Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,585 Year: 2,842/9,624 Month: 687/1,588 Week: 93/229 Day: 4/61 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A Plea to understanding: SCIENCE vs INTELLIGENT DESIGN
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(2)
Message 96 of 230 (654118)
02-26-2012 11:48 PM
Reply to: Message 90 by jchardy
02-26-2012 4:44 PM


Not a respecter of opinions...and you should not be one either
Of course, I believe ALL OPINIONS deserve respect; I believe INFORMATION based (when possible) on valid studies and review are the ONLY ones which deserve respect. This is a personal preference of course, but is also the one followed by most credible institutions.
This above is a prime example of an opinion which deserves absolutely no respect, primarily because it is wrong.
In fact, opinions in general are not deserving of respect in situations where the opinion involves the exact subject matter under investigation. In such situations, your opinion is due only the respect which your defense earns for it.
And of course some opinions are simply wrong. If you hold a wrong opinion, people might ignore your error out of politeness unless it turns out that your opinion really does affect them. In that case, the only respect your opinion is due is a "respectful" deconstruction and demolition.
Let's not forget, after all, that EvC is a debate site on which the merits of ID, Creationism, and the Theory of Evolution are all topics for analysis and discussion. The rules of engagement here are also pretty clear; bring your logical arguments based on evidence, or stay home.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by jchardy, posted 02-26-2012 4:44 PM jchardy has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 103 of 230 (654219)
02-28-2012 6:29 AM
Reply to: Message 101 by jchardy
02-28-2012 3:19 AM


Re: I'M NOT SO SURE!
Why are you enclosing your own, first-time-posted comments in quote boxes? Do you just like having boxes around what you write?
Since there is no answer (other than the technical reasons that --- at that time in the early universe all of the photons were tied up with electrons
For the purposes of discussion, let's ignore the fact that there is very good physical reason why the electrons were not bound up into atoms back when all protons, photons and electrons were in a high energy state, and accordingly that the big expansion of the universe completely explains and is consistent with an initially opaque universe.
It is only your assumption that there must be some ultimate higher purpose to every detail that causes you to question the sufficiency of said answer. In short, you are suggesting that your personal incredulity is something that is of importance. There is simply no reason to believe that line of thought is reasonable. Just because three-year-old children insist on saying "why" to every response, right or wrong that their parents give, does not mean that emulating a three year old is a reasonable course of action. Do you really think that three year old asking why the sky is blue even understands his dad's discussion of scattering before asking the next "why"?
other than this factual reasoning, we have no explanation except that, for that reason we are blind to the initiation of the early universe.
The technical explanations are completely sufficient. We cannot see light through an opacity, and we understand why the opacity existed. You aren't three years old anymore.
But not any longer. Too dangerous. Too uncomfortable. Too unsettling.
It appears that not having an ultimate purpose for every detail of the universe is uncomfortable and unsettling for you. Your mistake is projecting that nonsense onto everyone else. I'll have to admit to finding your attitude puzzling if not inane. Even if you accept, as I do, that God is the author of the universe, it still does not follow that any IDer had any reason or intent regarding the properties of the universe during those early few hundred thousand years when the universe was utterly inhospitable to life.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by jchardy, posted 02-28-2012 3:19 AM jchardy has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 141 of 230 (654975)
03-06-2012 7:16 AM
Reply to: Message 137 by jchardy
03-05-2012 9:32 PM


Re: purpose in science
2. Dogma (inflexible positions both in science and religion) has been damaging to both the image of science and Religion.
To help clarify what you mean here, can you provide an example of an inflexible science dogma that has damaged its image?
3. Religious, political and scientific concepts are mutually toxic to one another and should NOT be mixed except on an individual non-institutional basis.
I don't think it is possible to keep politics out of science, because many political decisions either are, or should be based on a consideration of the science. For example, the science showing the cigarettes were harmful to your health had unavoidable political and economic consequences. But perhaps I am missing your meaning here.
I.e., it’s OK to express a bias in one direction or the other, but there is no certitude== not really.
Quite often there is certitude, or at least a degree of confidence so high that it ought to require.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison

This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by jchardy, posted 03-05-2012 9:32 PM jchardy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 176 by jchardy, posted 03-09-2012 4:37 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 151 of 230 (655099)
03-07-2012 10:14 AM
Reply to: Message 144 by jchardy
03-07-2012 12:48 AM


Re: PIVOTAL QUESTION FOR ALL- jch
Psychological needs are different from spiritual needs. Those who claim no need for a spiritual connection with the universe are simply deluding themselves. I.e., they are in a sense of denial.
Is this an example of the kind of mutual respect, non-toxic language you are talking about.
If so, I'm down with that. I get to continue my testy examination of and discourse about all things ID.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison

This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by jchardy, posted 03-07-2012 12:48 AM jchardy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 152 by Percy, posted 03-07-2012 10:38 AM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(2)
Message 158 of 230 (655172)
03-08-2012 7:57 AM
Reply to: Message 152 by Percy
03-07-2012 10:38 AM


Re: PIVOTAL QUESTION FOR ALL- jch
It might be an example of how easy it is to be unintentionally offensive.
Perhaps, but the original post is riddled with insulting rhetoric. Knowing my own tendency towards testiness, I've held off from ripping through that screed in the manner that any OP full of nonsense should be critiqued.
I have noticed that jchardy has not been all that responsive to complaints that he is presenting a strawman version of science, or that he lumps all opponents of ID or Creationism onto the atheists pile, or that he has seemingly no knowledge of the history/beginnings of ID and blames science for the close ties of ID and fundamentalism.
Further, in the post I objected to, it is apparent that jchardy is firmly attached to his own "spiritual connect to the universe" dogma that is apparently not to be questioned.
I accept your own observation that the tone of the discussion here is way too often sarcastic and well, testy. But the opposite of testiness must not be avoiding critical analysis of opinions on ID, creationism, or science, or biting one's tongue when untruths are posted.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by Percy, posted 03-07-2012 10:38 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 159 by Percy, posted 03-08-2012 8:40 AM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 167 of 230 (655312)
03-09-2012 10:39 AM
Reply to: Message 162 by jchardy
03-09-2012 2:16 AM


Re: purpose in science
After all, Einstein’s thought experiments were founded in his imagination and not evaluable until mathematically formatted.
This characterization is wrong, and the analogy is completely inapt. Einstein's thought experiments were based on hypothetical scenarios that showed the ramification of postulates that were based on observed phenomena. The thought experiments were not random speculations and guesses divorced from any and all evidence.
I would characterize Einstein's thought experiments as hypothesis generating activity, where the result of the activity is predictions that were both falsifiable and explicitly logically (i.e. mathematically) required by the hypotheses. In other words, Einstein's thought experiments represent science activity of the highest order. Quite unlike your speculation.
As an aside, there is no doubt about in my mind, that there is an "I'm like Einstein, struggling in the patent office" corollary to Godwin's law.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison

This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by jchardy, posted 03-09-2012 2:16 AM jchardy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 172 by jchardy, posted 03-09-2012 4:05 PM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 179 of 230 (655351)
03-09-2012 5:28 PM
Reply to: Message 172 by jchardy
03-09-2012 4:05 PM


Re: purpose in science
But teleologic ID concepts are also NOT random speculations and guesses divorced from any and all evidence.
You've already admitted that those concepts are not evidenced.
I do NOT demand you (or any one else) accept those same concepts as "valid", since ---- they may not be; and certainly will never be "provable".
No, but if I don't accept those concepts, I'm in denial of the truth, according to you.
But you, I, and all of us have the advantage of his same quantum computer (our fertile human brain)
No, as a matter of fact, we don't. Even Einstein was only "in the zone" for a couple of decades. I've never been on Einstein's level and you are not currently there.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison

This message is a reply to:
 Message 172 by jchardy, posted 03-09-2012 4:05 PM jchardy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 184 by jchardy, posted 03-09-2012 9:32 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 212 of 230 (655528)
03-11-2012 9:17 AM
Reply to: Message 211 by jchardy
03-11-2012 1:15 AM


Re: purpose in science
off topic; removed by poster
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison

This message is a reply to:
 Message 211 by jchardy, posted 03-11-2012 1:15 AM jchardy has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(3)
Message 229 of 230 (655992)
03-15-2012 9:54 AM


Summary
I don't believe jchardy was ever sincere about his intentions. His initial posting reeked of disdain for science and the scientific method, even while insisting that all opinions ought to be respected. And if that weren't enough, he cited scientific mumbo-jumbo at creationist like rates.
I find it quite laughable that the man would find insult from being called a non-scientist, after the junk he posted here.
I'm glad to see the back of the man. He had absolutely nothing to offer.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024