Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wow! I just stopped by from my busy, secular day nd saw this flood of one-liner insults going on. I also saw tigetmax's post, #182, thus:
"The dogma in his dogmatism would come down to his fear of an open one-on-one debate - he's apparently afraid that it may burst his little bubble world that he's constructed for himself."
I realize he wasn't talking about me, but I still saw that barely disguised challenge to engage in a quiet honest one-on-one debate.
So... which aspect of science and it's apparent limitations do you feel is so at odds with the Biblical verse, tiget? In what specific way has it failed so miserably to validate some once-cherished aspect of Christianity? Or, alternately, in what obvious manner has it (in your eyes at any rate...) failed so miserably to debunk pretty much all of them?
OK then: I'd like to challenge you for that quiet one-on-one.
So... what tilts your windmill? The proven fact of Evolution? Or of an ancient earth? Or our very likely human lineage out of australopithecussediba? Or that birds ARE little tiny later-age dinosaurs? Take your pick.
Or do you personally embrace biblical literalism (Noah's Ark, Genesis, something out of nothing, courtesy of God The Creator, all in one 6-day week 6036.7 yrs ago, etc..
I await your beck and call, sir. Your honor. Respectfully, YrHmblScientistSrvnt rflmn™
Being that you're so dogmatic with respect to God's supposed non-existence, let's go ahead and debate that.
Atheism is a disbelief in the existence of the supernatural, deities, devils, gods, etc. We didn't originate the extraordinary claims that these things exist. It is not for us to argue one way or the other, since they are not our claims. It is for those who make these extraordinary claims to support them, not for us to refute them. Got ANYTHING like that?
It really is this simple. In any scientific endeavor, you earn respect among your colleagues by making discoveries that advance our knowledge base and further scientific progress. There is nothing in creationism that furthers our knowledge base or advances scientific progress. On the contrary, it does quite the opposite. Furthermore, creationism isn't even science, though it pretends to be. It is a religious belief held by a radical minority. It misrepresents science and what scientists say or do. It misapplies the scientific method (I question how many creationists even understand the process). In effect, it "lies for Jesus". It argues from ignorance, and claims authories that support its tenents who are, upon further inspection, not in support of it at all. It is a religion of dishonest men and women who's only goal is to make everyone believe that the Bible, particularly the Book of Genesis, is a science book and that the Flintstones is a documentary.
Respect that? Not if my life depended on it.
The choice to work as "scientist" (so?)...or the subscription to some "belief about" how the universe got "kicked off" as per a particular interpretation of The Bible (so?)...should have no bearing what-so-ever as to the granting of a base level of respect to people.
If either side would withhold respect from the other, for those reasons...I suggest they first figure out how to get their act together and lose their bias and intolerance head-trips.
The choice to work as "scientist" (so?)...or the subscription to some "belief about" how the universe got "kicked off" as per a particular interpretation of The Bible (so?)...should have no bearing what-so-ever as to the granting of a base level of respect to people.
If either side would withhold respect from the other, for those reasons...I suggest they first figure out how to get their act together and lose their bias and intolerance head-trips.
Actually, it does to me. "If god did it" is what does it for it you, I have no problem with that other than the fact that it does seem to me to be a lazy interpretation, since it doesn't inspire one to search for truth, and that does not inspire respect in me for someone who thinks that way because I do not like lazy thinking.
"If that is how you want to invoke your evidence for god, then as science makes inevidable progress explaining the world around us, the concept of god becomes an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance that's getting smaller and smaller and smaller as time goes on. So, just be ready for that to happen - if that's how you want to come at the problem. So, that's simply the god of the gaps (argument) that's been around forever. I don't even mind, I don't even care if someone wants to say "you don't understand that. God did it". That doesn't even bother me. What would bother me is if you were so content in that answer that you no longer had curiosity to learn how it happened. The day you stop looking because you are content god did it I don't need you in the lab. You're useless on the frontier of understanding the nature of the world. And if the world had been ...I'm glad whoever those folks are there aren't that many of them, because if they dominated the world we'd still be living in caves. We would have never left the cave 'because there are mysterious things out there, and, no god, is doing that and you don't need to know that so don't even think about it'. Where would we be if their understanding of the world ruled the world? So I don't mind it but just don't prevent others from conducting that investigation."
-Neil deGrasse Tyson
The dogma in his dogmatism would come down to his fear of an open one-on-one debate - he's apparently afraid that it may burst his little bubble world that he's constructed for himself. So much so, that he refuses to engage in discussion even under cover of a pseudonym.
Tosh. You are just avoiding discussion by using ad hominem. Ignore the debate by attacking the debators. As the user above said, when the OP of a thread starts trolling their own thread, something is amiss.
You asked a question on this thread and you were given many good answers, including my own, which you have mostly ignored... going on an ad hominem tirade against anyone and everyone instead.
The user merely suggested that respect is earned, not granted and I fully agree. It is neither atheism, nor dogmatism, to suggest such a thing... despite your attempts to obfuscate your lack of arguments by pretending it is.
The only person refusing to "engage in discussion" here is you. You are ignoring peoples posts, and merely attacking them instead. Or you find some other way to cop out and run such as suggesting there is "no point" in replying to someone or worse something like this....
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigetmax24
Being that you're so dogmatic with respect to God's supposed non-existence, let's go ahead and debate that.
...And then AS SOON as the user did that you copped out with...
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigetmax24
We're off topic. Meet me in the "A reasonable argument for God?" thread.
You actually asked a user to talk about something and the second they did you called him off topic and ran. And you have the gall to question the integrity or cowardice of others? For shame.
You simply have no basis, or credibility, to be questioning the honesty or cowardice of others. You have displayed them all yourself. Why not try going back in the thread and actually replying to peoples posts.... like my own for example... instead of hiding behind personal insults and attacks on the posters instead?
Not going to happen. It's already been tried...years ago. Why try to reason with someone who refuses to be reasonable?
The same will apply to you as well if you prove to be unreasonable. I have no use for unsubstantiated nonsense speculation.
"Refuses to be reasonable"? That's funny. I promised a fair and reasonable response, but I see you have not changed. Did you mention the word afraid? Thought so.
Guys; he loses by default. Like he did in the past. He knows he can't argue any of those points, since as we all know, they're inarguable. And so, he defaults, and thinks this is a "WIN".
But frankly, it's just another shining example of what so many reasonable posters here have seen and noted. There is no other valid response from a devoted evangelical literalist Christian but to hit and run. Mostly run.
Purty Phunny! Well OK; thx, tiget, old pal. Your scientific illiteracy rears it's ugly head yet again. (Suggestion though: don't ever try to debate things you obviously know NOTHING about... n'Kay? You'll only hurt yourself!!!)
Sometimes, all yah gotta do is stand back and they fall down ahwbythemsewuuuuz
Actually, it does to me. "If god did it" is what does it for it you, I have no problem with that other than the fact that it does seem to me to be a lazy interpretation, since it doesn't inspire one to search for truth, and that does not inspire respect in me for someone who thinks that way because I do not like lazy thinking.
"If that is how you want to invoke your evidence for god, then as science makes inevidable progress explaining the world around us, the concept of god becomes an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance that's getting smaller and smaller and smaller as time goes on. So, just be ready for that to happen - if that's how you want to come at the problem. So, that's simply the god of the gaps (argument) that's been around forever. I don't even mind, I don't even care if someone wants to say "you don't understand that. God did it". That doesn't even bother me. What would bother me is if you were so content in that answer that you no longer had curiosity to learn how it happened. The day you stop looking because you are content god did it I don't need you in the lab. You're useless on the frontier of understanding the nature of the world. And if the world had been ...I'm glad whoever those folks are there aren't that many of them, because if they dominated the world we'd still be living in caves. We would have never left the cave 'because there are mysterious things out there, and, no god, is doing that and you don't need to know that so don't even think about it'. Where would we be if their understanding of the world ruled the world? So I don't mind it but just don't prevent others from conducting that investigation."
-Neil deGrasse Tyson
Like I said...about the bias and intolerance headtrips.
And that one can show evidence that others share the same bias and intolerance headtrips they do, doesn't then make it okay to have them...it just demonstrates that there our others that need to "lose their prejudice" as well.
See, what you don't "get"...is that the mindset of another as to how the universe came to be, or any other such matter...does not determine their quality of character...which should be the only basis on which a person is assessed.
If subscription to religious dogma...or concepts that lead one to believe in the existence of a "God", "Creator", "Great Spirit", "First Cause/Source Entity", "Higher Power", etc, was a reasonable basis to withhold respect...98% of the people that have ever lived would not be respected by the other 2%.
Got a "Reality Check" for N. Tyson: This very minute, even in 2011, there are hundreds and hundreds of millions of people living very primitively and haven't a clue about any technical scientific knowledge. Furthermore, most of the people that have ever existed, and many still today, have never had even a second of formal education and were/are completely illiterate, and they also believe(d) in God(s).
I SUBMIT: The most brilliant scientists and gifted scholars were/are no more worthy of "basic respect" than any of them.
Of course, it goes BOTH WAYS---It is the one...who is SO ARROGANT that they feel their belief in religious concepts, or knowledge of scientific theories, is in any way a basis to disrespect those who don't agree with them...from which respect should be withheld.
Interesting....Are you here to discuss, or to attack? Your last ten posts have been nothing but insults directed at other posters.
The problem with the kind of apologetics offered by this poster is that there's no substance aside from "I said it so it's true". He presupposes god or whatever else he believes and demands everyone else prove him wrong. Once you start asking him to demonstrate anything positive, there's nothing there. This fact has to be covered up by misleading questions, making up implied motives to his opponents and all sorts of other dishonest tactics to distract from the fact that his whole belief has nothing backing it up.
There's a good example in the last exchange. A simple "creationism isn't reasonable" post gets turned into the idea that the poster is a coward who is afraid of honest debate. Why? Because tigetmax knows he can't show that creationism is reasonable and address the point directly. But by implying that his opponent is unwilling to debate him, he's trying to convince people that it is reasonable to be creationist. After all, why would his opponent be afraid to debate if there weren't lots of facts in favor of creationism to be afraid of?
But the problem here (and it's pretty obvious in this case due to the clumsy approach) is that no one's afraid of anything, no matter how many times tigetmax tries to stuff words in other peoples mouths. This is pretty standard apologetics. First come the bunches of leading questions. Then he'll pretend that his accusation is obviously true and you'd be crazy to question him. You'll also get implications of persecution for not taking his word as gospel. The next step out of the playbook will be where he claims he already proven this is true so why are you bothering to ask again and again - but somehow he'll never be able to point out where the question was answered. All the while the fact remains that this is just an idea he's fabricated out of nothing for no reason.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
