Flat Earth Society and Young Earth Creationists

Post Reply New Topic

If you believe that then you'll believe anything as long as it's popular, arrogant and completely stupid.

Are you suggesting kraftie did not come to this conclusion on his own?

This insult makes no sense. The theories Kraftiekortie presents are popular among archeologists and sociologists but why would it then follow that he would believe anything popular, even if it had no scientific backing. The theories are neither arrogant nor stupid so why assume he would believe things that are? Instead of a cryptic insult, why not just fisk his post to explain which parts you think are wrong and why.

Everyone, from the time they're big enough to watch the television, is brainwashed with that impossible nonsense.

A well organised bunch of publicity agents and censors do a very good job of convincing most people of average intelligence that they are very clever for coming to the conclusions that are planted into their minds; even though those conclusions will not bear scrutiny by any kind of logic or science.

Years of foolishly thinking that such opinions are simply mistaken and that most people are amenable to reason have left me with no illusions. Most people that believe that stuff do so because they want to and they don't care about logic or science. It's an ideology that can only defend itself by proclaiming that anything that agrees with it is "science" and anything that doesn't agree with it is "religion".

David, you really don't understand your audience in this forum. Sure, some are bound to follow the rhetoric that they have gained by osmosis, but to assume that of anyone here is the height of hubris.

Many of us have absorbed the so called "facts" and logic of the masses and come to a different conclusion because the ASD brain (generally speaking) does not do the social conformity thing. Of all the 'types' in this world, people with ASD are often the most independent thinkers. So please... don't lambast people here with your grand assumptions about where they are coming from. If anything, such assumptions are myopic and prejudicial to any debate, let alone being an assumption of your own superiority.

Which impossible nonsense? Exactly what point are you disputing?



Which conclusions are you disputing and why?



What do you think logic and science shows?

You have been very vague in the latter part of this thread. You throw out insults about people stupidly acepting something or other but never specify what it is that you think they have accepted or why you think it is wrong or what you think would be more correct.

KraftieKortie posted a set of widely accepted archeological and sociological theories about the origins of religion. It seems you are objecting to them (although that isn't entirely clear) but you haven't come up with any specific rebuttal to what is wrong about these theories.

I admire that you're a farmer/stockman. You put up with lots of crap, and must have lots of common sense to survive. I understand that you have faith in your notions/theories....but the objective truth veers away from those notions.

I don't attack/value judge your faith. Please don't insult us for having views who are not yours. Instead, let's have rational discussions.

Otherwise, we'll think of you as being an iconoclast solely for the sake of iconoclasm--even if it veers from objective truth.

As a small aside...
http://www.mountmacedon.org.au/places/anti-gravity-hill
I've been to this hill a couple of times. It's freakish.

Well, Lovecraft did place his story, The Shadow Out Of Time, in Australia, where other worldly beings called the Great Race of Yith had resided in prehistoric times. Who knows, maybe there is something to the so called lunatic fringe who say Lovecraft had been a "cosmic tuning fork," and a prophet of the New Age!

*hands your wife a pillow* There ya go now ya got a nice show to watch hehe!

I must say, I really wasn't expecting that response!

That's roughly what I was hoping to find on a 'spergic forum. However, my experience in a couple of 'spergic forums has been very disappointing. Maybe they don't "do the social conformity thing" at home but there is always a very aggressive cadre of supporters of the religious ideology of the shallowest popular brand of Materialism who are enthusiastic hecklers of anyone who might seriously challenge their untenable position. If there are genuinely "independent" thinkers they are most notable by their "discretion" in not exposing themselves to the derision and ridicule meted out by the hecklers.

This topic was much more fun when it could be used as a back-handed spoof of all completely subjective, relativistic opinions that are supposed to represent some kind of "personal "truth"".

There's one of those places in the hills just East of Perth. I went there once as a teenager. A most interesting optical illusion.

Anyhow, my quip, quoted above, was intended for a laugh at the expense of the troglodytes.... not as a statement of some observed "fact".

And thus you expose your debating style. You play the man, not the ball. A wonderful way to get at the truth.



By that logic, the only way to be independent in your thinking is to disagree with what's popular, even when what's popular might be right.

As a Christian of 35+ years I eventually turned to atheism. Logic and reason evolved in my mind over several years and turned me away from what was popular in my circle, despite the consequences, because I came to the conclusion I had been wrong for most of my life. If you want to continue belittling that kind of journey (not just mine), then I refer you back to your inimical need to play the man rather than the ball.