Timothy Standish PhD Bio., "Reading The Blind Watch...

Page 2 of 4 [ 52 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

DentArthurDent
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia

01 Jul 2010, 5:10 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

DentArthurDent wrote:

insult our intelligence

Funny that's you're the one accusing me of this as you and the rest seem to mock my intelligence in the same manner that Spanish Catholics of the 1500's mocked the people which they considered to be heretics.

Interesting analogy, I am not sure which people you are referring to Giordano Bruno perhaps, or Copernicus or to stretch the stated time period Galileo. To my mind you are behaving in the same way as the inquisition, denying science and sticking to long disproved hypothesis about the nature of our world and the universe it is in. In fact when it comes to a denial of scientific fact you and your cabal are worse than the inquisition, at least the theories of the above three greats were new, very controversial, and did not have the mass of scientific findings to back them up that modern evolutionary biology and geology does, so it is perhaps possible to forgive the inquisition for their denial of the facts, on the other hand your obstinacy :roll:

_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams

"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

01 Jul 2010, 5:15 pm

DentArthurDent wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

DentArthurDent wrote:

insult our intelligence

ORLY?

skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

01 Jul 2010, 6:13 pm

Creationism: It's like the dark ages never ended!!

_________________
Wherever they burn books they will also, in the end, burn human beings. ~Heinrich Heine, Almansor, 1823

?I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me.? - Hunter S. Thompson

skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

01 Jul 2010, 6:31 pm

Just because it can't be said in enough different ways:

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

01 Jul 2010, 6:36 pm

Wow, logic. Anybody? Anybody?

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

01 Jul 2010, 6:52 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Wow, logic. Anybody? Anybody?

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

01 Jul 2010, 6:56 pm

skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

01 Jul 2010, 7:25 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Wow, logic. Anybody? Anybody?

You've encapsulated my response to every "scientific" essay from a creationist.

"Evolution HAS to be wrong because I don't get what's going on here so therefore there must be a god who made everything."

AG's is more logical than that.

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

01 Jul 2010, 9:57 pm

skafather84 wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Wow, logic. Anybody? Anybody?

Oh, I see, that must be the "actual" argument utilized, how could I ever be so wrong.

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

01 Jul 2010, 10:51 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Oh, I see, that must be the "actual" argument utilized, how could I ever be so wrong.

That's what we keep asking ourselves!

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

02 Jul 2010, 12:08 am

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Oh, I see, that must be the "actual" argument utilized, how could I ever be so wrong.

That's what we keep asking ourselves!

Keep asking then, until the secular argument relies less on decrees and bullying over conclusions and more on scientific empiricism.

merrymadscientist
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 533
Location: UK

02 Jul 2010, 3:40 pm

Theories of the origin of life are currently quite hypothetical, but that doesn't matter - it doesn't mean that science can't explain it, it just means that science can't explain it yet. Expecting science to have all the answers ready made is clearly unrealistic - theories are proved by painstaking experiments. There are plenty of things we don't understand - invoking supernatural hypotheses that can never be tested indicates an unwillingness to be bothered to understand the scientific process and admit that we don't know the answers to everything. If it really bothers him, then he should consider working in this field to try and find the answers - if he doesn't want the truth but something convenient to his views, then best he stays out of science altogether.

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

02 Jul 2010, 3:54 pm

merrymadscientist wrote:

Theories of the origin of life are currently quite hypothetical, but that doesn't matter - it doesn't mean that science can't explain it, it just means that science can't explain it yet. Expecting science to have all the answers ready made is clearly unrealistic - theories are proved by painstaking experiments. There are plenty of things we don't understand - invoking supernatural hypotheses that can never be tested indicates an unwillingness to be bothered to understand the scientific process and admit that we don't know the answers to everything. If it really bothers him, then he should consider working in this field to try and find the answers - if he doesn't want the truth but something convenient to his views, then best he stays out of science altogether.

There's another thing: arguing against positions not held.

DentArthurDent
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia

02 Jul 2010, 5:38 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Oh, I see, that must be the "actual" argument utilized, how could I ever be so wrong.

That's what we keep asking ourselves!

Keep asking then, until the secular argument relies less on decrees and bullying over conclusions and more on scientific empiricism.

See statements like this makes we wonder if you are just a little confused. Just to simplify things for you religion decrees, science challenges, now I suggest you write that down on a card stick it into your wallet and whenever you get confused get it out and remind yourself which is which.

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

02 Jul 2010, 7:04 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Oh, I see, that must be the "actual" argument utilized, how could I ever be so wrong.

That's what we keep asking ourselves!

Keep asking then, until the secular argument relies less on decrees and bullying over conclusions and more on scientific empiricism.

Orwell already made an empirically based challenge to you, personally, 'keet. For you to say this seems kind of ridiculous, given the facts about the matter that everyone on this forum got to see. So, saying "you evolutionists lack scientific empiricism", is kind of bogus. Mainstream science has both more empirical and theoretical scholars than your pack of creationists, period.

skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

02 Jul 2010, 10:05 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Oh, I see, that must be the "actual" argument utilized, how could I ever be so wrong.

That's what we keep asking ourselves!

Keep asking then, until the secular argument relies less on decrees and bullying over conclusions and more on scientific empiricism.

I don't think there is a secular argument so much as it is entirely worthless to concern oneself's evolutionary studies with the existence of god. It provides no extra information nor does it provide any useful methodology for figuring out lineages or reasonings. "It just happened because of god" isn't an acceptable answer for anything because there are real causes for everything. The arguments you have posted have offered no reason of worth why god should be included in any scientific discussion other than that one's faith demands it for themselves; it serves no purpose in the actual research and, as displayed in your articles, hinders research and leads to conclusions without explanations.

Page 2 of 4 [ 52 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Jump to:

Timothy Standish PhD Bio., "Reading The Blind Watch... Post Reply New Topic

Timothy Standish PhD Bio., "Reading The Blind Watch...