Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
2 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: 0/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What is the point of this forum?
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17815
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.1


(1)
Message 33 of 139 (535621)
11-17-2009 2:10 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by slevesque
11-16-2009 10:01 PM


quote:
You are changing the goalpost, since we are not discussing creationist science peer-reviewed papers.
I think that you mean that he is objecting to your attempt to move the goalposts. Neither Sarfati's published work (I presume that you mean "Thermoelectric power and electron-phonon enhancement in YBa2Cu3O7-8" ?) nor even Stanford's make them especially well informed about evolution. Much the same can be said for Behe.
quote:
I am adressing your initial stance that there are no true scientists who know what they are talking about on the creationist side of the debate. This is the position you had that I adressed.
In order to adress this, I used the fact that creationist publish in peer-reviewed journals, just liek every other scientist, and that they do research, just like every other scientist. And that, in fact, they know what they are talking about, just like every other scientist.
Which would be shown by them actually writing peer-reviewed papers that support the creationist position would it not ? It certainly can't be shown by pointing to Sarfati co-authoring an unrelated paper more than twenty years ago.
Sarfati's current output is more on these lines:
The Links are Missing
You may remember it, since I introduced it as an example of a long-discredited argument still being used by CMI.
quote:
Therefore, that they were ''true scientists who know what they are talking about'', and so contradicting your position that no such thing existed.
So you are actually arguing that we should assume that Sarfati is an expert on evolutionary biology, doing real research in the field based on his co-authorship of a paper on "Thermoelectric power and electron-phonon enhancement in YBa2Cu3O7-8", more than twenty years ago ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by slevesque, posted 11-16-2009 10:01 PM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by slevesque, posted 11-17-2009 3:23 AM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17815
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.1


(1)
Message 44 of 139 (535637)
11-17-2009 3:53 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by slevesque
11-17-2009 3:23 AM


And anyone who can read the context can see that you were using those two examples as "evidence" for this alleged creationist research of yours. But in neither case do you actually refer to any actual creationist research !

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by slevesque, posted 11-17-2009 3:23 AM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by slevesque, posted 11-17-2009 4:36 PM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17815
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.1


(1)
Message 55 of 139 (535753)
11-17-2009 6:02 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by slevesque
11-17-2009 4:36 PM


In other words you are seriously suggesting that if they have published work in their own field they must be doing similar work with regard to creationism. That doesn't follow.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by slevesque, posted 11-17-2009 4:36 PM slevesque has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17815
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 83 of 139 (535985)
11-19-2009 2:19 AM
Reply to: Message 68 by Arphy
11-18-2009 6:00 PM


quote:
It does matter to the creationists because as christians we find it important not to lie. To lie is to sin against God which is the opposite of the way that christians are trying to live their lives.
Given the notorious dishonesty of creationists, this only supports the view that creationism is not Christian.
quote:
As a different subject, what compels an athiest to tell the truth and not lie?
Honesty.
quote:
As for a written debate check out link below.
Thanks for that nice demonstration of why scientists shouldn't bother with creationism.
Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by Arphy, posted 11-18-2009 6:00 PM Arphy has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17815
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 84 of 139 (535986)
11-19-2009 2:27 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by slevesque
11-19-2009 2:01 AM


Re: Lying for the lord?
quote:
Also this recent article by CMI on peer pressure in science: Science peer pressure - creation.com
Thanks for that nice example of creationist dishonesty.
Their description of the quote is:
Science journal editor admits: Peer review censors against-the-trend papers.
The actual quoted statements say:
... same way some people use the few things we don’t understand (we never understand everything) to challenge the whole idea of climate change. It’s not a valid way of talking about science
So there is absolutely no admission of censorship - all that is said is that the rejected papers aren't up to standard.
(I will also point out that Science rejects a lot of good papers - because they get more than they can possibly publish).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by slevesque, posted 11-19-2009 2:01 AM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by slevesque, posted 11-19-2009 1:26 PM PaulK has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17815
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 134 of 139 (536266)
11-21-2009 4:50 AM
Reply to: Message 133 by Arphy
11-21-2009 3:56 AM


I got the point. It's pure ad hominem. The whole point is to pretend that creationist lies aren't lies and to imply that those who catch them lying are liars. Combined, of course, with the usual false equation of "creationist" with Christian.
In fact there are many Christians who reject creationism and accept evolution - including far more and better qualified scientists than the list of creationist scientists offered in this thread (which has to stoop to the level of including the likes of Jack Cuozzo - a nutty dentist - to make up the numbers).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 133 by Arphy, posted 11-21-2009 3:56 AM Arphy has 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