Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8915 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 07-19-2019 8:26 AM
28 online now:
AZPaul3, Faith, Hyroglyphx, kjsimons, PaulK, Percy (Admin), RAZD, Stile, vimesey (9 members, 19 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Post Volume:
Total: 857,003 Year: 12,039/19,786 Month: 1,820/2,641 Week: 329/708 Day: 23/81 Hour: 3/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
56789
10
Author Topic:   Growing the Geologic Column
edge
Member
Posts: 4646
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 4.6


(2)
Message 700 of 740 (735108)
08-05-2014 5:52 PM
Reply to: Message 697 by Faith
08-05-2014 2:22 PM


Re: I didn'tRe: Sedimentary rocks are sedimentary
blah blah blah science this and science that.

Is this all you've got left?

The thing is if you don't know by now that I wouldn't confuse sedimentary with volcanic, and treat it as a simple misspeaking, ...

The problem is that all of these misspeaks start to form a pattern, Faith. You make up all these ad hoc explanations and eventually, something has to go haywire. Being constrained by evidence keeps this from happening. You were so determined that having volcanic rocks in the Phanerozoic section was impossible that you created a blunder. You simply could not accept these data points, and simply vanished them away with a casual, thoughtless remark.

... but in fact ridicule me as if I could really make such a mistake, you are not worth talking to.

Faith, realistically, what have you done around here to get respect? You've treated everyone her with disrespect and towering arrogance. Maybe this all has more to do with your attitude and less with everyone else in the forum.

This kind of thing is all too common in this madhouse. That and a dozen other abuses of logic, reason, sanity and civility I could probably list.

Please do so. I would love to see such a list. We could address them one by one.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 697 by Faith, posted 08-05-2014 2:22 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 705 by Faith, posted 08-06-2014 12:08 AM edge has not yet responded

  
edge
Member
Posts: 4646
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 4.6


(1)
Message 720 of 740 (735184)
08-06-2014 5:07 PM
Reply to: Message 714 by Faith
08-06-2014 9:57 AM


Is it so strange that I'm at odds with the whole crowd here really?

Not at all. There are a lot of people in the world who think that everyone else is wrong or crazy.

It's so rare that anybody ever agrees with me or says anything positive to anything I say and yet you think

Well, I'm surprised if it ever happens. Admit it, Faith. There are times when you disagree with us out of pure stubbornness. Even when it's not necessary, you disagree. It seems like some kind of automatic response on your part.

I should be friendlier to this pack of wolves?

Friendliness is not a problem. Being respectful would be a step in the right direction.

Edited by edge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 714 by Faith, posted 08-06-2014 9:57 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
edge
Member
Posts: 4646
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 4.6


Message 729 of 740 (735268)
08-08-2014 8:26 PM
Reply to: Message 727 by jar
08-08-2014 4:21 PM


Re: Discussion Can Continue
And that is exactly the issue.

Faith (and all Biblical Christians) idea of honest is totally unrelated to anything anyone else could identify as honest. In fact it can only be described as "willful lying" under any normal definition.

I have no doubt that Faith and the typical Biblical Christian are sincere unlike the pastors, evangelists and anyone claiming to be a Creation Scientist but sincere and honest are not synonymous.

The issue is that Biblical Christianity demands personal dishonesty, you MUST lie to yourself constantly in order to even be a Biblical Christian beginning by denying the many contradictions in the various Bible stories, accepting so called prophecies that are claimed but refuted by the facts, placing "source" over "content" and willfully issolating yourself from any threats to your belief system.

What Faith is doing yet again is simply adopting the "avoidance" tactic that is a classic symptom of the Christian Cult of Ignorance. She retreats to her blog just like Christian Radio and TV and most Christian Avoidance Schools and much of Home Schooling and separate peer review groups, wikis, browsers and accrediting boards.

Call Faith sincere and I doubt anyone would even comment but to use the term 'honest" in relation to Faith is to resort to Newspeak.


This is really an interesting subject to me and I hope we are not diverging too far off topic.

I sometimes think that dealing with YECs is like watching a train wreck. You know that you don't want to see it, but you can't take your eyes off the action. It's almost voyeuristic. I find it disorienting, a kind of Alice-in-Wonderland feeling.

I think what Percy is saying is that Faith has no intent to lie, so in that sense it is not a lie. I used to agree with this, but now, after many years in forums such as this, I'm not so certain.

Edited by edge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 727 by jar, posted 08-08-2014 4:21 PM jar has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 732 by NoNukes, posted 08-08-2014 10:01 PM edge has not yet responded

  
edge
Member
Posts: 4646
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 4.6


Message 730 of 740 (735269)
08-08-2014 8:33 PM
Reply to: Message 723 by Percy
08-08-2014 8:56 AM


Re: Discussion Can Continue
Faith said she'll be responding at her blog. I visited her blog, and she repeats that she will be responding there:
http://evofantasy.blogspot.com/...ronic-vexation-of-evc.html
When she posts about this thread or the other thread she was participating in (SCIENCE: -- "observational science" vs "historical science" vs ... science.) I suggest we respond here at EvC, carefully quoting what she says first.

What I find interesting from this blog is that the argument about angular unconformities has been going on for at least 3 years.

And it hasn't gotten any further than back in early 2011. Still no supporting evidence.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 723 by Percy, posted 08-08-2014 8:56 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 731 by Coyote, posted 08-08-2014 8:55 PM edge has not yet responded

  
Prev1
...
56789
10
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019