|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,461 Year: 3,718/9,624 Month: 589/974 Week: 202/276 Day: 42/34 Hour: 5/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Evolution of evcforum.net | |||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
I've tried for myself to figure out what my list of beliefs are -those things which I take as true without any evidence Some people think there is such a thing as private evidence. People don't just believe something for no reason. Secondly, my point was that the two entities--tooth fairy and God--are not comparable. The tooth fairy is an extraneous entity. God's a different kind of concept since he is thought of as the creator. This message has been edited by robinrohan, 11-04-2005 09:51 AM This message has been edited by robinrohan, 11-04-2005 10:09 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.1 |
NosyNed writes: The sooner everyone treats the literalists with the derision they deserve and gets the separation between them and more thoughtfull, sophisticated Christians clear the happy most Christians will be. Fine, treat their position with derision but don't be surprised when there aren't any of the literalist persuasion left here. I was able to have discussions with Faith without resorting to name calling and labelling. There was a post earlier on in this thread lamenting the fact that there were no more YECs to convert, yet there seems to be a a lot of complaining about the YECs trying to convert Atheists to their position. Evangelical Atheists seem to be applauded, but evangelical YECs are treated with derision. Everybody is entitled to my opinion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 434 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
GDR} writes: I was able to have discussions with Faith without resorting to name calling and labelling. I don't think I ever called Faith names, yet she felt free to call me names. I'm sure many others could say the same thing. So, how do you figure she was "driven" away?
Evangelical Atheists seem to be applauded, but evangelical YECs are treated with derision. I don't see that at all. I would challenge you to quote a dozen or so threads in which "evangelical atheism" is expressed - and another dozen in which that expression is applauded. And it isn't so much the evangelical YECs themselves who are being derided - it's their ideas. And their ideas are being derided both scientifically and Biblically. The problem here is not that there's a double standard - if anything, the YECs are given too much leeway. The problem is that the YECs have nothing but their belief. When their belief is challenged, all they can do is whine and run away. When YECs drive by with their empty ideas, the scientifically-minded have no choice but to expose that emptiness. The site is called "Evolution versus Creation" after all - not "Creationist Soapbox". People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.1 |
Ringo316 writes: I don't think I ever called Faith names, yet she felt free to call me names. I'm sure many others could say the same thing. So, how do you figure she was "driven" away? I'm only speaking in general terms. There are any number of posts that treat her views with total contempt. Actually one of the main reasons that Faith gave for leaving was that she felt she was being drawn into responding in kind to the posts of others. Take that for what it's worth.
Ringo316 writes: I don't see that at all. I would challenge you to quote a dozen or so threads in which "evangelical atheism" is expressed - and another dozen in which that expression is applauded. To be honest I'm only trying to give admin a constructive answer to the question of why Christians and particularly YECs leave the forum.Here is a quote however from earlier on in this thread. night train writes: Regardless of how many creationists we turn away, regardless of how many (or few) converts we make, the fact remains that we have a low success rate with our arguments. If we can`t impress low numbers, how then can we find a formula for mass conversions in the real world? Ringo316 writes: The problem here is not that there's a double standard - if anything, the YECs are given too much leeway. The problem is that the YECs have nothing but their belief. When their belief is challenged, all they can do is whine and run away. It's back to labelling again. Why do you have to say "whine and run away". The use of such pejorative terms just detract from any dialogue, and is in essence name calling.
Ringo316 writes: When YECs drive by with their empty ideas, the scientifically-minded have no choice but to expose that emptiness. The site is called "Evolution versus Creation" after all - not "Creationist Soapbox". "Empty ideas" Another example of pejorative language. It is called "Evolution versus Creationism" so presumably both points of view should be respected and in order to do that one has to accept that, it is legitimate to express as evidence something that isn't scientific. Everybody is entitled to my opinion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.1 |
Just deleting post that wound up getting posted twice. (It wasn't that brilliant that it needed posting more than once. )
This message has been edited by GDR, 11-04-2005 10:49 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1489 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Why don't you get off your highhorse, Crashfrog? Your beliefs are just as inviolable as everybody else's. No, actually, I've made the case several times, with no successful rebuttals, that agnostic atheism is the conclusion that is most reasonable and best supported by the evidence. On the other hand, the best the believers can seem to do is assert "hey, all belief is equally unsupported, so just believe what you want to believe." Well, no. There's reasons to conclude atheism; the fact that there is no good reason to conclude theism is a prominent, celebrated aspect of that belief - they call it "faith."
Please . . . total nonsense. Yes, absolutely. So what's the difference between tooth fairy nonsense and God nonsense? Why do people like you treat one with derision and one with respect, when they're the same thing? Why the inconsistency?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 434 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
GDR writes: ... she felt she was being drawn into responding in kind to the posts of others. -------------
... both points of view should be respected and in order to do that one has to accept that, it is legitimate to express as evidence something that isn't scientific. So, where do you draw the line? What constitutes "legitimate" evidence and what does not? Should The Big Book of Fairies be considered evidence alongside the Bible? People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
The Big Book of Fairies Great book. I read that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 9003 From: Canada Joined: |
It is called "Evolution versus Creationism" so presumably both points of view should be respected and in order to do that one has to accept that, it is legitimate to express as evidence something that isn't scientific. We have had some short discussions on this kind of thing. This is not the forum for it but if you want to PNT something it might be interesting. The problem is I haven't heard anyone propose any other way of arriving safely at what might be "knowledge". We know that individuals are both easily foold and can be very deluded. We know that supposed "evidence" of something other than a scienticfic kind has lead people very badly astray many times. (NB. this is not to say that we can't mess up with a scientific process as well, it is just that it is both more unlikely and seems to get corrected eventually). In your PNT you can describe a form of "evidence" that is explicitly not scientific and we can figure out how it would be dealt with and be useful.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.1 |
Hi Ned
Frankly I don't want to start another thread that will deteriorate into more of the same. (Equating the Bible to the Book of ferries etc.) I think it is up to the admins to decide what they want to include as evidence. I also think that the admins should decide just what is allowed as debate on the forum. I'm in a minority here but I don't think that equating Christianity with a belief in Santa or the tooth fairy is reasoned debate, and I think posts like that should be deleted and the poster should have be sanctioned. On the other side, I personally believe that anybody who can look at the strange world of QM and the BB, or consider the range and depth of human emotion and come to the conclusion that this all happened through some huge cosmic accident, with no intelligent thought behind it, is seriously deluded and completely out to lunch. I've never posted that in any of the discussions on religion.I don't think a post like that adds to the debate, and is just a case of me labelling those who have come to a different conclusion about the genesis of this world than I have. As for myself I enjoy the science threads and mostly disregard the threads on Christianity because it inevitably seems to go the same way that this one has. Everybody is entitled to my opinion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 9003 From: Canada Joined: |
As for myself I enjoy the science threads and mostly disregard the threads on Christianity because it inevitably seems to go the same way that this one has. Exactly! Without what we call scientific evidence it doesn't seem to be possible to settle any debate and they go on for decades and centuries.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Nighttrain Member (Idle past 4015 days) Posts: 1512 From: brisbane,australia Joined: |
Right on cue, our national daily had an article on the decay of respect
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/...15%255E28737,00.html A couple of quotes
It's the kind of incident that appalls Lynne Truss, columnist, broadcaster and author of the newly published Talk to the Hand: The Utter Bloody Rudeness of Everyday Life. In her international bestseller Eats, Shoots & Leaves, Truss went to war against bad punctuation. Her new target is the collapse of civility in a "f--- off" age she says is characterised by "lazy moral relativism combined with aggressive social insolence". The stories she recounts to back her theory of a society gone to the dogs include a man on a London bus set on fire after he told off a gang of boys and another stabbed to death when he objected to someone throwing food at his girlfriend. Respect has been debased, says Truss. Whereas the word once implied regarding another with esteem or deference, or treating them with consideration, she argues it has become "a cool street-crime buzz word mainly associated with paying feudal obeisance to those in possession of firearms". "The end of deference? You've got to be kidding," says influential British sociologist and author Frank Furedi. In a recent essay, Furedi complains about cultural commentators who celebrate the erosion of authority as "an end to deference". Instead of freeing us, he argues, the collapse of respect for authority has made us slaves to a new set of masters. He is weary of a society that venerates children's rights over adult wisdom, blaming this collapse in authority for contributing to a classroom climate in which swearing and challenging instructions "has become the norm". Under the new deference, he writes, "We doubt the word of our doctors but turn happily to the herbalist, the New Age healer and the osteopath." We encourage victims of crime "to make pronouncements on the issue of law and order" and treat parents of Iraq war casualties as experts in military affairs. Then there is what Furedi describes as a growing tendency to institutionalise deference to the expert. "Parenting coaches, life coaches, supernannies, all apparently possess the authority to tell us how to live our lives." Even worse is the political class's shifting its deference to the authority of the celebrity. "Our leaders are happy to listen to Bob Geldof moralising about how to save Africans or Jamie Oliver instructing us how to rescue our children from obesity," Furedi says. In our little oasis of sanity we call EvC, I hope after spirited battles that we remain friends.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1365 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
quote: hahah awesome. i blame cultural relativism, though.
quote: i love the academic wording for stuff like that.
quote: hey, don't knock liveaid. SIR bob geldoff raised millions of dollars to feed starving people, and the liveaid foundation continues to raise money and feed people. i think that fact that he IS saving africans qualifies him to make a statement on the matter. besides, who honestly listens to the boomtown rats? seriously, he's not a very popular celebrity.
In our little oasis of sanity we call EvC, I hope after spirited battles that we remain friends. i like the chat. people are very friend in there, even bitter debate enemies. and creationists are questioning, not argumentative. i don't think there are many hate-filled tirades here.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
bobbins Member (Idle past 3635 days) Posts: 122 From: Manchester, England Joined: |
WHO LISTENS TO THE BOOMTOWN RATS?!!!!!
Wash out the ears - albums to track down and listen to, 'Tonic for the Troops' and 'Fine Art of Surfacing' - and if a whole album is too difficult and long then listen to 'Rat Trap' at full blast, new wave/post punk greatness in 5 minutes. Admittedly the US never really got them apart from 'I don't like Mondays' Your loss. Ho Hum.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1365 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
WHO LISTENS TO THE BOOMTOWN RATS?!!!!! Admittedly the US never really got them apart from 'I don't like Mondays' that was quite a good song. but seriously, at this point sir bob's a lot better known for liveaid than even that song.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024