Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 88 (8927 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-23-2019 7:22 PM
30 online now:
AZPaul3, DrJones*, Faith, JonF, PaulK, xongsmith (6 members, 24 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jedothek
Post Volume:
Total: 860,343 Year: 15,379/19,786 Month: 2,102/3,058 Week: 476/404 Day: 80/63 Hour: 0/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   WTF is wrong with people
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 884
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 4 of 457 (707467)
09-27-2013 12:59 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by frako
09-27-2013 11:18 AM


Explaining evolution or global warming or germ theory seems simple as the concepts are simple to grasp

To be honest, I don't believe the concepts themselves are the problem. I think it is the rampant denial permeating in our society that is the true root cause. Coupled with a great deal of mis-information put forth by individuals who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.

I am pretty certain the Koch Brothers have no illusions about the true nature of Global Warming. But nonetheless, their business would be threatened if the environmental folks got traction with their ideas. Additionally, numerous individuals, including working middle class have jobs associated with various energy sector jobs and their livelihood is at stake.

I will say that the denial of evolution however is beyond idiotic. The agenda there is strictly religious in nature (as we all know) and acceptance of the theory would have no impact on our economy as a whole. Except for maybe a few scam artists like Eric Hovind or Ken Ham going out of business. No loss there.


"Our future lies not in our dogmatic past, but in our enlightened present"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by frako, posted 09-27-2013 11:18 AM frako has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by frako, posted 09-27-2013 6:50 PM Diomedes has not yet responded

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 884
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013
Member Rating: 2.7


(3)
Message 20 of 457 (707544)
09-28-2013 11:45 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Faith
09-27-2013 7:34 PM


Re: so much for smarts
That's just plain lying slander to say that medical progress is put at risk by those who know that evolution is a fraud. NO Christian denies medical progress. It has nothing to do with evolution, that's a mental trick you all pull on yourselves.

Incorrect. There are Christians who have already been arrested and charged with manslaughter because they denied medical treatment for their children in favor of 'prayer'. Several cases have made the news of late. Additionally, there are numerous Christian sects that have various views regarding the type and nature of medical treatment they receive.

Regardless, the theory of evolution has been at the forefront of numerous advances in modern medicine. There is even a topic page dedicated on Wikipedia called 'Evolutionary Medicine'.

So I am sorry, but in deference to your earlier statement, denying evolution is tantamount to denying medical progress. Pure and simple.


"Our future lies not in our dogmatic past, but in our enlightened present"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Faith, posted 09-27-2013 7:34 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Faith, posted 09-28-2013 2:28 PM Diomedes has not yet responded

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 884
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013
Member Rating: 2.7


(4)
Message 57 of 457 (707712)
09-30-2013 3:46 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by Faith
09-30-2013 3:24 PM


Re: Back on topic
I understand that it's really too much to ask of you to consider that your life's work is based on a delusion

Wow. Condescend much?

And am I the only one that finds irony in somebody who believes in talking snakes, dinosaurs and man living together, a giant wooden boat holding two of every animal, etc,etc, calling someone else delusional?

Does EVC have a dramatic irony meter built into its JavaScript and PHP code? If so, I think it just red-lined.


"Our future lies not in our dogmatic past, but in our enlightened present"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by Faith, posted 09-30-2013 3:24 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Faith, posted 09-30-2013 4:16 PM Diomedes has responded

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 884
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013
Member Rating: 2.7


(2)
Message 63 of 457 (707732)
09-30-2013 7:05 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by Faith
09-30-2013 4:16 PM


Re: Back on topic
Faith writes:

Yeah, I enjoy needling evolutionists when I can, just as they needle me

Very Christian of you. Guess the Old Testament is your favorite?

Faith writes:

And you are off topic and committing the same violation of the rule against personal attack that Ringo was doing

You mean when I called you out for being insulting with regards your statement about Coyote's life's work being a delusion? You do know forum rules are not one-sided, right?

Faith writes:

The right thing to do with an argument is address the argument itself, but of course evolutionists suffer from an inability to do anything but make charts that demonstrate their fantasies, actual reality eludes them

LMAO! Those 'charts', amongst many other things are generally referred to in scientific parlance, as FACTS.

Maybe as a counter you can show us the engineering schematics for Noah's Ark, along with all the calculations on how it could function?
But I can understand your dislike of charts. The last one I saw produced by a Creationist was drawn in crayon.


"Our future lies not in our dogmatic past, but in our enlightened present"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Faith, posted 09-30-2013 4:16 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by Faith, posted 09-30-2013 8:04 PM Diomedes has not yet responded

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 884
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013
Member Rating: 2.7


(1)
Message 92 of 457 (707837)
10-01-2013 1:03 PM
Reply to: Message 89 by Coyote
10-01-2013 12:37 PM


Re: Back on topic
Coyote writes:

Ignorance is sad. Willful ignorance is disgraceful!

And I think that adequately summarizes the spirit of the original thread, as proposed by frako when he asked 'WTF is wrong with people'?

The answer appears to be self-evident. They are both willfully ignorant and display a level of zealotry that borders on insanity.


"Our future lies not in our dogmatic past, but in our enlightened present"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by Coyote, posted 10-01-2013 12:37 PM Coyote has not yet responded

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 884
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 105 of 457 (707854)
10-01-2013 2:22 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by ringo
10-01-2013 1:56 PM


Re: Back on topic
That makes me wonder.

When a creationist looks at the following chart:

So by their logic, Noah was Australopithecus Afarensis?

Not the most handsome fellow. And I somehow doubt he could build a canoe, let alone a giant wooden ship.


"Our future lies not in our dogmatic past, but in our enlightened present"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by ringo, posted 10-01-2013 1:56 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by ringo, posted 10-01-2013 2:29 PM Diomedes has not yet responded
 Message 115 by Faith, posted 10-01-2013 3:21 PM Diomedes has responded

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 884
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013
Member Rating: 2.7


(1)
Message 124 of 457 (707875)
10-01-2013 3:48 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by Faith
10-01-2013 3:21 PM


Re: Back on topic
Faith writes:

Sheesh you guys are credulous people. All it takes is a drawing of a bunch of skulls to "prove" the ToE to you.

Well, no. The chart is a compendium of the various facts and data points collected over the years which demonstrates the veracity of the theory.

And for the record, all it takes to prove anything to a Creationist are words in a book written 2000 years ago by a bunch of Bronze Age goat herders who would have thought an iPad was a gift from Jehovah himself.

And as for 'proof' of evolution. Why, we have that right here:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/...ases/2009/10/091018141716.htm

Speciation occurring right before our eyes. And also a finding which led to one of the most embarrassing gaffes by Creationist Uber Apologist, Andrew Schlafly:

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Lenski_Affair

So take heart Faith. None of your rantings here can come close to the massive facepalm Schlafly received in that exchange.


"Our future lies not in our dogmatic past, but in our enlightened present"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Faith, posted 10-01-2013 3:21 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 128 by Faith, posted 10-01-2013 4:34 PM Diomedes has not yet responded

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 884
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013
Member Rating: 2.7


(3)
Message 149 of 457 (707935)
10-02-2013 11:55 AM
Reply to: Message 147 by Faith
10-02-2013 11:33 AM


Re: Back to how population genetics defeats evolution
Faith writes:

What YOU don't understand is that the ToE hasn't been "tested,"....

I am curious: do you even bother to read posts by other individuals, especially when they provided references, or do you just rant?

Frako provided several examples of instances where the ToE was validated through testing. I provided an example of Prof. Lenski's groundbreaking research on Bacteria that showed how they 'evolved' the capability to ingest citrate. All of these findings are experiments; i.e. 'testing'.

But regardless of evidence presented, you just ignore it and prefer to rant. And if all you want to do is rant, I guess that is your prerogative. But if you are attempting to sway people's opinions or give credence to your views, you are doing a pretty dismal job. I would actually argue that the rants of people like yourself, Kirk Cameron, Kent Hovind, etc have done more to advance the knowledge of things like the ToE rather than detract away from it. When you present yourself as little more than the guy on the street corner with the 'End is Near' sign, you are not going to be taken seriously. Pure and simple.


"Our future lies not in our dogmatic past, but in our enlightened present"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by Faith, posted 10-02-2013 11:33 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 884
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 159 of 457 (707962)
10-02-2013 10:37 PM
Reply to: Message 157 by Percy
10-02-2013 7:47 PM


Re: Back on topic
You're saying that when scientists think a species is descended from another species, in reality they're the same species, but the descendent species has reduced genetic diversity. If this were true then the descendent species would possess only a subset of alleles of the parent species, and it would have no alleles unique to itself. No genetic analysis has ever revealed any such thing, therefore you're wrong

Not only is she wrong, she would have to deny meiosis to validate her hypothesis.

http://www.sciencelearn.org.nz/...-inheritance-and-variation

The following paragraphs sum things up well:

quote:
Genetic variation is increased by meiosis

During fertilisation, 1 gamete from each parent combines to form a zygote. Because of recombination and independent assortment in meiosis, each gamete contains a different set of DNA. This produces a unique combination of genes in the resulting zygote.

Recombination or crossing over occurs during prophase I. Homologous chromosomes – 1 inherited from each parent – pair along their lengths, gene by gene. Breaks occur along the chromosomes, and they rejoin, trading some of their genes. The chromosomes now have genes in a unique combination.

Independent assortment is the process where the chromosomes move randomly to separate poles during meiosis. A gamete will end up with 23 chromosomes after meiosis, but independent assortment means that each gamete will have 1 of many different combinations of chromosomes.

This reshuffling of genes into unique combinations increases the genetic variation in a population and explains the variation we see between siblings with the same parents.



"Our future lies not in our dogmatic past, but in our enlightened present"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by Percy, posted 10-02-2013 7:47 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 163 by Faith, posted 10-03-2013 12:15 AM Diomedes has not yet responded

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 884
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013
Member Rating: 2.7


(2)
Message 204 of 457 (708062)
10-04-2013 11:07 AM
Reply to: Message 203 by Coyote
10-04-2013 11:03 AM


Re: What's wrong!
They are blinded by belief and dogma such that they deny and misrepresent reality, hoping somehow to make it appear to conform to their belief and dogma.

And don't forget playing the victim and claiming 'persecution' by the scientific 'elite'.


"Our future lies not in our dogmatic past, but in our enlightened present"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by Coyote, posted 10-04-2013 11:03 AM Coyote has not yet responded

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 884
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013
Member Rating: 2.7


(3)
Message 211 of 457 (708075)
10-04-2013 12:37 PM
Reply to: Message 208 by Faith
10-04-2013 12:12 PM


Re: What's wrong!
"They are blinded by belief and dogma such that they deny and misrepresent reality, hoping somehow to make it appear to conform to their belief and dogma."
Good definition of evolutionists.

Psychological projection

"Psychological projection was conceptualized by Sigmund Freud in the 1890s as a defense mechanism in which a person unconsciously rejects his or her own unacceptable attributes by ascribing them to objects or persons in the outside world. For example, a person who is rude may accuse other people of being rude."

For the layman, also known as the 'I know you are but what am I' defense.


"Our future lies not in our dogmatic past, but in our enlightened present"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 208 by Faith, posted 10-04-2013 12:12 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 212 by Faith, posted 10-04-2013 12:51 PM Diomedes has not yet responded
 Message 213 by frako, posted 10-04-2013 12:52 PM Diomedes has not yet responded

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 884
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013
Member Rating: 2.7


(2)
Message 275 of 457 (708325)
10-08-2013 1:08 PM
Reply to: Message 274 by New Cat's Eye
10-08-2013 10:10 AM


Re: What's wrong!
First off: since they "know" that the Bible is God's word, then what it says, first and foremost, is what is true and everything that contradicts it must be wrong.

Yet ironically, they tap dance around the verbiage of the Old Testament, trying to down play several of the extraordinarily vile passages from the Books of Leviticus, Exodus, Deuteronomy, etc and reconcile those barbaric tenets with our modern day society. Of all the things that surprise me the most about fundamentalists, is their ability to read the Old Testament, believe it literally and yet still try to pass off god as being 'merciful'. It's almost a form of Stockholm Syndrome.


"Our future lies not in our dogmatic past, but in our enlightened present"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 274 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-08-2013 10:10 AM New Cat's Eye has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 278 by ringo, posted 10-08-2013 1:41 PM Diomedes has not yet responded
 Message 280 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-08-2013 1:58 PM Diomedes has not yet responded

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 884
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013
Member Rating: 2.7


(1)
Message 304 of 457 (708408)
10-09-2013 4:45 PM
Reply to: Message 303 by New Cat's Eye
10-09-2013 12:29 PM


Re: WTF indeed
Faith writes:

Aw, I can't personalize "evolution" I have to say "evolutionists" huh?


Meh, even "evolutionists" is a silly word. How about: "people who aren't intellectually crippled by religious fanaticism".

For me, I just simplify it and say 'rationalist'. That essentially encompasses evolutionist, darwinist, einsteinist, farady-ist, maxwell-ist, bohr-ist, and any other 'ist' they may want to ascribe to me. And all it essentially stipulates is that I rely on data and facts to draw my conclusions as opposed to hocus-pocus, gut feelings, little devils & angels on your shoulders, or books written in ancient times by people who would think an iPad was dark magic.


"Our future lies not in our dogmatic past, but in our enlightened present"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 303 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-09-2013 12:29 PM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 305 by Tangle, posted 10-09-2013 5:05 PM Diomedes has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019