"evolutionist"

Page 3 of 4 [ 51 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 70
Gender: Male
Posts: 35,189
Location: temperate zone

17 Jun 2017, 5:23 am

Would you call most of the human race "Loch Ness Monster deniers", or "Moth Man deniers"?

Of course not.

Its the believers in Moth Man, and the believers in Nessie, who are the minority, and who are the ones who make a cause out of the existence/nonexistence of the thing in question. So its the "Moth Man believers" who get labeled not the doubters.

Folks who don't deny evolution are equivalent to folks who DO deny Moth Man and Nessie. They are the mainstream group that doesn't need to be labeled.

leejosepho
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock

17 Jun 2017, 7:23 am

funeralxempire wrote:

leejosepho wrote:

funeralxempire wrote:

Snark is how one responds to madness fairly.

It is completely wrong to imply creationists are the opposite or contrast of "sane educated people".

Uninformed or misinformed seem more fair than 'insane', but ultimately they're spouting nonsense no matter how you want to slice it.

BS. The idea of creative intelligence cannot be proved to be nonsense, and neither can any other generalization you are tossing out in relation to so-called creationists.

_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================

Wolfram87
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Feb 2015
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,976
Location: Sweden

17 Jun 2017, 8:45 am

leejosepho wrote:

BS. The idea of creative intelligence cannot be proved to be nonsense, and neither can any other generalization you are tossing out in relation to so-called creationists.

You do realize that something being undisprovable means it's an incredibly weak proposition that should be disregarded entirely, correct?

Lintar wrote:

No, it is NOT "as real as gravity". :roll:

Stop deluding yourself. People who believe in evolution do so because they hate what religion promotes (which is understandable), and most of them are ex-theists who became upset with God over something that happened in their life, and they think that by denying his/her/its existence they are somehow "getting back" at him (or her, or it).

Not only is evolution at least as real as gravity, it's also better undersood, better observed and more consistent in its predictions.

TL:DR for the both of you: Link

_________________
I'm bored out of my skull, let's play a different game. Let's pay a visit down below and cast the world in flame.

naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 70
Gender: Male
Posts: 35,189
Location: temperate zone

17 Jun 2017, 9:41 am

leejosepho wrote:

funeralxempire wrote:

leejosepho wrote:

funeralxempire wrote:

Snark is how one responds to madness fairly.

It is completely wrong to imply creationists are the opposite or contrast of "sane educated people".

Uninformed or misinformed seem more fair than 'insane', but ultimately they're spouting nonsense no matter how you want to slice it.

BS. The idea of creative intelligence cannot be proved to be nonsense, and neither can any other generalization you are tossing out in relation to so-called creationists.

Actually... I agree. You cant disprove that the universe was set into a motion by a creator, anymore than you can prove it. The watch-like universe we live in might have been designed and built by a watchmaker who set it all in motion billions of years ago.

But believing in a creator is one thing. Adhering to Biblical literalism, and to adhering to Young Earth Creationism, is something else.

Proclaiming that the Earth is 6000 years old when the mainstream accepts that the Earth is four and half billion years old is like proclaiming that the distance between Portland Maine, and Portland Oregon, is not the 3000 miles that most map readers accept, but is only all of twenty feet! And then on top of that offering no credible evidence to prove that its only twenty feet, nor any evidence that it is not 3000 miles.

There are religious folks who don't adhere to Biblical literalism.

funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 30,865
Location: Right over your left shoulder

17 Jun 2017, 10:50 am

leejosepho wrote:

BS. The idea of creative intelligence cannot be proved to be nonsense, and neither can any other generalization you are tossing out in relation to so-called creationists.

The idea of a generic creator cannot be proven nor disproven, making it an idea that cannot be evaluated scientifically.
The biblical creation myths however are just that, myths. :wink:

_________________
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
They have a name for Nazis that were only Nazis because of economic anxiety or similar issues. They're called Nazis.

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 48,787
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

17 Jun 2017, 12:54 pm

naturalplastic wrote:

leejosepho wrote:

funeralxempire wrote:

leejosepho wrote:

funeralxempire wrote:

Snark is how one responds to madness fairly.

It is completely wrong to imply creationists are the opposite or contrast of "sane educated people".

Uninformed or misinformed seem more fair than 'insane', but ultimately they're spouting nonsense no matter how you want to slice it.

BS. The idea of creative intelligence cannot be proved to be nonsense, and neither can any other generalization you are tossing out in relation to so-called creationists.

I had seen a documentary from the viewpoint of so called "creationist science," in which the pseudo-scientists present had tried to demonstrate that the earth was only six thousand years old. I had also seen a documentary made by Lutheran theologian, Paul Maier, in which he had mentioned the archaeological remains of a prehistoric tower dating back seven thousand years. Go figure. :wink:

Funny how even legitimate theologians don't agree with creationist pseudo-science.

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

zac2
Hummingbird

Joined: 31 Mar 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 18
Location: UK

17 Jun 2017, 3:53 pm

To find Man's destiny: you have to kiss
a few mutant genes!

_________________
INTP sufferer with AS as dessert!

leejosepho
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock

17 Jun 2017, 4:09 pm

Wolfram87 wrote:

You do realize that something being undisprovable means it's an incredibly weak proposition that should be disregarded entirely, correct?

No, and that makes no sense to me whatsoever. I cannot prove there are no radio waves traveling across my back yard at the moment, but that fact only proves I cannot prove there are none.

naturalplastic wrote:

...believing in a creator is one thing. Adhering to Biblical literalism, and adhering to Young Earth Creationism, is something else.

So-called "Biblical literalism" seems to me to vary too greatly from one English-only speaker to the next for me to give it much consideration, but I have heard some so-called "Young-Earth Creationists" make some interesting points and contrasts to at least occasionally ponder a bit.

_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================

funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 30,865
Location: Right over your left shoulder

17 Jun 2017, 11:07 pm

leejosepho wrote:

No, and that makes no sense to me whatsoever. I cannot prove there are no radio waves traveling across my back yard at the moment, but that fact only proves I cannot prove there are none.

But you can prove there are some radio waves traveling across [your] back yard at the moment - making it a testable hypothesis.

leejosepho
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock

18 Jun 2017, 8:20 am

funeralxempire wrote:

leejosepho wrote:

No, and that makes no sense to me whatsoever. I cannot prove there are no radio waves traveling across my back yard at the moment, but that fact only proves I cannot prove there are none.

But you can prove there are some radio waves traveling across [your] back yard at the moment - making it a testable hypothesis.

Yes, agreed, and I was actually thinking more of something like the signal of a wireless router or mouse but just went with "radio" rather than trying to build a tricky construct of some kind. And overall, my only real concern here is that we at least try to present our arguments and such in relation to the actual facts of any given matter rather than tossing snark around in relation to mere human beings as done by people who quite possibly have no truly valid argument to present in the first place.

_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================

LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

18 Jun 2017, 8:52 am

The truth is unknowable.

So, "evolutionist" is useful to describe people who adopt that belief.

Like, "capitalist", "socialist", "determinist" ...

jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

18 Jun 2017, 9:15 am

Then you're okay with religionist?

Lee, that last post contains a morass of weasel words.

_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade

leejosepho
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock

18 Jun 2017, 9:29 am

jrjones9933 wrote:

Lee, that last post contains a morass of weasel words.

If you wish, please edumecate me about "weasel words". I do not know what you are saying there. I just know I seldom listen very closely to anyone whose arguments include bashing or trashing the personal character of the opposing speaker. I want the facts about the pizza, not the deliver person.

_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================

jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

18 Jun 2017, 10:56 am

leejosepho wrote:

jrjones9933 wrote:

Lee, that last post contains a morass of weasel words.

Weasel word
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word

I characterized your remark, not you personally. #fakenews

_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade

leejosepho
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock

18 Jun 2017, 3:41 pm

jrjones9933 wrote:

Weasel word
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word

I characterized your remark, not you personally. #fakenews

Whether or not you might wish to show me exactly what you believe I "weaseled in" or whatever is up to you, but I can tell you I usually do my very best to avoid that kind of thing while saying what I mean and meaning what I say. Life as I try to live it is not a contact sport, and I long ago gave up trying to out-think, out-smart, out-maneuver, shuck, jive, get over, get even and all of that kind of BS.

_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================

shlaifu
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 May 2014
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,659

18 Jun 2017, 5:03 pm

LoveNotHate wrote:

The truth is unknowable.

So, "evolutionist" is useful to describe people who adopt that belief.

Like, "capitalist", "socialist", "determinist" ...

or postmodernist ...?

the truth may unknowable, but that doesn't mean you are free to make up stuff.
and there are things we can observe and agree on. like the evolution that had taken place when antibiotic resistant bacteria started to become a serious problem for modern medicine.
or when chinese parents have chinese children (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvAsHTn3pbM).

so... if you want to disprove evolution - figure out - and I mean, really, learn what the theory actualy is, what genes are, what epigenetics is - how it is supposed to work, and then put in the time and find a fault beyond any doubt.

the question is: how do we know what we know, in contrast to just believing it.
that's what logic and scientific thought are for.

so I guess, actually, the term "evolutionist" has a purpose, describing people who believe in evolution, without understanding and actually knowing evolution, who wouldn't realize they were seeing it when they encounter MRSA, and who don't understand that they themselves, whenever they use antibacterial soap, are becoming a selective factor for the bacteria living on their skin.

_________________
I can read facial expressions. I did the test.

Page 3 of 4 [ 51 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Jump to:

"evolutionist" Post Reply New Topic

"evolutionist"