Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8896 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-22-2019 9:54 AM
51 online now:
CosmicChimp, Diomedes, PaulK, Percy (Admin), Phat (AdminPhat), PurpleYouko (6 members, 45 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 848,542 Year: 3,579/19,786 Month: 574/1,087 Week: 164/212 Day: 6/25 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1819
20
21222324Next
Author Topic:   Has the bias made this forum essentially irrelevant?
Bolder-dash
Member (Idle past 1707 days)
Posts: 983
From: China
Joined: 11-14-2009


(1)
Message 286 of 355 (618078)
06-01-2011 9:05 AM
Reply to: Message 276 by Dr Adequate
06-01-2011 4:00 AM


Yes you are right Dr. A, Aaron is very polite. He backs up everything he says with hard facts, he knows what he is talking about, and he is not sarcastic. And yet you do none of those things. Isn't that odd?

Come to think of it, sleevesque is polite Marc is polite. Dawn is polite. Buzsaw is polite. And just about every creationist who has ever come on here is polite.

And yet so many of the evolutionists who post here are not, isn't that very strange? You don't consider your self polite do you A? Does granny? Does Azpaul? Does huntard? Does hooah? Does taq? Does anglagard? Does Jar? Does Rahlvin?

Why aren't you polite A? You want everyone else to be, but you simply are not.

So what is the matter with so many of the evolutionists here? What has got into them?

Edited by Bolder-dash, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-01-2011 4:00 AM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 287 by Percy, posted 06-01-2011 9:28 AM Bolder-dash has responded
 Message 302 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-01-2011 5:50 PM Bolder-dash has not yet responded

Percy
Member
Posts: 18309
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 287 of 355 (618083)
06-01-2011 9:28 AM
Reply to: Message 286 by Bolder-dash
06-01-2011 9:05 AM


Good question. Maybe we need some politeness police.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 286 by Bolder-dash, posted 06-01-2011 9:05 AM Bolder-dash has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 288 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-01-2011 10:16 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply
 Message 289 by Buzsaw, posted 06-01-2011 10:39 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply
 Message 306 by Bolder-dash, posted 06-02-2011 10:22 PM Percy has responded

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 288 of 355 (618085)
06-01-2011 10:16 AM
Reply to: Message 287 by Percy
06-01-2011 9:28 AM


Good question. Maybe we need some politeness police.
--Percy

Hrm, no smiley....


This message is a reply to:
 Message 287 by Percy, posted 06-01-2011 9:28 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 289 of 355 (618092)
06-01-2011 10:39 AM
Reply to: Message 287 by Percy
06-01-2011 9:28 AM


Percy writes:

Good question. Maybe we need some politeness police.

--Percy

. Bold blatanly bombasted, implicating balance police, I nominate Adminbold for a trial run unbiased non-Biblical thumping EvC balance moderator.

Edited by Buzsaw, : No reason given.

Edited by Buzsaw, : No reason given.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 287 by Percy, posted 06-01-2011 9:28 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

Taq
Member
Posts: 7673
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 2.6


(1)
Message 290 of 355 (618093)
06-01-2011 11:00 AM
Reply to: Message 270 by Bolder-dash
05-31-2011 11:27 PM


Here azpaul is making the argument that the evidence points to the ToE as the only real conclusion.

Really? Let's take a look at what azpaul actually said:

"The evidence does lead. The interpretations of evidence and thus the conclusions reached MUST reflect the reality presented by the evidence.
Science follows the evidence, interprets the results and draws conclusions."

Nope, nothing at all about evolution. Nothing. AZPaul was talking about the difference in how scientists and creationists approach science in general and how it causes problems with moderation which is exactly on topic.

All of your little groupies can back you up, and keep screaming that it is me who is out of line, but the fact is one of the posters makes an unsubstantiated claim-that the evidence clearly points one direction- I challenge that statement, and you see what happen? On your site? Based on your words?

Again, AZPaul was stating that scientists follow the evidence as a general rule. AZPaul did not mention evolution at all in the quote you used. We have already shown that creationist organizations, like AiG, do not follow the evidence. They start with the conclusion. This was done by citing their statement of faith. It is this approach which causes problems for creationists in science forums, which is what AZPaul was getting at.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 270 by Bolder-dash, posted 05-31-2011 11:27 PM Bolder-dash has not yet responded

GDR
Member
Posts: 4782
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 291 of 355 (618094)
06-01-2011 11:13 AM
Reply to: Message 281 by Granny Magda
06-01-2011 7:55 AM


Re: Ok, I'll give my opinion ...
Granny Magda writes:

Maybe. Maybe not. I don't think that the Bible, being a work of disparate parts, can be said to have any single correct way of approaching it. There must have been multiple intents by the multiple authors. Some of what creationists and literalist take as being literal probably was intended as a literal statement of fact. Some of it they are taking out of context.

I think the biggest single mistake made by Christians interpreting the Bible is the idea that it forms a cohesive whole. I don't think it does. Sure there are themes that come up repeatedly, but there are big departures as well, especially between Old and New Testaments.

Seeing how this is in the coffee house I guess we are allowed to go off on tangents.

I disagree with this view of the Bible. I see it as a meta-narrative. It isn't necessarily chronologically correct all the way through but it is an on-going story in which the final chapter hasn't been written. IMHO it is a collection of stories written by people who were inspired to record their histories. (By inspired I don't mean that it was dictated by God or that it isn't culturally conditioned.)The narrative includes all sorts of genres including mythology, poetry, theatre, revelation, history etc. With all of that there is a thread that runs throughout of God continuing to work in and through the creatures He created in His image, starting with creation and ending with a newly re-created world where God's heavenly dimension and our Earthly dimension become one. (In the meantime we are charged with managing our Earthly dimension, so the Christian message shoule be that we are to care for this planet and its inhabitants as it has eternal consequences.)

I suggest it tells an evolutionary story. There is no doubt that we can point to all sorts of horrendous atrocities in the world today but if we look back through the Biblical record we can see that God is making progress in and through us. There is a continual movement through history of mankind having gradually more respect for human life and even bit by bit all life.

Granny Magda writes:

Really? Do you think so? I wouldn't have thought so, but then, i am in Britain, where the moderate Church of England is the biggest player. Round my way the Muslims are probably the biggest creationist group!

Of course there is no disagreement in the CoE. Anglican theology is essentially that if something is true then Anglicans believe it. (Credit to NT Wright for that quote.) It is different in NA, although more so in the US than Canada.

For whatever reason most of what I read is written by Brits. Initially CS Lewis was instrumental in my acceptance of the Christian faith. More recently N T Wright who was the Bishop of Durham and is now a professor at St. Andrews Scotland has had a huge influence on my thinking. I also enjoy John Polkinghorne, Alister McGrath and John Lennox. (Lennox of course is Irish but over here we kinda lump you all together. ) I read some of Dawkins and Hitchens just to keep track of what the other side is up to of course. There are North American writers I like to read but it does seem that more often than not it is the British writers that I turn to.


Everybody is entitled to my opinion. :)
This message is a reply to:
 Message 281 by Granny Magda, posted 06-01-2011 7:55 AM Granny Magda has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 292 by Percy, posted 06-01-2011 11:22 AM GDR has responded
 Message 293 by Granny Magda, posted 06-01-2011 11:36 AM GDR has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18309
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 292 of 355 (618096)
06-01-2011 11:22 AM
Reply to: Message 291 by GDR
06-01-2011 11:13 AM


Re: Ok, I'll give my opinion ...
GDR writes:

Seeing how this is in the coffee house I guess we are allowed to go off on tangents.

All discussions diverge onto other issues, it's inevitable. It's only a concern when a divergence begins to distract attention or become a side discussion unrelated to the main topic or even replace the main topic. At that point it's time to find another thread, and in my opinion you guys are reaching that point.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 291 by GDR, posted 06-01-2011 11:13 AM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 295 by GDR, posted 06-01-2011 2:22 PM Percy has responded

  
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2380
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007


Message 293 of 355 (618099)
06-01-2011 11:36 AM
Reply to: Message 291 by GDR
06-01-2011 11:13 AM


Re: Ok, I'll give my opinion ...
I disagree with this view of the Bible. I see it as a meta-narrative...

I suggest it tells an evolutionary story. There is no doubt that we can point to all sorts of horrendous atrocities in the world today but if we look back through the Biblical record we can see that God is making progress in and through us. There is a continual movement through history of mankind having gradually more respect for human life and even bit by bit all life.

I know that you hold that opinion, but in my view, you could say that about all religious discourse. If you took the Bible, old and new, all the associated works and apocrypha, then threw in the Quran, the Vedas, the Guru Granth, ect., you would still be able to draw a meta-narrative. The themes you cite are common to all religion, or certainly all modern ones.

If you want to spin this off into another thread, you're welcome, but my time is limited right now, both on and off this board. we should probably give this a rest here though. Wouldn't want to derail Bolder-dash's very interesting and important whine debate.

Mutate and Survive


This message is a reply to:
 Message 291 by GDR, posted 06-01-2011 11:13 AM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 294 by GDR, posted 06-01-2011 11:48 AM Granny Magda has not yet responded

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 4782
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 294 of 355 (618101)
06-01-2011 11:48 AM
Reply to: Message 293 by Granny Magda
06-01-2011 11:36 AM


Re: Ok, I'll give my opinion ...
Granny Magda writes:

I know that you hold that opinion, but in my view, you could say that about all religious discourse. If you took the Bible, old and new, all the associated works and apocrypha, then threw in the Quran, the Vedas, the Guru Granth, ect., you would still be able to draw a meta-narrative. The themes you cite are common to all religion, or certainly all modern ones.

I agree with that which I think just supports my case.

As both you and Percy have humbly suggested I think we have crossed the line and so we can return to the on-going saga of "forum decorum". Good day eh!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 293 by Granny Magda, posted 06-01-2011 11:36 AM Granny Magda has not yet responded

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 4782
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 295 of 355 (618125)
06-01-2011 2:22 PM
Reply to: Message 292 by Percy
06-01-2011 11:22 AM


Re: Ok, I'll give my opinion ...
Hi Percy

Thanks again for all the time you devote to this forum. For me it's a valuable educational tool.

That actually brings me to a point I want to make. I value this forum as a tool in which to engage in two way discussion so that I can learn both by listening to others, and to learn by being forced to explain my own position.

It seems to me that there are others who view the forum as a debating forum where they will defend a position to the bitter end.

I am more than pleased to be able to admit that someone has shown me to be wrong because it means I have actually learned something. It appears to me that there are others that feel that admitting that they were wrong is viewed as a failure in terms that they lost the debate.

I think in some ways that the problem with the creationists on the forum is that although they are interested in the discussion they wind up debating because their belief is so much a part of who they are, and that their view must be defended at all costs. They are in a difficult position. They can't back down without changing their most basic belief system which is essentially that the Bible has to be defended or they have let God down.

When this is considered and you put a creationist up against someone who believes that the Bible has no significance at all and is trying to score debating points it does make sense that creationists would get discouraged and leave.

An atheist's POV leaves him with all sorts of flexibility in his/her position and thus is virtually invulnerable to attack, (except I can't resist saying that believing that the material world, that life itself, and that consciousness can all come about by some cosmic accident and no external intelligence requires more faith than I can possibly muster ), whereas the creationist's view is so narrow that their position is particularly vulnerable. (A narrow POV isn't necessarily wrong just because it is narrow.)

So, in all this I again am suggesting that when a creationist expresses views that others believe to be ridiculous, and if their postings remain courteous then they should be treated with courtesy as well and not be subjected to sarcasm and ridicule.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 292 by Percy, posted 06-01-2011 11:22 AM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 296 by Theodoric, posted 06-01-2011 2:27 PM GDR has responded
 Message 297 by Percy, posted 06-01-2011 2:37 PM GDR has responded

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 5954
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 296 of 355 (618126)
06-01-2011 2:27 PM
Reply to: Message 295 by GDR
06-01-2011 2:22 PM


Re: Ok, I'll give my opinion ...
The site is not atheism versus creationism.

Evolution is not an atheistic belief.


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
This message is a reply to:
 Message 295 by GDR, posted 06-01-2011 2:22 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 299 by GDR, posted 06-01-2011 3:12 PM Theodoric has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18309
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 297 of 355 (618128)
06-01-2011 2:37 PM
Reply to: Message 295 by GDR
06-01-2011 2:22 PM


Re: Ok, I'll give my opinion ...
GDR writes:

(except I can't resist saying that believing that the material world, that life itself, and that consciousness can all come about by some cosmic accident and no external intelligence requires more faith than I can possibly muster )

I believe that any conclusions I might reach about ultimate origins are bound to be wrong, so I try to avoid reaching any. If you really meant "cosmic accident" then that probably isn't a possibility in which I could see much promise, but if what you meant comes closer to feelings of skepticism that the universe came about simply by reality being reality then I can say that I share these feelings. And you might also agree with me that at the same time I see no overt evidence for intelligent guidance.

So, in all this I again am suggesting that when a creationist expresses views that others believe to be ridiculous, and if their postings remain courteous then they should be treated with courtesy as well and not be subjected to sarcasm and ridicule.

I wish I could make this happen, but there are practical issues regarding moderation that are too complex and debatable to get into, and with so many bad examples out there like PZ Myers and Dawkins and Penn & Teller's show, not to mention the more, uh, excitable members here, its like putting your finger in the dike. Too many people feel if you can insult it or ridicule it you've rebutted it.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 295 by GDR, posted 06-01-2011 2:22 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 300 by GDR, posted 06-01-2011 3:20 PM Percy has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 7673
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 298 of 355 (618139)
06-01-2011 3:05 PM
Reply to: Message 275 by Bolder-dash
06-01-2011 3:23 AM


Re: Called to a lower standard
That there is a double standard here that makes it useless for any one to wish to come here and actually debate. Its not a debate forum.

We gave you multiple examples of evidence that we claim support the theory of evolution, and we even linked to the threads where you can discuss these topics with us. What is stopping you from participating in those threads?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 275 by Bolder-dash, posted 06-01-2011 3:23 AM Bolder-dash has not yet responded

GDR
Member
Posts: 4782
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 299 of 355 (618142)
06-01-2011 3:12 PM
Reply to: Message 296 by Theodoric
06-01-2011 2:27 PM


Re: Ok, I'll give my opinion ...
Theodoric writes:

Evolution is not an atheistic belief.

Amen to that. It's a marvelously designed vehicle of creation.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 296 by Theodoric, posted 06-01-2011 2:27 PM Theodoric has not yet responded

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 4782
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 300 of 355 (618145)
06-01-2011 3:20 PM
Reply to: Message 297 by Percy
06-01-2011 2:37 PM


Re: Ok, I'll give my opinion ...
Percy writes:

I believe that any conclusions I might reach about ultimate origins are bound to be wrong, so I try to avoid reaching any. If you really meant "cosmic accident" then that probably isn't a possibility in which I could see much promise, but if what you meant comes closer to feelings of skepticism that the universe came about simply by reality being reality then I can say that I share these feelings.

See, even you can be dragged off topic. That's what I said without your gift of language.

Percy writes:

And you might also agree with me that at the same time I see no overt evidence for intelligent guidance.

Yes, as long as you accept that fact that we breathe, think, feel and exist as being overt then I agree.

Percy writes:

I wish I could make this happen, but there are practical issues regarding moderation that are too complex and debatable to get into, and with so many bad examples out there like PZ Myers and Dawkins and Penn & Teller's show, not to mention the more, uh, excitable members here, its like putting your finger in the dike. Too many people feel if you can insult it or ridicule it you've rebutted it.

Too true. I guess I'm just trying to suggest maybe some self moderating might be in order, or possibly moderators suggesting that the rhetoric might be toned down without any threat of suspension.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 297 by Percy, posted 06-01-2011 2:37 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 301 by Percy, posted 06-01-2011 3:49 PM GDR has not yet responded

  
RewPrev1
...
1819
20
21222324Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019