|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
 Posted - 06/07/2001 : 10:48:23 [Permalink]
|
I was just looking in some boxes of old books I had stored and found "EVOLUTIONISTS CONFRONT CREATIONISTS---Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Pacific Division, American Association for the Advancement of Science, Vol 1, Part 3---April 30,1984"
In it is a piece by Duane T. Gish entitled "The Scientific Case for Creation" Followed by pieces from seven people in the sciences correcting everything that he was mistaken on.
That was April of '84 this is June of '01 and yet he is still making exactly the same arguments. He has known the correct answers for at least 17 years and yet he doesn't alter his attack.
I am told that a sure sign of insanity is to repeat the same actions and expect to get different results every time.
Why does this guy never address his detractors rebuttals?
When the dead talk -- they talk to him |
 |
|
|
James
SFN Regular
USA
754 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2001 : 11:02:51 [Permalink]
|
I have a feeling that Gish is like a horse with blinders on. The only things he can see are right in front of him and, unfortunetly, everyone who challenges him is off to the side.
Maybe I'm nuts too...
"Try not. Do or do not. There is no try." -Master Yoda |
|
|
|
Zandermann
Skeptic Friend
USA
431 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2001 : 11:26:07 [Permalink]
|
quote:
That was April of '84 this is June of '01 and yet he is still making exactly the same arguments. He has known the correct answers for at least 17 years and yet he doesn't alter his attack.
I am told that a sure sign of insanity is to repeat the same actions and expect to get different results every time.
Why does this guy never address his detractors rebuttals?
He's just ignoring the 'corrections', since he doesn't believe that he's incorrect.
"My mind's made up; don't confuse me with facts."
|
|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2001 : 11:29:18 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I have a feeling that Gish is like a horse with blinders on.
Think ya nailed it there James. Then most religious fundamentalists are that way. Flying their irrational beliefs in the face of logic and reason.
He's YOUR god, they're YOUR rules, YOU burn in hell! |
|
|
|
JRB
New Member
USA
37 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2001 : 12:49:27 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I imagine you were mashing your teeth a lot.
What was your opinion of how the debate went, JRB?
Yes - I definitely felt like a "fish out of water" there.
I was a little disappointed in Shermer, however, when he would criticize the belief-system (christianity) of the audience.
He should have stuck with science of evolution. Yes, it made sense to me ("God made the universe!" "OK - what God", etc.) but did not score any points with the audience. In fact, I think it hurt his argument.
Gish stuck mostly to "science" (and I use the term loosely), but invoked christianity in response to Shermer.
Again, Shermer should have stuck with the science of evolution.
I did enjoy it - it lasted a good 3 hours, so I still had time to get some books signed by Dr. Shermer, have a couple beers and get something to eat before calling it a night.
|
|
|
|
Randy
SFN Regular
USA
1990 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2001 : 15:21:14 [Permalink]
|
Interesting, maybe e Shermer your comments. Wished I had a e-skeptic of his from last year. He spoke of another time with a fundie debater in California. A very interesting angle Shermer brought up.
"Imagine a Martian is looking over to study Earth's inhabitants and the history of human's religions. He'll see there's been around a quarter million religions, worshiping over 2,000 different gods. How many of you believe in the early Egyptian, or the Mesopotamian, or early Greeks gods? - no one raised their hands."
Shermer then goes on to say..."the fact you do not believe in them makes you atheist towards those gods. You are atheist to those gods. Now, the difference between you and I is just one god. One god out of 2,000."
Anywho, thought the above was a good overview, to get people to broaded their horizons.
Evolution is both fact and theory.
Creationism is neither. |
|
|
|
Hawks
SFN Regular
Canada
1383 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2001 : 16:06:21 [Permalink]
|
Slater wrote:
In it is a piece by Duane T. Gish entitled "The Scientific Case for Creation" Followed by pieces from seven people in the sciences correcting everything that he was mistaken on.
That was April of '84 this is June of '01 and yet he is still making exactly the same arguments. He has known the correct answers for at least 17 years and yet he doesn't alter his attack.
------------------------------
Several possible explanations for Gish's behavior spring to mind:
- He's right.
- He's got bad hearing and never hears of any counter arguments
- Attention Deficit Disorder - his mind starts wandering off as soon as someone else says something.
- Senile Dementia - stuck in the good old days.
- He's knowingly lying - what does the bible say about that?
Up, up and away!!! |
|
|
|
Marc_a_b
Skeptic Friend
USA
142 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2001 : 16:08:39 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Wished I had a e-skeptic of his from last year. He spoke of another time with a fundie debater in California. A very interesting angle Shermer brought up.
This site is an archive for e-skeptic. Unfortunately it hasn't been updated for months, but it does have 97 on.
http://www.e-skeptic.de/
|
|
|
|
Randy
SFN Regular
USA
1990 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2001 : 17:18:35 [Permalink]
|
quote:
This site is an archive for e-skeptic. Unfortunately it hasn't been updated for months, but it does have 97 on.
http://www.e-skeptic.de/
Most excellent Marc. This is the one I was thinking of...
http://www.e-skeptic.de/260199.HTM
Thanks,
Randy
Evolution is both fact and theory.
Creationism is neither. |
|
|
|
Randy
SFN Regular
USA
1990 Posts |
Posted - 06/26/2001 : 10:45:29 [Permalink]
|
http://www.reporternews.com/2001/opinion/letters0622.html
Goto the "Chicken came first" letter to the editor.
Keep in mind this is the year 2001!
Amazing how quickly the writer reduces the whole of science to just some kind of dumb process.
This person's letter to the editor is exactly why everyone needs to stay vigilant to keep these creationist zombie brains out of our classrooms!
GAGK!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
Randy
SFN Regular
USA
1990 Posts |
Posted - 07/05/2001 : 01:42:15 [Permalink]
|
More drivel! And imagine, this guy (most likely) can legally drive and vote.
From the link.........
===================
http://www.reporternews.com/2001/opinion/letters0705.html
Thursday, July 5, 2001
Empirical evidence needs interpretation
Mike Stock (“Leap of faith,” June 26) will not accept the age of the Earth. He's right, it does require faith; and therefore, no one will convince him.
No one can prove empirically the Earth is 6,000 years old; however, no one can prove empirically that the Earth is billions of years old. The evidence does not “tell” us anything; it's simply a matter of how we choose to interpret it, i.e., what philosophy we have been indoctrinated into. For the most part, the indoctrination has been by the school of evolution.
Anyone who bothers to explore the real facts about evolution, and all the assumptions made, even just a little bit, will realize that to trust in evolution is equally or even more a “leap of faith.” There are numerous scientists who recognize and admit the fallacies and assumptions with evolution and accept the historical Biblical creation account.
It is difficult to convince one on faith issues; but when indoctrination is one-sided, day-in day-out for 12 to 16-plus years (as in the case of evolution in public education), and it's reinforced everywhere you turn (television, news, magazines, movies), and with Biblical training today so poor, it isn't hard to understand why people accept evolution without question.
This is partially an indictment of the Christian church, as rarely are we taught how to understand even the most basic of questions that come from reading Genesis.
Dan Hall
Abilene
===============
What an zombie idiot!
Evolution is both fact and theory.
Creationism in neither.
|
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
