|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 51 (9221 total) |
| |
danieljones0094 | |
Total: 920,776 Year: 1,098/6,935 Month: 379/719 Week: 21/146 Day: 2/19 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Anyone else notice this pattern? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23189 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23189 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
You could be the poster boy for this topic.
--Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23189 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23189 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23189 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23189 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23189 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23189 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23189 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23189 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23189 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
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:
--Percy Edited by Percy, : Spelling.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23189 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23189 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
Hill Billy writes: Wouldn't highly evolved ![]() 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23189 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23189 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
Incoherent writing is a reflection of incoherent thinking, and a wise-guy attitude is no substitute for effective communication.
--Percy
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2025