Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,760 Year: 4,017/9,624 Month: 888/974 Week: 215/286 Day: 22/109 Hour: 0/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Whether to leave this forum or not
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1431 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(4)
Message 6 of 307 (655288)
03-09-2012 7:13 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by foreveryoung
03-08-2012 7:52 PM


Hi foreveryoung,
It is obvious that I am quite despised here.
Not by me. In fact I wouldn't mind your participation on a couple threads
Dogs will be Dogs will be ???
Speciation + Evolution = More Diversity
Transitional Fossils Show Evolution in Process
and
How "novel" features evolve when that gets promoted
My point of view obviously rubs people the wrong way on this site.
What rubs people the wrong way is when you say things they know are false, and particularly if you don't appear willing to learn where you are wrong.
I've learned a lot on this forum, and as a result have changed my opinions on a number of issues, but facts remain facts, and denial of facts can be a problem. Such as denial of the age of the earth:
see Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1
I do not want to stay in a place where my presence is not welcome.
Well now your presence is requested in a couple of places.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by foreveryoung, posted 03-08-2012 7:52 PM foreveryoung has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by foreveryoung, posted 03-10-2012 1:42 AM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1431 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 41 of 307 (655434)
03-10-2012 9:55 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by foreveryoung
03-10-2012 1:42 AM


Hi again foreveryoung
You have to convince me they are facts before I will believe them. You say the age of the earth is a fact. I read a bit of your age correlations paper. I am not convinced ...
your answer is here on the Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1 thread.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by foreveryoung, posted 03-10-2012 1:42 AM foreveryoung has seen this message but not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1431 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(2)
Message 66 of 307 (655489)
03-10-2012 7:33 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by shadow71
03-10-2012 7:06 PM


faith vs assumptions and knowledge by natural means
Hi shadow71
It appears to me that metaphysical naturalists do require faith. The faith that everything is and comes from natural explanations and that anyone who believes otherwise is not really competent.
Science is based on the assumption (a) that objective evidence is a part of reality rather than illusion, and (b) that we can understand reality by testing concepts against objective evidence.
Assumptions aren't faith, they are tentative positions that can be demonstrated to be false, while faith is not based on an assumption that god/s exist.
Message 65: Do Scientists have evidence that everthing has arisen by natual means?
That the origin of life came about by natural means?
That the Universe came about by natural means?
That all benefical mutations are random?
That the CRISPR systems are not dedicated nonrandom beneficial change?
Science is only able to test natural means (unless you have a source for employing supernatural means), so (until there is evidence otherwise) it is rational to proceed with explaining objective evidence with natural means up until those means fail.
Science is a feed-back system that seeks to eliminate false concepts through falsification by testing against objective evidence, thus reaching closer approximations to what we assume to be reality as time passes and more knowledge is derived of what seems to work and what we know doesn't work.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by shadow71, posted 03-10-2012 7:06 PM shadow71 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by shadow71, posted 03-11-2012 12:45 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1431 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 86 of 307 (655543)
03-11-2012 1:29 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by shadow71
03-11-2012 12:45 PM


Re: faith vs assumptions and knowledge by natural means
Hi again shadow71,
My point is that the metaphysical naturalists do not allow for anything but natural. Therefore a faith in nature.
You can't thread a nut on a nail. You may think you can jam one on, but that still does not make the nail a bolt. Science is currently unable to employ supernatural, so it uses the tools available to study what it can.
The Methodological naturalists doe allow for faith ...
Yet, curiously, many scientists are people of faith, so obviously they have allowed faith in their worldview.
... while learning what nature is and studying and learning from nature.
Using nature and natural processes to study nature and natural processes, what an amazing concept.
I agree science is only able to test natural means, but it does not have to rule out supernatural means ...
Amazingly, the evidence is that many people of faith do not rule out supernatural means while they use nature and natural processes to study nature and natural processes, but instead are focused on what nature and natural processes can tell us about nature and natural processes.
Would you not agree that the more we know about nature and natural processes, then the more we know about the created world?
Should scientists have to allow for a flat earth or a geocentric earth in order to make room for specific faiths when the evidence clearly shows that these concepts are falsified?
Should scientists have to allow for a world wide flood and a young earth in order to make room for specific faiths when the evidence clearly shows that these concepts are falsified?
Enjoy.
Edited by RAZD, : make room?

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by shadow71, posted 03-11-2012 12:45 PM shadow71 has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1431 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 89 of 307 (655546)
03-11-2012 1:33 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by jar
03-11-2012 1:31 PM


Re: Fool me once
is or isn't?

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by jar, posted 03-11-2012 1:31 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by jar, posted 03-11-2012 1:38 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1431 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 105 of 307 (655562)
03-11-2012 1:58 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by foreveryoung
03-11-2012 1:34 PM


sect vs sect
Hi again foreveryoung,
So the vast majority of christians don't even believe there is such a thing as a bible? They aren't christians in my book.
Two points:
(1) cognitive dissonance predicts this reaction, and
(2) remember this if you ever try to argue that there is a majority of Christians that support any particular cause or concept.
And if you mean they aren't young-earth-fundamentalist-flood-literalist Christians then,
(a) that was the point and,
(b) they are not the majority,
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by foreveryoung, posted 03-11-2012 1:34 PM foreveryoung has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by foreveryoung, posted 03-11-2012 2:14 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1431 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 125 of 307 (655595)
03-11-2012 5:09 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by foreveryoung
03-11-2012 2:14 PM


Re: sect vs sect
Hi foreveryoung,
... I have glazed over eyes right now.
Understandable.
Read about Cognitive Dissonance, then, when your eyes unglaze, go back to Message 105.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by foreveryoung, posted 03-11-2012 2:14 PM foreveryoung has seen this message but 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