 
Support Wrong Planet Awareness!
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Kalister1
Phoenix
Joined: Sep 09, 2007
Posts: 2882
Location: California
|
 Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 10:47 pm Post subject: Re: Of what real value is evolutionary "knowledge" |
 |
|
| Sedaka wrote: | | Ragtime wrote: | | Orwell wrote: | | Ragtime wrote: | | biologists publicly assent to evolution even while many privately doubt it |
Substantiate this claim or recant it. |
It's just common sense.
But where's your stake? Aren't you supposed to burn me at it after you said "Recant" and I didn't? |
wow.... |
Yeah, he is not smart. Common sense isn't an argument, and appealing to common sense is a cardinal sin in both science and philosophy.
Isn't it common sense that the Earth is flat? We couldn't stand on a sphere!
Isn't it common sense the Earth goes around the sun? If it didnt, we'd fly off!
Isn't it common sense that time is the same all over the universe? Einstein is an idiot!
_________________
Warghh!!!!!!!!!!!
Last edited by Kalister1 on Sun May 11, 2008 10:54 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
twoshots
The Moos of Derision
Joined: Nov 27, 2007
Posts: 1412
Location: NJ
|
| Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 10:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The crab thing is quite fascinating. 
It was so fascinating I just had to research it. But I just found something which contends it (see the pdf in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heikegani). |
|
| Back to top |
|
Orwell
Outer Party Member
Joined: Aug 09, 2007
Age: 18
Posts: 3208
Location: Room 101
|
| Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 10:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
this post has served its purpose
_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
Last edited by Orwell on Mon May 12, 2008 12:40 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
Sedaka
Searching For My Catcher in the Rye
Joined: Jul 17, 2006
Age: 26
Posts: 5067
Location: In the recesses of my mind
|
| Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 10:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="Ragtime"] | Sedaka wrote: | | Ragtime wrote: | | Awesomelyglorious wrote: | | Ragtime wrote: | | All this arguing brings me to my secondary point: Of what real value is all this arguing about evolution? What grand good is going to be accomplished if creationists begin to believe in evolution? WTF is gonna change the world for the better if creationists became converted to believe in a politicized "science" that has not been proven conclusively to have occurred, or to be in the process of occurring? |
Well, the value is that it prevents bad science from getting into the school system and justifies the proper conclusions.
|
Note to AG: politicized science IS bad science! The bad science in the classroom stops with evolution ceasing to be taught as a fact! Teach it as what it is, a near-retarded theory. (Sorry for insulting your religion.) |
we do teach it as a theory and not as fact. sorry but it's true... |
I would love for that to be true, but I've heard too many leading experts on evolution literally cry out that "Evolution is a fact". Carl Sagan went as far as to declare: "Evolution is a fact, not a theory. It DID HAPPEN." (Boldface representing his inflections.)
That kind of statement is unmistakeable in what it's attempting to claim. And he's not the only one saying this -- I hear it everywhere I go! C'mon, you can't fool me on this.[/quote
people say the dumbest things, huh? 
_________________
and yet i'm
still roaming these
empty streets at night
alone again only to find
there are no shelters here;
i must simply resolve
to play in the rain. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Kalister1
Phoenix
Joined: Sep 09, 2007
Posts: 2882
Location: California
|
| Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 10:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| twoshots wrote: |
The crab thing is quite fascinating.
It was so fascinating I just had to research it. But I just found something which contends it (see the pdf in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heikegani). |
Hmmm.. Controversy! Just how much of the crab shell was influenced by fishermen? Dun dun dun.
_________________
Warghh!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
Awesomelyglorious
Destroyer of worlds, reaver of souls
Joined: Dec 18, 2005
Posts: 5545
Location: United States
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 12:16 am Post subject: Re: Of what real value is evolutionary "knowledge" |
|
|
| Kalister1 wrote: |
Yeah, he is not smart. Common sense isn't an argument, and appealing to common sense is a cardinal sin in both science and philosophy.
|
Well, unless you are Thomas Reid! |
|
| Back to top |
|
Gromit
Velociraptor
![]()
Joined: May 20, 2006
Posts: 478
Location: In Cognito
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 5:44 am Post subject: Re: Of what real value is evolutionary "knowledge" |
|
|
| Ragtime wrote: | | Orwell wrote: | | Ragtime wrote: | | biologists publicly assent to evolution even while many privately doubt it |
Substantiate this claim or recant it. |
It's just common sense. |
In my experience, Ragtime has a history of evading specifics. If you try to get him to back up his claims with either evidence or logical argument, he either ignores you, uses appeal to ridicule, like above, or tries to distract you by insulting you or trying to be as annoying as possible, like here:
| Ragtime wrote: | | But where's your stake? Aren't you supposed to burn me at it after you said "Recant" and I didn't? |
I have two possible explanations for that consistent pattern of behaviour, not mutually exclusive: Ragtime may take an unholy and quite unchristian joy in annoying people. That would make him a troll. And although his debating tactics are intellectually dishonest, paradoxically the root of this may be that he does have some intellectual honesty. Enough that he wants to avoid thinking about anything that would put him at risk of choosing between admitting he's wrong and admitting that he values his intellectual integrity less than his beliefs. Ragtime is deeply ignorant of evolution, and I suspect he cherishes that ignorance.
I think this assessment has a better than even probability of being accurate, but I still hope that Ragtime will prove me wrong. If he does, I will gladly retract my claims, and if I get reason to retract quickly enough, I will do it by an edit in this message.
He could start by contributing to Orwell's thread on evolution vs creation. I suspect Ragtime avoids it because Orwell's ground rules for serious debate (and people's effort to stick to them) would make Ragtime's usual tactics stick out like a sore thumb, and Ragtime has nothing substantial to contribute. Again, I would dearly like to be proven wrong.
Edit: He did it! On pages 14 and 15 of this thread Ragtime has two posts where he makes a substantial point. I disagree with what he says, but so what, it's an argument. I doubted he could do it, but I was wrong, he can. 
Last edited by Gromit on Mon May 12, 2008 2:26 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
Ragtime
Legal Eagle Eye
Joined: Nov 03, 2006
Age: 29
Posts: 7392
Location: Dallas, Texas
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 10:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kalister1 wrote: | | Sedaka wrote: | | Ragtime wrote: | | Awesomelyglorious wrote: | | Ragtime wrote: | | All this arguing brings me to my secondary point: Of what real value is all this arguing about evolution? What grand good is going to be accomplished if creationists begin to believe in evolution? WTF is gonna change the world for the better if creationists became converted to believe in a politicized "science" that has not been proven conclusively to have occurred, or to be in the process of occurring? |
Well, the value is that it prevents bad science from getting into the school system and justifies the proper conclusions.
|
Note to AG: politicized science IS bad science! The bad science in the classroom stops with evolution ceasing to be taught as a fact! Teach it as what it is, a near-retarded theory. (Sorry for insulting your religion.) |
we do teach it as a theory and not as fact. sorry but it's true... just like physics teaches theory.
i don't care what adjectives you choose to associate it with. |
Actually, evolution IS a fact. Evolution by natural selection is a theory. |
See, there's not even agreement here! Science??? Can't even get straight whether evolution is a fact or a theory.
This is the dishonesty I referred to that keeps me skeptical of evolutionists. Like the Catholic Church, they say one thing, and then turn around and say the exact opposite -- all the while insisting they're not! It's quite galling.
_________________
Anyone who is interested in philosophy, the of meaning of life, and answers to our hardest questions, I suggest you check out the free, online mp3 archive of Ravi Zacharias at www.rzim.org. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Ragtime
Legal Eagle Eye
Joined: Nov 03, 2006
Age: 29
Posts: 7392
Location: Dallas, Texas
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 10:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kalister1 wrote: | | Sedaka wrote: | | Kalister1 wrote: | | Sedaka wrote: | | Ragtime wrote: | | Awesomelyglorious wrote: | | Ragtime wrote: | | All this arguing brings me to my secondary point: Of what real value is all this arguing about evolution? What grand good is going to be accomplished if creationists begin to believe in evolution? WTF is gonna change the world for the better if creationists became converted to believe in a politicized "science" that has not been proven conclusively to have occurred, or to be in the process of occurring? |
Well, the value is that it prevents bad science from getting into the school system and justifies the proper conclusions.
|
Note to AG: politicized science IS bad science! The bad science in the classroom stops with evolution ceasing to be taught as a fact! Teach it as what it is, a near-retarded theory. (Sorry for insulting your religion.) |
we do teach it as a theory and not as fact. sorry but it's true... just like physics teaches theory.
i don't care what adjectives you choose to associate it with. |
Actually, evolution IS a fact. Evolution by natural selection is a theory. |
im tryin to work with ppl here 
i would still consider evolution a theory cause the observable is: change over time (as i was allowed to say in public schools)... and evolution is just an explanation for this observance. natural selection, genetic drift, ect... are also theories, but they are nested in evolution.
it's all semantical anyway... which is why people argue over it. |
The semantics are important in this case, since people want to nitpick over fact, theory, etc.
Evolution is as much a fact as gravity is. |
How do you get that from your daily (nay, moment-by-moment) observations of gravity versus your supposed daily observations of evolution?? Do you wake up every morning, and feel evolution like you feel gravity every morning? And, interestingly, I've never heard gravity argued for with such pregnant passion, as if the fate of the world rested on everyone believing in gravity. (And before you try a cheap shot, yes, I believe in gravity. I have to cover all my bases with some of you people.)
_________________
Anyone who is interested in philosophy, the of meaning of life, and answers to our hardest questions, I suggest you check out the free, online mp3 archive of Ravi Zacharias at www.rzim.org. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Ragtime
Legal Eagle Eye
Joined: Nov 03, 2006
Age: 29
Posts: 7392
Location: Dallas, Texas
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 10:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Orwell wrote: | | Sedaka wrote: | | Kalister1 wrote: | | Actually, evolution IS a fact. Evolution by natural selection is a theory. |
im tryin to work with ppl here
i would still consider evolution a theory cause the observable is: change over time (as i was allowed to say in public schools)... and evolution is just an explanation for this observance. natural selection, genetic drift, ect... are also theories, but they are nested in evolution.
it's all semantical anyway... which is why people argue over it. |
Well, evolution (that things change) is just historical fact. We've observed it happen. Natural selection is the theory, as is genetic drift and all the other components.
|
Ah, okay, there you are correct. "Evolution" has become a very wide-ranging, and hence problematic term to use, since people use it for both microevolution and macroevolution. Indeed, and as I've said before, scientists use the term "evolution" for everything from the smallest random mutation, to abiogenesis producing cells that eventually produce man -- which is a long stretch indeed, mathematically.
_________________
Anyone who is interested in philosophy, the of meaning of life, and answers to our hardest questions, I suggest you check out the free, online mp3 archive of Ravi Zacharias at www.rzim.org. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Ragtime
Legal Eagle Eye
Joined: Nov 03, 2006
Age: 29
Posts: 7392
Location: Dallas, Texas
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 10:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Awesomelyglorious wrote: | | Ragtime wrote: |
That Mr. Stein was added to the list of people Orwell hates is a red flag. |
Not really, what he said WAS pretty stupid and arrogantly so. I'd get angry about something that wrong myself, especially in a field I cared about.
|
Orwell admitted that hate was too strong a word to use, and I accept that.
_________________
Anyone who is interested in philosophy, the of meaning of life, and answers to our hardest questions, I suggest you check out the free, online mp3 archive of Ravi Zacharias at www.rzim.org. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Ragtime
Legal Eagle Eye
Joined: Nov 03, 2006
Age: 29
Posts: 7392
Location: Dallas, Texas
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 10:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Also, I should warn you guys, if you want me to read your posts, putting "Raggy" is a good way to get me to skip 'em.
_________________
Anyone who is interested in philosophy, the of meaning of life, and answers to our hardest questions, I suggest you check out the free, online mp3 archive of Ravi Zacharias at www.rzim.org. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Ragtime
Legal Eagle Eye
Joined: Nov 03, 2006
Age: 29
Posts: 7392
Location: Dallas, Texas
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 10:25 am Post subject: Re: Of what real value is evolutionary "knowledge" |
|
|
| Quatermass wrote: | | Ragtime wrote: | | Orwell wrote: | | Ragtime wrote: | | biologists publicly assent to evolution even while many privately doubt it |
Substantiate this claim or recant it. |
It's just common sense.
But where's your stake? Aren't you supposed to burn me at it after you said "Recant" and I didn't? |
Common sense is not so common. |
C'mon, you're telling me that atheists and agnostics don't wonder from time to time whether there's a God?
It's just common sense that they do.
_________________
Anyone who is interested in philosophy, the of meaning of life, and answers to our hardest questions, I suggest you check out the free, online mp3 archive of Ravi Zacharias at www.rzim.org. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Ragtime
Legal Eagle Eye
Joined: Nov 03, 2006
Age: 29
Posts: 7392
Location: Dallas, Texas
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 10:26 am Post subject: Re: Of what real value is evolutionary "knowledge" |
|
|
| Orwell wrote: | | Ragtime wrote: | | Orwell wrote: | | Ragtime wrote: | | biologists publicly assent to evolution even while many privately doubt it |
Substantiate this claim or recant it. |
It's just common sense.
But where's your stake? Aren't you supposed to burn me at it after you said "Recant" and I didn't? |
I've never heard of scientists burning people at the stake for holding different views, even if those views are demonstratably wrong.
|
Hey, times change. Of course we're not there yet, but things are moving toward that day.
The religious establishment burned people at the stake because they were in great, great power.
Ever hear of the saying, "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely"?
If evolution's brand of, shall we say, "scientific zealotry" reaches a high peak of power, the scientific community will do similar things to the powerless non-believers.
_________________
Anyone who is interested in philosophy, the of meaning of life, and answers to our hardest questions, I suggest you check out the free, online mp3 archive of Ravi Zacharias at www.rzim.org. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Ragtime
Legal Eagle Eye
Joined: Nov 03, 2006
Age: 29
Posts: 7392
Location: Dallas, Texas
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 10:32 am Post subject: Re: Of what real value is evolutionary "knowledge" |
|
|
| Orwell wrote: | | Quatermass wrote: | | And as for burning you at the stake, I'd rather break you on the wheel. |
If we're going to insist on going back to medieval execution methods, I'm rather partial to drawing and quartering myself. |
Ya, and you guys might call it survival of the fittest.
Oh, the forboding malevalence the theory of evolution stirs you up into!
Therefore, I ask you again: Why is impressing that theory upon people like me worth generating all this violent anger inside you?
Answer: It's not. So drop it.
_________________
Anyone who is interested in philosophy, the of meaning of life, and answers to our hardest questions, I suggest you check out the free, online mp3 archive of Ravi Zacharias at www.rzim.org. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
