-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
The Flat Earth Myth
- Thread starter Agonaces of Susa
- Start date
- Nov 18, 2009
- 3,605
- 50
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Constitution
LOL.
That's because you didn't read the opening post.
If you'd read the Gould paper, which you obviously didn't, you would have heard of him.
Upvote
0
Gracchus
Senior Veteran
- Dec 21, 2002
- 7,199
- 821
- Faith
- Pantheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
It is true that scholars have accepted the spherical nature of the Earth for thousands of years. Most unscholarly people scorned the idea as nonsense. There are still some of them around.
Just so, 99% of those in the biological and geological sciences accept the fact of evolution. Those who know little or nothing of these sciences scorn the conclusions of scientists and scholars as nonsense.
The ignorant and unskilled tend to overestimate their skills and knowledge in inverse proportion to their actual knowledge. This is known as the "Dunning-Kruger Effect".
Just so, 99% of those in the biological and geological sciences accept the fact of evolution. Those who know little or nothing of these sciences scorn the conclusions of scientists and scholars as nonsense.
The ignorant and unskilled tend to overestimate their skills and knowledge in inverse proportion to their actual knowledge. This is known as the "Dunning-Kruger Effect".
Upvote
0
ReverendDG
Defeater of Dad and AV1611VET
lol yes that must be it, it couldn't be your argument is a complete farce.
by the way i don't see scientific citations or references, unless quote-mines and straw-men define scientific citations and references to you now? i mean i wouldn't put it past you, you do love that semantic slight-of-hand game you play.
Upvote
0
ReverendDG
Defeater of Dad and AV1611VET
sure i did, i don't see any quotes from the guy. i didn't realize i had to debate with a pdf file and not a human being.
are you so out out of ammo that you can't even present an argument anymore? oh wait, coming from the guy who just copypastas the same worn-out poorly understood quote-mines, i guess not.
by the way your argument is a total distortion of what gould is talking about. he uses the flat-earth as a lead-in to a myth that science and religion are in conflict.
the first part about the flat-earth is to point out that so called "dark-age" believers did know the earth was round and had no conflict with early science.
in fact he references a lot of false made up stuff that many groups think are true, like the "noble savage" crap from the 19th century.
the reason, which you fail to grasp or even attempt to grasp is to reference the so called belief that science and religion are in conflict, which wasn't remotely true.
just like the flat-earth, the rivalry between the two is nothing but a 18th century fabrication.
given that he says so in the text!
yeah i didn't read the pdf, now i did and what you said is wrong.
as for cosmas indicopleustes, he is referenced ONCE in the text, and you claimed he had influence in "darwinian circles". i've never bloody heard of the guy! so you are wrong! seems you are looking in the mirror when you accuse people of not reading posts. try reading what i wrote in context, or is that too much to ask?
Upvote
0
Similar threads
