Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 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: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Anyone else notice this pattern?
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 1 of 318 (444303)
12-28-2007 8:57 PM


So, I have noticed that many of the Creationists on this board have, shall we say, less than stellar writing skills compared to the science-minded folks.
Sure, there are a few exceptions, but I would guess that well more than two thirds of the Creationists who have ever posted here simply write very poorly.
Their grammar and punctuation ranges from average to downright awful, they frequently fail to break their posts into paragraphs, and their ability to express ideas, sentence structure and word usage doesn't give one an impression of their having done very well in high school English.
On a related note, my husband frequents a message board populated by people who work in higher education. Not surprisingly, most posters there write well, and express themselves clearly and often eloquently.
Every so often a controversial subject such as Affirmative Action comes up in discussion, and he has noticed that of those people who pop up to write posts condemning it, many of them possess markedly poor writing skills.
So, why does everyone think this pattern exists?

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by molbiogirl, posted 12-28-2007 9:06 PM nator has not replied
 Message 3 by Zawi, posted 12-28-2007 9:23 PM nator has replied
 Message 4 by Taz, posted 12-28-2007 10:02 PM nator has not replied
 Message 28 by Jon, posted 12-29-2007 8:22 PM nator has not replied
 Message 41 by LinearAq, posted 12-31-2007 8:15 AM nator has not replied
 Message 47 by ThreeDogs, posted 01-08-2008 3:50 PM nator has not replied
 Message 59 by riVeRraT, posted 01-09-2008 7:39 PM nator has replied
 Message 95 by Trae, posted 01-16-2008 4:44 PM nator has replied
 Message 99 by pelican, posted 01-17-2008 11:55 PM nator has not replied
 Message 294 by Hill Billy, posted 01-27-2008 1:30 AM nator has replied
 Message 315 by pelican, posted 01-27-2008 8:50 PM nator has not replied
 Message 317 by pelican, posted 01-27-2008 10:01 PM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 10 of 318 (444440)
12-29-2007 1:33 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Zawi
12-28-2007 9:23 PM


quote:
Someone who is wrong about an issue can increase their persuasiveness if their writing skills are superior to that of their opponent's
I don't think this is true at all.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Zawi, posted 12-28-2007 9:23 PM Zawi has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by obvious Child, posted 12-31-2007 3:23 AM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 11 of 318 (444443)
12-29-2007 1:44 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Buzsaw
12-28-2007 11:22 PM


Re: Postulating Poster Patterns
quote:
NJ is as good as they come; heads and shoulders over many evolutionists here relative to articulation, phraseology and intelligence.
I'll agree that NJ is much better than most Creationists at basic writing skills, but he isn't any better than average among all writers on this board.
As for intelligence...if he's so smart, then why are so very many of his arguments demolished so easily?
He and you both, Buz, have abandoned so many posts and threads and ignored so many rebuttals!
This indicates that you and Juggs tend to not think through the logical implications of your argument before you post them, or if you think you have, you haven't done a very good job. There's also a lot of inaccurate facts that you both tend to put out there that your opponents have to spend a lot of time correcting...
Edited by nator, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Buzsaw, posted 12-28-2007 11:22 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Hyroglyphx, posted 12-29-2007 4:46 PM nator has not replied
 Message 19 by Buzsaw, posted 12-29-2007 7:04 PM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 44 of 318 (446494)
01-06-2008 2:13 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Buzsaw
12-29-2007 7:04 PM


Re: Postulating Poster Patterns
quote:
In addition, the intelligence level of sooo much of which is thrown out at us by some notorious evolutionists on this board is too similar to the stuff orangutans throw at zoo spectators. It's in our best interest to move on and leave the stuff lay.
Really?
If what you are replying to is of such poor quality, it should be incredibly easy to rebut, shouldn't it? (pun intended)
For example, I have rebutted your general, unspecific claims regarding the safety of comfrey and that it has never hurt anyone.
When I provided several specific examples of where theraputic ingestion of comfrey has killed people, you scampered off.
You do that kind of thing all the time, and you aren't fooling anyone since everyone who can read, and is willing to examine the threads in a fair and balanced manner, can see that you've done this, over and over.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Buzsaw, posted 12-29-2007 7:04 PM Buzsaw has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 45 of 318 (446496)
01-06-2008 2:14 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by Buzsaw
12-29-2007 7:16 PM


Re: Getting Challenged
quote:
According to your own statement you don't get challenged on your own ideological turf.
I've challeneged jar on several occasions.
Once regarding film and another time regarding gun control.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Buzsaw, posted 12-29-2007 7:16 PM Buzsaw has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 46 of 318 (446499)
01-06-2008 2:18 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Hyroglyphx
12-29-2007 7:40 PM


Re: Postulating Poster Patterns
quote:
But there is this wrong-headed philosophy that abounds concerning scientists -- that they are the be-all, end-all -- as if no other human being could possibly add anything of substance to any given debate.
I don't know where you get that idea.
Maybe you are exaggerating. I think what is most often said is that if what a layperson thinks is true about a particular scientific issue contradicts what the consensus opinion of the scientific experts is concerning that issue, we should probably give greater weight to the scientific consensus.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Hyroglyphx, posted 12-29-2007 7:40 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 70 of 318 (447755)
01-10-2008 6:11 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by riVeRraT
01-09-2008 7:39 PM


quote:
I'll tell you what pattern I did notice, that supposedly higher educated, rational thinkers rarely know which way to turn a screw driver, can't hang a picture, or change their oil.
Having spent the last 15 years hanging out with many, many science PhD candidates and professional scientists, the opposite has been true in my experience.
quote:
I've noticed there is a big difference in talking about how the world works, and actually working on it.
I don't think so at all.
I think that the more you understand and think about how the world works the better you are at working on it.
Of course, the stuff you are talking about has little to do with education more to do with physical coordination and experience.
I'll bet you wouldn't know how to design an FMRI experiment to test a theory about a particular aspect of working memory and how to analyse the data, but that's because you haven't gone to graduate school and gotten a PhD in Cognitive Psychology and therefore haven't been trained to do that. My husband has, and that's why he can, and has, done that numerous times.
quote:
I've noticed so called "dumb" people, have more street smarts and common sense than most "educated" people.
Again, that hasn't been my experience at all. I have spent the last 15 years working in the specialty food/restaurant/grocery industry. The educational backgrounds of the people I've worked with have varied widely, from people with PhD's, Masters and MD's to technical school degrees to high school diplomas to dropouts who've been in prison and/or rehab for most of their lives.
The "dumb" ones were the ones more likely to have spent time in prison and to have gotten mixed up with drugs. Obviously, they couldn't have had much "street smarts" or "common sense" if they got mixed up with that kind of stuff.
The smart ones, regardless of educational background, were always trying to get more education.
quote:
Autism kids are an example of just how people are good in some areas, and not good in others.
Huh?
quote:
In other words what you've noticed is just life, and it doesn't mean shit. That's why the pattern exists. Should I go around calling all people who do not know how to turn a screw driver idiots?
The difference is, rat, that we don't spend 12 years of school taking classes on using screwdrivers.
Furthermore, our ability to communicate our ideas effectively in written form is a very good indicator of how orderly our thinking is and if we have mastered the use of our language.
Not everyone will be a brilliant writer, of course, but it is shameful how truly poorly some people write in this country. We already know that sub-standard school systems turn out illiterate people so it isn't that much of a stretch to figure that it will also turn out people who are really poor writers.
What I'd like to know, though, is why so many of those terrible writers on this board seem to be religious and/or Creationists?
quote:
Or should I be fair, understanding, open minded, and willing to see both sides of a story and give the benefit of the doubt, and even help them to turn the dam screwdriver?
I've tried to help you learn to write more clearly and to learn to use the correct contraction of "you are" (you're/your), but you have only resented it. I can't help someone who doesn't want to improve their skills.
quote:
It's like your saying to us, only stupid people believe in God, and smart people are the ones that actually know what is going on.
No.
I am saying that a lot of Creationists are poor writers.
Apparently, you have a problem with comprehension as well as expression.
There are lots of smart people who believe in God, but I think people can't be all that smart and also a Creationist. At the very least, a smart Creationist has to struggle with a lot of cognitive dissonance and willful ignorance.
quote:
I fear not because I know God will show you different one day nator, as He did me. There's that chip I was talking about (bluegenes). The higher up you put yourself on that pedestal, the longer it is to fall.
Whatever, rat.
I am not ashamed of having good writing and communication skills. I think that this sort of anti-intellecualism and fear and resentment of education and intelligence can only be damaging to our country.
quote:
Long live God, Nascar, beer, 3 wheelers, and people who can't spell who have no teeth. end rant.
Huh?
Edited by nator, : No reason given.
Edited by nator, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by riVeRraT, posted 01-09-2008 7:39 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by Phat, posted 01-11-2008 3:41 AM nator has not replied
 Message 81 by riVeRraT, posted 01-11-2008 1:05 PM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 71 of 318 (447770)
01-10-2008 6:37 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by riVeRraT
01-10-2008 1:03 PM


quote:
What ever made you think you were one of those who can express themselves well?
When Taz explains something, I can understand him just fine.
I don't reply to any of his points with "Huh?" like I have to do with you all the time.
quote:
People who lose their temper often are not among the ranks of people expressing themselves well.
Well, I suppose that means you express yourself the least well of just about anyone on this board.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by riVeRraT, posted 01-10-2008 1:03 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by riVeRraT, posted 01-11-2008 1:23 PM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 89 of 318 (448021)
01-11-2008 6:14 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by riVeRraT
01-11-2008 12:10 PM


Re: Working At Improvement
quote:
I've noticed a pattern with people who, quote "express themselves well in writing" seem to not be able to understand others writings, unless they agree on things, and even then it is shaky.
If I may assume that you are referring to me, I'll just point out that I have disagreed with Percy, Phat, Jar, Holmes, Crashfrog, Subbie, Monk, LinearAq, RedVento, Nemesis Juggernaut, Faith, and lots of other people and I have generally had no trouble understanding what those posters write.
People like Buzsaw, Mike The Wiz, Iano, and you tend to mangle the language and write in disjointed ways, creating muddled word salads and even losing track of your own arguments so that they have to be repeated back to you.
Lots of people don't understand what the hell you are trying to say, rat.
Don't mistake an unwillingness on many people's part to be taken on one of your avoidant runarounds as some kind of endorsement of the clarity of your expression.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by riVeRraT, posted 01-11-2008 12:10 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by riVeRraT, posted 01-13-2008 7:50 AM nator has replied
 Message 273 by Hill Billy, posted 01-26-2008 2:56 PM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 91 of 318 (448030)
01-11-2008 6:49 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by riVeRraT
01-11-2008 1:05 PM


quote:
I call Bullshit. You always come out these things that appear to completely contradict what I say.
LOL! Gasp! Maybe that's because what I say does completely contradict what you say.
quote:
Let me tell you nator, I work on things for a living, and the majority of my customers are academic people who do not know how to turn a screw driver.
"Academic people"? As in, "people who work in academia"? Or, do you mean people with a lot of education? there's a difference, you know.
Of course, even if this is true, you are making an illogical leap to conclude that since you have a lot of highly-educated clients that all or most highly-educated people can't turn a screwdriver.
Things you might not have considered:
-They know how to but don't enjoy it so they pay someone to do it.
-They know how to do it but don't have the time to do it.
-Less-educated people might be just as likely to not know how to turn a screwdriver as a more educated person, but they cannot afford to have someone like you come to their house to fix things, so you never see them.
-you don't get called to the houses where the highly-educated people don't need you because they already know how to do it.
So, you have a self-selected sample that doesn't really tell you anything about educated people's general ability to turn screwdrivers, since you don't know what proportion of all highly-educated people that works out to. You also don't know how many less-educated people don't know how to turn screwdrivers because they can't afford to have people like you come to their house.
quote:
I even had one lady who was so impressed with my problem solving skills, and once explained to her in an understandable fashion she commented on why can't her husband who is a brain surgeon, figure these things out. This is typical.
If the brain surgeon had the proper instruction, he almost certainly would be able to figure these things out.
quote:
you didn't just say that all people on drugs are dumb?
No.
I said, since you clearly didn't read it the first time:
The "dumb" ones were the ones more likely to have spent time in prison and to have gotten mixed up with drugs. Obviously, they couldn't have had much "street smarts" or "common sense" if they got mixed up with that kind of stuff.
People with a lot of common sense and street smarts don't get mixed up with drugs and get on the wrong side of the law.
I hardly think that this could be considered a controversial statment.
Furthermore, our ability to communicate our ideas effectively in written form is a very good indicator of how orderly our thinking is and if we have mastered the use of our language.
quote:
No it isn't. People who score well in English do not usually do as well in math, and vise versa. Very few people possess the complete package, or are compelled to even try.
Look, read what I wrote.
People who don't write well have not mastered the use of our language. How could it be otherwise?
People who's thought processes are disorganized would naturally have disorganized writing.
But anyway, to get into graduate school you have to take the GRE's, and to get into the better schools you have to be good at both. In fact, you have to be pretty good at both to get into graduate school at all.
I mean, there's a reason most people don't become MD's or PhD's. You have to be really smart and want to work really hard for years and years.
Most people drop out before completion of their MD and PhD programs becasue they don't have what it takes.
quote:
I hated English, but that does not mean I couldn't be good at it. Just coming into these forums has inspired me to become better at it. I hope you have noticed an improvement.
I have noticed an improvement, actually.
I am saying that a lot of Creationists are poor writers.
quote:
*correction* A lot of creationists on this board are poor writers.
Yeah, which is what I wrote in my OP.
quote:
Which has nothing to do with their intelligence.
I actually think it often does have something to do with their intelligence.
Sorry, but there's a reason people with poor writing skills can't get into Harvard.
Edited by nator, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by riVeRraT, posted 01-11-2008 1:05 PM riVeRraT has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 92 of 318 (448037)
01-11-2008 7:13 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by riVeRraT
01-11-2008 1:23 PM


When Taz explains something, I can understand him just fine.
quote:
Because you agree with him.
I understood everything Faith wrote very well, yet I disagreed with her rather strenuously. I read articles by conservative writers that I understand just fine, even though I disagree with nearly every sentence.
Sorry, Charlie, but I am perfectly able to understand well-written English even if I disagree with it. You can even test me if you like.
Perhaps you are projecting a bit here?
Well, I suppose that means you express yourself the least well of just about anyone on this board.
quote:
Is insulting people a part of expressing yourself well?
You missed the point again rat.
You said that Taz is a bad communicator because he blows up and gets angry.
I observed that you must be the worst communicator here (using your own rule), since you tend to blow up and get angry rather frequently.
quote:
I never claimed any different. As a matter of fact I have always expressed how frustrated I am with being able to get my thoughts across to others. Mostly to those who disagree with me. But I am not convinced it is my writing skills, or the stubbornness of others.
I think people would be much more forgiving of your lack of written clarity if you didn't work so hard to defend your poor arguments and lack of clarity, often becoming rather belligerant and obfuscatory.
quote:
All I know is there are communication gaps, and forums are pretty challenging. I mean you could go on to explain something to me, and if I just don't understand, that does not mean you didn't write it well. The same consideration needs to be taken both ways.
Maybe. On the other hand, when I go to the trouble to explain something in detail to you, but you simply brush it aside with a sarcastic "I know you are but what am I"-type dismissive one-liner instead of explaining how each of my points is in error, then I confess I tend to think you are trying to avoid addressing arguments.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by riVeRraT, posted 01-11-2008 1:23 PM riVeRraT has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 94 of 318 (448645)
01-14-2008 6:12 PM
Reply to: Message 93 by riVeRraT
01-13-2008 7:50 AM


Re: Working At Improvement
quote:
Like I said, I am not convinced that it is solely my writing as much as it is ones ability to comprehend.
Rat, I have never gotten less than an A in any English class I had in school, and it was always easy for me. In seventh grade, we took achievement tests, and my reading comprehension grade level was "12th grade and above". I have always taken Advanced or College-Prep English classes all throughout high school, and got A's in them without studying much. I got a nearly perfect score on the verbal section of the SAT. When I arrived for my freshman year at college, we had the opportunity to take exams to see if we could "test out" of certain basic courses. I took the College English exam, and got a perfect score on my reading comprehension and tested out of taking the course.
I tell you all of this to try to convince you that I really don't think my reading comprehension skills are the problem here.
Really.
quote:
The bible is very well written, yet most of us fail to understand it.
The bible is not particularly well-written, Rat! The Song of Songs is kind of pretty, and Psalms is nice, but an awful lot of it is clunky and vague and mistranslated and nonsensical and dry as dust.
And besides, you aren't trying to write in flowery, poetic, melodramatic "Biblical style" are you? You're just trying to communicate in ordinary English, right?
quote:
If you disagree with me, then that will only amplify the problem. For the most part you understand me, otherwise you wouldn't even be talking to me.
As I already wrote, I disagreed with Faith very strenuously, but she was a very good writer, so I had no problem understanding her at all.
I can disagree very strongly with someone and simultaneously understand everything they write with no problem at all. I have done so many times in the past.
You often don't write clearly, and you want to blame everybody else for not understanding you.
quote:
I understand mike the wiz, iano, and buzsaw perfectly. Well iano sometimes speaks in code, and you have to really think about what they he is saying. doesn't mean he isn't expressing himself well.
"Writing in Code" = "not writing clearly". Iano writes in such a way as to produce a lot of words that don't actually relay any substantive information. In other words, he shovels a lot of bullshit.
Mike sometimes writes clearly, but other times writes muddled word salad. Buzsaw is the best of the three, it is true, but he tries to gussy up his words too much to be considered a very clear writer.
quote:
I know some people here express themselves better than others, but that does not mean they are mis-understood, or "mangle the language."
True. I don't write anywhere near as well as Ringo, Crashfrog or Omniverous, but one of those was an English major and another was a professional jounalist, so I can't feel too bad about that.
However, you do mangle the language. So does Buzsaw, and also our new friend ThreeDogs.
quote:
Nosey Ned, and Molibol are some of my favorites, they express themselves in the fewest words, and only address the issue, where as you seem to constantly drift off topic, and take things out of context, which then sends the conversation off in directions.
Yes, I admit to being bad about being off-topic. I don't think I take things out of context, though. I have never heard anybody else say that about my replies.
quote:
Then you accuse me of losing track of my own words, when all I am trying to too is address what you say. That never happens with the fore-mentioned people, and other people as well.
I've seen other people say that to you, on several occasions.
You seem to have a real problem with following analogies. You seem to not be able to see the connections for some reason, so I have mostly stopped using them in arguments with you.
quote:
Well I was thinking of ringo when I wrote that, but yes you are included in that. I often find problems with your comprehension, and rrhain as well.
It isn't a problem with my comprehension.
quote:
It's only your willingness to drift off-topic and assuming attitude that does it, not your intelligence. What drives it is still unclear to me, unless it is just a hatred towards people who believe in God.
Oh sure. The reason I can't understand you when you write poorly is because I hate people who believe in God.
That's definitely the reason.
So, how come I was always able to understand Faith, then?
Edited by nator, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by riVeRraT, posted 01-13-2008 7:50 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by riVeRraT, posted 01-16-2008 6:56 PM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 97 of 318 (449160)
01-16-2008 10:25 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by Trae
01-16-2008 4:44 PM


quote:
Unless required by work or school there is little societal requirement for grammar. Of the tools people feel they need to succeed in life grammar is viewed by most as the tool of lesser value than the tool of persuasion.
Possibly.
Of course, I'm career retail sales and have developed some mad skillz in that arena, so I think I've got the "persuasive" thing going for me, too.
Of course, sales skills don't work when you argue with the customer.
Edited by nator, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by Trae, posted 01-16-2008 4:44 PM Trae has seen this message but not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 98 of 318 (449171)
01-16-2008 10:49 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by riVeRraT
01-16-2008 6:56 PM


Re: Working At Improvement
quote:
I think this pretty much sums you up. Not that you are dry as dust, but your opinion of the bible speaks volumes about your comprehension.
Hardly.
Why don't you post a passage from the Bible that you think is particularly well-written and then explain why you think that?
quote:
You may have scored well in school, but I find most, if not all of your responses very biased, and prejudice towards your own personal belief's and opinions.
Even if true, this has nothing to do with my reading comprehension.
The point is, my reading comprehension skills are probably not at fault every single time there is confusion over what you've written, rat. I was an advanced reader from quite a young age, remember. At 13, I was reading at 5 or more grade levels above most of the rest of the seventh graders in Pennsylvania.
If it is written reasonably well, I should be able to understand it reasonably well.
quote:
In other words, you are blinded by your own way of thinking.
Of course. It is our fault that a bunch of us can't understand what you are trying to say half the time.
I can't help but notice, rat, that you've dropped your "Educated people don't know how to turn a screwdriver." argument like a hot potato. Why is that? Is it because you realized that your conclusion was based upon poor logic and a failure to consider the self-selected nature of your sample; educated people with money as opposed to poor people who can't afford you?
Who is blinded now? Have a little bit of a problem admitting your error, perhaps?
quote:
It drives your responses, and your comprehension on things.
Rat, come on now. If my comprehension is wrong, then it is your job to correct me.
If, in the course of that correction, you paint yourself into a logical corner and contradict yourself, as so often happens, then who's fault is that?
So, how come I was always able to understand Faith, then?
quote:
I don't know.
I certainly do. She was a damn fine writer, that's why. Very clear.
quote:
It may be because she fits your description of a believer better, and you relate to her.
I never "related" to Faith in any way whatsoever. I never understood how she could possibly come to the conclusions she did, and her reasoning was often really ridiculous.
However, she always articulated her thoughts really well, even if I could never relate to her thought processes.
quote:
I do not always agree with faith, hence we come from different perspectives on who and what God is. Everyone here has/had me pegged as a fundie for a long time, yet after really getting into it, they found out I am not one. That to me means that people here are prejudice. Then their writings and responses reflect that.
Maybe people had you pegged as a fundie partly becasue you appeared to be a fundie. You said for a long time that you weren't, but then you would say something or express a view that influenced the rest of us to put you back in the fundie camp.
Just sayin'.
The only thing any of us have to go on here is what we read, you know.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by riVeRraT, posted 01-16-2008 6:56 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by riVeRraT, posted 01-21-2008 9:04 AM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 102 of 318 (449998)
01-20-2008 7:39 AM
Reply to: Message 101 by pelican
01-19-2008 6:55 PM


Re: ????????????????????????????????????
quote:
When in fact, the organised trained mind rarely understands anything outside of it's way of thinking.
That's crap, I do believe.
Care to provide examples, or any sort of proof for this claim?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by pelican, posted 01-19-2008 6:55 PM pelican has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by pelican, posted 01-20-2008 8:16 AM nator has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024