Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Quick Questions, Short Answers - No Debate
Dogmafood
Member (Idle past 348 days)
Posts: 1815
From: Ontario Canada
Joined: 08-04-2010


Message 226 of 341 (655717)
03-12-2012 10:05 PM
Reply to: Message 224 by Dr Adequate
03-12-2012 9:39 PM


Re: Bogus or what?
A broom like that one? All my brooms have rakish angles.
But yeah it is more likely related to making news papers I guess.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 224 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-12-2012 9:39 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 227 by Panda, posted 03-12-2012 10:40 PM Dogmafood has seen this message but not replied

Panda
Member (Idle past 3713 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 227 of 341 (655718)
03-12-2012 10:40 PM
Reply to: Message 226 by Dogmafood
03-12-2012 10:05 PM


Re: Bogus or what?
Kinda addictive.

Tradition and heritage are all dead people's baggage. Stop carrying it!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 226 by Dogmafood, posted 03-12-2012 10:05 PM Dogmafood has seen this message but not replied

foreveryoung
Member (Idle past 582 days)
Posts: 921
Joined: 12-26-2011


Message 228 of 341 (655725)
03-13-2012 1:12 AM
Reply to: Message 216 by PaulK
03-12-2012 2:58 PM


Re: Looking for info on scientists in ID camp
So the only scientists that count who believe in ID are those in the biological sciences who have done post doctoral work?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 216 by PaulK, posted 03-12-2012 2:58 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 229 by nwr, posted 03-13-2012 1:53 AM foreveryoung has seen this message but not replied
 Message 230 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-13-2012 1:57 AM foreveryoung has seen this message but not replied
 Message 231 by PaulK, posted 03-13-2012 2:37 AM foreveryoung has replied
 Message 232 by dwise1, posted 03-13-2012 3:08 AM foreveryoung has replied

nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 229 of 341 (655726)
03-13-2012 1:53 AM
Reply to: Message 228 by foreveryoung
03-13-2012 1:12 AM


Re: Looking for info on scientists in ID camp
foreveryoung writes:
So the only scientists that count who believe in ID are those in the biological sciences who have done post doctoral work?
Presumably, that depends on what you are counting.
The theory of evolution is not a theology. It is, most importantly, a framework for research in biology. So, strictly speaking, only those who are using the theory that way are qualified to judge how well it serves that purpose.
Personally, I am a mathematician and computer scientist. I find biology interesting, and I count myself as an evolutionist. But I am not doing biological research, so my view doesn't really count. If biologists find a better theory tomorrow, and start using that, then if I want to maintain my interest in what the biological researchers are doing, I would have to switch to the new theory.

Jesus was a liberal hippie

This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by foreveryoung, posted 03-13-2012 1:12 AM foreveryoung has seen this message but not replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 230 of 341 (655727)
03-13-2012 1:57 AM
Reply to: Message 228 by foreveryoung
03-13-2012 1:12 AM


Re: Looking for info on scientists in ID camp
So the only scientists that count who believe in ID are those in the biological sciences who have done post doctoral work?
If they've not done post-doctoral work, it's not clear that they even count as scientists; and since Trixie was explicitly asking for scientists with "experience in biological sciences", then scientists not fulfilling that criterion would not count as an answer to her question.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by foreveryoung, posted 03-13-2012 1:12 AM foreveryoung has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 239 by anglagard, posted 03-15-2012 3:20 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 231 of 341 (655728)
03-13-2012 2:37 AM
Reply to: Message 228 by foreveryoung
03-13-2012 1:12 AM


Re: Looking for info on scientists in ID camp
I question whether anyone who hasn't done post doctoral work should be counted as a scientist, no matter what they believe.
Matt Ridley, writer of a number of pro-evolution books isn't usually counted as a scientist despite having a doctorate in Zoology.
The suggestion that I am only counting those in the biological sciences ignore the context of the question. Certainly those with other qualifications can be counted as scientists - but equally their qualifications don't automatically give us any reason to believe that they have any real understanding of biology or evolution. Their opinions on those matters cannot automatically be given any more credence than those of the man in the street (perhaps less, if their opinion is clearly based on prejudice). This is why Trixie wanted to know about the number of biologists in the ID movement.
And might I suggest that if you find this site a hostile environment you should turn down your own hostility. If you act like this you have to expect replies in kind, and complaining would be hypocrisy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by foreveryoung, posted 03-13-2012 1:12 AM foreveryoung has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 236 by foreveryoung, posted 03-15-2012 2:49 AM PaulK has replied

dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


(1)
Message 232 of 341 (655732)
03-13-2012 3:08 AM
Reply to: Message 228 by foreveryoung
03-13-2012 1:12 AM


Re: Looking for info on scientists in ID camp
A little perspective, perhaps.
I work as a software engineer, doing the software for embedded systems (hardware systems that are driven by a microprocessor, far more common than most people know). Before working on my computer science degree, I was a foreign language major, primarily German.
One of my German professors, a PhD, once shared with us his blue-collar father's views, that he, as a blue-collar "Joe", knew a little about every thing, whereas his son, the PhD, knows everything about nothing. In other words, PhDs are very highly educated, but normally within narrow fields. When a PhD says something pertaining to his own field, he should know what he's talking about. But when he says something completely outside his own field, his doctorate doesn't really lend any support there. For example, disregarding the "diploma mill" issues, "Dr." Kent Hovind has made many "scientific" claims and statements and his followers figure that since he's a PhD then he is a scientist. Well, his PhD, whether valid or not, was in Religious Education. Has nothing to do with science. In comparison, back in the 1970's there was a commercial depicting a cocktail party where a medical situation arises and somebody calls for a doctor and a doctor steps forward, a PhD in Musicology (as per Peter Schickele, made infamous by P.D.Q. Bach: "Those who can, do. Those who cannot, teach. Those who cannot teach become musicologists.").
So, back to your question:
So the only scientists that count who believe in ID are those in the biological sciences who have done post doctoral work?
It is a question for the biological sciences. So are you going to accept as pertinent or as questionable the objections of someone with a PhD in religious education? That is not a rhetorical question.
Here's an infamous example. Fred Hoyle was a well-known astronomer. He made some well-known probability arguments, including the "tornado in a junkyard randomly assembling a 707". They were complete bullshit; he didn't know what he was talking about. Hoyle knew something about astronomy, but he didn't know anything about biology. Does his expertise and reputation in one field transfer over to an entirely different field? Uh, no, unless he can demonstrate knowledge of that other field, which Hoyle did not do.
Of course, we do have Jonathan Wells, PhD in Molecular and Cell Biology from Berkeley. A member of the Unification Church, his expressed purpose for getting his PhD was in order to oppose evolution and in very short order he joined the Discovery Institute, etc. A parallel story is that of Steve Austin of the Institute for Creation Research (ICR). The ICR financed his education, during which he would publish under the pseudonym of "Stuart Nevins." He used that pseudonym to cover up his identity to his professors. During that time as a post-graduate student, he made many statements and claims that any lower-division under-graduate would have immediately known was completely and utterly false. Now as an in-house PhD for the ICR, his main claim to fame is in setting up situations that any geologist would know would create false dates, which means that he is deliberately creating "anomalous dates".
Both Wells and Austin have agendae outside of science. And they have both demonstrated a willingness to prostitute the truth in favor of their agendae.
OK, those PhDs in favor of ID. That has to do with the biological sciences. How many of those PhD's are in the biological sciences? What is said by those PhDs in the biological sciences? What does it matter what is said by the PhDs in the law, or even by Phillip E. Johnson, the father of Intelligent Design? Whose main objection against evolution is that "it leaves God with nothing to do." (I did honestly and truly read that article by Johnson, but have not been able to find it since then).
OK, then, just exactly why do you question biological sciences expertise in a question that intimately involves the biological sciences?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by foreveryoung, posted 03-13-2012 1:12 AM foreveryoung has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 235 by foreveryoung, posted 03-15-2012 1:33 AM dwise1 has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 233 of 341 (655740)
03-13-2012 8:59 AM
Reply to: Message 222 by Dogmafood
03-12-2012 9:08 PM


Re: Bogus or what?
Me, too. That's what makes me suspect an April Fools style joke. Static electricity at a level that wouldn't spontaneously discharge through the air to any nearby object is probably at least a couple of orders of magnitude too weak to cause a broom lying on the floor to stand on end. The typical demonstration of static electricity involves a comb and little bits of paper, not a cylinder of wood.
George Lolos is apparently a real professor of physics, but either he's in on the joke or one should avoid his courses. Anyone who's played with a Van de Graaff generator has observed that even charges of thousands of volts causing sparks longer than a foot do not generate easily noticeable forces.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 222 by Dogmafood, posted 03-12-2012 9:08 PM Dogmafood has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 234 by Dogmafood, posted 03-13-2012 7:23 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Dogmafood
Member (Idle past 348 days)
Posts: 1815
From: Ontario Canada
Joined: 08-04-2010


Message 234 of 341 (655824)
03-13-2012 7:23 PM
Reply to: Message 233 by Percy
03-13-2012 8:59 AM


Re: Bogus or what?
I suspected that it was malarky but then I thought maybe it was something that I had never heard of.
I will have to recalibrate my bogosity sensor. Cheers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 233 by Percy, posted 03-13-2012 8:59 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

foreveryoung
Member (Idle past 582 days)
Posts: 921
Joined: 12-26-2011


Message 235 of 341 (655936)
03-15-2012 1:33 AM
Reply to: Message 232 by dwise1
03-13-2012 3:08 AM


Re: Looking for info on scientists in ID camp
Although a PhD in a specific field should know more about his field than scientists from other fields, most competent scientists from a wide range of fields, can offer very valid objections if they have done sufficient research on the subject. Having certain analytical skills and a certain amount of intuition comes with being a competent scientist in my opinion. Now, if you get a large number of competent scientists from a variety of fields outside of the subject in question that object to the conclusions of the expert in the subject, I feel their objections have considerable merit. The subject of global warming comes to mind.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 232 by dwise1, posted 03-13-2012 3:08 AM dwise1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 238 by PaulK, posted 03-15-2012 3:17 AM foreveryoung has replied
 Message 240 by Pressie, posted 03-15-2012 3:45 AM foreveryoung has seen this message but not replied

foreveryoung
Member (Idle past 582 days)
Posts: 921
Joined: 12-26-2011


Message 236 of 341 (655943)
03-15-2012 2:49 AM
Reply to: Message 231 by PaulK
03-13-2012 2:37 AM


Re: Looking for info on scientists in ID camp
What hostility? I am giving my opinion. I guess my opinion is offensive to some on the face of it. I find your post to be hostile though.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 231 by PaulK, posted 03-13-2012 2:37 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 237 by PaulK, posted 03-15-2012 3:12 AM foreveryoung has seen this message but not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 237 of 341 (655945)
03-15-2012 3:12 AM
Reply to: Message 236 by foreveryoung
03-15-2012 2:49 AM


Re: Looking for info on scientists in ID camp
What do you mean, "what hostility" ? Your post was aggressive and confrontational, falsely attributing a quite unreasonable view to me - as well as ignoring the context.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 236 by foreveryoung, posted 03-15-2012 2:49 AM foreveryoung has seen this message but not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 238 of 341 (655948)
03-15-2012 3:17 AM
Reply to: Message 235 by foreveryoung
03-15-2012 1:33 AM


Re: Looking for info on scientists in ID camp
quote:
Although a PhD in a specific field should know more about his field than scientists from other fields, most competent scientists from a wide range of fields, can offer very valid objections if they have done sufficient research on the subject.
Well that's the issue isn't it. We can''t assume that they HAVE done sufficient research. And just listing people won't tell you whether their opinion is based on anything more than prejudice.
Really, just giving a list of scientists (often padded with people who aren't even scientists) is more often a propaganda tool designed to cover up a lack of valid scientific support.
quote:
Now, if you get a large number of competent scientists from a variety of fields outside of the subject in question that object to the conclusions of the expert in the subject, I feel their objections have considerable merit. The subject of global warming comes to mind.
Except that it turns out that the objections didn't have much merit...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 235 by foreveryoung, posted 03-15-2012 1:33 AM foreveryoung has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 241 by foreveryoung, posted 03-19-2012 1:17 AM PaulK has replied

anglagard
Member (Idle past 836 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 239 of 341 (655949)
03-15-2012 3:20 AM
Reply to: Message 230 by Dr Adequate
03-13-2012 1:57 AM


Post-Doc Meaning?
I am confused as to what you mean by people who have performed post-doctoral work. If by that term you mean anyone and everyone who is recruited to perform research after obtaining a PhD in a given field, such as those who jump right in to the path of a tenure-track position or those hired by industry or national labs to do research, OK. If instead you mean those who could not find suitable employment in their field and labor away in what is commonly advertised as post-doctoral positions at close to minimum wage, well they have my pity, but they are not the sole keeper of the flame.
Just puzzled as to the terminology.

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider. - Francis Bacon

This message is a reply to:
 Message 230 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-13-2012 1:57 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


(2)
Message 240 of 341 (655952)
03-15-2012 3:45 AM
Reply to: Message 235 by foreveryoung
03-15-2012 1:33 AM


Re: Looking for info on scientists in ID camp
No, foreveryoung, that should read:
quote:
Although a PhD in a specific field certainly does know more about his field than scientists from other fields, most competent scientists from a wide range of fields can offer very valid objections if they have done sufficient research on the subject and if they can demonstrate their objections.
Having certain analytical skills and a certain amount of intuition comes with being a competent scientist in my opinion. Now, if you get a relatively small percentage of competent scientists from a variety of fields outside of the subject in question that object to the conclusions of the bulk of the experts in the subject, without demonstrating their objections, I feel their objections don't have merit. The subject of global warming comes to mind.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 235 by foreveryoung, posted 03-15-2012 1:33 AM foreveryoung has seen this message but not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024