RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (3) < [1] 2 3 >   
  Topic: 4 Questions For Skeptic, FtK and VMartin, They're easy yes/no questions too!< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Mr_Christopher



Posts: 1238
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,14:05   

Skeptic, FtK and VMartin I have a couple of questions for you.

Do you

1) Deny/doubt the HIV=AIDS relationship

2) Deny/doubt global warming

3) Believe ID ("certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection...") is a scientific theory.

4) Believe ID should be taught in public high school science class.

These are pretty easy questions and each only requires a yes/no answer.  I have no desire to debate/deconstruct your answers or suggest your answers are right or wrong.  I'm just curious about where you stand on these issues.

Thanks in advance for your answers!

Chris

ps.  PLEASE FOLKS DO NOT ATTEMPT TO ANSWER FOR SKEPTIC, FtK OR VMARTIN.  Thank you.

--------------
Uncommon Descent is a moral cesspool, a festering intellectual ghetto that intoxicates and degrades its inhabitants - Stephen Matheson

  
Henry J



Posts: 4565
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,14:22   

Quote
ps.  PLEASE FOLKS DO NOT ATTEMPT TO ANSWER FOR SKEPTIC, FtK OR VMARTIN.  Thank you.


Rats! :)

  
Ftk



Posts: 2239
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,14:39   

I have no idea why I'm even doing this, but I've found myself with an hour of down time, so what the heck...

1) Deny/doubt the HIV=AIDS relationship

NO

2) Deny/doubt global warming

NO.  But, that's really not a yes or no question.  There is much more to consider, and I think that is where most of the arguments lie.

3) Believe ID ("certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection...") is a scientific theory.

I prefer to address it as a scientific inference.

4) Believe ID should be taught in public high school science class.

I'd prefer that it be taught at the university level...FAIRLY.  But, since it is obvious from the syllabuses that I've read from those professors already teaching ID, I'm not sure how one would get to the truth of the issues.  Students don't have the time or interest to check out pro-ID sites to get to the truth of the matter.

--------------
"Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

  
Mr_Christopher



Posts: 1238
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,14:41   

Thanks for your answers FtK.

--------------
Uncommon Descent is a moral cesspool, a festering intellectual ghetto that intoxicates and degrades its inhabitants - Stephen Matheson

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,14:45   

Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,14:39)
I have no idea why I'm even doing this,

Because you love us all so much. Admit it.  :)

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Ftk



Posts: 2239
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,14:46   

????

What?  No arguments?  No slams?

Hmmm....mysterious.

--------------
"Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

  
Ftk



Posts: 2239
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,14:48   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Nov. 06 2007,14:45)
Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,14:39)
I have no idea why I'm even doing this,

Because you love us all so much. Admit it.  :)

:( I do love all of you, but nobody believes me....so I'll just keep my love hidden away.

--------------
"Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

  
Mr_Christopher



Posts: 1238
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,14:49   

Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,14:46)
????

What?  No arguments?  No slams?

Hmmm....mysterious.

I'm an honest guy.  As I previously mentioned I did not ask the questions to argue with you or rate your answers.  I was just interested in your opinions.  

I'll argue with you in other threads I'm sure :-)

And you have not answered a question I have posed twice to you now in the DI says the PBS teachers guide is unconstitutional thread.

Hey a bonus question, what's your take on the Discovery Institute?

--------------
Uncommon Descent is a moral cesspool, a festering intellectual ghetto that intoxicates and degrades its inhabitants - Stephen Matheson

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,14:49   

Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,14:48)
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Nov. 06 2007,14:45)
 
Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,14:39)
I have no idea why I'm even doing this,

Because you love us all so much. Admit it.  :)

:( I do love all of you, but nobody believes me....so I'll just keep my love hidden away.

Wow. You're taking John Lennon's advice.  :O

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,14:50   

Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,14:46)
????

What?  No arguments?  No slams?

Hmmm....mysterious.

We all PM'd each other just before this posted, and agreed not to do any of that stuff. We're trying to freak you out, to see what happens.

Is it working?

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,14:50   

Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,14:39)
I have no idea why I'm even doing this, but I've found myself with an hour of down time, so what the heck...

1) Deny/doubt the HIV=AIDS relationship

NO

2) Deny/doubt global warming

NO.  But, that's really not a yes or no question.  There is much more to consider, and I think that is where most of the arguments lie.

3) Believe ID ("certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection...") is a scientific theory.

I prefer to address it as a scientific inference.

4) Believe ID should be taught in public high school science class.

I'd prefer that it be taught at the university level...FAIRLY.  But, since it is obvious from the syllabuses that I've read from those professors already teaching ID, I'm not sure how one would get to the truth of the issues.  Students don't have the time or interest to check out pro-ID sites to get to the truth of the matter.

Where would you recommend that students go to check out "the truth of the matter" then?
Maybe they should go to
http://www.overwhelmingevidence.com/oe/blog/forthekids
The site created by ID proponents to teach children the truth of the matter.
There we can read things like
Quote
whether you accept evolution or the biblical account of creation doesn’t matter. My personal opinion is that I see no reason to disregard portions of God’s word for current scientific theories that are certainly questionable. Scientific theories postulated by mere human intellect are always changing.

And of course those pesky scientists need to be told
Quote
His fingerprints are obviously everywhere and it seems that scientists who hold various religious beliefs should take that into consideration at all times (even in the science lab).

Oh, here's a classic FTK moment
Quote
The Dover school board merely expressed the desire to have a four-paragraph statement read at the introduction of the evolution curriculum defining ID as "an explanation of the origin of life that differs from Darwin's view". It also mentioned that the textbook, Of Pandas and People, was available for those students who have an interest.

Now, FTK, have you possibly changed your mind? Only teach it at university now? That's different to what you said about dover...
forthekids/god_allows_the_universe_to_create_itself_and_evolve_via_the_lutheran

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,14:51   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Nov. 06 2007,14:50)
Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,14:46)
????

What?  No arguments?  No slams?

Hmmm....mysterious.

We all PM'd each other just before this posted, and agreed not to do any of that stuff. We're trying to freak you out, to see what happens.

Is it working?

no  :p

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,14:55   

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Nov. 06 2007,14:51)
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Nov. 06 2007,14:50)
Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,14:46)
????

What?  No arguments?  No slams?

Hmmm....mysterious.

We all PM'd each other just before this posted, and agreed not to do any of that stuff. We're trying to freak you out, to see what happens.

Is it working?

no  :p

Oh shit, I must have forgotten to include you in the cc list.

:angry:

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Ftk



Posts: 2239
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,14:56   

Hey a bonus question, what's your take on the Discovery Institute?

That's kind of a silly question.  I think the Discovery Institute it great.  Though, I do prefer some of ID proponents over others.  And, no, I won't be sharing more on that comment.

--------------
"Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,15:01   

Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,14:56)
Hey a bonus question, what's your take on the Discovery Institute?

That's kind of a silly question.  I think the Discovery Institute it great.  Though, I do prefer some of ID proponents over others.  And, no, I won't be sharing more on that comment.

Wikipedia gets it right.
Quote
Although it often describes itself as a secular organization, critics, members of the press and former institute fellows consider the Discovery Institute to be an explicitly conservative Christian organization, and point to the institute's own publications and the statements of its members that endorse a religious ideology. Americans United for Separation of Church and State notes, "Though the Discovery Institute describes itself as a think tank 'specializing in national and international affairs,' the group's real purpose is to undercut church-state separation and turn public schools into religious indoctrination centers." The 2005 judge in the "Dover Trial", Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, came to a similar conclusion about the Institute in his ruling: "CSRC expressly announces, in the Wedge Document, a program of Christian apologetics to promote ID. A careful review of the Wedge Document's goals and language throughout the document reveals cultural and religious goals, as opposed to scientific ones."

As evidence of the institute's organized campaign to mask or downplay its religious origins and agenda, critics point to the Discovery Institute's renaming of its Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture to Center for Science and Culture in 2002 to avoid religious overtones implied with trying to "renew" society. They claim the name change "followed hard on the heels of accusations that the center's real interest was not science but reforming culture along lines favored by conservative Christians".As further evidence that the institute is promoting a Christian agenda, observers of the institute also point to the fact that the Discovery Institute is largely comprised of outspoken Christian members,who are promoting an explicitly Christian agenda, funded largely by conservative Christians, catering to an almost exclusively Christian constituency.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_Institute

All that money spent and *nothing* to show for it. How's that positive evidence for ID coming FTK?

Quote
The CSC offers lucrative fellowships of up to $60,000 a year for "support of significant and original research in the natural sciences, the history and philosophy of science, cognitive science and related fields." Since its founding in 1996, the institute's CSC has spent 39 percent of its $9.3 million on research according to Meyer, underwriting books or papers, or often just paying universities to release professors from some teaching responsibilities so that they can work on intelligent design related scholarship. Over those nine years, $792,585 financed laboratory or field research in biology, paleontology or biophysics, while $93,828 helped graduate students in paleontology, linguistics, history and philosophy.


--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Mr_Christopher



Posts: 1238
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,15:01   

Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,14:56)
Hey a bonus question, what's your take on the Discovery Institute?

That's kind of a silly question.  I think the Discovery Institute it great.  Though, I do prefer some of ID proponents over others.  And, no, I won't be sharing more on that comment.  Again I appreciate your answers.

Thanks!

And I don't think that was a silly question, many IDers view the Discovery Institute as scum sucking vermin who lie through their teeth, others not so much.  So i think the question was legit.

Chris

--------------
Uncommon Descent is a moral cesspool, a festering intellectual ghetto that intoxicates and degrades its inhabitants - Stephen Matheson

  
Ftk



Posts: 2239
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,15:21   

Quote (Mr_Christopher @ Nov. 06 2007,15:01)
Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,14:56)
Hey a bonus question, what's your take on the Discovery Institute?

That's kind of a silly question.  I think the Discovery Institute it great.  Though, I do prefer some of ID proponents over others.  And, no, I won't be sharing more on that comment.  Again I appreciate your answers.

Thanks!

And I don't think that was a silly question, many IDers view the Discovery Institute as scum sucking vermin who lie through their teeth, others not so much.  So i think the question was legit.

Chris

"Many" IDer's?  As is those who support ID feel that way?

Perhaps a list of those people would be appropriate here so that I can consider their views on the matter.

--------------
"Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,15:32   

Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,15:21)
Quote (Mr_Christopher @ Nov. 06 2007,15:01)
 
Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,14:56)
Hey a bonus question, what's your take on the Discovery Institute?

That's kind of a silly question.  I think the Discovery Institute it great.  Though, I do prefer some of ID proponents over others.  And, no, I won't be sharing more on that comment.  Again I appreciate your answers.

Thanks!

And I don't think that was a silly question, many IDers view the Discovery Institute as scum sucking vermin who lie through their teeth, others not so much.  So i think the question was legit.

Chris

"Many" IDer's?  As is those who support ID feel that way?

Perhaps a list of those people would be appropriate here so that I can consider their views on the matter.

Why not just go with your "gut" instinct, that the DI is right and all it's detractors are wrong?

Object lesson in religious splinter groups forming if you ask me.

Have you not read what the "fathers of ID" have said recently?

You want to teach it. They don't think it's teachable. Why should we believe you over them?

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,15:35   

Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,15:21)
Quote (Mr_Christopher @ Nov. 06 2007,15:01)
And I don't think that was a silly question, many IDers view the Discovery Institute as scum sucking vermin who lie through their teeth, others not so much.  So i think the question was legit.

"Many" IDer's?  As is those who support ID feel that way?

Perhaps a list of those people would be appropriate here so that I can consider their views on the matter.

Well, actually they prefer to remain anonymous so that they aren't banned by the moderators at UD.  The ID movement is not accepting of anyone who doesn't embrace all the tenets of their ideology wholeheartedly.  They don't want to be blackballed from the very movement they are sympathetic to.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,15:36   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Nov. 06 2007,15:35)
Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,15:21)
 
Quote (Mr_Christopher @ Nov. 06 2007,15:01)
And I don't think that was a silly question, many IDers view the Discovery Institute as scum sucking vermin who lie through their teeth, others not so much.  So i think the question was legit.

"Many" IDer's?  As is those who support ID feel that way?

Perhaps a list of those people would be appropriate here so that I can consider their views on the matter.

Well, actually they prefer to remain anonymous so that they aren't banned by the moderators at UD.  The ID movement is not accepting of anyone who doesn't embrace all the tenets of their ideology wholeheartedly.  They don't want to be blackballed from the very movement they are sympathetic to.

DAMM those censoring darwinists...er...

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,16:03   

Quote (Mr_Christopher @ Nov. 06 2007,14:05)
Skeptic, FtK and VMartin I have a couple of questions for you.

Do you

1) Deny/doubt the HIV=AIDS relationship

2) Deny/doubt global warming

3) Believe ID ("certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection...") is a scientific theory.

4) Believe ID should be taught in public high school science class.

These are pretty easy questions and each only requires a yes/no answer.  I have no desire to debate/deconstruct your answers or suggest your answers are right or wrong.  I'm just curious about where you stand on these issues.

Thanks in advance for your answers!

Chris

ps.  PLEASE FOLKS DO NOT ATTEMPT TO ANSWER FOR SKEPTIC, FtK OR VMARTIN.  Thank you.

Point 1) and 2) is something I don't know much about. No opinion.

3,4) If a (neo)darwinism is a scientific theory I don't see a reason why telepathy and astrology are not also taught at school.

Anyway some basics of religion should be taught at schools for those childrens whose parents are fanatic atheists or neodarwinists and do not talk with their children about religion which formed thinking of our grand parents and our predecessors more than 1.000 years so intensively

Also children should know some other evolutionary approaches as well - it means ID, orthogenesis etc., and their basic arguments - if they want to study it outside school. They should be taught more facts about "natural selection" and what some great scientists thought of it. They should be taught about living organisms and Nature  from some different point of view, which is much more sensitive and have more sympathy for life as those reductionist concepts of "struggle for survival", "selfish gene" etc...
Such concepts  have harmful effect on youngsters on my opinion. Whats more such concepts are unscientific. Such concepts spoils the perception of beauty of living world, where "struggle for life" and "natural selection" obviously play no main role, but creativeness of life itself.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10756
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,16:09   

Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,14:56)
Hey a bonus question, what's your take on the Discovery Institute?

That's kind of a silly question.  I think the Discovery Institute it great.  Though, I do prefer some of ID proponents over others.  And, no, I won't be sharing more on that comment.

They're not as funny as UD, but the on-going "no-research, only press releases" gag still has legs.

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
Mr_Christopher



Posts: 1238
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,16:13   

Quote (VMartin @ Nov. 06 2007,16:03)
Quote (Mr_Christopher @ Nov. 06 2007,14:05)
Skeptic, FtK and VMartin I have a couple of questions for you.

Do you

1) Deny/doubt the HIV=AIDS relationship

2) Deny/doubt global warming

3) Believe ID ("certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection...") is a scientific theory.

4) Believe ID should be taught in public high school science class.

These are pretty easy questions and each only requires a yes/no answer.  I have no desire to debate/deconstruct your answers or suggest your answers are right or wrong.  I'm just curious about where you stand on these issues.

Thanks in advance for your answers!

Chris

ps.  PLEASE FOLKS DO NOT ATTEMPT TO ANSWER FOR SKEPTIC, FtK OR VMARTIN.  Thank you.

Point 1) and 2) is something I don't know much about. No opinion.

3,4) If a (neo)darwinism is a scientific theory I don't see a reason why telepathy and astrology are not also taught at school.

Anyway some basics of religion should be taught at schools for those childrens whose parents are fanatic atheists or neodarwinists and do not talk with their children about religion which formed thinking of our grand parents and our predecessors more than 1.000 years so intensively

Also children should know some other evolutionary approaches as well - it means ID, orthogenesis etc., and their basic arguments - if they want to study it outside school. They should be taught more facts about "natural selection" and what some great scientists thought of it. They should be taught about living organisms and Nature  from some different point of view, which is much more sensitive and have more sympathy for life as those reductionist concepts of "struggle for survival", "selfish gene" etc...
Such concepts  have harmful effect on youngsters on my opinion. Whats more such concepts are unscientific. Such concepts spoils the perception of beauty of living world, where "struggle for life" and "natural selection" obviously play no main role, but creativeness of life itself.

You answered two questions and used the others as a spring board for your anti-evolution ideas.

I was hoping to get yes/no answers for all the questions I asked.  FtK was able to do so, can you try again?

Chris

--------------
Uncommon Descent is a moral cesspool, a festering intellectual ghetto that intoxicates and degrades its inhabitants - Stephen Matheson

  
Steverino



Posts: 411
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,17:10   

Quote (VMartin @ Nov. 06 2007,16:03)
Quote (Mr_Christopher @ Nov. 06 2007,14:05)
Skeptic, FtK and VMartin I have a couple of questions for you.

Do you

1) Deny/doubt the HIV=AIDS relationship

2) Deny/doubt global warming

3) Believe ID ("certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection...") is a scientific theory.

4) Believe ID should be taught in public high school science class.

These are pretty easy questions and each only requires a yes/no answer.  I have no desire to debate/deconstruct your answers or suggest your answers are right or wrong.  I'm just curious about where you stand on these issues.

Thanks in advance for your answers!

Chris

ps.  PLEASE FOLKS DO NOT ATTEMPT TO ANSWER FOR SKEPTIC, FtK OR VMARTIN.  Thank you.

Point 1) and 2) is something I don't know much about. No opinion.

3,4) If a (neo)darwinism is a scientific theory I don't see a reason why telepathy and astrology are not also taught at school.

Anyway some basics of religion should be taught at schools for those childrens whose parents are fanatic atheists or neodarwinists and do not talk with their children about religion which formed thinking of our grand parents and our predecessors more than 1.000 years so intensively

Also children should know some other evolutionary approaches as well - it means ID, orthogenesis etc., and their basic arguments - if they want to study it outside school. They should be taught more facts about "natural selection" and what some great scientists thought of it. They should be taught about living organisms and Nature  from some different point of view, which is much more sensitive and have more sympathy for life as those reductionist concepts of "struggle for survival", "selfish gene" etc...
Such concepts  have harmful effect on youngsters on my opinion. Whats more such concepts are unscientific. Such concepts spoils the perception of beauty of living world, where "struggle for life" and "natural selection" obviously play no main role, but creativeness of life itself.

Can I puke now?

I cannot begin to point out, in so many ways, the false logic of that post.


VMartin,

Do you walk to work or carry your lunch?

--------------
- Born right the first time.
- Asking questions is NOT the same as providing answers.
- It's all fun and games until the flying monkeys show up!

   
Assassinator



Posts: 479
Joined: Nov. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,17:39   

Quote
If a (neo)darwinism is a scientific theory I don't see a reason why telepathy and astrology are not also taught at school.

It's ok if someone comments darwinism and neodarwinisn, but only if the person in question would have good knowledge about those theory's. You Martin, do not have such knowledge. At least, in your recent topics and reactions you have shown 0 knowledge about any evolution-linked topic. That would be fine ofcourse, but you're making al kinds of statements wich i'm still wondering about how you support them with your VERY limited knowledge about the subjects, other then just acting like a sheep and following those anti-evo guys without question.
Quote
They should be taught about living organisms and Nature  from some different point of view, which is much more sensitive and have more sympathy for life as those reductionist concepts of "struggle for survival", "selfish gene" etc...
Such concepts  have harmful effect on youngsters on my opinion. Whats more such concepts are unscientific. Such concepts spoils the perception of beauty of living world, where "struggle for life" and "natural selection" obviously play no main role, but creativeness of life itself.

O please Martin, are you trying to get ethics into this? Ethics have NOTHING to do with the workings of nature, absolutly 0. The world works in a way, if you like it or not: it simply does. You're not living in some kind of fluffy Bambi world wich you think is nature, right? You're bassicly saying that evolution would totally reduct nature into nothing more then a cold machinery. You couldn't be more wrong. The fact that we would know how certain aspects of nature would work, doesn't say anything about my emotions I linked to those very aspects of nature. I know what I'm looking at when I see the sunset, but the fact that I do says absolutly nothing about the beauty of that very sunset. Same with the stars at night. I know what I'm looking at, but I'm actually even more amazed because of certain facts I know about what I'm looking at.
You're mixing things up, BIGTIME.

  
Ftk



Posts: 2239
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,19:03   

Quote
3,4) If a (neo)darwinism is a scientific theory I don't see a reason why telepathy and astrology are not also taught at school.

Anyway some basics of religion should be taught at schools for those childrens whose parents are fanatic atheists or neodarwinists and do not talk with their children about religion which formed thinking of our grand parents and our predecessors more than 1.000 years so intensively

Also children should know some other evolutionary approaches as well - it means ID, orthogenesis etc., and their basic arguments - if they want to study it outside school. They should be taught more facts about "natural selection" and what some great scientists thought of it. They should be taught about living organisms and Nature  from some different point of view, which is much more sensitive and have more sympathy for life as those reductionist concepts of "struggle for survival", "selfish gene" etc...
Such concepts  have harmful effect on youngsters on my opinion. Whats more such concepts are unscientific. Such concepts spoils the perception of beauty of living world, where "struggle for life" and "natural selection" obviously play no main role, but creativeness of life itself.


Ooh, I like his answers much better than mine.  Especially his answer to questions 3&4.  That is sooooooo true.  

No doubt in the future when students read about neo-Darwinist beliefs in regard to dino to bird, ape to man etc., etc., they'll split a gut laughing at how backwoods we used to be.

"Mom, can you freaking believe scientists used to think that we all evolved from a common blob?"

--------------
"Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

  
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,19:17   

Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,20:03)
 
Quote
3,4) If a (neo)darwinism is a scientific theory I don't see a reason why telepathy and astrology are not also taught at school.

Anyway some basics of religion should be taught at schools for those childrens whose parents are fanatic atheists or neodarwinists and do not talk with their children about religion which formed thinking of our grand parents and our predecessors more than 1.000 years so intensively

Also children should know some other evolutionary approaches as well - it means ID, orthogenesis etc., and their basic arguments - if they want to study it outside school. They should be taught more facts about "natural selection" and what some great scientists thought of it. They should be taught about living organisms and Nature  from some different point of view, which is much more sensitive and have more sympathy for life as those reductionist concepts of "struggle for survival", "selfish gene" etc...
Such concepts  have harmful effect on youngsters on my opinion. Whats more such concepts are unscientific. Such concepts spoils the perception of beauty of living world, where "struggle for life" and "natural selection" obviously play no main role, but creativeness of life itself.


Ooh, I like his answers much better than mine.  Especially his answer to questions 3&4.  That is sooooooo true.  

No doubt in the future when students read about neo-Darwinist beliefs in regard to dino to bird, ape to man etc., etc., they'll split a gut laughing at how backwoods we used to be.

"Mom, can you freaking believe scientists used to think that we all evolved from a common blob?"

Muddled Confusion, I'd like you to meet Confused Muddle. Confused Muddle, this is Muddled Confusion.

(Hey, I think they've really hit it off!)

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

"Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10756
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,21:44   

Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,19:03)
No doubt in the future when students read about neo-Darwinist beliefs in regard to dino to bird, ape to man etc., etc., they'll split a gut laughing at how backwoods we used to be.

"Mom, can you freaking believe scientists used to think that we all evolved from a common blob?"

I shed a tear at how 'backwoods' we are now. Intellectual self-harmers.

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
skeptic



Posts: 1163
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 06 2007,22:30   

1) NO

2) I deny global warming hysteria, actually I worse than deny it but that's not really the question, or is it?

3) No

4) No

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,00:08   

Steverino:

Quote

VMartin,

Do you walk to work or carry your lunch?


And you? Instead of lunch do you carry your copy of "Selfish gene"? Are you affected by memes there so strongly you are beyond any help?

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
IanBrown_101



Posts: 927
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,01:14   

Quote (VMartin @ Nov. 07 2007,06:08)
Steverino:

 
Quote

VMartin,

Do you walk to work or carry your lunch?


And you? Instead of lunch do you carry your copy of "Selfish gene"? Are you affected by memes there so strongly you are beyond any help?

Martin, I don't think I can express this passionately enough.

You're just an annoyance now, at least FtK answers some questions and is, generally, sort of polite.
Skeptic, while he has some...odd ideas, seems like a sane enough, generally responsive, person who isn't obnoxious and doesn't compare anyone he disagrees with to Stalinists (A pretty bizzare term, for even if your delusion of a scientific coverup was true, I don't think that any scientists group ever blew someones head off in a wood somewhere. Nor do they routinely remove all trace of someone from record).

--------------
I'm not the fastest or the baddest or the fatest.

You NEVER seem to address the fact that the grand majority of people supporting Darwinism in these on line forums and blogs are atheists. That doesn't seem to bother you guys in the least. - FtK

Roddenberry is my God.

   
Robert O'Brien



Posts: 348
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,02:05   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Nov. 06 2007,16:09)
Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,14:56)
Hey a bonus question, what's your take on the Discovery Institute?

That's kind of a silly question.  I think the Discovery Institute it great.  Though, I do prefer some of ID proponents over others.  And, no, I won't be sharing more on that comment.

They're not as funny as UD, but the on-going "no-research, only press releases" gag still has legs.

You'll be sorry when they emerge from their secret underwater lab to present their research.

--------------
Caeli enarrant gloriam Dei

    
IanBrown_101



Posts: 927
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,02:38   

Quote (Robert O'Brien @ Nov. 07 2007,08:05)
Quote (Richardthughes @ Nov. 06 2007,16:09)
Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,14:56)
Hey a bonus question, what's your take on the Discovery Institute?

That's kind of a silly question.  I think the Discovery Institute it great.  Though, I do prefer some of ID proponents over others.  And, no, I won't be sharing more on that comment.

They're not as funny as UD, but the on-going "no-research, only press releases" gag still has legs.

You'll be sorry when they emerge from their secret underwater lab to present their research.

That's pretty funny, particularly since it brings up mental images of Dembski doing an evil scientist laugh, and Sal and Dave as witless but loyal henchmen.

--------------
I'm not the fastest or the baddest or the fatest.

You NEVER seem to address the fact that the grand majority of people supporting Darwinism in these on line forums and blogs are atheists. That doesn't seem to bother you guys in the least. - FtK

Roddenberry is my God.

   
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,02:48   

Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,19:03)
Quote
3,4) If a (neo)darwinism is a scientific theory I don't see a reason why telepathy and astrology are not also taught at school.

Anyway some basics of religion should be taught at schools for those childrens whose parents are fanatic atheists or neodarwinists and do not talk with their children about religion which formed thinking of our grand parents and our predecessors more than 1.000 years so intensively

Also children should know some other evolutionary approaches as well - it means ID, orthogenesis etc., and their basic arguments - if they want to study it outside school. They should be taught more facts about "natural selection" and what some great scientists thought of it. They should be taught about living organisms and Nature  from some different point of view, which is much more sensitive and have more sympathy for life as those reductionist concepts of "struggle for survival", "selfish gene" etc...
Such concepts  have harmful effect on youngsters on my opinion. Whats more such concepts are unscientific. Such concepts spoils the perception of beauty of living world, where "struggle for life" and "natural selection" obviously play no main role, but creativeness of life itself.


Ooh, I like his answers much better than mine.  Especially his answer to questions 3&4.  That is sooooooo true.  

No doubt in the future when students read about neo-Darwinist beliefs in regard to dino to bird, ape to man etc., etc., they'll split a gut laughing at how backwoods we used to be.

"Mom, can you freaking believe scientists used to think that we all evolved from a common blob?"

In other news, the moon still *might* be made of green cheese.

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5402
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,02:59   

I find it odd that while there seems to be such a strong correlation between anthropomorphically caused global climate change denial, HIV causes AIDS denial, and biological evolution denial in the the IDCH movement at large, it seems to be somewhat weaker in the particular cases which are the subject of this thread.

What's up with that?

Is it perhaps a matter of confirmation bias in the larger sample, or are we the hosts to some abnormality?  If the latter, what is the cause of that abnormality, and what brought it here?

Are Skeptic, FtK, and VMartin actually the least credulous folks of the IDCH movement?

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,03:01   

Quote (Lou FCD @ Nov. 07 2007,02:59)
I find it odd that while there seems to be such a strong correlation between anthropomorphically caused global climate change denial, HIV causes AIDS denial, and biological evolution denial in the the IDCH movement at large, it seems to be somewhat weaker in the particular cases which are the subject of this thread.

What's up with that?

Is it perhaps a matter of confirmation bias in the larger sample, or are we the hosts to some abnormality?  If the latter, what is the cause of that abnormality, and what brought it here?

Are Skeptic, FtK, and VMartin actually the least credulous folks of the IDCH movement?

I suspect if their "mentors" came out against them so would they. They appear not to be able to think for themselves and so *need* a leader to follow.

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5402
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,03:09   

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Nov. 07 2007,04:01)
I suspect if their "mentors" came out against them so would they. They appear not to be able to think for themselves and so *need* a leader to follow.

Were I to just "go with my gut", I'd probably just agree and move on, but it brings up some quasi-interesting questions.

What will VMartin do when DAJ kicks the bucket?

What if Dr. Dr. Dumbski and Flaky Walt disagree?

Who is the masked puppeteer behind Skeptic's opinions?  Has he ever said?

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Assassinator



Posts: 479
Joined: Nov. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,03:11   

Thank you Martin for again ignoring any substantial ontopic reaction and only reacting on a tiiiiny fragment of just 1 post that's nothing more then an ad hominem!

  
tsig



Posts: 339
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,04:00   

Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,14:56)
Hey a bonus question, what's your take on the Discovery Institute?

That's kind of a silly question.  I think the Discovery Institute it great.  Though, I do prefer some of ID proponents over others.  And, no, I won't be sharing more on that comment.

If you don't share with us how will we know?

God may hold you responsible for our souls as you did not teach us.

  
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,06:32   

Quote (VMartin @ Nov. 07 2007,01:08)
Steverino:

   
Quote

VMartin,

Do you walk to work or carry your lunch?


And you? Instead of lunch do you carry your copy of "Selfish gene"? Are you affected by memes there so strongly you are beyond any help?

Gesture:

Raise right hand to position approximately three inches above and and three inches in front of head. Posture hand into "flat" configuration with palm facing floor and thumb to rear. Now rapidly move hand over head in a motion parallel to the floor. Simultaneously utter "whoooosh."

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

"Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington

  
Steverino



Posts: 411
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,06:37   

Quote (VMartin @ Nov. 07 2007,00:08)
Steverino:

 
Quote

VMartin,

Do you walk to work or carry your lunch?


And you? Instead of lunch do you carry your copy of "Selfish gene"? Are you affected by memes there so strongly you are beyond any help?

VMartin,

The way you conflate topics when responding to questions....I felt that question was right up your alley.

Beyond the religious myth of "being saved"?  That is your cultural/religious meme.  You are in more danger than I.

--------------
- Born right the first time.
- Asking questions is NOT the same as providing answers.
- It's all fun and games until the flying monkeys show up!

   
George



Posts: 314
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,07:32   

Quote (VMartin @ Nov. 06 2007,16:03)
Whats more such concepts are unscientific. Such concepts spoils the perception of beauty of living world, where "struggle for life" and "natural selection" obviously play no main role, but creativeness of life itself.

You don't get out of the TardCave much, do you?

  
slpage



Posts: 349
Joined: June 2004

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,08:23   

Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,14:39)
I'd prefer that it be taught at the university level...FAIRLY.  But, since it is obvious from the syllabuses that I've read from those professors already teaching ID, I'm not sure how one would get to the truth of the issues.  Students don't have the time or interest to check out pro-ID sites to get to the truth of the matter.

I know you are ignoring me because I am mean and all, but what, exactly, should be taught in a university class re: ID?

  
slpage



Posts: 349
Joined: June 2004

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,08:31   

Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,19:03)
Quote
3,4) If a (neo)darwinism is a scientific theory I don't see a reason why telepathy and astrology are not also taught at school.

Anyway some basics of religion should be taught at schools for those childrens whose parents are fanatic atheists or neodarwinists and do not talk with their children about religion which formed thinking of our grand parents and our predecessors more than 1.000 years so intensively

Also children should know some other evolutionary approaches as well - it means ID, orthogenesis etc., and their basic arguments - if they want to study it outside school. They should be taught more facts about "natural selection" and what some great scientists thought of it. They should be taught about living organisms and Nature  from some different point of view, which is much more sensitive and have more sympathy for life as those reductionist concepts of "struggle for survival", "selfish gene" etc...
Such concepts  have harmful effect on youngsters on my opinion. Whats more such concepts are unscientific. Such concepts spoils the perception of beauty of living world, where "struggle for life" and "natural selection" obviously play no main role, but creativeness of life itself.


Ooh, I like his answers much better than mine.  Especially his answer to questions 3&4.  That is sooooooo true.  

No doubt in the future when students read about neo-Darwinist beliefs in regard to dino to bird, ape to man etc., etc., they'll split a gut laughing at how backwoods we used to be.

"Mom, can you freaking believe scientists used to think that we all evolved from a common blob?"

My daughter has gone to church several times with her conservative christian friend.  This the friend who has, on at least 2 occasions, asked my daughter if she likes GW Bush, and when my daughter has said no, her christian friend has pointed at her and yelled 'Democrat!  Democrat ! Democrat!'  My daughter isin 5th grade.

This is also the 'friend' that told her a few years ago that if you don't believe in god you are "stupid" and are going to hell.

My daughter thinks religion is silly.  And my wife and I have never talked to her about it, except to answer her questions.  She came to that conclusion all by herself, about 2 years ago, in part when she found out that I am the Tooth Fairy - she thought for a second, then asked about the Easter Bunny.  I nodded.  Santa?  Nodded again.  God?  I smiled.

Kids are pretty smart, providing they have not been brainwashed by repetitive mantras and browbeating by authority figures.

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,08:37   

Quote (slpage @ Nov. 07 2007,14:23)
Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,14:39)
I'd prefer that it be taught at the university level...FAIRLY.  But, since it is obvious from the syllabuses that I've read from those professors already teaching ID, I'm not sure how one would get to the truth of the issues.  Students don't have the time or interest to check out pro-ID sites to get to the truth of the matter.

I know you are ignoring me because I am mean and all, but what, exactly, should be taught in a university class re: ID?

I'd love to see this answered too. I'd LOVE to see what an ID course, in a scientific context, would contain.

I've seen what Denyse O'Leary's output is and it ain't foolin' me (nor any universities), so that's clearly out. Since Dembski's NFL/CSI/EF stuff and Behe's IC stuff have been both thoroughly refuted and thoroughly rejected by the academe I'd like to see what is left of ID that is not already well refuted pseudoscience.

My guess is it's going to be a short course in which all one has to do is sign up to the AiG Oath of Loyalty.

Any advances?

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
stevestory



Posts: 10127
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,08:43   

Quote (slpage @ Nov. 07 2007,09:31)
My daughter has gone to church several times with her conservative christian friend.  This the friend who has, on at least 2 occasions, asked my daughter if she likes GW Bush, and when my daughter has said no, her christian friend has pointed at her and yelled 'Democrat!  Democrat ! Democrat!'  My daughter is in 5th grade.

I'm not the least bit surprised this happened.

   
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,08:53   

Quote (stevestory @ Nov. 07 2007,08:43)
Quote (slpage @ Nov. 07 2007,09:31)
My daughter has gone to church several times with her conservative christian friend.  This the friend who has, on at least 2 occasions, asked my daughter if she likes GW Bush, and when my daughter has said no, her christian friend has pointed at her and yelled 'Democrat!  Democrat ! Democrat!'  My daughter is in 5th grade.

I'm not the least bit surprised this happened.

My sister* was verbally accosted in a church parking lot by a fellow parishoner who told her in no uncertain terms that you couldn't be a Christian and a Democrat**.

* My sister is a bit of a head case.  When her car was totalled in an accident, she scrambled about for a "John Kerry for President" bumpersticker for her new car........in 2006.

** Probably true.  After all Matthew 5:9 states "Blessed are the moneychangers;for they shall be called the children of God."

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,09:16   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Nov. 07 2007,08:53)
Quote (stevestory @ Nov. 07 2007,08:43)
Quote (slpage @ Nov. 07 2007,09:31)
My daughter has gone to church several times with her conservative christian friend.  This the friend who has, on at least 2 occasions, asked my daughter if she likes GW Bush, and when my daughter has said no, her christian friend has pointed at her and yelled 'Democrat!  Democrat ! Democrat!'  My daughter is in 5th grade.

I'm not the least bit surprised this happened.

My sister* was verbally accosted in a church parking lot by a fellow parishoner who told her in no uncertain terms that you couldn't be a Christian and a Democrat**.

I know a whole lot of Black people around here who would take exception to that idea very strongly.

(PS: What about all those 'Christian Democrat' parties in Europe??)

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
skeptic



Posts: 1163
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,13:20   

Nothing quite so sinister in my case as there is no evil puppeteer there is only me.  I responded to the questions because I was asked but I must point out that I reject the premise.  I'm not an IDer so you'll have to come up with another catagory to throw me into.  (Shut up, Louis lol)

As far as Ftk's suggestion of university study, I find this problematic.  ID is solidly in philosophy or current events discussions and nothing more.  But if you were to extend it into science I can only think of one way.  As a practical class on experimental design with ID as the focus.  The goal would be to design scientifically valid experiments testing the claims of ID.  What better way to learn how to design good experiments then to try to achieve the impossible.  I've always thought that a little bit of failure is the best teacher.

  
Mr_Christopher



Posts: 1238
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,13:24   

Quote (skeptic @ Nov. 06 2007,22:30)
1) NO

2) I deny global warming hysteria, actually I worse than deny it but that's not really the question, or is it?

3) No

4) No

skeptic, thanks for your answers.  Could you explain answer #2, your point is not clear to me.

Chris

--------------
Uncommon Descent is a moral cesspool, a festering intellectual ghetto that intoxicates and degrades its inhabitants - Stephen Matheson

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,13:25   

IanBrown
Quote

You're just an annoyance now, at least FtK answers some questions and is, generally, sort of polite.


Yeah, he is as polite as neodarwinists here. There is no better example of politeness than neodarwinists here.


 
Quote

Skeptic, while he has some...odd ideas, seems like a sane enough, generally responsive, person who isn't obnoxious and doesn't compare anyone he disagrees with to Stalinists (A pretty bizzare term, for even if your delusion of a scientific coverup was true, I don't think that any scientists group ever blew someones head off in a wood somewhere. Nor do they routinely remove all trace of someone from record).


Then you perhaps can present some quotation of me  where I have claimed "all neodarwinists" = "stalinists"?
(Please do not confuse "all neodarwinists" with poor Arden Chatfield).

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Assassinator



Posts: 479
Joined: Nov. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,13:31   

I'll revert to
Quote
Thank you Martin for again ignoring any substantial ontopic reaction and only reacting on a tiiiiny fragment of just 1 post that's nothing more then an ad hominem!

again, thank you.

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,14:01   

Quote (VMartin @ Nov. 07 2007,13:25)
IanBrown
 
Quote

You're just an annoyance now, at least FtK answers some questions and is, generally, sort of polite.


Yeah, he is as polite as neodarwinists here. There is no better example of politeness than neodarwinists here.


 
Quote

Skeptic, while he has some...odd ideas, seems like a sane enough, generally responsive, person who isn't obnoxious and doesn't compare anyone he disagrees with to Stalinists (A pretty bizzare term, for even if your delusion of a scientific coverup was true, I don't think that any scientists group ever blew someones head off in a wood somewhere. Nor do they routinely remove all trace of someone from record).


Then you perhaps can present some quotation of me  where I have claimed "all neodarwinists" = "stalinists"?
(Please do not confuse "all neodarwinists" with poor Arden Chatfield).

Start here, dipshit.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,15:07   

Lou FCD

   
Quote

What will VMartin do when DAJ kicks the bucket?


Maybe it will be you who first kicks the bucket. And then Dawkins at the same day. You could have a common funeral.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Kristine



Posts: 3061
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,15:28   

Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,18:03)
 
Quote
3,4) If a (neo)darwinism is a scientific theory I don't see a reason why telepathy and astrology are not also taught at school.

Anyway some basics of religion should be taught at schools for those childrens whose parents are fanatic atheists or neodarwinists and do not talk with their children about religion which formed thinking of our grand parents and our predecessors more than 1.000 years so intensively

Also children should know some other evolutionary approaches as well - it means ID, orthogenesis etc., and their basic arguments - if they want to study it outside school. They should be taught more facts about "natural selection" and what some great scientists thought of it. They should be taught about living organisms and Nature  from some different point of view, which is much more sensitive and have more sympathy for life as those reductionist concepts of "struggle for survival", "selfish gene" etc...
Such concepts  have harmful effect on youngsters on my opinion. Whats more such concepts are unscientific. Such concepts spoils the perception of beauty of living world, where "struggle for life" and "natural selection" obviously play no main role, but creativeness of life itself.


Ooh, I like his answers much better than mine.  Especially his answer to questions 3&4.  That is sooooooo true.  

No doubt in the future when students read about neo-Darwinist beliefs in regard to dino to bird, ape to man etc., etc., they'll split a gut laughing at how backwoods we used to be.

"Mom, can you freaking believe scientists used to think that we all evolved from a common blob?"

Is it a bet? How about in 8 1/2 years?

(Very Felliniesque, that, BTW.)
Quote (VMartin @ Nov. 07 2007,14:07)
Maybe it will be you who first kicks the bucket. And then Dawkins at the same day. You could have a common funeral.

VMartin, behave yourself, and don't behave like yourself. Remember how frightened silly you got when I unleashed a fake woman's "hysterical" (and it was) tirade after your "come to bad ends" comment.

(I am such a whistling girl and crowing hen, moi.)

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,15:35   

Quote (Lou FCD @ Nov. 07 2007,03:09)
 
Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Nov. 07 2007,04:01)
I suspect if their "mentors" came out against them so would they. They appear not to be able to think for themselves and so *need* a leader to follow.

Were I to just "go with my gut", I'd probably just agree and move on, but it brings up some quasi-interesting questions.

What will VMartin do when DAJ kicks the bucket?

It won't be pretty.



--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
skeptic



Posts: 1163
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,18:38   

Chris, I find the typical end-of-the-world hysterical rhetoric insulting.  The largest aspect of the global warming debate is political and economical, IMO, and the pandering that goes on to appear publically favorable is annoying to say the least especially given the extreme ignorance of the general public.  It's far past time for some rationality to enter this discussion but I fear a critical mass has been reached and we've been launched on this global crusade to save the planet.  What hogwash!

that about sums it up...IMO

  
Mr_Christopher



Posts: 1238
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,21:09   

Quote (skeptic @ Nov. 07 2007,18:38)
Chris, I find the typical end-of-the-world hysterical rhetoric insulting.  The largest aspect of the global warming debate is political and economical, IMO, and the pandering that goes on to appear publically favorable is annoying to say the least especially given the extreme ignorance of the general public.  It's far past time for some rationality to enter this discussion but I fear a critical mass has been reached and we've been launched on this global crusade to save the planet.  What hogwash!

that about sums it up...IMO

Thanks for clarifying your answer.

--------------
Uncommon Descent is a moral cesspool, a festering intellectual ghetto that intoxicates and degrades its inhabitants - Stephen Matheson

  
IanBrown_101



Posts: 927
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,21:13   

Quote (skeptic @ Nov. 08 2007,00:38)
Chris, I find the typical end-of-the-world hysterical rhetoric insulting.  The largest aspect of the global warming debate is political and economical, IMO, and the pandering that goes on to appear publically favorable is annoying to say the least especially given the extreme ignorance of the general public.  It's far past time for some rationality to enter this discussion but I fear a critical mass has been reached and we've been launched on this global crusade to save the planet.  What hogwash!

that about sums it up...IMO

So, you DON'T believe that global warming can cause a global environmental catastrophe?

Based on what, exactly?

--------------
I'm not the fastest or the baddest or the fatest.

You NEVER seem to address the fact that the grand majority of people supporting Darwinism in these on line forums and blogs are atheists. That doesn't seem to bother you guys in the least. - FtK

Roddenberry is my God.

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 10756
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,23:24   

Quote (Robert O'Brien @ Nov. 07 2007,02:05)
Quote (Richardthughes @ Nov. 06 2007,16:09)
Quote (Ftk @ Nov. 06 2007,14:56)
Hey a bonus question, what's your take on the Discovery Institute?

That's kind of a silly question.  I think the Discovery Institute it great.  Though, I do prefer some of ID proponents over others.  And, no, I won't be sharing more on that comment.

They're not as funny as UD, but the on-going "no-research, only press releases" gag still has legs.

You'll be sorry when they emerge from their secret underwater lab to present their research.

I'll just sternberg them. I'll sternberg them real good.

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 07 2007,23:57   

Dancer, surrealist and knowledgeable evolutionist Kristine:

Quote

VMartin, behave yourself, and don't behave like yourself. Remember how frightened silly you got when I unleashed a fake woman's "hysterical" (and it was) tirade after your "come to bad ends" comment.

(I am such a whistling girl and crowing hen, moi.)


Kristine why don't you quote the whole sentence and paragraph where the "come to bad ends" is written? You know very well what was the meaninig of it. But you behave like poor Arden.
Do you know Arden? Probably yes. A touching friendship between older beauty and a darwinian simpleton.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Assassinator



Posts: 479
Joined: Nov. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2007,08:13   

I'll quote myself for the 2nd time Martin:
Quote
Thank you Martin for again ignoring any substantial ontopic reaction and only reacting on a tiiiiny fragment of just 1 post that's nothing more then an ad hominem!

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2007,08:45   

Quote (Assassinator @ Nov. 08 2007,08:13)
I'll quote myself for the 2nd time Martin:
Quote
Thank you Martin for again ignoring any substantial ontopic reaction and only reacting on a tiiiiny fragment of just 1 post that's nothing more then an ad hominem!

You might as well set up a macro to repeat the same things over and over. I suspect VMartin already has!

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5402
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2007,08:52   

Ok, I think the answers by the people in question have been given.

Can we summarize them and put this thread to bed?

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Robert O'Brien



Posts: 348
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2007,13:41   

Quote (Robert O'Brien @ Nov. 07 2007,02:05)
You'll be sorry when they emerge from their secret underwater lab to present their research.



Tragically, the DI realizes too late that implanting Hitler's brain in the body of a great white shark in order to cement the relationship between Nazism and evolution was a bad idea.

--------------
Caeli enarrant gloriam Dei

    
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2007,13:50   

Quote (Robert O'Brien @ Nov. 08 2007,13:41)
 
Quote (Robert O'Brien @ Nov. 07 2007,02:05)
You'll be sorry when they emerge from their secret underwater lab to present their research.



Tragically, the DI realizes too late that implanting Hitler's brain in the body of a great white shark in order to cement the relationship between Nazism and evolution was a bad idea.

Post o' the month!



--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5402
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2007,13:54   

That was pretty good, but with that as an endnote, I think we're done here, unless there's good reason to further discuss the original topic.

PM me should you have good cause to re-open this thread.

Say goodnight, Gracie.

Thread closed.

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
  66 replies since Nov. 06 2007,14:05 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (3) < [1] 2 3 >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]