Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The smoldering of EVC
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 857 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


(2)
Message 61 of 168 (715199)
01-02-2014 9:55 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by marc9000
01-01-2014 8:26 PM


Re: challenge
it's important to note that equally, the reasons people are creationists are much more complicated and varied than most in the scientific community (and at forums like this) are willing to acknowledge.
People are creationists because they understand that the Bible says its true and their literal interpretation of what scripture says is infallible.
Only scientific scrutiny, or scrutiny from other sources of knowledge?
I am not really sure what you are implying here. Science is a very specific way of understanding our world. It deals with natural phenomenon and processes. If a particular belief involves natural processes, then it is subject to scientific scrutiny. Do I consider the Bible to be a source of knowledge? Yes, I do. What other "sources" are you thinking of?
What misconceptions did you learn at church? How did you figure out that they were misconceptions?
My remark was made specifically regarding why people are atheists. The misconception that many churched people have is that people are atheists because they want to live a wicked lifestyle. That they reject God so they don't have to accept any moral values. In reality, a significant reason people are atheists is the utter failure of the church to live up to its name (Christians = little Christs). A major part of this failure in recent times is this idea that if the earth is old the we need to throw out the entire Bible. Those that hold to this young earth position resort to half-truths, misrepresentations, misunderstanding and out-right deception to support their supposed "truth." It is utterly deplorable.
Hopefully, you didn't let an atheist tell you.
Well, yes. Shouldn't I allow an atheist to inform me as to why he/she is an atheist? (That is the context of my comment after all)
How about atheists who don't want to learn, don't want to consider ANY point of view that any creationist has to offer, and who doesn't want their personal beliefs challenged?
I think you mean "atheists who won't agree with you because they think you are wrong." What about it? If you are coming here to try and convert an atheist into a YEC, then you are totally wasting your time. But you only have control over yourself. If your argument is sound and you convince yourself, then it doesn't matter what others think. You can't make them accept your beliefs and whining about it won't help your case any.
About 95% of the posters at EvC fit that description,
Care to support this? This may be an example of why you take such heckling - unsupportable, unfounded assertions. Let me guess, you, Faith, Mindspawn and bolderdash are the only ones who DON'T fit this description.
the increasing clarity that the former claims that Christianity and naturalistic science don’t conflict is, and always has been, untrue.
Nonsense. Dwise1 hit the nail right on the head in his Message 854. What young earth proponents do is start with conclusion that is "true" and then try and get "science" to agree with their conclusion. This claim of literalists is what is incompatible with science. It never occurs to them that their initial premise could be wrong. It never occurs to them to think "maybe we have misunderstood this particular interpretation."
They’ve gone from having a more scientific content to being more about largely insignificant one-sided bashing of traditional religion.
It might be time for traditional religion to get bashed. If you think about it, when the church was established it was intended to be radically different, not traditional. But today the church wants to be comfortable, it wants to hold on to its dogmatic traditions regardless of how ineffective and out of touch with our modern world they are. The church of today has become so much like the Pharisees of Jesus' time; more concerned with the traditions of men that with the purpose God has given us - to be salt and light.
HBD

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for. But until the end of the present exile has come and terminated this our imperfection by which "we know in part," I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by marc9000, posted 01-01-2014 8:26 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


(2)
Message 62 of 168 (715200)
01-02-2014 9:57 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by Faith
01-02-2014 4:41 AM


Re: The smoldering of EvC
I didn't just say Geology I think I said Old Earth Geology or something like that, because I've read a LOT in basic Geology, and found I already knew some 80% of Dr. A's course when he was posting it here.
Message 683:
... to make the points I want to make on this thread doesn't need sophisticated knowledge of geology, and if I had such knowledge I wouldn't be any less insulting...
Message 847:
I know very little about conventional Old Earth Geology, the names of the supposed eras and all that and I don't want to know more, it's obviously just an elaborate fantasy into which a lot of genuine science is forced to fit, too bad.
So you did say Old Earth geology there, but you made it clear you know very little.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Faith, posted 01-02-2014 4:41 AM Faith has not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 857 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


(2)
Message 63 of 168 (715201)
01-02-2014 10:04 AM
Reply to: Message 60 by RAZD
01-02-2014 9:52 AM


Re: challenge
Ever been to a christian forum and watched how the naturalist views are treated? Seems they don't want to be popular with all people.
From my experience on EFF, what I realized is that their primary purpose is to proselytize the "unbelievers." When they realize that you will not be converted they just ban you since there is no reason for you to be there except to waste people's time.
HBD

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for. But until the end of the present exile has come and terminated this our imperfection by which "we know in part," I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by RAZD, posted 01-02-2014 9:52 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 988 days)
Posts: 1497
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


(6)
Message 64 of 168 (715206)
01-02-2014 11:09 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by Faith
01-02-2014 4:41 AM


Re: The smoldering of EvC
It's certainly not the "science" here that we creationists suffer from, it's the misrepresentations and the idiotic purely imaginative speculative answers that are taken for gospel over anything we offer about anything. ALL you guys have IS speculation and the POWER TO ENFORCE it.
This would be true indeed if the only places these "old Earth" theories are promoted are on evolution v. creation websites. But of course we know that is not the case. We actually USE our theories to find billions of dollars in natural resources? You know how Creationist "geologists" make money? They bilk the ignorant masses like you by selling books, videos, and "Technical Journal" papers, which you turn around and defend to the non-believers. You ingest junk science and defecate insensible rubbish.
Rather than sit in your sweet little creationist offices writing ABOUT geology and coming up with all these sciency theories, why aren't you all out applying your theories? That is the true test of whether your theories ought to be accepted or not. Instead, you'd rather sit at home complaining and whining and crying and acting worse than a petulant 3 year old child whose mother won't buy them a Thomas the Tank Engine toy because the mean old Atheists won't blindly accept your cockamamie stories. Boo fucking hoo.
As a geologist, nearly every single day of my job, I get questioned, derided, laughed at, eyes rolled at, and snickered at by other geologists, and have my science called "voodoo" by ignorant engineers for my own cockamamie ideas. You know how I handle it? I get the fuck to work and show them EVIDENCE and more EVIDENCE of why my idiotic idea is right or better and theirs is wrong. The ones who cry about being laughed at, find themselves with less and less work until they can only talk about the days, "I used to be a geologist." We don't put up with whiny babies in geology, because climbing mountains or hiking deserts with a pack full of rocks, beer, and a hammer is hard enough work.
And if you go to Geology conferences, there are arguments all the time about so-and-so's ridiculous theory about the K-T extinction or the ha ha snowball earth joke or continental drift or a giant flood in Washington state or meteorites hitting the earth. If scientists gave up every time they were laughed at or derided, no one would ever go on to discover anything new.
So forgive me if I don't give a shit about your having to put up with a little written abuse for your cockamamie ideas on geology on some EvC website on the internet.
If you want to leave, leave. Stop playing the poor persecuted Christian and grow some fucking balls already. In fact, grow a vagina. They're tougher.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Faith, posted 01-02-2014 4:41 AM Faith has not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 857 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


(3)
Message 65 of 168 (715211)
01-02-2014 11:19 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by Faith
01-02-2014 7:47 AM


Re: The smoldering of EvC
Creationists hardly ever share the same point of view or argue the same issues. I could not expect another Creationist to join in on my argument, it's something I've worked on for a long time on my own. It's sad but we are therefore of just about no use to each other.
Shouldn't that be a huge red flag that something is terribly wrong? Why can creationists not agree on important issues like flood geology? Why is there no coherent, unified theory that holds it all together? But instead it gives the appearance that everyone is basing their ideas on their own imaginings.
HBD

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for. But until the end of the present exile has come and terminated this our imperfection by which "we know in part," I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Faith, posted 01-02-2014 7:47 AM Faith has not replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


(1)
Message 66 of 168 (715213)
01-02-2014 11:39 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Bolder-dash
12-30-2013 9:13 PM


Smoldering?
Bolder-dash writes:
It is with a certain amount of glee that I watch the now complete decline of a website that once purported to be an inclusive forum for rational debate concerning evolution and creation.
This thread itself has over 60 posts in less than 4 days.
It was even over the holidays. I try to read here as much as possible, but even I didn't see this until it already had pages of posts.
It makes me wonder what "complete decline" actually entails...
As we can now clearly see, that no longer exists, although in reality it never did, it just was a better illusion before, because they had topic names that actually looked like places where people could debate.
What names for thread titles would you prefer?
  • Evolution vs. Creationism
  • Why Creationism is true
  • When Evolution attacks!
    ?
Personally, I don't like those sorts of threads at all. That debate was over in the '70s when it started ('60s? ...older folks than me will know).
It's just wrong. But some people will believe in wrong things... that will never go away.
I prefer titles like these:
  • Is religion good for us
  • Do we need God
This sort of debate may not ever have an ending. I don't think one side here actually is "better" in any objective way. I think people are different and different people will need different things. Some will need religion and others will need atheism. Maybe. Maybe not. It is interesting, though.
And, yeah, as the original EvC debate crops up in the news every now and then... we'll still note it here. But you are right, Creationists are becoming fewer and farther between. I don't think that's because of this forum, though. I think that's just because most people don't like to be wrong for their entire lives.
Thanks for adding to the diversity!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Bolder-dash, posted 12-30-2013 9:13 PM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4344
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.9


Message 67 of 168 (715216)
01-02-2014 11:59 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by Faith
01-02-2014 7:39 AM


Re: The smoldering of EvC
Faith writes:
ALL you have is your theories and speculations about the facts and evidence, and the facts and evidence are subject to other interpretations than yours -- you just refuse to consider the other interpretations
You are wrong. You do NOT have a different interpretation, all you have is POOF!
There was no flood. ALL the evidence is against you. There were no hundreds of miles of undisturbed layers. You made that up....POOF!
You ignore all the evidence that proves you are wrong and make up stuff that is outrageously wrong.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie
If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Faith, posted 01-02-2014 7:39 AM Faith has not replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4344
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.9


(2)
Message 68 of 168 (715217)
01-02-2014 12:08 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by Faith
01-02-2014 7:47 AM


Re: The smoldering of EvC
The reason for unanimity among those on the science side is not a result of any effort to "harmonize with each other." It comes from basing one's views upon evidence.
There's that recitation of the Creed again. What a lie from the pit of Hell that is.
Ahhhh, nicely put, Evidence is a lie from the pit of Hell.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie
If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Faith, posted 01-02-2014 7:47 AM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by Percy, posted 01-02-2014 1:25 PM Tanypteryx has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 69 of 168 (715221)
01-02-2014 1:25 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by Tanypteryx
01-02-2014 12:08 PM


Re: The smoldering of EvC
In Faith's defense, and before you become the target of her invective, I think what she was calling a "lie from the pit of Hell" was that evidence is why we agree. She thinks there's some kind of secret conspiracy and that evidence has nothing to do with it. Lacking the ability to connect dots of evidence into reconstructions of what actually happened and having to just make it up, she assumes that everyone just makes it up.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by Tanypteryx, posted 01-02-2014 12:08 PM Tanypteryx has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by AZPaul3, posted 01-02-2014 1:41 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(2)
Message 70 of 168 (715223)
01-02-2014 1:41 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Percy
01-02-2014 1:25 PM


Re: The smoldering of EvC
We're seeing a lot of this conspiracy theory science-cabal thing popping up all across the net.
It's getting out of hand. We need to get this genie back into the bottle and under control. It's time to change all the passwords and the secret handshakes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Percy, posted 01-02-2014 1:25 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by Tanypteryx, posted 01-02-2014 2:36 PM AZPaul3 has replied
 Message 87 by roxrkool, posted 01-02-2014 10:14 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
Genomicus
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 852
Joined: 02-15-2012


(2)
Message 71 of 168 (715227)
01-02-2014 2:03 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Bolder-dash
12-30-2013 9:13 PM


As we can now clearly see, that no longer exists, although in reality it never did, it just was a better illusion before, because they had topic names that actually looked like places where people could debate. That was never true, you never could debate, because Percy wouldn't allow that, but it looked like you could if you were a first time visitor.
Actually, in this universe, Percy did/does allow debates. I'm still not sure where you get this idea of not being able to debate here.
They pretended they wanted to discuss science, but Percy made sure that would never be allowed, by silencing all detractors of his world view, and giving harsh warning to the rest about making sure you toe the party line.
I never toed "the party line" (not that there ever was a "party line"), I was never silenced, and, from what I can see, nor was anyone else. Compared to other forums that are concerned with origins, EvC is pretty tolerant. You won't get kicked just because you disagree with someone (or disagree with the "party line").

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Bolder-dash, posted 12-30-2013 9:13 PM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
Genomicus
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 852
Joined: 02-15-2012


Message 72 of 168 (715229)
01-02-2014 2:06 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Percy
12-31-2013 8:59 AM


Discussion boards are more difficult to use on mobile platforms, and those looking around for something interesting are going to emphasize social media sites like Facebook and Twitter where we have no presence.
Just curious -- why doesn't EvC have a Facebook page? I suppose the main concern there would be the absence of anonymity for the participants, but beyond that, it seems like a Facebook platform for EvC might lead to more discussion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Percy, posted 12-31-2013 8:59 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by Percy, posted 01-02-2014 2:23 PM Genomicus has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 73 of 168 (715230)
01-02-2014 2:23 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by Genomicus
01-02-2014 2:06 PM


I did create what now appears to be a Facebook Ads account (that wasn't what they were calling it at the time - I signed up under some sort of organization category), but I lacked the time to do anything with it. If someone wants to volunteer to run our Facebook page they should send me a PM.
Before anyone rushes to volunteer, in my view no Facebook page at all is better than a half-baked or slapdash one. While I couldn't do much if any of the work I'd need to be involved in decisions about what it looks like and what is done with it, and I'd have to have ultimate say.
So, that being said, I think having a Facebook page would be a great idea, and I'm usually not that impossible to deal with.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Genomicus, posted 01-02-2014 2:06 PM Genomicus has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by RAZD, posted 01-02-2014 2:36 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 78 by Tanypteryx, posted 01-02-2014 2:59 PM Percy has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 74 of 168 (715232)
01-02-2014 2:36 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by Percy
01-02-2014 2:23 PM


I'm not sure Facebook is appropriate for debate -- it suffers from all the problems other boards have regarding tracking of arguments and such.
That said, I wonder if it wouldn't be a good place for "News in Evolution and Creation" with a link to follow up in a debate forum.
The news would not be for debate but information, new studies etc, much like the Creation/Evolution In The News
Just a thought
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by Percy, posted 01-02-2014 2:23 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by roxrkool, posted 01-02-2014 3:19 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4344
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.9


Message 75 of 168 (715233)
01-02-2014 2:36 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by AZPaul3
01-02-2014 1:41 PM


Re: The smoldering of EvC
It's time to change all the passwords and the secret handshakes.
Oh crap! I deleted the email with the new passwords and handshakes. Now what?

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie
If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by AZPaul3, posted 01-02-2014 1:41 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by Percy, posted 01-02-2014 2:47 PM Tanypteryx has not replied
 Message 77 by AZPaul3, posted 01-02-2014 2:58 PM Tanypteryx has replied
 Message 79 by RAZD, posted 01-02-2014 3:00 PM Tanypteryx 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