Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Equating science with faith
Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 13 of 326 (460203)
03-13-2008 11:45 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by tesla
03-13-2008 1:33 AM


Re: defining faith
tesla writes:
Faith is: Action, based on belief, with no doubt to the outcome.
Tesla, here is the problem that the rest of us have with the way YOU personally confuse the words "faith" and "trust".
Let me tell you a very short story. From when I was a toddler to about age 20, I was a devout christian fundamentalist. Then I became an atheist. Then recently I had a dream of Prometheus and have started to believe and worship the God Prometheus.
The point is for the better part of my life I had always been taught by every, and I mean EVERYONE, from my parents to my pastors to everyone else that faith requires no evidence, proof, reason, logic, etc. That's what faith in god is suppose to be about. If you don't believe me, go talk to your local pastors. Go talk to catholic priests. Go talk to historians. Heck, just grab a person off the street and talk to him. It's pretty much unanimously agreed that faith is pretty much an unsupported belief. This is on contrast to trust, which is the belief based on experience.
Walking across the room is trust, because we've never fallen right through the floor toward the Earth's core before. We walk across the room because there is no apparent danger from falling into the core. We type on the keyboard because it's always worked before. Occasionally, some keys go bad and we have to replace the keyboard. That's called trust because all of it worked before. Sure, you must have walked across the room or typing your keyboard the first time at some point. But think about it. You were scared shitless as a toddler to attempt to walk for the first time. Someone at some point had to show you how to use a keyboard. It's all trust.
By equating faith in god and trust in the keyboard, you are undermining the whole of religion. Again, if you don't believe me, just start talking to random people. It pretty much is unanimously agreed that belief in god requires no evidence, otherwise religion as a whole is in big trouble.
Seriously, tesla, I know people from time to time have weird ideas, but you seem to have the oddest ideas of them all lately. Again, if you don't believe me, just ask our resident preachers like ICANT and Buzsaw. I'm betting you 10 bucks that they will agree with me on this one in regard to faith in god and trust in the physical world.

Thou shalt accept Prometheus as thy savior for HE is the true light of Humanity and the World.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by tesla, posted 03-13-2008 1:33 AM tesla has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by tesla, posted 03-13-2008 1:30 PM Taz has replied

Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 15 of 326 (460206)
03-13-2008 11:53 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by ICANT
03-13-2008 11:39 AM


Re: defining faith
ICANT, I think I have an idea of where you want to go with this. But step back for a moment and look at tesla's proposition. He is equating the faith in god to the belief that the keyboard will work the next time you try to type on it. Tell us right now. Are you in agreement with tesla or are you just keeping quiet about it? If you're keeping quiet about it, this proves that creationists/christians generally don't police themselves at all even if really weird ideas are proposed, as I have been trying to point out for a while now.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by ICANT, posted 03-13-2008 11:39 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by ICANT, posted 03-13-2008 12:54 PM Taz has not replied

Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 31 of 326 (460230)
03-13-2008 2:12 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by tesla
03-13-2008 1:30 PM


Re: defining faith
tesla writes:
With this, how can i hope to make any sense to any of you?
You can try by starting to not copy iano's style of writing. Basically, what you look like right now is you bought a bag of fortune cookies, opened them up randomly, and wrote out to us what you read on the notes inside the fortune cookies. Someone here coined the term "fortune cookie language", and I agree with him.
It really does help to try to talk in a linear manner rather. You can think in cryptic terms all you want, but communication relies on linear speech.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by tesla, posted 03-13-2008 1:30 PM tesla has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by tesla, posted 03-13-2008 2:25 PM Taz has not replied

Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 122 of 326 (461126)
03-22-2008 2:29 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by Beretta
03-22-2008 11:44 AM


Re: Exxonmobile (three cheers)
Hey Beretta, good to see you again. I'd like to see your input in this thread.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Beretta, posted 03-22-2008 11:44 AM Beretta has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 130 by Beretta, posted 03-23-2008 4:32 AM Taz has not replied

Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 259 of 326 (463963)
04-22-2008 11:46 AM
Reply to: Message 258 by 1071
04-22-2008 11:19 AM


Re: defining faith
antiLIE writes:
2. Macroevolution / Microevolution is what Biology college textbooks call it.. I am just repeating what is taught.
And physicists tend to refer to the hydrogen fusion that goes on in the sun "hydrogen burning". Your argument is the same as arguing that since physicists use the term "hydrogen burning" to describe what goes on in the sun, they must really mean the sun is burning chemically.
You really should stop arguing semantics and really try to understand the concepts in biological science. Being able to nitpick people's words doesn't impress anyone.
We are all telling you right now. Yes, scientists tend to use the word "macroevolution" in text books simply because it is easier to convey the idea across to students much the same way that physicists tend to use "hydrogen burning" to convey the idea of fusion across to students. "Macroevolution" is nothing more than a description of lots and lots of evolutionary steps.
Let me know when you're ready to stop arguing semantics and start getting down to the real business.
By the way, there is a reason why I brought up "hydrogen burning". Your messiah Kent Hovind was one of those that didn't know that the term was meant by physicists to describe hydrogen fusion. Arguing semantics doesn't impress anyone.

I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 258 by 1071, posted 04-22-2008 11:19 AM 1071 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 261 by 1071, posted 04-22-2008 11:58 AM Taz has not replied

Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 267 of 326 (463976)
04-22-2008 12:31 PM
Reply to: Message 266 by 1071
04-22-2008 12:27 PM


Re: defining faith
antiLIE writes:
anti-LIE means I am against LIES. In other words, I am for the never ending quest for truth.
Good, then you can start by telling your fellow christians to stop lying all the time. Hint: look at the Rover trial fiasco.

I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 266 by 1071, posted 04-22-2008 12:27 PM 1071 has not replied

Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 275 of 326 (464245)
04-24-2008 11:28 AM
Reply to: Message 274 by 1071
04-24-2008 10:37 AM


Re: Answering Granny Magda
LIAR writes:
Okay, now you said "macroevolution, not a term that scientists tend to use." ... Indeed it is. I do not like this term, I just use it because Biology books call it that. This is NOT a straw man by any means.
For the last time, the reason it is a strawman whenever you guys use it is because you're using it to mean something completely different than what science text books use it for.
When science text books use the term, they are using it to refer to many many many tiny little changes in a population over a very long time added together. When you guys use the word, you want to give the impression that "macroevolution" means a dolphin morphs into a shark or a croc morphs into a crocoduck and into a duck. That's why it's a strawman everytime you guys use the term.
In fact, just the other day I talked to someone just like you. He insisted that the theory of evolution stated that some time in the past a crocodile decided to morph into a duck and that's why evolution is silly. When I confronted him on it, he pointed out that science text books use the word "macroevolution" all the time.
Isn't there a commandment that says thou shalt not lie or else thy god shalt pwnz thee?
Stop purposely misusing the word. It's annoying as hell.

I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 274 by 1071, posted 04-24-2008 10:37 AM 1071 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 276 by 1071, posted 04-24-2008 11:40 AM Taz has replied

Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 277 of 326 (464248)
04-24-2008 11:49 AM
Reply to: Message 276 by 1071
04-24-2008 11:40 AM


Re: Answering Granny Magda
And thus you just demonstrated my point exactly. You know what science text books meant when they use the word "macroevolution". And yet you continue to use the word to imply a croc morphing into a duck. This is using a strawman because you know damn well that the general public have absolutely no clue what "macroevolution" really means and so everytime you people use the word they will automatically assume we're talking about a croc morphing into a duck or a dog morphing into a snake. Even if you don't say outright what the lie is, this is bearing false witness because you're using advantage of people's ignorance.

I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by 1071, posted 04-24-2008 11:40 AM 1071 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 278 by 1071, posted 04-24-2008 11:56 AM Taz has replied

Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 279 of 326 (464252)
04-24-2008 12:24 PM
Reply to: Message 278 by 1071
04-24-2008 11:56 AM


Re: Answering Granny Magda
antiLIE writes:
How is this not crock to duck ideology?
They didn't use the word "appearance" to mean feathers started popping up in a population. This is like trying to portray the theory of walking as saying I could take a step forward and I've gone from New York to Austin, Texas. That's what you're doing. You're trying to discredit a theory by using a strawman and language ambiguity. The word "appearance" in there doesn't mean feathers started popping up on an individual in a generation.
You are playing that semantic game again.

I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 278 by 1071, posted 04-24-2008 11:56 AM 1071 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 280 by seekingthetruth, posted 04-24-2008 12:27 PM Taz has not replied
 Message 281 by 1071, posted 04-24-2008 12:37 PM Taz has not replied

Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 301 of 326 (464315)
04-24-2008 6:53 PM
Reply to: Message 298 by tesla
04-24-2008 5:12 PM


Re: defining faith
Tesla, do you practice writing in fortune cookie language? Take a look at the following statement.
tesla writes:
if a seed has no faith in its ability to grow, it would not grow.
This is the kind of statement you'd find in a fortune cookie. On the outside it sounds like something a wise Chinese Master would say, but on the inside it has absolutely no meaning whatsoever.

I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 298 by tesla, posted 04-24-2008 5:12 PM tesla 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