Bad Logic

[Split Rock]

Would someone please answer this for her, besides me?

It's happened a handful of times... usually it's about inconsequential stuff that wasn't crucial to his argument anyway, but this is a rare occurrence. Usually, he employs the tactics I described earlier, then waits for this to happen, at which point the subject has been successfully changed to something he's actually got some authority on. He's an artful dodger to say the least.

Yeah, he has admitted he is wrong on ocassion. So, it is not fair to say AVET never admits he is wrong.

 

[Hespera]

Yeah, he has admitted he is wrong on ocassion. So, it is not fair to say AVET never admits he is wrong.

ok, just asking.

 

[plindboe]

Okay, Plindboe, I'll give in and say something here; but be advised that I almost never answer a post that accuses me of having "my interpretation", as I try so very hard here to get you guys to realize that the Bible is to be interpreted literally, so as to make even those hostile to It admit to what It says, only to have people argue against that.

Even though you might not like to hear this, you will never convince anyone of that, as it's a well known fact that anything that comes through our senses is filtered and molded based on our expectations, prior beliefs and cultural norms. It's one of those pesky realizations one has to make when one realizes one is a fallible human being, cabable of misunderstanding the slightest sights and words.

Also the fact that there are countless different views of what the Bible says, even among self-professed literalists, and that these views have changed slavishly over time with society's changing views of what should be considered moral or not, clearly testifies to the point that a non-interpretive approach just doesn't exist.

By way of a good example, some won't care how the water during the Flood got here (that's clearly covered by the Scriptures) --- rather --- they want to know where it went;

That's a good point. I think people arguing against Bible believers often descent into the same mode as many creationists do when arguing against evolution, where they simply want to stump their opponents and hear them utter the words "Uhhh, I don't know", so they can claim victory.

and Heaven help anyone who even dares venture an educated guess.

Educated guesses are fine, if you make it clear it's an educated guess. If you mistake your guess for reality and present it with bravado (i.e. dad's approach), it doesn't reflect well on you. But saying "I don't know" and "I'm not sure but perhaps...." is the honest way to go about it.

In any event, I'll answer this the way you wrote it:I'm saying that anything that contradicts 'my specific beliefs' is religious.

I appreciate you answering, but I'm afraid your answer generates even more confusion. First you said that contradicting your belief was anti-religious (#51+#69), now you say it's religious.

Since 'my specific beliefs' rule out other religions on principle, there's only one valid "religion" on the face of the earth: His.

Are you saying that other religions aren't religions? In other words: to be anti-religious is to be against your religion and your religon only (i.e. an anti-islamic or anti-hindu message wouldn't count as being anti-religious?).

Peter

 

[Hespera]

Originally Posted by AV1611VET

Okay, Plindboe, I'll give in and say something here; but be advised that I almost never answer a post that accuses me of having "my interpretation", as I try so very hard here to get you guys to realize that the Bible is to be interpreted literally, so as to make even those hostile to It admit to what It says, only to have people argue against that.QVOTE///////////



H sez. You try very hard with stuff like neptune taking all the noah flood water and its a beacon to warn renegade angels? Like dinosaurs getting footprints in angel's cola bins? water canopy? entropy started when someone chomped some fruit?

You could hardly be more sure to have the opposite effect from what you say you want, if you plotted it out and tried.

i had no idea that "literally' interpreting the bible could lead off into such vast absurdities.

i really am sorry for the frustration you must feel but you is trying to push back a river with a stick.





​

 

[Gawron]

Ah, you guys almost had me going for a moment there, then I read the following:

Posted by BlindPoe:

“If they show humility and openness they'll be greeted with friendly people happy to educate them.”

Here is how I interpret this comment. There is no argument, no debate to be had, the question is completely settled, and we will only tolerate anyone who does question if and only if they will humbly admit their ignorance and let us teach them the error of their ways. Outside of this narrow construct, cry havoc, and let slip the dogs of war.

Then there is this gem:

Posted by uke2se:

“There isn't much else to do for someone who lives in the real world but mock the ideas of creationists.”

Nice to know you guys have something to live for. Compared to such mundane concerns as children, a wife recovering from cancer, balancing a career and attempting to hold to ones beliefs, it is amazing that I haven’t realized the importance in the “real world” of mocking the ideas of others. Is that part of the “education”?

Posted by random325nicaea:

“the next generation is the future of our species, we better make dam sure we don't retard them with creation "science".”

Or proper spelling, punctuation, and grammar, I suppose. But tell me, random, who is going to get to make this decision concerning exactly what is taught the next generation? And who is going to enforce it on the parents of the next generation? Strictly atheist? Because they are not “delusional”?

Posted by Hespera:

“Oh not to worry. The Chinese and Indians wont be wasting any time on that, the human species wont be affected by creation science, or voodoo.”

Or compassion either, I suppose:

Report: China remains world's top executioner

Quote:

“The number of prisoners put to death worldwide decreased in 2008, a human rights group said Wednesday, adding that China retained its position as the world's top executioner.”

“The report said China accounted for at least 5,000 executions — or 87.3 percent of the total — the same estimate as last year.”

End quote. Link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32205569...s-asiapacific/

Congratulations! Godless adherence to principal triumphs again!! Oh, and I am curious, do the Chinese and the Indians account for the sum total of the “human species”? Or are you implying on a Freudian level that someday, the Chinese and the Indians will rule the “human species” and be in a position of dictating belief?

“Why would anti religion, anti crationism (sic) be 'infused"?”

In the same sense that anti-liberalism is infused into holding conservative values. You guys can scream all you want about how evolutionary theory makes no attempt to disprove the existence of god because in the context you say that it is an accurate statement. What you ignore is the default built-in assumption of evolutionary theory that there is no god, no creator, no design other than that which occurred randomly.

I ignored this before, but in post number 40 you stated:

“I send some of this back to China.”

Why? So you guys can twitter about how stupid and ignorant Americans really are? You think a belief in god alone accounts for that?

As for the other issue you raised in post number 40, I do not need you to straighten anything out for me. You made yourself clear with your original comment, and from here nothing else need be said concerning that issue.

 

[uke2se]

Posted by BlindPoe:

“If they show humility and openness they'll be greeted with friendly people happy to educate them.”

Here is how I interpret this comment. There is no argument, no debate to be had, the question is completely settled.

You should have stopped there, and your post would have been the best post you've ever made.

The question is settled. There is no debate. Evolution is a fact. What we're doing now is fighting a rear-guard action against those people who fear change and the increased dominance of rationality in our daily lives.

Furthermore, there has never been any solid arguments or evidence put forth by creationists, period. Even if there was any doubt, creationists have done such a poor job of presenting their case that creation wouldn't even be considered as an alternative.

I'm sorry, dude. That's just the way it is in the real world.

 

[random325nicaea]

"Posted by random325nicaea:

“the next generation is the future of our species, we better make dam sure we don't retard them with creation "science".”

Or proper spelling, punctuation, and grammar, I suppose. But tell me, random, who is going to get to make this decision concerning exactly what is taught the next generation? And who is going to enforce it on the parents of the next generation? Strictly atheist? Because they are not “delusional”?"

well im just to lazy to spell correcty onsuch forums, it's not all that serious anyway. even if my posts are 5% typo's the message is still conveighed effectively enough.

btw, what happend to sane, rational induviduals? why did you pick atheists?
don't you have freedom of religioin back there? all the more reason not to teach it in public schools.

and i know you're inclining that ToE and BBT are "delusional".
which just shows how much you know of the theories XD.

 

[random325nicaea]

"Congratulations! Godless adherence to principal triumphs again!! Oh, and I am curious, do the Chinese and the Indians account for the sum total of the “human species”? Or are you implying on a Freudian level that someday, the Chinese and the Indians will rule the “human species” and be in a position of dictating belief?"

well no,
they account for 1/3 of the world population. luckily, they don't dabble with religious dogma that much as the fundementalist Christian america does.

 

[Hespera]

Posted by Hespera:

“Oh not to worry. The Chinese and Indians wont be wasting any time on that, the human species wont be affected by creation science, or voodoo.”

Or compassion either, I suppose:

Report: China remains world's top executioner

Quote:

“The number of prisoners put to death worldwide decreased in 2008, a human rights group said Wednesday, adding that China retained its position as the world's top executioner.”

“The report said China accounted for at least 5,000 executions — or 87.3 percent of the total — the same estimate as last year.”

End quote. Link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32205569...s-asiapacific/

Congratulations! Godless adherence to principal triumphs again!! Oh, and I am curious, do the Chinese and the Indians account for the sum total of the “human species”? Or are you implying on a Freudian level that someday, the Chinese and the Indians will rule the “human species” and be in a position of dictating belief?

“. You guys can scream all you want about how evolutionary theory makes no attempt to disprove the existence of god because in the context you say that it is an accurate statement. What you ignore is the default built-in assumption of evolutionary theory that there is no god, no creator, no design other than that which occurred randomly.

I ignored this before, but in post number 40 you stated:

“I send some of this back to China.”

Why? So you guys can twitter about how stupid and ignorant Americans really are? You think a belief in god alone accounts for that?

.

You sure are full of something! Else why do you use expressions like

"You guys can scream all you want about......." Nobody is screaming unless its you. What ARE you so full of that makes you talk like this?
Anger? Resentment? Bitterness?

Is it "do unto others as you would have them do unto you"?

Interesting that you think Christians have the market cornered on compassion. Esp in light of the way you talk.

Chinese and Indians wont be wasting any ot their time on voodoo like "creationism". That is an amazing leap from there to some of the faults of the current Chinese govt. Steady on the topic, man!

Is evolution godless? to me it is. Its like the rest of the universe that way.
What makes you think I "ignore" that? you are right ! godless godless godless. "Random" tho? This stuff about random is a xtian mantra but it still doesnt express anything.

As for what i said about how i send some of it back to China?

"Why? So you guys can twitter about how stupid and ignorant Americans really are? You think a belief in god alone accounts for that?"

DINGDINGDINGDING!! you almost got it. Its about how ignorant some christian americans are. Do i think a belief in god alone accounts for it? no. i think they have to really work at it.

Mere ignorance, a moments failure to reflect deeply would not account for cra[wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth]imo like the water canopy, hydroplate theory, and donosaurs in the angels coal bins. THAT takes effort.


Oh finally..."Or are you implying on a Freudian level that someday, the Chinese and the Indians will rule the “human species” and be in a position of dictating belief?"

I dunno where you get this "implying on a freudian level" stuff, but, Chinese and Indians will certainly prevail over the willfully ignorant. They are doing a good job of it already.

 

[Gawron]

There is that "real world" again.

Do you really think that everything in evolutionary science is settled? That would put a lot of people out of a job.

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

There is that "real world" again.

Do you really think that everything in evolutionary science is settled? That would put a lot of people out of a job.

Well it did put "Dr." Dino out of a job. Now if we could just shut down Ham and Eric Hovind.

 

[Hespera]

There is that "real world" again.

Do you really think that everything in evolutionary science is settled? That would put a lot of people out of a job.

DARN that real world, always butting into our fondest fantasies!

Nobody thinks everything in any science is 'settled".

I wonder what you think "evolutionary science" is? Guys in white lab coats studying "evolutionary science"?

There is always lots to learn

If the question really means, "is there any reasonable doubt about the correctness of the basic theory" then, no. There isnt.

Could there be? Who knows. Come on, theocreos, do you part and come up with a REASONABLE doubt. No more "interstratate fossils' and dino tracks is the cola bins. Reasonable stuff, with data. Please?
data?

 

[Split Rock]

Ah, you guys almost had me going for a moment there, then I read the following:

(quote-mine deleted)

You guys are so enamored with quote-mines that you have even created your own here from posts in this very thread... I am impressed!

You guys can scream all you want about how evolutionary theory makes no attempt to disprove the existence of god because in the context you say that it is an accurate statement. What you ignore is the default built-in assumption of evolutionary theory that there is no god, no creator, no design other than that which occurred randomly.

As Hespera noted, who is "screaming" here? We have to repeat ourselves because you guys have a filter that removes stuff you don't like from your mind. Maybe that is where you got the impression we were "screaming" at you.

Next, please tell me which scientific theories assume that there is a god, creator or designer? The answer is none.

Finally, evolution does not occur randomly, just according to natural laws.

 

[corvus_corax]

You guys can scream all you want about how evolutionary theory makes no attempt to disprove the existence of god because in the context you say that it is an accurate statement. What you ignore is the default built-in assumption of evolutionary theory that there is no god, no creator, no design other than that which occurred randomly.

(emphasis mine)
Yep
In the exact same way that the Relativity Theories do, and Germ Theory does, and Heliocentric theory does, and Atomic theory does, and .... well you should see the point by now.

 

[Gawron]

Posted by Hespera:

“You sure are full of something!”

Ironically, at the moment it is Chinese food.

“Nobody is screaming unless its you.”

Yeah, that is why I use the caps lock.

“What ARE you so full of that makes you talk like this?
Anger? Resentment? Bitterness?”

How about curiosity? Why are you taking yourself so seriously here, that in the face of a simple metaphor you react so stridently?

“Is it "do unto others as you would have them do unto you"?”

The above is not an instruction to be a doormat. Because I am Christian, I am not allowed to defend myself or my beliefs? Or if I am, just not in any manner which in any way might be considered the least bit offensive by anyone anywhere? I think what you are mad at here is that I am playing by the rules as established by the majority who post on these forums.

“Interesting that you think Christians have the market cornered on compassion.”

I never said that.

“Is evolution godless?”

To say that evolution is godless is not the same as saying that evolution contains an underlying assumption that there is no god. But has a hidden agenda been exposed here? Is the principal reason you are such a strict adherent to evolutionary thought because it is “godless godless godless”?

“Its about how ignorant some christian americans are.”

Thank you for making that distinction.

“I dunno where you get this "implying on a freudian level" stuff”

You made the comment that the “human species” won’t be affected by creation science because the Chinese and Indians won’t be wasting any time on that. Explain just what you meant by those words.

“but, Chinese and Indians will certainly prevail over the willfully ignorant. They are doing a good job of it already.”

I am sure you are referring to some aspect such as math score comparisons, but do you not see how a comment such as this can also be interpreted?

Posted by random325nicaea:

“and i know you're inclining that ToE and BBT are "delusional".”

Really? You know this? Amazing……wrong, but still amazing.

Posted by Split Rock:

“You guys are so enamored with quote-mines that you have even created your own here from posts in this very thread... I am impressed!”

So let me get this straight. You quote me, and then accuse me of quote-mining? So if I respond to someone’s post and I quote them, then I am quote-mining, whereas if you respond to my post and quote me, you are not. Just so I am straight with the rules.

 

[random325nicaea]

"Posted by random325nicaea:

“and i know you're inclining that ToE and BBT are "delusional".”

Really? You know this? Amazing……wrong, but still amazing."

well done, sorry i misread.

but the first part of my reply was the most important anyway.
and i WOULD consider creationists (a la hovind) pushing creation "science", as delusional. so at leas ti don't wan them in charge of anything.

 

[uke2se]

There is that "real world" again.

The real world is a reference to the world were rational thinking and evidence counts for something.

Do you really think that everything in evolutionary science is settled? That would put a lot of people out of a job.

Nope, but that's not what we were talking about. You can try to dodge around all you like, but it's just going to make you tired and look silly.

The debate on wether evolution is true or not is over. It's been over for almost 150 years. Time to get with the times.

 

[gaara4158]

To say that evolution is godless is not the same as saying that evolution contains an underlying assumption that there is no god. But has a hidden agenda been exposed here? Is the principal reason you are such a strict adherent to evolutionary thought because it is “godless godless godless”?

The only underlying assumption is that the evidence suggests what it looks like it suggests, with no regard to what any ancient book says. Unless disregarding a literal interpretation of the Bible is a godless assumption, evolution is not necessarily godless.

The Bible is not literal =/= There is no god.

In fact, the Bible doesn't even have to be true for God to be real.

 

[Gawron]

Posted by uke2se:

"The real world is a reference to the world were rational thinking and evidence counts for something."

Which only occurs where? Dawkins.net, MTV? Please, this open disdain for anything "god" cannot be masked by the use of a cheap metaphor. And the debate may be over for you, but not everyone is so closed minded.

Posted by gaara4158:

"Unless disregarding a literal interpretation of the Bible is a godless assumption, evolution is not necessarily godless."

Agreed. But this wasn't quite the point I was trying to make with Hespera.

 

[plindboe]

Posted by BlindPoe:

Why do you call me that?

“If they show humility and openness they'll be greeted with friendly people happy to educate them.”[/B]

Here is how I interpret this comment. There is no argument, no debate to be had, the question is completely settled, and we will only tolerate anyone who does question if and only if they will humbly admit their ignorance and let us teach them the error of their ways.

That's very different from my actual opinion though. I'd like to see more humility and openness from the pro-evolution side as well. They're admirable characteristics so not sure how you manage to see them in such a negative light. As I said earlier, there are almost no experts on evolution here, so of course there's room for debate.

But sadly almost all creationists who enter this forum considers themselves authorities on science, and at the same time show a remarkable ignorance of what the theory actually says. To enter a forum with such hubris and lack of understanding of one's own limits tends to cause annoyance, though I'm often amazed by the restraint and patience of people trying to correct the misunderstandings.

Outside of this narrow construct, cry havoc, and let slip the dogs of war.

I haven't said any such thing, and am neither of such an opinion.

You tend to read between the lines and attribute extremely negative and exaggerated opinions onto others. Why do you do that?

Peter