|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
 Posted - 03/27/2009 : 16:56:55 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
So, how many live debates do you think it will it take to accomplish that? |
A lot. I just think stand-up debates should be a part of the mix, even if only a minor part.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
 |
|
|
Simon
SFN Regular
USA
1992 Posts |
Posted - 03/27/2009 : 17:11:36 [Permalink]
|
Well; creationists have nothing but lies and disinformations.
Sure, some of them will die rather than realize they have been mislead, but a few people in assistance might only have been creationists because their only access to the theory of evolution might have been through the lies of YEC. |
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
Carl Sagan - 1996 |
|
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
Posted - 03/27/2009 : 18:19:08 [Permalink]
|
Ah, reading the comments of Rhology on erv's blog, the "creationists can't get published because of bias" shenanigans pops up again. To answer Rhology's question here:
"No, I'll have to admit I don't have any of that; it's certainly not my passion. If I contact ICR or AiG or someone like that, do you really think they'll have NOTHING [ie, submissions for peer-reviewed publications] along those lines?"
I honestly think they'll have NOTHING along those lines. Nothing, Nada, noppes, niets, nichts, zero, zilch, rien.
AIG and IRC are pseudoscientific organizations offering nothing but lies. And preaching, lots of preaching. But mainly lies. Science is not something they offer now, is not something they ever offered in the past and is not something they'll ever offer in the rest of their pathetic lifetimes. |
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 03/27/2009 : 18:23:41 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by tomk80
Ah, reading the comments of Rhology on erv's blog, the "creationists can't get published because of bias" shenanigans pops up again. To answer Rhology's question here:
"No, I'll have to admit I don't have any of that; it's certainly not my passion. If I contact ICR or AiG or someone like that, do you really think they'll have NOTHING [ie, submissions for peer-reviewed publications] along those lines?"
I honestly think they'll have NOTHING along those lines. Nothing, Nada, noppes, niets, nichts, zero, zilch, rien.
AIG and IRC are pseudoscientific organizations offering nothing but lies. And preaching, lots of preaching. But mainly lies. Science is not something they offer now, is not something they ever offered in the past and is not something they'll ever offer in the rest of their pathetic lifetimes.
|
These guys are beginning to set up fake "scientific journals" now, to publish their apologetics. Just so they can claim to be "published."
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 03/27/2009 : 18:40:58 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by HalfMooner
Originally posted by Kil
So, how many live debates do you think it will it take to accomplish that? |
A lot. I just think stand-up debates should be a part of the mix, even if only a minor part.
|
More often than not, stand up debates are a sideshow. No one's mind gets changed. If all the science debaters were as good as ERV, perhaps it would mean something. But to the ignorant and faithful, a few sciency sounding sound bites and eye rolling incredualities like "have you ever seen a cat give birth to a dog?" goes a long way. And a whole bunch of them strung together (the Gish Gallup) goes ever farther.
They won't duck a standing debate because highly technical talking points can be easily waved away with their usual dog and pony show aimed at the ignorant.
I admire your optimism Mooner but outside of the sort of thing that took place in Dover PA or Texas, these debates just don't matter.
We need a new playing field and we need to call them on their unwillingness to engage in structured written debates. We need to start calling them out, over and over again, and demonstrate what chickenshits they really are.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 03/27/2009 : 19:28:05 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
We need a new playing field and we need to call them on their unwillingness to engage in structured written debates. We need to start calling them out, over and over again, and demonstrate what chickenshits they really are. |
I agree with that last part, anyway. And that's more important than the public debates.
All I'm saying is that skilled debaters like Abbie can help, too. I think the "don't ever debate them in public" crowd was only half right, which makes them half wrong.
If all science supporters to refused such debates, it would create the impression that our side is afraid of the Creationists. That would be, has been, a weapon they can flog us with. People like Abbie show we have no reason to fear them, and can hold our own even in stand-up debates.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
Simon
SFN Regular
USA
1992 Posts |
Posted - 03/27/2009 : 20:38:15 [Permalink]
|
I tend to agree with Mooner.
It's not like most of the people are going to read the publications are attend university classes.
People with the motivation to do that will, for the large part, realize how flimsy the 'arguments' from the creationists are, anyway.
These debates are a good way to bring sciences to people that would otherwise only receive the creationists' deformed strawman.
It's tricky, but I can understand while it can prove useful... |
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
Carl Sagan - 1996 |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 03/27/2009 : 23:20:15 [Permalink]
|
Both sides make good points. I tend to agree with Kil that it's far easier to trash complex science than marshal a comprehensive rebuttal to creationist nonsense. But, if the person knows this going in and puts the creationists on the defensive, like Abbie does and as PZ has done in radio interviews, then it can be a good way to reach the public. It will always be a gamble, and Kil is correct in that even sharing a stage with them leaves the impression that there are two equally defensible positions to debate. But public debates are more about style and rhetoric than facts, and creationism is inherently stupid. A skilled debater should be able to keep relentlessly hitting them where they are weak, which is practically everywhere. I think the danger is when you get an earnest but naive scientist who really does believe the facts speak for themselves. Those are the guys creationists can wipe the floor with. But you put them up against a bulldog like Hitchens? It's no contest. The trick is to never defend. Always attack. That's the creationist strategy, after all.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 03/27/2009 23:22:00 |
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2009 : 09:00:35 [Permalink]
|
ERV has posted about that debate now.
|
>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.
What brought that on? this. Original posting here.
Another example of this guy's lunacy here. |
|
|
|
Simon
SFN Regular
USA
1992 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2009 : 11:51:10 [Permalink]
|
Interesting stuff!
|
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
Carl Sagan - 1996 |
|
|
|
Zebra
Skeptic Friend
USA
354 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2009 : 14:27:16 [Permalink]
|
ERV says it's 3.5 hrs but that seems to be exaggeration - looks like it's 10 videos, avg ~9 minutes each. Part 1 here on Youtube.
Has anyone watched all of it yet? Any particularly good parts you might point out for the rest of us...? |
I think, you know, freedom means freedom for everyone* -Dick Cheney
*some restrictions may apply |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2009 : 15:14:37 [Permalink]
|
I was disappointed. I suppose after all I have said, I shouldn't have been. Unless there comes out an edited version of the debate, I don't see it as mattering at all. Sorry...
What might also be effective is a transcript of the debate, or the highlights anyhow. Just a thought. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
dglas
Skeptic Friend
Canada
397 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2009 : 16:02:19 [Permalink]
|
That something is difficult is not an argument in itself to not try. If you leave stupidity unchallenged, it flourishes. This is the offset to "giving them a stage." For those who don't know, and like it or not, we are the ones stealing their stages, not the other way around. As long as they have special legal tax exemptions and other political favour, this remains the case. We have the stronger hand, if we decide to play it. If we don't, we lose. Period.
Perhaps people do not know or remember 30 years ago. I do. Things are very much better today then they were then. This is not because we let them have exclusive dominion over the stage. It's because we had the courage to challenge them.
Every single voice, whether it be a satire, impassioned humanism, or calm reason, is necessary in the struggle to bring reason to the world. If it is difficult to put forward ideas in a way that is understandable to the average person, it may be because we can't be bothered to put it in terms the average person will appreciate. That's not the fault of the audience; it's the fault of the presenter.
Or is it just easier to pretend that everyone else is stupid and unreachable and despair in smug self-righteousness? Why don't you just go join the rapture ready crew?
It is not a matter of PollyAnna "optimism" as fatalistically depicted. It is a matter of necessity. A prerequisite for even the possibility of success.
Not to try is to fail. |
--------------------------------------------------
- dglas (In the hell of 1000 unresolved subplots...)
--------------------------------------------------
The Presupposition of Intrinsic Evil
+ A Self-Justificatory Framework
= The "Heart of Darkness"
--------------------------------------------------
|
| Edited by - dglas on 04/04/2009 21:35:28 |
|
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2009 : 16:18:09 [Permalink]
|
Now listening to the debate. Damn, that Jackson guy sure knows how to whip up some strawmen.
edited to add:I've stopped following ID-creationism/creationism vs evolution debates without the after the bar closes filter for some time now. I've desensitized, listening to this guy spewing misunderstanding after strawman after downright lies almost physically hurts. I really need to start reading a daily dose of unfiltered creationism again to build up more resistance.
edited to add some more: I'm now at ERV's starting statement. I actually think she takes a good shot at it. Her explanations on why scientists have certain ideas are very clear and she makes a good effort at communicating the ideas to the public. I especially like her efforts to link evolution directly to health research, which I think is important in these efforts. |
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
| Edited by - tomk80 on 04/04/2009 16:34:37 |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2009 : 17:15:15 [Permalink]
|
Thanks, Ig and Zebra for the notice and the links!
I'm watching also, and enjoying it very much, though at times Jackson has my blood pressure going up with his extremely dishonest presentation. He has most of the Creationist tricks mastered, plus he seems to have perhaps invented one of his own: Showing charts that are enormously supportive of evolution, then interpreting them as opposing science.
I'll update here with comments as I watch the debate
I am especially angered when Jackson, who is scientifically trained and certainly knows better, repeatedly refers to hominids alike Lucy as "monkeys"! That's a bald lie, for propaganda purposes. He clearly wants his flock to remain ignorant and emotionally charged, not not teach them any facts. at the same time, this is a slap in the face of anyone with even a basic knowledge of biology -- but Jackson's not speaking to them. His screed is entirely anti-intellectual, meant for knuckle-walkers who disdain both eggheads and those damned monkeys swinging in the trees over their heads.
I expect to see Jackson's trousers spontaneously erupt into flames at any moment.
Okay, finished. I liked the way Abbie kept her temper under control, and was kindly in explaining science to Creationist questioners. I do feel she could have been more aggressive with Jackson. I do truly wish Abbie Smith had called Jackson on the "monkeys" for instance, or had hit him for claiming that he'd abandon Creationism if scientific evidence disproved it. Overall, however, I approve of her performance and tactics.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
| Edited by - HalfMooner on 04/04/2009 19:29:23 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Abbie 'ERV' Smith to debate YEC Charles Jackson
