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?
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 14 of 318 (444499)
12-29-2007 5:07 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Hyroglyphx
12-29-2007 4:46 PM


Re: Postulating Poster Patterns
NJ writes:
Buz and I have stood toe to toe against a sea of adversity and have come out on top more than our fair share.
This is called the Black Knight syndrome, but I heartily agree about your and Buz's writing skills, right up there!
As someone commented above, sloppy writing often accompanies sloppy thinking, but not always, and contrariwise, even the most erudite among us often harbor at least a few wacky ideas.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Hyroglyphx, posted 12-29-2007 4:46 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by tesla, posted 12-29-2007 5:30 PM Percy has not replied
 Message 20 by Hyroglyphx, posted 12-29-2007 7:15 PM Percy has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 42 of 318 (444871)
12-31-2007 8:34 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by tesla
12-31-2007 12:19 AM


Re: Postulating Poster Patterns
You could be the poster boy for this topic.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by tesla, posted 12-31-2007 12:19 AM tesla has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 138 of 318 (450420)
01-21-2008 7:48 PM


My only comment related to the current discussion is that I don't understand why people wouldn't want to make it as easy as possible to tell them apart from loons who rave on street corners.
One more comment, I guess, a rhetorical question. If you write at a 4th grade level or lower and you're an adult, why would you broadcast that information to the world by joining discussion boards? Unless, of course, the goal is practicing your communication skills.
Alright, one more rhetorical question. What is it about some people that makes them want to not only discuss things they know nothing about, but even to insist, for literally pages and pages, that they're right?
Okay, I'm done. I feel better now.
--Percy

Replies to this message:
 Message 140 by RAZD, posted 01-21-2008 8:12 PM Percy has not replied
 Message 145 by PaulK, posted 01-22-2008 1:26 AM Percy has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 151 of 318 (450494)
01-22-2008 9:35 AM
Reply to: Message 148 by pelican
01-22-2008 4:33 AM


Re: Don't Consent
dameeva writes:
No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.
--Eleanor Roosevelt
I doubt Eleanor Roosevelt ever experienced feeling inferior...
The on-topic point is why in the world you would boldly state something so questionable. This is an example, though a rather mild one, of one of the complaints of this thread, when people declare things as so that they couldn't possibly know, and which seem unlikely anyway.
This is the wrong place to look for sympathy, empathy, or understanding. It is a debate board. It's all about the battle.
And who do you suppose is going to battle for those who cannot respond in enough of an academic way that you can understand, if not me?
Is this really what it seems to be, an argument that the dumber you are the better your comprehension?
The correlation that I would note is that the more incoherent or unintelligible the idea, the more it requires ignorance and/or incoherent thinking for someone to accept it.
As Zawi pointed out in Message 3: Someone who is wrong about an issue can increase their persuasiveness if their writing skills are superior to that of their opponent's, giving them an unfair advantage in debate,...
Exactly!!! This thread proves this point. Those who are wrong believe they are right because they imagine they are superior in more than their writing and debating skills.
Ah, the hypothesis of the articulate incompetent! The fact is that clarity and accuracy of expression stem from knowledge and coherent thinking. Cogent arguments built upon evidence are not produced by dumb luck.
Haven't you noticed? They do maintain their distance. There is only me who is a glutton for punishment and I do get pummled and one day the 'pummelers' will see themselves and stop it.
The realistic hope is that the pummeled will learn that ignorance and slothful thinking lie at the core of their problems.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 148 by pelican, posted 01-22-2008 4:33 AM pelican has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 153 of 318 (450496)
01-22-2008 9:48 AM
Reply to: Message 149 by pelican
01-22-2008 8:24 AM


Re: Anything is possible
Heinrik writes:
What if you educated folk are too educated to understand some of us?
That's a silly proposition. We all only know a tiny bit of all knowledge, so we are all of us ignorant of almost everything. The question being asked is why some people are incapable of recognizing when they don't know something. The king in The King and I says, "Sometimes I'm not even sure of what I absolutely know," but the rule for creationists seems to be, "I'm especially sure about things of which I have absolutely no clue."
Presumably those of us who are not poker players would not join a poker discussion board and start arguing with members about poker strategy. We know we don't know anything about poker, at least compared to those who play all the time. But a goodly number of creationists with almost no knowledge of biology or evolution think nothing of coming here and arguing for post after post about how wrong evolution is, all the while rejecting most of the valid scientific information that is provided to them. It's incredible and seems extremely unlikely that people could behave this way when you think about it in clinical terms, but it happens here literally every day.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by pelican, posted 01-22-2008 8:24 AM pelican has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 155 by Trixie, posted 01-22-2008 11:20 AM Percy has not replied
 Message 158 by pelican, posted 01-22-2008 6:21 PM Percy has not replied
 Message 172 by pelican, posted 01-23-2008 5:01 AM Percy has replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 154 of 318 (450501)
01-22-2008 10:30 AM


A wonderful example was posted by LucyTheApe just yesterday at Message 5 in the The Tesla Challenge thread:
LucyTheApe writes:
>OC: ”Gravity is the weakest force of all.”
Come on sidelined, gravity is the greatest force of all.
Seldom right but never in doubt, I guess.
So, those of you arguing against the premise of this thread, what's the explanation for LucyTheApe's faux paux. Why does he boldly state something of which he is clearly so ignorant? I assume it's because he thinks it's just so obvious, but clearly he hasn't given the issue a moment's thought before typing. Consider an iron nail sitting on a table. The gravity of the mass of the entire earth is pulling down on that nail, yet a tiny magnet has no problem pulling the nail up off the table. That's because the electromagnetic force is far stronger than gravity.
Obvious, right? Yet LucyTheApe is going to string out diversion after diversion and make the science side explain every little detail, no matter how obvious, and he'll do this for post after post and thread after thread until in the end the original topics never actually get discussed.
Hence the frustration on the science side.
--Percy

Replies to this message:
 Message 156 by Percy, posted 01-22-2008 1:09 PM Percy has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 156 of 318 (450530)
01-22-2008 1:09 PM
Reply to: Message 154 by Percy
01-22-2008 10:30 AM


LucyTheApe's dissembling over at the The Tesla Challenge thread continues. To lay it out clearly:
Tesla: like the G force that holds atoms together, being a big one, because without that, no shape of anything would be possible.
Sidelined: If by the G force you mean gravity{I believe you do} then you are dead wrong since gravity does not hold atoms together...Gravity is the weakest force of all.
LucyTheApe: Come on sidelined, gravity is the greatest force of all.
Sidelined: Jeez don't go getting all mystical on me now eh?
LucyTheApe: If sidelined wants to reduce the magnificence the effect gravity has on the universe, down to a couple of self-evident scientific statements, he should use dry scientific jargon with maybe a bit of Latin and/or ancient Greek thrown in.
To summarize, Tesla says gravity holds atoms together, Sidelined explains that it doesn't and that gravity is a very weak force, LucyTheApe replies about how wonderful gravity is, and then he just continues in that same vein that has nothing to do with gravity not being the force that holds atoms together.
Anyone care to take a swing at explaining LucyTheApe's behavior as anything other than distracting hogwash? Why do creationists do this? Why don't creationists police themselves and when they see things like this post, "Dude, you're being an idiot and making us look bad. Sidelined wasn't being disparaging of gravity, and that's not the topic anyway. And especially, why are you being an idiot in a thread discussing another creationist who's being an idiot. I mean, come on guys, get with it, you're making the whole lot of us look like idiots."
Well, I can dream.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by Percy, posted 01-22-2008 10:30 AM Percy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 162 by teen4christ, posted 01-22-2008 7:54 PM Percy has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 187 of 318 (450708)
01-23-2008 10:26 AM
Reply to: Message 172 by pelican
01-23-2008 5:01 AM


Re: Anything is possible
dameeva writes:
You dismissed Heinriks' concept as silly. Could this be the example of 'why some people are incapable of recognizing when they don't know something'? To be specific, in this case because it is not understood the reader automatically assumes it is 'silly'.
Heinrik's response in Message 158 was even sillier, and Rahvin, Molbiogirl, RAZD and Teen4christ all carefully explained to Heinrik how he was once again only contributing more evidence for the premise of this thread.
dameeva writes:
Your analysis is spot on. Your only 'mistake' is in thinking it isn't you.
I explained why it was silly, when Heinrik replied it was explained at length and in painful detail why he was just proving the thread's point, and all you can do is say it's not him it's me? All you're doing is providing yet more evidence of a common creationist pattern, namely ignoring the evidence and going, "Nuh-uh!"
Too bad this thread has to end at 300 posts, because the creationist side is apparently intent upon providing an endless supply of examples of the very point this thread is trying to make.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 172 by pelican, posted 01-23-2008 5:01 AM pelican has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 189 by Rahvin, posted 01-23-2008 10:40 AM Percy has not replied
 Message 201 by pelican, posted 01-23-2008 11:04 PM Percy has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 220 of 318 (450843)
01-24-2008 10:30 AM
Reply to: Message 217 by pelican
01-24-2008 10:03 AM


Re: Creationist Craziness
The video, Peanut Butter, The Atheist's Nightmare!, is from Chuck Missler of the Koinonia House ministry. He's a fundamentalist minister, and he's perfectly serious. Though I couldn't find the video there, his article on the subject, The Kitchen Laboratory, which repeats everything he says in the video, can be read just by clicking the link.
No one is trying to caricature creationist views to make them look ridiculous. There's no need, because their views, as presented by the creationists themselves, are ridiculous on their face, as you seem to realize in this particular case. Wait'll you see the Ray Comfort Banana Video (you need to know that the wild banana bears no resemblance to the modern domesticated banana, which was bred by man).
Getting back to the topic, the pattern that you're exhibiting here is another very common one with creationists, failure to perform even a cursory investigation.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 217 by pelican, posted 01-24-2008 10:03 AM pelican has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 240 by pelican, posted 01-24-2008 10:44 PM Percy has replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 228 of 318 (450871)
01-24-2008 1:56 PM
Reply to: Message 224 by molbiogirl
01-24-2008 11:46 AM


Re: First step.
molbiogirl writes:
Isn't it common knowledge that Scopes was on trial for breaking a law forbidding the teaching of evolution ?
And that he lost? Both the trial and the appeal?
He was found guilty at trial, but it was overturned on a technicality because the judge set the fine at $100 when statute required that the jury set any fine exceeding $50.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 224 by molbiogirl, posted 01-24-2008 11:46 AM molbiogirl has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 229 by molbiogirl, posted 01-24-2008 2:31 PM Percy has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 257 of 318 (450965)
01-25-2008 8:42 AM
Reply to: Message 240 by pelican
01-24-2008 10:44 PM


Re: Creationist Craziness
Heinrik writes:
percy writes:
Getting back to the topic, the pattern that you're exhibiting here is another very common one with creationists, failure to perform even a cursory investigation.
Do you think creationists are also inept in their own chosen field?
Here's yet another example of a common creationist pattern, changing the subject. Your question has nothing to do with your failure to do even cursory checking of whether the Missler video was valid. As has been shown, the validity of Missler video, which shows him speaking his very own words with a clear and unambiguous meaning, as if that weren't more than enough evidence, is confirmed by a webpage at his own site saying the precise same thing.
The mystery is why creationists like yourself do things like this. In an earlier message you provided yet another example of a common creationist pattern, obvious dissembling, by denying you're a creationist in one paragraph, then in the next referring to "you evolutionists."
My recommendations to creationists are these:
  • Be honest (you broke this one).
  • Only get into discussions about things you understand.
  • Don't make claims you can't support (you broke this one, too).
  • Support your arguments with evidence (you also broke this one).
  • Don't write like a 3rd grader.
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Spelling.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 240 by pelican, posted 01-24-2008 10:44 PM pelican has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 260 by pelican, posted 01-25-2008 11:21 AM Percy has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 261 of 318 (450989)
01-25-2008 11:52 AM
Reply to: Message 259 by Taz
01-25-2008 10:23 AM


Re: Not Quite
Taz writes:
If we are talking about swaying public opinion, creationism really has the upper hand in this.
Right, that's the true core of the problem, isn't it. All we have to do to defeat creationism is give a science education to the 99% of the American public that doesn't already have one. Or at least to 50.1%.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 259 by Taz, posted 01-25-2008 10:23 AM Taz has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 265 by pelican, posted 01-25-2008 6:10 PM Percy has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 275 of 318 (451200)
01-26-2008 6:07 PM
Reply to: Message 273 by Hill Billy
01-26-2008 2:56 PM


Re: Working At Improvement
Hill Billy writes:
Wouldn't highly evolved and finely tuned comprehension skills allow one to comprehend even the most poorly written stuff?
Sure, if the only problem is that it's poorly written, but not if it's unintelligible, incomprehensible or nonsense. The primary point of this thread is that some people's writing skills are so poor that you can't tell if it's nonsense or just poorly written.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by Hill Billy, posted 01-26-2008 2:56 PM Hill Billy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 281 by Hill Billy, posted 01-26-2008 7:50 PM Percy has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 303 of 318 (451314)
01-27-2008 8:43 AM
Reply to: Message 282 by pelican
01-26-2008 8:10 PM


Re: Not Quite
Heinrik writes:
Can you prove there is no god?
Can you prove this theory E=MC2
I do not believe either can prove the other 100% wrong.
You've already received a couple replies explaining why this makes no sense as argument, so I'll just focus on the improper use of the word prove, and on the "100% wrong" portion. Scientists use the word prove all the time, but in science it's just shorthand for "support with evidence". Plus science is tentative, so nothing in science is ever 100% right or 100% wrong. So what you're really saying is:
Can you provide evidence that there is no god?
Depends upon what you mean by "god". Did you intend the lowercase? If not and you meant the fundamentalist Christian God of the 6000 year old earth and global flood, then yes, of course, we can provide lots of evidence that that God does not exist.
Can you provide evidence of this theory E=MC2?
Yes, of course, scads and scads of evidence.
I do not believe either can provide evidence that the other 100% wrong.
Absolutely right! In science nothing is ever 100% certain, not even being wrong.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 282 by pelican, posted 01-26-2008 8:10 PM pelican has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 304 by pelican, posted 01-27-2008 9:30 AM Percy has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 313 of 318 (451391)
01-27-2008 3:22 PM


Summation
Incoherent writing is a reflection of incoherent thinking, and a wise-guy attitude is no substitute for effective communication.
--Percy

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024