User Tag List

Informational! Informational!:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 7 of 13 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 ... LastLast
Results 49 to 56 of 98

Thread: Nice evolution controversy article

  1. #49
    herenorthere's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    almost Hartford
    Posts
    3,785
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    So how is it that intelligent, informed people can be creationists? I used to know a geology professor and a physics professor who were. They weren't Lyell and Einstein, but they were on the faculty of good schools. Other faculty seemed happy to have them around, but maybe it was because the others enjoyed watching grad students having their entire worldview dismantled after getting too cocky about it. Don't get me wrong - I think creationism is one religion's myth and intelligent design manages to be both heretical as religion and absurd as science. Not even one minute of science class time should be spent on either. But few advocates of evolution can hold their own against top competition from the other side.
    Bruce in CT

    Madness is something rare in individuals but in groups, parties, peoples, ages it is the rule. Friedrich Nietzsche

  2. #50

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    2,344
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]The definition of "theory" as per Dictionary.com
    I was talking about science.
    God is not a theory, not even a hypothesis.
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]Limiting when applied to YOUR definition of a scientific theory!
    no, THE definiton of a scientific theory.
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]Dictionary.com, or virtually any other publicly available dictionary, gives the definition I have given and so this is likely to be more widely accepted.
    I really couldn't care less what dictionaries say about scientific terms. They say apes are monkeys. What I had said before:
    Dictionaries just define common parlance. They tell you what people MIGHT mean when they say a certain word, which means real scientific words or math words, etc. are not defined how they should be.

    I don't care about what people might think a word means, I care about what it actually means.
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]As I've yet to hear anyone tell me that the sky is green, I believe that most people agree with me.
    What if I tell you the sky is purple? i'm looking at it right now! :P
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]So how is it that intelligent, informed people can be creationists?
    the real question is, were they informed about evolution? so far, I haven't found any creationist who really knows what evolution is. They say it's "just" a theory, they say it has something to do with the origins of the moon or something, they say all the species goes extinct when one population speciates, etc. Some were more informed than others, but basically none really understood evolution or the evidence.
    Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish-Euripides
    wikipedia rocks! (except for species info)(CPers-add your vast knowledge of CPs to wikipedia&#33
    A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it
    Get all the fools on your side and you can be elected to anything

  3. #51

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Oxfordshire, UK.
    Posts
    141
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]So how is it that intelligent, informed people can be creationists? I used to know a geology professor and a physics professor who were.
    I simply don't believe that.
    Proof?
    T.

  4. #52
    Tropical Fish Enthusiast jimscott's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Western New York
    Posts
    18,768
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] (tonyc @ Sep. 02 2005,7:23)]Jimscott, I don't understand that argument at all.

    I mean, if I say that the sky is blue (which is occasionally true in the UK), all I mean is that I call light of a particular wavelength 'blue'. As I've yet to hear anyone tell me that the sky is green, I believe that most people agree with me.

    Do you mean that what I see as blue someone else might see as green? If so, I think were moving back into FSM/IPU territory.....

    T.
    Ugh, this is sounding way too much like my Mercury instrument and that calibration curve I have to do and that dratted "second source" standard for my QCS & LFB to show that my standards for the calibration curve, which is relative to itself, is actually giving me correct readings! Please excuse mini-rant! I had to toss my run today because the second source wasn't matching up with the calibration curve.

    *rubs eyes* Okay. How do we know what I call blue and waht you call blue is really some universally absolutely true phenomenon that is blue? Maybe what I am calling blue is what you are calling green? Maybe we're both wrong and reality is truly yellow. How can we prove it for sure? Just because there is correlation, doesn't mean that there is causality.

    BTW, haven't I seen you on some other discussion forum?

  5. #53
    StifflerMichael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    339
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]But few advocates of evolution can hold their own against top competition from the other side.
    'Most' would be closer to the truth. Really, a large part of the scientific community stays aways from the argument.
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]So how is it that intelligent, informed people can be creationists?
    I've wondered that myself too. I've noticed that for the most part it is scientist who are far outside of biology. But many people are strongly religious (Christian mainly in this case), it is very unsettling to have this concept which seems so heavily in conflict with, well, the Bible (Genesis).

  6. #54

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Oxfordshire, UK.
    Posts
    141
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi, Jim.
    You know as well as I do that the question you posed is by definition unanswerable (unless you're the FSM).
    Regarding whether you've met me before, maybe, but unless it was at CPUK I can't place you. I have the same username on all my forums.
    Cheers,
    T.
    Incidentally, I've also spent far too much of my working life calibrating measuring equipment. Just to have His Noodly Appendage interfere. [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/new/smile_m_32.gif[/img]

  7. #55
    endparenthesis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Northern VA
    Posts
    1,262
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] (StifflerMichael @ Sep. 02 2005,12:06)]Wikepedia is even more accepted (dictionary.com and any other dictionary is written by only a few people, Wikepedia is surveyed by thousands) that's where I get my stuff. I don't know, I'm a 4th year grad student at Harvard University studying chemistry and biology. I'm Pretty sure I have a good grasp of the definition of scientific theory. But I guess I'll know for sure at my thesis defense!!
    There was an awesome article in Wired about why wikipedia is so reliable and comprehensive. It's like an open source encyclopedia. It's one of those great ideas that you would think would never work, and once you see it in action you wonder why it didn't show up earlier.

  8. #56

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    2,344
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]Really, a large part of the scientific community stays aways from the argument.
    and that's exactly why nobody knows what evolution is!
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]There was an awesome article in Wired about why wikipedia is so reliable and comprehensive
    all hail the mighty wikipedia!!! whooo!
    link?
    actually... wikimedia... i like wikiquote and others too. it has like EVERYTHING. there's a evowiki, a creationist wiki, a magic wiki, wiktionary, wikispecies, wikinews, holy crap!
    they're not nearly as good as wikipedia, but I'm hoping they will grow and prosper (except the creationist wiki... lol)
    Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish-Euripides
    wikipedia rocks! (except for species info)(CPers-add your vast knowledge of CPs to wikipedia&#33
    A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it
    Get all the fools on your side and you can be elected to anything

Page 7 of 13 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •