|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1404 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Why "YEC"/Fundamentalist Creationism is BAD for America | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 411 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Jaf writes:
The apes may not be thrilled about being related to you either but we don't get to choose our relatives.
I'm not closely related to any apes, you may wish to believe you are.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 411 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Jaf writes:
Sure you do. You also get to yell at the TV when some cartoon character does something you don't like. But scientists won't pay any more attention to you than your TV does. Creationism is a dead issue.
We get to tell people in funny white coats, clip boards and Bunsen burners to effoff when they try and lie to us about who are ancestors are.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 411 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Jaf writes:
The creation part is for the creationists to provide. You tell us what the creationist model is.
... wtf is the creation part then, ???"??????????"??????????
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 411 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Jaf writes:
I think you'll find that most things are on the side of reality. All you're doing is shaking your little fist at a cloud.
Actually I think you will the find hellavision is on your side I'm often yelling at the lies that come out of it in relation to so called science.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 411 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Jaf writes:
By definition, a troll would be somebody who's here to stir up trouble instead of honestly discussing the issues. The onus is on creationists to present their side of the question. Unfortunately, there's little enough to present and few creationists understand creationism any better than they understand science.
You tell me what it is chap itsyour troll hole not mine.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 411 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Dredge writes:
So you lied when you said that aliens were the "best scientific explanation" for... whatever. Something that doesn't exist can not be the "best scientific explanation" for anything. I don't believe in aliensIzquierdo.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 411 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
If Dredge is referring to a "spiritual realm", that is a religious argument, not a scientific one. Don't you keep saying that the "spiritual realm" can not be measured objectively? It is therefore not science and can not be the "best scientific explanation" for anything. Thus, the phenomena if they could be objectively measured originate from a spiritual realm....Izquierdo.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 411 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Phat writes:
I keep in mind that that's your opinion. You're wrong. Keep in mind that the best explanations are not always scientific. But that isn't the issue here. Dredge was talking about the "best scientific explanation", not the "best woo explanation".
Phat writes:
If it's unverifiable, it isn't even good, much less best. There are some events that have intuitive unverifiable explanations.Izquierdo.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 411 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
That's a totally empty claim with no basis in reality whatsoever. And the sad thing is, once this fact becomes known globally, the entire scientific secular humanist community will be quite literally blown away!!Izquierdo.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 411 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Dredge writes:
"Not impossible" does not make for the "best possible explanation". Any scientific explanation has to be based on something that is.
According to science, the existence of aliens is not impossible. Dredge writes:
No you couldn't. First, you'd have to have evidence that Jesus actually existed. Then you'd have to have evidence that He walked on water. Only then would science take any interest in the how.
I could think of the best scientific explanation for how Jesus walked on water... Dredge writes:
So there you go, admitting that you have no respect for science. You have "better explanations".
... I wouldn't believe that explanation because I have a better explanation that is non-scientific. Dredge writes:
What have atheists got to do with it? This is a difficult concept for an atheist to grasp, since to an atheist, science= truth.Izquierdo.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 411 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Phat writes:
Frankly, I don't think it is. It's more like wishful thinking; you relish the thought of being able to say, "I told you so."
It is a belief. Phat writes:
You could say the same thing about any nonsense you choose to spout: Trump will ride to his twentieth inauguration on a flying unicorn. My basic point is that not everything that may happen will be corroborated by evidence except after the fact. ABE:
Phat writes:
No.
Do you believe that Jesus was anything more than an Elmer Gantry type of amalgamation? Phat writes:
You know the answer to that. Intuition is thoroughly unreliable. Would you ever reconsider based on intuition or would you man up and wait for solid objective evidence? Edited by ringo, : Replied to Phat's edit.Izquierdo.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 411 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Dredge writes:
It's not an argument. It's an observation.
ringo writes:
A poor argument but what an excellent "straw man"! So there you go, admitting that you have no respect for science. You have "better explanations". Dredge writes:
Just about everybody agrees that science is limited. But you didn't just say that science is limited. You said, "I have a better explanation that is non-scientific." You have not shown that your non-scientific "explanation" is "better".
Believing science is limited doesn't mean I have no respect for what science can achieve. Dredge writes:
A supercomputer can tell you as much about God as it can tell you about leprechauns or Bigfeet. You have not shown that there is anything about God, leprechauns or Bigfeet that a supercomputer can't tell you.
A super computer can't tell me about God but that doesn't mean I have no respect for a super computer. Dredge writes:
So, again, what has that got to do with this conversation? Are there any atheists here who think that way? You might as well be pontificating about how black people think. To an atheist, science is the ultimate measure of truth - ie, science is their god and in effect, they worship it.All that are in Hell, choose it. -- CS Lewis That's just egregiously stupid. -- ringo
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024