|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
 Posted - 09/04/2010 : 12:29:29 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by daehgnab
Shorter version of the above:
Instead of making arguments such as: "The existance of a Creator is questionable because we know that....."
find arguments such as: "We can not prove the existance of a Creator because we still don't know ...."
-- and you might even get that sucker... |
Not likely. Faith inoculates against uncertainty by asserting that it (faith) is more important than proof. The Bible (for example) basically states that faith is the belief in things for which there is no evidence, and faith in Jesus' sacrifice is what gets you into Heaven, so proof is irrelevant.
The fact that so many creationists think that there should be scientific proof of the Bible's miraculous actually runs contrary to the dogma. I think it's because they actually lack the faith they're supposed to have (or think they should have). |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
 |
|
|
daehgnab
New Member
22 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2010 : 14:41:55 [Permalink]
|
Do you realize that if you would have argued this way and then would have gotten some answer that is similar to what you just sayed, you would have succeded? Because, then this person would have explained you that doing what this person just tried to do (misusing science for making their point) is not what they supposed to do. Do you see the logic behind this? It is not about using science to prove anything or nothing. It is about finding a ground on which you can get them.
It is a mouse trap.
|
|
|
|
daehgnab
New Member
22 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2010 : 15:18:24 [Permalink]
|
Sorry, I forgot. My idea is if you have a good point, but the person that argues with you is not willing to at least consider that you might have a good point then try to find a ground on which you can make an argument or ask a question to which the response can only fall into one of two categories:
A. partial or full agreement.
B. selve disqualification
With other words: build a mouse trap.
If your point is actually good, then this should be possible because it is impossible to find a good argument against the truth. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2010 : 18:01:51 [Permalink]
|
"Getting them" or building a mouse trap doesn't work. They make excuses, shrug it off, claim that you're not theologically sophisticated enough to understand, and/or they just stop talking to you.
Just look at the reams written on theodicy. They know the solutions that have been proposed to the "problem of evil" are unsatisfactory (even to them), so they keep guessing up new ones. William Dembski went so far as to claim that the effects of the Fall were applied retroactively back to the beginning of time, in a ridiculous unbiblical fabrication that ludicrously attempts to reconcile the Bible with the sciences. With such mental gymnastics as standard operating procedure, the "traps" work about as well as trapping water in a sieve. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2010 : 21:42:10 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
TX is well on it's way to banning the teaching of evolution in public school science classrooms.
|
What do you consider well on it's way? Texas is nowhere near banning evolution from the classroom. |
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2010 : 21:58:32 [Permalink]
|
Because TX had this (edited to add these adjectives: delusional, retarded, moronic, asshole) douchebag running the state schoolboard:
| "I don't care what the educational political lobby and their allies on the left say," he declared at one point. "Evolution is hooey." This bled into a rant about American history. "The secular humanists may argue that we are a secular nation," McLeroy said, jabbing his finger in the air for emphasis. "But we are a Christian nation founded on Christian principles. The way I evaluate history textbooks is first I see how they cover Christianity and Israel. Then I see how they treat Ronald Reagan—he needs to get credit for saving the world from communism and for the good economy over the last twenty years because he lowered taxes." |
| McLeroy piped up and chided his fellow board members, saying, “Somebody’s gotta stand up to [these] experts!” He and his allies then turned around and put forward a string of amendments that had much the same effect as the “strengths and weaknesses” language. Among other things, they require students to evaluate various explanations for gaps in the fossil record and weigh whether natural selection alone can account for the complexity of cells. This mirrors the core arguments of the intelligent design movement: that life is too complex to be the result of unguided evolution, and that the fossil evidence for evolution between species is flimsy. The amendments passed by a wide margin, something McLeroy counts as a coup. “Whoo-eey!” he told me. “We won the Grand Slam, and the Super Bowl, and the World Cup! Our science standards are light years ahead of any other state when it comes to challenging evolution!” |
>LINK<
And another.
The backers of evolutionary theory, who wanted the State Board of Education to drop the 20-year-old requirement that both “strengths and weaknesses” of scientific theories be taught, said the new plan uses confusing language that allows creationist arguments to slip into Texas classrooms.
“Through a series of contradictory and convoluted amendments, the board crafted a road map that creationists will use to pressure publishers into putting phony arguments attacking established science into textbooks,” said Kathy Miller, president of the watchdog group Texas Freedom Network.
|
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
| Edited by - Dude on 09/04/2010 22:00:25 |
|
|
|
daehgnab
New Member
22 Posts |
Posted - 09/05/2010 : 10:37:37 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
"Getting them" or building a mouse trap doesn't work. They make excuses, shrug it off, claim that you're not theologically sophisticated enough to understand, and/or they just stop talking to you.
|
What is your idea then? I mean you can't just say: "This is not working and that is not working". In order to be constructive, we all need to participate in brainstorming by comming up with possible solutions that might work at least in some cases.
With the schools, it is correct as fare as that Evolution is a problem and this across the USA. I do know (from teacher) that at many schools teacher have trouble with this issue. Many are afrait and decided that it is better to say nothing. From others I know that they teach Evolution without naming it.
I am currently involved in a school project that shows students different adaptations to the environment. Some species are better adapted than others - Evolution through the backdoor.
However, the problem is often not the school board, but the parents. The parents are those that causes teacher trouble if the teachers say the "wrong" thing. The school board can actually do what ever they want if only parents stick together. Or, my children had their extended scientific Evolution education at home.... Home teaching isn't forbitten and sometimes the only thing that one can do is planting seeds.
A while ago I gave a presentation about my research (real science) in a school where about 80% of the children are absolute convinced that science is bullsh.. for religious reasons and this they did NOT learn at school. After my presentation the kids asked smart questions. With those kids simply exposing them to something that they end up finding interesting worked just fine. This however needs people who are brave enough to do it. That means people that do it (in a correct way) even though 'hell might open up'. Let them then screem. If they do, they make idiots out of themselfs. Many even realize this and yes, those might stop talking to you, but more important, those don't stop you from talking. Though, it really isn't easy and what does or does not work in a particular situation depends on many factors.
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 09/05/2010 : 11:06:21 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by daehgnab
A while ago I gave a presentation about my research (real science) in a school where about 80% of the children are absolute convinced that science is bullsh.. for religious reasons and this they did NOT learn at school. After my presentation the kids asked smart questions. With those kids simply exposing them to something that they end up finding interesting worked just fine. This however needs people who are brave enough to do it. That means people that do it (in a correct way) even though 'hell might open up'. Let them then screem. If they do, they make idiots out of themselfs. Many even realize this and yes, those might stop talking to you, but more important, those don't stop you from talking. Though, it really isn't easy and what does or does not work in a particular situation depends on many factors. |
Well, there you go: the solution doesn't actually involve trapping or even talking to the die-hard creationists or other dogmatic anti-science folks. It involves talking to those who are still willing to learn, or at least change their minds.
I discuss and debate things with the proponents of nonsense all the time, but my intended audience isn't really them, but is instead the other people reading. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
daehgnab
New Member
22 Posts |
Posted - 09/05/2010 : 13:57:48 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Well, there you go: the solution doesn't actually involve trapping or even talking to the die-hard creationists or other dogmatic anti-science folks. It involves talking to those who are still willing to learn, or at least change their minds.
I discuss and debate things with the proponents of nonsense all the time, but my intended audience isn't really them, but is instead the other people reading.
|
I like that one. Dave, sorry for my stupidity. I noticed that you have thousands of posts. I imagene that you have quite some experiences at least when it comes to internet discussion. I don't. What would you want a scientist to do if he/she finds his/her research on a Creationist webpage misused for their purpose? I mean this person knows better than anybody else on this planet... but what is the best thing to do? This is a real question. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 09/05/2010 : 14:28:54 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by daehgnab
Originally posted by Dave W.
Well, there you go: the solution doesn't actually involve trapping or even talking to the die-hard creationists or other dogmatic anti-science folks. It involves talking to those who are still willing to learn, or at least change their minds.
I discuss and debate things with the proponents of nonsense all the time, but my intended audience isn't really them, but is instead the other people reading.
|
I like that one. Dave, sorry for my stupidity. I noticed that you have thousands of posts. I imagene that you have quite some experiences at least when it comes to internet discussion. I don't. What would you want a scientist to do if he/she finds his/her research on a Creationist webpage misused for their purpose? I mean this person knows better than anybody else on this planet... but what is the best thing to do? This is a real question.
|
It isn't like responding to genuine criticism from readers of a journal in the letters page.
If they are violating rules for fair use of your content, get a lawyer to send a cease and desist.
If they are just misrepresenting your work, start an official blog to respond. Go point by point and dissect their claims. Then send some emails to prominent science bloggers, many of them actually read emails. Some may write about you and/or link to your response.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Need help on replying to Creationist
