|
Author
|
Topic: Reasons for Creationist Persistence
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
Message 19 of 220 (394078)
04-09-2007 3:00 PM
|
Reply to: Message 17 by DorfMan
04-09-2007 2:22 PM
|
|
Dorfman writes: You can't make up your scientific mind what's what, so I'm gonna wait until you do, then I'm gonna remember the last time you were so sure. That's an excellent example of why (Biblical) creationists are so persistent: laziness. They want all The Answers™ now and they want them to last forever. They don't want to put any effort into keeping up with advances in knowledge. Edited by Ringo, : Added "Biblical".
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 17 by DorfMan, posted 04-09-2007 2:22 PM | | DorfMan has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 22 by DorfMan, posted 04-09-2007 3:42 PM | | ringo has not replied | | | Message 24 by GDR, posted 04-09-2007 3:50 PM | | ringo has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 26 of 220 (394097)
04-09-2007 4:03 PM
|
Reply to: Message 24 by GDR
04-09-2007 3:50 PM
|
|
GDR writes: One problem I suppose is that there seems to be a group that feels that if a six day creation period isn't literally true then none of it's true. I think the laziness applies to Biblical thinking just as it does to scientific thinking. They don't want to have to look at the scientific evidence (or the Bible) and try to improve their understanding of it. They just want to accept or reject it wholesale. We see it here all the time: people who swallow the six-day creation dogma will swallow whatever dogma they have been fed. There's no desire - or even willingness - to put any effort into understanding. It isn't just bad information that they want to foster. It's a bad way of thinking.
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 24 by GDR, posted 04-09-2007 3:50 PM | | GDR has not replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
Re: The Argument From Personal Ignorance
mjfloresta writes: Thus my perception of creationists at large (of whom I am one) is quite the contrary to that which is presented at large on this board.. And quite un-backed-up by any facts. We have creos telling us all the time that there are lots and lots and lots and lots of real scientists who are creationists. But we never see the list. Why are creationists so persistent in telling us about those creo-scientists, and so equally persistent in not telling us who they are?
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 37 by mjfloresta, posted 04-10-2007 2:52 PM | | mjfloresta has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
Re: The Argument From Personal Ignorance
mjfloresta writes: You're going to choose to disbelieve me because I haven't provided the names of the my creationist friends and acquaintances that practice science? This is a science thread. The deal is: no evidence, no belief. You agreed to that implicitly when you posted in a science thread. Put up your evidence or retract the assertion.
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 40 by mjfloresta, posted 04-10-2007 3:34 PM | | mjfloresta has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
Re: The Argument From Personal Ignorance
mjfloresta writes: ...so why don't you read through this thread and tell me if it reads more like an empirically supported research paper or an opinions page from the NY Times... If anybody else was asked to support their opinions, they would be expected to do so. By persistently refusing to support your opinion, you are just undermining your own credibility. When creationists persistently refuse to put up their evidence, it's usually because they don't have any. Think how easy it would be to prove me wrong. Instead, you prefer to assert me wrong.
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 46 by mjfloresta, posted 04-10-2007 3:55 PM | | mjfloresta has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
Re: The Argument From Personal Ignorance
mjfloresta writes: Are you asking me for the names of my acquaintances? How many names would satisfy you? The thirty or so that I know? Any or all of those would be better than evasion.
However many pro-creation scientists actually exist? My estimate is zero. Prove me wrong. (Just so you don't accuse me of moving the goalpoasts, make that: people who do science in biology-related fields and come up with results that conflict with evolution.)
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 49 by mjfloresta, posted 04-10-2007 4:07 PM | | mjfloresta has not replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 98 of 220 (394427)
04-11-2007 11:55 AM
|
Reply to: Message 97 by Buzsaw
04-11-2007 9:43 AM
|
|
Re: Creo Scientists
Hi Buz. Glad you're still keeping an eye on us. 
Here's a list of close to 200 from AIG, a number of whom should fit the ticket as scientists. Thanks. Now, the next step would be a list of their peer-reviewed papers that refute evolution, an old earth, etc. (Just one comment on one example that I'm somewhat familiar with: Dr. Steve Austin has a legitimate Ph.D. in geology. He also has one (1) peer-reviewed paper that I could find. It has nothing to do with the evolution/creation controversy. He also has a long litany of appallingly bad "science" to his "credit".)
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 97 by Buzsaw, posted 04-11-2007 9:43 AM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 104 of 220 (394527)
04-11-2007 9:36 PM
|
Reply to: Message 102 by Buzsaw
04-11-2007 9:18 PM
|
|
Re: Creo Scientists
Buzsaw writes: Ringo called for a list of creo scientists. He did not specify. I did, actually, in Message 52:
quote:
(Just so you don't accuse me of moving the goalpoasts, make that: people who do science in biology-related fields and come up with results that conflict with evolution.)
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 102 by Buzsaw, posted 04-11-2007 9:18 PM | | Buzsaw has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 125 by Buzsaw, posted 04-13-2007 8:05 PM | | ringo has not replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 169 of 220 (399237)
05-04-2007 3:20 PM
|
Reply to: Message 167 by RAZD
05-04-2007 2:01 PM
|
|
Re: good posts
RAZD writes: Do you know of any creationist site that does either answer the refutations or change their pages? I know of one change - that last update is thanks to me.  He removed a reference to the infamous "vertical whale". The remainder of the two-year email exchange was less fruitful. He (almost) admitted to me once that Steve Austin screwed up the Mt. St. Helens dating thing, but the rest of the page is still Mt. St. PRATT. He doesn't answer my emails any more.
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 167 by RAZD, posted 05-04-2007 2:01 PM | | RAZD has not replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 175 of 220 (402910)
05-30-2007 5:25 PM
|
Reply to: Message 173 by Tyberius
05-30-2007 4:43 PM
|
|
Re: The Current Plan of the Christian Cult of Ignorance
Tyberius writes: ... thus making the virus "immune" to the antibiotic. The virus does not mutate into a better organism.... Ummm.... Isn't resistance to death "better"?
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 173 by Tyberius, posted 05-30-2007 4:43 PM | | Tyberius has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 178 of 220 (402919)
05-30-2007 5:52 PM
|
Reply to: Message 176 by Tyberius
05-30-2007 5:35 PM
|
|
Tyberius writes: IT does not matter that it is "better". It is a degenerated form of the original virus. For evolution to work, two things matter: - The organism has to change - e.g. by mutation.
- The "new" organism has to be able to survive and reproduce.
"Degeneration" is irrelevant.
There is never a decrease in disorder, always a increase. Nonsense, but off topic. We have lots of other threads where people will be glad to show you that you don't know the first thing about science. The topic here is "Reasons for Creationist Persistence". If you're a creationist (and a persistent one), maybe you can give us some insight. Welcome to EvC. Edited by Ringo, : Removed inappropriate subtitle.
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 176 by Tyberius, posted 05-30-2007 5:35 PM | | Tyberius has not replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 203 of 220 (403498)
06-03-2007 1:24 PM
|
Reply to: Message 201 by Phat
06-03-2007 10:33 AM
|
|
Phat writes: ... if you question everything, including whether you even exist or not, you can never have a foundational belief. There are people whose only job is to go around inspecting foundations for soundness. What makes you think an untested foundation is a good thing?
You tell me sometimes that in order to arrive at a more honest and examined truth, I need to throw God away. To me, that is like throwing away the sample of a substance that I wished to test. It's more like throwing away your preconceived notions of what the sample is.
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 201 by Phat, posted 06-03-2007 10:33 AM | | Phat has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2