Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   H-D isn't what it used to be according to Stephen ben Yeshua
MrHambre
Member (Idle past 1393 days)
Posts: 1495
From: Framingham, MA, USA
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 20 of 32 (82506)
02-03-2004 6:33 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by Mammuthus
02-03-2004 3:32 AM


Will the Circle Be Unbroken?
The tentative nature of science must be intolerable to anyone who wants total unambiguous certainty in life. This is why creationist reasoning is totally circular, and therefore impervious to falsification. Unlike scientific acceptance, which only comes after research has created a realistic foundation for our 'belief,' faith is necessary to validate its own assumptions.
Biblical literalism is the introduction to this mode of thinking, where every word of the Bible is assumed to be true even before the word has been read. Any really egregious error is attributed to translation error or assumed to be a matter of deeper interpretation. The only reason literalists suspect such anomalous exceptions, however, is because they've already assumed the text is the infallible Word of God.
From there, we see the fundies move on to making similarly circular pronouncements about evolution, which they assume is untrue without a background in scientific methodology. So the examples of evolution with which they are presented can be dismissed as 'microevolution,' which they define as 'anything that can be presented in support of the evolutionary model.' They have assumed that different organisms cannot descend from common ancestors, and their capacity for denial is seemingly boundless.
The 'design inference' is the ultimate unfalsifiable fundie delusion, based on the assumption that a Designer created everything. The dazzling complexity we see in nature, they say, is just what we expect to see from a designed ecosystem. Darwinsterrier can talk till he's blue in his Limey face, but his countless examples of poor design can't falsify a design inference that already assumes that everything is the way it is because a designer wanted it that way.
So Salty and Doc Steve are like the guy searching for the keys he lost in the park, who assumes he'll find them under the streetlight because the light is so much better there. They assume the light of science can be used to illuminate their futile search for transcendence, and no failure can falsify that.

The dark nursery of evolution is very dark indeed.
Brad McFall

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Mammuthus, posted 02-03-2004 3:32 AM Mammuthus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Mammuthus, posted 02-03-2004 6:47 AM MrHambre has replied

MrHambre
Member (Idle past 1393 days)
Posts: 1495
From: Framingham, MA, USA
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 22 of 32 (82514)
02-03-2004 7:09 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by Mammuthus
02-03-2004 6:47 AM


You Results-Bully
Mammuthus,
The only reason you reject Doc Steve's fart-based methodology is because you're one of those paradigm-defending phonies. That and your office has poor ventilation. It's high time you stopped excluding subjective, anecdotal, and nonexistent evidence from the lab. Aside from all those medical and technological advances, what has MN ever done for us?
regards,
Esteban "Semi-Flatulent" Hambre

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Mammuthus, posted 02-03-2004 6:47 AM Mammuthus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Mammuthus, posted 02-03-2004 7:28 AM MrHambre has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024