Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8925 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-19-2019 4:25 PM
34 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jedothek
Post Volume:
Total: 860,028 Year: 15,064/19,786 Month: 1,787/3,058 Week: 161/404 Day: 48/113 Hour: 2/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
2Next
Author Topic:   WTF is wrong with people
ringo
Member
Posts: 17141
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.2


(2)
Message 43 of 457 (707635)
09-29-2013 5:51 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by Faith
09-28-2013 4:14 PM


Re: so much for smarts
Faith writes:

I think all this through for myself.


Just on the off-chance that you were ever wrong about something, how would you know?

When I'm wrong the people on "my side" don't hesitate to tell me so. (It's a good thing I'm not paranoid.) If you don't consider anybody else's ideas but your own, how do you avoid confirmation bias?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Faith, posted 09-28-2013 4:14 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Faith, posted 09-29-2013 5:52 PM ringo has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 17141
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.2


(1)
Message 45 of 457 (707637)
09-29-2013 5:54 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by Faith
09-29-2013 5:52 PM


Re: so much for smarts
Faith writes:

I stick to the stuff I DO know, it's a pretty limited array.


What you know is much more limited than you think.

How do you know what your own limits are?

Edited by ringo, : Fixed quote.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Faith, posted 09-29-2013 5:52 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Faith, posted 09-29-2013 5:55 PM ringo has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 17141
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.2


(1)
Message 47 of 457 (707639)
09-29-2013 5:58 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by Faith
09-29-2013 5:55 PM


Re: so much for smarts
Faith writes:

What I know is a lot less limited than YOU think.


How would you know if you were looking through the wrong end of the telescope?

What possibilities exist for self-correction in your method?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Faith, posted 09-29-2013 5:55 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Faith, posted 09-29-2013 8:53 PM ringo has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 17141
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.2


(1)
Message 55 of 457 (707682)
09-30-2013 11:44 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by Faith
09-29-2013 8:53 PM


Re: so much for smarts
Faith writes:

You're off topic and you're violating the rule against attacking the person, both.


The topic is about how creationists can believe such nonsense in the face of all of the evidence and contrary to any logic. I have not attacked you as a person; I'm saying that you hold idiotic beliefs because your methodology is flawed.

So let's try again: If, in the course of human events, you could ever be the slightest teeny bit wrong about anything, how would you know? What possibilities are there in your methodology for correcting errors?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Faith, posted 09-29-2013 8:53 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 17141
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.2


(1)
Message 87 of 457 (707825)
10-01-2013 12:18 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by Faith
09-30-2013 11:49 PM


Re: Back on topic
Faith writes:

Funny you don't seem to realize that all you are doing is speculating, theorizing, fantasizing, and treating it as if it were real.


You're misusing the word "theorizing". Theorizing involves testing so it shouldn't be associated with speculating or fantisizing. Theorizing is not the same as treating something as if it was real but it does explain what is real.

You can speculate or fantasize about things that can not be tested, such as God.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by Faith, posted 09-30-2013 11:49 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by Faith, posted 10-01-2013 12:33 PM ringo has responded
 Message 89 by Coyote, posted 10-01-2013 12:37 PM ringo has acknowledged this reply

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 17141
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.2


(4)
Message 90 of 457 (707834)
10-01-2013 12:52 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by Faith
10-01-2013 12:33 PM


Re: Back on topic
Faith writes:

... theorizing and calling it fact...


You're still misunderstanding what a theory is. Evolution is a fact - and no creationist has ever been able to point out what prevents microevolution from adding up to macroevolution. The Theory of Evolution is an explanation of how that fact works. It happens to be the only explanation of how that fact works because creationists admit that their God can not be explained.

Faith writes:

... fantasizing and calling it theory...


As I mentioned, a theory is tested (and passes the test) before it is called a theory.

WTF is wrong with creationists is that they don't understand the basic concepts and terminology of science.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Faith, posted 10-01-2013 12:33 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 17141
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.2


(1)
Message 100 of 457 (707847)
10-01-2013 1:45 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Faith
10-01-2013 1:27 PM


Re: Back on topic
Faith writes:

Mutations are not needed to provide genetic diversity, that is built into the genome of each species from creation.


That's just speculation and fantasy. To bring the claim anywhere near science, you'd have to test it.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Faith, posted 10-01-2013 1:27 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by Faith, posted 10-01-2013 1:53 PM ringo has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 17141
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.2


(1)
Message 103 of 457 (707850)
10-01-2013 1:56 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by Faith
10-01-2013 1:53 PM


Re: Back on topic
Faith writes:

Yes, I'm merely stating the alternate theory which pre-existed the ToE.


It's not an alternate theory, not a theory at all until it has been tested. What part of that do you not understand?

Faith writes:

Everything I've been saying here, however, goes to support it over the ToE.


Saying something is not support.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by Faith, posted 10-01-2013 1:53 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by Diomedes, posted 10-01-2013 2:22 PM ringo has responded
 Message 108 by Faith, posted 10-01-2013 2:55 PM ringo has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 17141
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.2


(1)
Message 107 of 457 (707857)
10-01-2013 2:29 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by Diomedes
10-01-2013 2:22 PM


Re: Back on topic
Diomedes writes:

So by their logic, Noah was Australopithecus Afarensis?


Their "logic" is very fluid.

(Of course that chart is pure "fantasy", even though it's made up of real items - whereas the Flood story is very "real", even though there are no real items to back it up.)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by Diomedes, posted 10-01-2013 2:22 PM Diomedes has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 17141
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.2


(1)
Message 148 of 457 (707934)
10-02-2013 11:45 AM
Reply to: Message 108 by Faith
10-01-2013 2:55 PM


Re: Back on topic
Faith writes:

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


That's nonsense, of course. For one example, the theory of evolution by natural selection was formulated before we knew anything about DNA. The subsequent discovery and study of DNA has provided the mechanism by which mutation and the resulting natural selection works. On the other hand, the study of DNA has provided NO support for the creationist tripe about a magical "super genome".

Every discovery of new facts is a test of the theory. If creationists are so confident in their hypothesis, why aren't they looking for factual support?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by Faith, posted 10-01-2013 2:55 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 17141
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.2


(2)
Message 151 of 457 (707937)
10-02-2013 11:58 AM
Reply to: Message 126 by Faith
10-01-2013 3:57 PM


Re: Back on topic
Faith writes:

You guys are the ones evading the truth, as I said.


As a friend of mine used to say, you wouldn't know the truth if it sat down beside you in church.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by Faith, posted 10-01-2013 3:57 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 17141
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.2


(2)
Message 205 of 457 (708065)
10-04-2013 11:45 AM
Reply to: Message 196 by Faith
10-04-2013 1:09 AM


Re: What's wrong!
Faith writes:

...they SHOULD limit their dictionaries to what they actually know....


If that was the standard, there wouldn't be anything in the dictionary about gods or religion.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by Faith, posted 10-04-2013 1:09 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 17141
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.2


(1)
Message 214 of 457 (708078)
10-04-2013 12:55 PM
Reply to: Message 212 by Faith
10-04-2013 12:51 PM


Re: What's wrong!
Faith writes:

Yes, indeed, projection, although a very primitive psychological concept that appeals to the sophomoric pedantic mind, does describe well enough what the evolutionists do as they accuse creationists of their own attitudes.


I've asked you more than once: On the off-chance you you might conceivably be wrong about anything, how would you know? What possibility is there for correction in your methodology?

If you were looking in a mirror, how would you know?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 212 by Faith, posted 10-04-2013 12:51 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 17141
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.2


(2)
Message 278 of 457 (708330)
10-08-2013 1:41 PM
Reply to: Message 275 by Diomedes
10-08-2013 1:08 PM


Re: What's wrong!
Diomedes writes:

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'.


Fundie: "Slavery was fun in the Old Testament. It was like a ride at Disneyland."

Heathen: "But what about the Golden Rule? Would you want to be a slave in the Old Testament?"

Fundie: "Look! A dog with a poofy tail!"


This message is a reply to:
 Message 275 by Diomedes, posted 10-08-2013 1:08 PM Diomedes has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 17141
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.2


(1)
Message 301 of 457 (708395)
10-09-2013 12:11 PM
Reply to: Message 286 by New Cat's Eye
10-08-2013 3:07 PM


Re: WTF indeed
Catholic Scientist writes:

WTF is wrong with these people?


The pinnacle of their logic is, "I know you are but what am I?"
This message is a reply to:
 Message 286 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-08-2013 3:07 PM New Cat's Eye has acknowledged this reply

  
1
2Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019