Support thread: thrown out of someone's house b/c of beliefs

Page 4 of 5 [ 74 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

24 Apr 2008, 3:17 pm

Ragtime wrote:
Yes, I know.
Tell it to those trying to keep ID out of the schools, and trying to silence anyone who thinks ID could have occurred. As the new movie "Expelled" points out, scientists have been fired for simply suggesting ID.

I've heard that some of these claims are overhyped. Honestly, I am not distressed as it is just a sign of the fear of subversion that would be present given the tactics of ID. I am concerned about freedom of thought of course, but still, I am not shocked.



Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

24 Apr 2008, 3:21 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
The hype by evolutionary theorists is because ID isn't science and cannot be science. Not because it cannot be correct. It must be recognized that science is a specific mechanism to find out certain things about the world, it is not necessarily correct, but it is the best way that we know of to get information that seems correct about the world.


But that is a total cop-out!

First of all, evolution isn't science. It's a fervent ideology held by many scientists and non-scientists, who pressure dissenting scientists into towing that line, through withholdings of grants, terminations of employment, and general intimidation for simply thinking different.
(Might as well declare that all Aspies should be NT's, because NT's run the world. It's a stupid argument.)

Secondly, how can you arbitrarily say that ID "cannot be science"? You've certainly made sure to cover your bases with that blanket, if random, statement! But, are you saying that "science" (the often-flawed process by which scientists attempt to determine truth) will always be too stupid to recognize our Creator? No matter how obvious He may choose to make himself in the future, "science" will remain blind to him? The head-in-the-sand argument is a cop-out, plain and simple. It's intellectual dishonesty, no matter how terms are parsed and twisted and an attempt to try and put God outside of the realm of evidensibility.


_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.


Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

24 Apr 2008, 3:30 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Yes, I know.
Tell it to those trying to keep ID out of the schools, and trying to silence anyone who thinks ID could have occurred. As the new movie "Expelled" points out, scientists have been fired for simply suggesting ID.

I've heard that some of these claims are overhyped.


Oh, well, it's certainly not worth looking into then. After all, you heard it somewhere.
The movie gives the names of, and even live interviews with, those who were fired.
The truth is right there, but you have to want it.
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Honestly, I am not distressed as it is just a sign of the fear of subversion that would be present given the tactics of ID.


:lol: What are we, Commies now? Suddenly, ID is a DANGEROUS IDEA!111!1!!


_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.


Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

24 Apr 2008, 3:32 pm

Ragtime wrote:
First of all, evolution isn't science. It's a fervent ideology held by many scientists and non-scientists, who pressure dissenting scientists into towing that line, through withholdings of grants, terminations of employment, and general intimidation for simply thinking different.
(Might as well declare that all Aspies should be NT's, because NT's run the world. It's a stupid argument.)

No, evolution is a scientific theory. Not only that, but I said that I didn't like it, but I considered a lot of what was happening to be frightened agitation. Really though, given that there are theistic scientists, I can't imagine that the line being towed is as sharp as many people think. Like I said, I have heard that a few of the claims made in Expelled on suppression were later found to be incorrect.
[quuote]
Secondly, how can you arbitrarily say that ID "cannot be science"? You've certainly made sure to cover your bases with that blanket, if random, statement! But, are you saying that "science" (the often-flawed process by which scientists attempt to determine truth) will always be too stupid to recognize our Creator? No matter how obvious He may choose to make himself in the future, "science" will remain blind to him? The head-in-the-sand argument is a cop-out, plain and simple. It's intellectual dishonesty, no matter how terms are parsed and twisted and an attempt to try and put God outside of the realm of evidensibility.[/quote]
Yes, I am saying that science will never ever ever touch God. Yes, no matter how obvious, science will likely remain blind to God. I don't think that this is a problem at all, because science is meant to be incredibly skeptical, and God, the greatest and most unknowable of all things will generate the most skepticism. That being said, science isn't human choice or anything like that, so human beings can still be theistic no matter what the science says on a matter.



Triangular_Trees
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2007
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,799

24 Apr 2008, 3:46 pm

Evolution has been proven.

Regardless of your religious beliefs, you have to believe that animals evolve. If you deny that, when there is evidence to prove it beyond any possible doubt - evidence that was shown in most of our lifetimes, than you honestly don't have the ability to rationally and logically decide anything. If you don't have that ability, all of your beliefs must be called into question

I'm afraid i spelled the name wrong last I mentioned this, but do a search for the anolis lizards that Jonathon Losos introduced into 14 different lizard-free Carribbean islands in the 1980's. In just 14 years the lizards on the different islands had evolved to such an extent they were no longer considered the same species


***Also this more proof that people evolved from soup than there is from god. One can see soup in existence. In the billions of years that the earth has been present not one being has ever been recorded seeing god, and there is no tangible proof whatsoever that god exists. Sooup is more realistic because soup is something that one cannot deny exists, without looking is idiotic as someone denying evolution today looks. God is something that one cannot prove exists no matter how much they try., how much they believe he does, and how much they want to prove his existence



Last edited by Triangular_Trees on 24 Apr 2008, 3:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

24 Apr 2008, 3:50 pm

Ragtime wrote:
Oh, well, it's certainly not worth looking into then. After all, you heard it somewhere.
The movie gives the names of, and even live interviews with, those who were fired.
The truth is right there, but you have to want it.

Yeah, and other groups argue that the claims in Expelled of individuals cast out are factually wrong.

Quote:
:lol: What are we, Commies now? Suddenly, ID is a DANGEROUS IDEA!111!1!!

It is a dangerous idea, it is not scientific and to hold to a non-scientific idea as a scientific idea while remaining a scientist is just a bad mix.

Triangle_Trees wrote:
Evolution has been proven.

No, evolution is the best theory. Proof is not something found in the scientific process.



Gromit
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 May 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,302
Location: In Cognito

24 Apr 2008, 3:55 pm

Ragtime wrote:
Tell it to those trying to keep ID out of the schools, and trying to silence anyone who thinks ID could have occurred. As the new movie "Expelled" points out, scientists have been fired for simply suggesting ID.

"Expelled" is a piece of propaganda less reliable than Michael Moore's films. Episode 074 of the Skepticality podcast is about Expelled, and seems to give a good summary of the slant the film had from the start. For example, when the film makers interviewed the scientists, they claimed the title was "Crossroads" and it was generally about science and religion, but they had reserved the domain name expelled.com before they interviewed those people. When they asked how Darwin's theory affected society, they didn't want to hear about laissez-faire capitalism, and tried to get their interviewee to make a link with the Nazis. I conclude that they knew from the start what they wanted to hear, and edited until they had what they wanted.

By the way, the most prominent ID advocate who does work in research, Michael Behe, is employed. Here is his work homepage. All his department has done is put up this disclaimer:
Department of Biology, Lehigh University wrote:
Department Position on Evolution and "Intelligent Design"

The faculty in the Department of Biological Sciences is committed to the highest standards of scientific integrity and academic function. This commitment carries with it unwavering support for academic freedom and the free exchange of ideas. It also demands the utmost respect for the scientific method, integrity in the conduct of research, and recognition that the validity of any scientific model comes only as a result of rational hypothesis testing, sound experimentation, and findings that can be replicated by others.

The department faculty, then, are unequivocal in their support of evolutionary theory, which has its roots in the seminal work of Charles Darwin and has been supported by findings accumulated over 140 years. The sole dissenter from this position, Prof. Michael Behe, is a well-known proponent of "intelligent design." While we respect Prof. Behe's right to express his views, they are his alone and are in no way endorsed by the department. It is our collective position that intelligent design has no basis in science, has not been tested experimentally, and should not be regarded as scientific.

So the man who has not merely suggested ID, but has written at least two books on the subject and was an expert witness in favour of ID has not been fired.

I ask you yet again to show what is scientific about ID. Can you?



Last edited by Gromit on 24 Apr 2008, 4:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Triangular_Trees
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2007
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,799

24 Apr 2008, 4:13 pm

EVOLUTION HAS BEEN PROVEN.

BEYOND ANY POSSIBLE DOUBT.

RESEARCH THE TOPIC I MENTIONED YOU SHOULD DO TWICE!! !


Then you'll see. Anoliz lizards evolved into completely different species when they were introduced into different islands with no pre-existing lizard populations and it only took 14 years for them to do so. Thats proof. Evolution on a grandscale for all species on earth is a theory. Evolution for the anolis lizards is absolute proof. Rather than die of extinction as they should have, the lizards evolved into different species capable of living on whatever island Losos had introduced them too. On one island they evolved into stocky, short legged creatures, on another they evolved into long-legged skinny ones.

This is probably the best free article you'll find. It only does a half decent job of explaining it though so you have access to sciencemag or an academic database search for the paper that losos wrote himself

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.h ... wanted=all


The fact that you feel qualified to discredit my statement without putting any effort at all into checking it astounds me. And I know you didn't take a second to research it, because your comments to discredit me show your utter lack of knowledge about the anolis lizards



Last edited by Triangular_Trees on 24 Apr 2008, 4:36 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Griff
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Nov 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,312

24 Apr 2008, 4:22 pm

Ragtime wrote:
Griff wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Many evolutionists, including Dawkins, state bluntly and angrily that mankind was not created by any deity.
Because Creationism is an ignorant load of trash. It would annoy anyone who knew better.


Scientific formulas, please. We're discussing science.
If you have a rabid opinion, that doesn't count as evidence, let alone proof.
I didn't posit it as evidence. I posited it as an explanation for the antics of Richard Dawkins.

Quote:
I hate to say this, but arguing with you and AG is like arguing with a Catholic apologist -- in stalwart and close-minded defense of his religion, he shifts meanings of words (in this case "evolution", which can mean anything from one tiny mutation to the theory that there has never been an active deity), doubletalks regarding definitions of beliefs ("Oh no, we freely admit we don't have that data, and we always have!" :roll:
I only become closed-minded when I'm upset, and I must admit that you are quite skilled at getting me into this state.

I really don't like the term, "evolution," for exactly that reason, though. It is too broad a term. It is more productive to examine the particulars, such as how simple organic molecules form in the absence of biological processes.

Quote:
Nonsense. You lie about the data until you are caught,
You couldn't catch a cold. You're trying to play a game of "gotcha!" but all you're going to hear is what we've been saying all along: if we're going to play guessing games about the origin of life, it is important to produce a model that is likely to occur in nature. It remains exactly that, though: a guessing game. Anyone who tells you differently is lying to you, especially hardcore creationists who don't know jack diddly squat about the basics of biochemistry, which is a course that I personally won't be taking until the semester after next. Ask me more about the subject when I've had time to absorb the mentally overwhelming truckloads of information that you're required to internalize before a reputable university will call you a biochemist. Hopefully, I won't be so schizoid by then that I've been rendered completely incapable of person-to-person communication.

Quote:
and then you admit the truth: that there is no data showing people came from soup, or that one species evolved into the next,
No. We say that from the get-go. We only posit that as a model that could reasonably be expected to occur in nature, at least somewhere in the universe if not here, and we posit that it's reasonable to consider it applicable to the existence of life on Earth.

Quote:
or that you even have a credible idea for how such new genetic information could have been generated out of thin air in this supposedly-spontaneous climb upwards toward staggeringly greater genetic ordered complexity),
Well, when I've gotten my Bachelor of Sciences in biochemistry, I'll give you a better explanation. For the time being, though, I actually don't know of any route between point A and point B. I do, however, know that it's not unreasonable to assume that polypeptides can form without the input of enzymes as long as the necessary precursors are present. When I've taken some trig and a few more classes in chemistry, I might give you a hypothetical mechanism by which this can occur, but learning all this stuff requires a great deal of patience and dedicated attention to detail.

Quote:
and pretends to know processing which he cannot possibly (in this case, that inorganic material somehow formed into organic life).
Nope. I told you straight-up that I didn't know enough about organic chemistry to explain to you the details.

Quote:
God is a very plausible explanation for how the universe got here.
This isn't a discussion about cosmology, Ragtime. Besides, I know nothing of cosmology. I can explain a very small amount of organic chemistry to you if you really want me to, but I can't give you a lecture on cosmology because, frankly, it's not even a major interest for me.



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

24 Apr 2008, 4:48 pm

Triangular_Trees wrote:
EVOLUTION HAS BEEN PROVEN.

BEYOND ANY POSSIBLE DOUBT.

RESEARCH THE TOPIC I MENTIONED YOU SHOULD DO TWICE!! !

Beyond any reasonable doubt perhaps, but never proven. Like I said, science is not about proof.

Quote:
The fact that you feel qualified to discredit my statement without putting any effort at all into checking it astounds me. And I know you didn't take a second to research it, because your comments to discredit me show your utter lack of knowledge about the anolis lizards

Because my position is philosophical. It isn't a matter of research, but that science is not about proof. Ask a scientist and they will tell you that scientists aren't in the business of proving things, that is why the scientific method loops back around every time there is new evidence. I think I have heard that story or a similar one before, but that is not proof that all life was evolved and speciated through evolutionary means though, that is proof that it has happened once and can happen. Frankly, my comments do not show any lack of knowledge, but rather simply a dislike of your position on the philosophical nature of science as science is not about anolis lizards, anolis lizards are evidence that can be used to argue for evolution, but not absolute proof. The fact that we are attracted to the earth in a manner modelable by Gm1m2/r^2 is evidence of our theory of gravity but it is not proof of our theory of gravity.



Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

24 Apr 2008, 4:51 pm

Triangular_Trees wrote:
Evolution has been proven.


That is false, and you are intelligent enough to know that.

If I'm wrong, show me where scientists have recorded one species evolving into a significantly more complex one on its own.


_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.


Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

24 Apr 2008, 4:55 pm

Gromit wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Tell it to those trying to keep ID out of the schools, and trying to silence anyone who thinks ID could have occurred. As the new movie "Expelled" points out, scientists have been fired for simply suggesting ID.

"Expelled" is a piece of propaganda less reliable than Michael Moore's films.


OMGosh, what a fib! :lol:
I guess the idea is that, by using ridiculously grandiose hyperbole, I'm likely to accept at least a modicum of your obscene exaggeration -- a modicum roughly equivalent to your main point.
Not gonna work. ;)


_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.


Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

24 Apr 2008, 5:01 pm

Ragtime wrote:
OMGosh, what a fib! :lol:
I guess the idea is that, by using ridiculously grandiose hyperbole, I'm likely to accept at least a modicum of your obscene exaggeration -- a modicum roughly equivalent to your main point.
Not gonna work. ;)

Actually, from what I've heard that seems pretty honest as an assessment. One of the filmmakers is known for outright lying to interviewed scholars to get them to come. That seems pretty nasty to me.



monty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Sep 2007
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,741

24 Apr 2008, 5:16 pm

First Ragtime makes the assertion that speciation has never been observed.
Then I provide dozens of examples where it has.
No reply. There's no reply at all.



Gromit
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 May 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,302
Location: In Cognito

24 Apr 2008, 5:21 pm

Ragtime wrote:
Gromit wrote:
"Expelled" is a piece of propaganda less reliable than Michael Moore's films.

OMGosh, what a fib! :lol:
I guess the idea is that, by using ridiculously grandiose hyperbole, I'm likely to accept at least a modicum of your obscene exaggeration -- a modicum roughly equivalent to your main point.
Not gonna work. ;)

A few questions:

Did you follow the link I gave you and listen to the critique of Expelled? If you did, do you have a reasoned response?

Can you argue the points I make without resorting to polemic like accusing me of lying, "ridiculously grandiose hyperbole" and "obscene exaggeration"?

And far more importantly, can you show that ID is scientific? I'm beginning to wonder whether you intentionally avoid this question. Please do try to offer arguments instead of insults. And if you have arguments, respond to monty's examples of speciation. By the way, the extra criterion you inserted, that speciation has to involve increased complexity, is not a prediction of evolutionary theory. You can't falsify a theory by saying there's no evidence for something it doesn't predict. It's another straw man argument.



Griff
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Nov 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,312

24 Apr 2008, 5:43 pm

I've had enough of you weirdoes.