commitment to debate. He presents his team to match your team in disciplines. The details are worked out. Once the debate begins the affirmer states his case and presents his evidence. Then the opposing side presents the rebutal. The affirmer is allowed to rebut the rebutal The opposing side then presents final rebutal. These pappers must be written in a publishable form. It will be very time consuming as you will only get two chances to state your case. Then the debate moves on. This is the way all debates I was in on the debate team was conducted except we put our cases and evidence together and then met face to face with a time limit for presentation and then a short time for rebutal. That was some 55 years ago but I doubt if it has changed much. But all those things are worked out in the discussions setting the rules of the debate. So if you are ready as you say they message him to state exactly how he wants the Firm commitment presented and present one. So why not get somebody in Myers or Dawkins league to help you and go for it. I am glad you are not walking away. But you are not meeting the requirements for the debate to move to step 2. You are like a 6 year old standing on a soap box yelling at his daddy bring it on you big bully, you just full of hot air. If you guys are as good as you think you are and his team is as good as he thinks they will be you probably would not have to worry about a job. Oh and BYW we would not be able to read the debate until it was published so we would have to buy the book. If it was aired here there would be no customers for the book. I would still like to see the debate take place. It would make interesting reading. Now if in the rules of the debate portion if every body agreed to forgo any monotary gain from the project then it could take place on EvC. God Bless, "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 284 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
You saying yes is not a SIGNED FIRM COMMITMENT. It is, however, a "FIRM COMMITMENT". What is this "SIGNED" nonsense? How do I sign my name on this forum, and where did he ask me to?
You need a team that can cover the 5 disciplines outlined. Why shift the goalposts? I am in no need of a team --- but he is in need of an excuse. Here's what he wrote in his OP:
The OP writes: The proposal for this thread is to establish who among the intelligent and educated EVC proponents of universal common descent (neo-Darwinism) would represent evolution in a formal written debate exclusively regarding the scientific evidence. The debate would occur outside the confines of EVC Forum and would be publishable.
A single individual or an entire team of EVC folks could participate and collaborate in written responses on behalf of evolution - but at least one team member should be qualified with a Ph. D. in a technical field (to offer bona-fide credibility for potential publishers). I am a "single individual" (is there another kind of individual?) I have a Ph.D. in a technical field. I am ready whenever he is.
You have already said you did not have the ability to cover all the subjects. This is, of course, not true.
First order of business is the challenge. He has done that.
Second the Firm Commitment to debate. I have done that.
He presents his team ... And that's what we're waiting for.
Once the debate begins the affirmer states his case and presents his evidence. Then the opposing side presents the rebutal. The affirmer is allowed to rebut the rebutal The opposing side then presents final rebutal. These pappers must be written in a publishable form. It will be very time consuming as you will only get two chances to state your case. Then the debate moves on. This is the way all debates I was in on the debate team was conducted except we put our cases and evidence together and then met face to face with a time limit for presentation and then a short time for rebutal. I don't think that this is what he has in mind. We are, after all, talking about a book, not a pamphlet.
So why not get somebody in Myers or Dawkins league to help you and go for it. Because that was not what I was asked to do in the OP. If it is now his position that I need, not to participate in his project myself, but rather to persuade PZ Myers or Richard Dawkins to do so, then I think this is a contemptible way of evading the debate. But so far as I can see this is your excuse, not his. Again, let me remind you of his OP:
The OP writes: The proposal for this thread is to establish who among the intelligent and educated EVC proponents of universal common descent (neo-Darwinism) would represent evolution in a formal written debate exclusively regarding the scientific evidence. The debate would occur outside the confines of EVC Forum and would be publishable.
A single individual or an entire team of EVC folks could participate and collaborate in written responses on behalf of evolution - but at least one team member should be qualified with a Ph. D. in a technical field (to offer bona-fide credibility for potential publishers). If you now want Richard Dawkins to participate, or if he now insists that I produce a professional cosmologist, then this seems to me to be a paltry excuse for evading debate. He has exactly what he originally asked for --- an EvC member with a Ph.D. in a technical field who is ready and willing to represent evolution. If he now wishes to slime his way out of it, that's his problem.
I am glad you are not walking away. But you are not meeting the requirements for the debate to move to step 2. I have made a firm commitment to debate, from which the coward has run like a frightened little bunny-rabbit.
You are like a 6 year old standing on a soap box yelling at his daddy bring it on you big bully, you just full of hot air. I am rather more like a 36-year-old not standing on a soapbox and saying to a halfwitted poltroon: "Bring it on you sniveling little coward --- you're full of shit." Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.5 |
Hi Dr,
Dr Adequate writes: Because that was not what I was asked to do in the OP. This is not his suggestion but mine. Since he had said those at EvC and then later added anyone in his challenge. That opened it wide open. Since there is confusion between what you think fullfills a requirement for a full commitment and his view why not just put up a post asking what you have to do to meet that requirement? God Bless, "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024