Evolutionary superiority

quote:

---

What about true beliefs built on rational feeling, life experience and logic? No proof whatsoever. I have a few that no way could be proved scientifically and no-one who hasn't had these experiences would believe it.

---

That's trust, not religious belief.And I'll bet they are more amenable to scientific testing that you think.

quote:

---

I think a lot of people come to these forums hoping to change people's minds with rational, well-thought-out arguments (I did, but it only took me one and a half debates with tesla to wake up from that fantasy). Others probably come to blow off steam, because of the aforementioned paucity of listening ears. Do not judge them by this: I'm sure Rahvin is a perfectly amiable and decent human being.

---

My motivations in the debate are thus:1) To learn about science from those more knowlegeable than I am2) To become a better critical thinker3) To understand better how the anti-science crowd thinks and what they believe, so I can better combat their influence in our society4) To confront and address falsehoods, misrepresentations, and deceptions about science and Evolution to the fencesitting lurkers.My morivations in the debate are NOT:1) To convert anyone to my way of thinking about evidence2) To simply blow off steam

quote:

---

Are you saying my beliefs could be scientifically tested?

---

The only way to judge is if you give an example.

quote:

---

I believe my sole purpose on this earth is to become aware/realize that I am the sole creator of my own life experiences.

---

But that's not a "true belief" about natural phenomena.That's a personal philosophical opinion.Remember, bluejay wrote: We are talking about material evidence of something in nature, not personal opinions about abstract concepts.Here is the whole quote, in context: Clearly, he is not talking about personal philosophy, but about the physical evidence of Evolutionary Biology.Edited by nator, : No reason given.

quote:

---

I'll add you (nator) to the long list of people I'd like to have forgive me for my uncautious typing. I didn't mean to point any of this at you, and I believe you're sincere. I also didn't mean to point it at Rahvin, either, but it sure sounded like I was.

---

No apology needed, bluejay. I just took the opportunity to correct and clarify.

quote:

---

is a very critical point here. Most of us evolutionists are used to debating with other evolutionists about scientific matters: we're used to be rebutted with answers like: "Your point is wrong for the following reasons..." When dealing with creationists, we often get responses like "I don't believe that and you can't convince me," or "This is my point and I'm sticking to it." So, some try to repeat the facts ad nauseum, and some try to explain the rules of debating, and this naturally comes off as condescending.

---

When a Creationist refuses to debate in good faith, uses poor reasoning, etc., and is simply too closed minded to entertain the very notion that they might be wrong, I think they very much deserve to have the rules of debate explained to them.When they repeat falsehoods and misrepresentations for, literally, years (in the style of our own Buzsaw) even though they have been refuted and addressed many, many times, I think they very much deserve to have the evidence presented to them repeatedly.Remember, I'm not ever trying to convince those who are blind and deaf to anything but their own religious myths and argue that way.I will address the same argument from the same person and give essentially the same response over and over again, and I do this for the fencesitting lurkers.

quote:

---

Perhaps the bigger the inferiority complex of an individual, the more likely he or she is to escape from the slings and arrows of reality by adopting fierce adherence to a "true" religion, and the more sectarian they are likely to be.

---

Maybe.People used to believe that children who bullied other children or who break rules did so becasue they had low self-esteem.We now understand that what was generally thought of before that theory was pretty much correct; bullies and rule breakers have very high-self esteem. Too high, in fact. They belive they have every right to bully and to break rules. They believe the rules apply to other people but not them.I believe the same thing is going on with a lot of Creationists when they believe themselves to be "special" or "chosen" or "saved" or "born again".

quote:

---

I believe my life experiences are verifiable, physical, evidence that only I can know, but maybe others can relate to.

---

Evidence that "only you can know" cannot also be "verifiable".By definition, for evidence to be verifiable, anyone must be able to observe it.

quote:

---

The evidence would be verifiable with others having the same experiences

---

So, we aren't actually talking about "evidence only you can know", then.Is that correct?

You wrote:

quote:

---

Beginning with the premise that evolutionists feel superior I was nudged into a re evaluation early in this thread. The new premise being, that the educated feel superior.

---

Dr. Adequate replies: And then you write:

quote:

---

Really? So educated folks don't feel sad, or lonely , or angry? Are you trying to tell me that educated people only feel one emotion, better educated?

​

Hummm, now who is trying to deceive who here?

---

What does this reponse have to do with feeling superior, which you know was the point he was responding to? Nothing, right?See, the above garbage response is what admin will bust you for, since it is just avoidant and irrelevant to the discussion at hand.You know that it is, yet you posted it anyway. I predict you will take another time out very soon.

quote:

---

I wonder does this anti-science actually exist?

---

Of course. We have had an anti-science president in the White House for the last 7 1/2 years.There is a strong grass roots anti-vaccination movement, anti-FDA movement, anti-modern medicine movement, all of which reject science in favor of pseudoscience, quackery, and mysticism.

quote:

---

I am completely unfamiliar with this term but it seems to me if they are real they would be obvious. They would be naked cause science taught us that cloths keep us warm.

---

Um, science didn't reach us that clothes are warm, experience did.

quote:

---

Last time I checked the medical profession, doctors, hospitals and drug companies had become the number 1 cause of death in the US.

---

Incorrect.Heart disease is the leading cause of death in the US.You know, if you think that modern medicine is so dangerous, you are welcome to live without any medical care at all. Perhaps move somewhere like Zambia where they've never heard of antibiotics. You can have a tribal healer treat you if you get, say, bacterial pneumonia or lymphoma and we'll see how you get along.On the other hand, it is true that the US pretty much sucks when it comes to the administration of healthcare, so it is no surprise that our country ranks low compared to places that place the health of its citizens as a high national priority such as Columbia, Oman, and Costa Rica.So, it isn't "western medicine" per se which we need to be wary of, since all statistics point to the great increase in life expectancy and quality of life that coincides with advances in medical science. It is the fact that the medical industry in the US, thanks to our love of money over principle, is an industry. It is, first and foremost, a money-making enterprise that some in politics want to change while others resist this change. source

quote:

---

Maybe it is time somebody started asking questions.

---

Excuse me? We "bleeding hearts" have been asking questions about why almost 50 million Americans have no no access to regular healthcare for quite some time. Edited by nator, : No reason given.