Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,808 Year: 3,065/9,624 Month: 910/1,588 Week: 93/223 Day: 4/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham
DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3101 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 541 of 824 (719696)
02-16-2014 5:08 PM
Reply to: Message 536 by hooah212002
02-16-2014 3:36 PM


Wow, never heard of this guy before and I lived in Johnson City, TN when I went to college. It does not surprise me though that there is a racist pastor in this area of the country.
Watching a video of him on YouTube, this guy doesn't open the Bible once. He glorifies a so-called -prophet over the Christian gospel. Most Christians would denounce this "pastor" and consider this a cult.
BTW, I am not discounting anything you say Hooah, just saying that this man does not speak for the majority of Christians out there. He is definitely one of the most racist pastors I have heard, and I have heard a few. Though there are worst.
My father, a one-time part-time minister told off the leaders of the church he just preached at in the Florida panhandle, because they ran off a black couple. My Mom grabed us out of Sunday school after my Dad gave them what for and we never went back to that church. There are still some churches like that. However, this is a small and hopefully disappearing fragment of churches.
BTW here is the full version of racist Donny Reagan's racist rant:
Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.
Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.
Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World
"In coming to understand anything we are rejecting the facts as they are for us in favour of the facts as they are. - C.S. Lewis, An Experiment in Criticism

This message is a reply to:
 Message 536 by hooah212002, posted 02-16-2014 3:36 PM hooah212002 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 565 by Dawn Bertot, posted 02-18-2014 12:10 AM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 167 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 542 of 824 (719702)
02-16-2014 6:58 PM
Reply to: Message 539 by marc9000
02-16-2014 4:28 PM


Re: This debate was typical creationist pap vs science
where do you think non-theists get their morals? The same evolutionary process that DID NOT give any morals to animals?
Yes. Although many animals show signs of morality, especially our cousins. Different species are different. We seem to be the most intelligent and maybe the most moral. So what?
How anyone seriously thinks prisoners can be trusted to answer questions truthfully is beyond me. Doesn't it make sense that prisoners are going to claim to be Christian in hopes of getting off easier because of it? That many of them could be skilled enough to fake out the chaplains that contribute to these findings?
I didn't claim it was definitive. But you obviously didn't read the link. they didn't ask the prisoners.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 539 by marc9000, posted 02-16-2014 4:28 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 543 of 824 (719703)
02-16-2014 6:59 PM
Reply to: Message 540 by Percy
02-16-2014 4:35 PM


Re: Trashing Darwin?
One more time: I get it from the quote from Darwin himself, just read it as it seems to present itself to me, as implying an EVOLUTIONARY distance between the civilized races and the "savage" races, which he hopes will be ended with an even higher evolution of the civilized making an even wider gap between them and the baboon "instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla. " As I read this he is saying there is at present not a very wide gap between the negro and the gorilla, and implying another evolutionary gap between the negro and the civilized races, which he hopes [abe:] will come to an end as the civilized races eliminate the savage races and become even more civilized. That's how I read what he wrote. [/abe]
Darwin himself may not have had racist attitudes. The point is that this paragraph reads to me as implying that his THEORY assumes evolutionary differences (which today we'd call genetic differences) between human groups.
The great break in the organic chain between man and his nearest allies, which cannot be bridged over by any extinct or living species, has often been advanced as a grave objection to the belief that man is descended from some lower form; but this objection will not appear of much weight to those who, from general reasons, believe in the general principle of evolution. Breaks often occur in all parts of the series, some being wide, sharp and defined, others less so in various degrees; as between the orang and its nearest alliesbetween the Tarsius and the other Lemuridae between the elephant, and in a more striking manner between the Ornithorhynchus or Echidna, and all other mammals. But these breaks depend merely on the number of related forms which have become extinct.
At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now ; between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.;
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 540 by Percy, posted 02-16-2014 4:35 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 544 by Coyote, posted 02-16-2014 7:53 PM Faith has replied
 Message 547 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 02-16-2014 8:23 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 549 by PaulK, posted 02-17-2014 1:23 AM Faith has replied
 Message 557 by Percy, posted 02-17-2014 7:31 AM Faith has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2105 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 544 of 824 (719705)
02-16-2014 7:53 PM
Reply to: Message 543 by Faith
02-16-2014 6:59 PM


Re: Trashing Darwin?
The terms "civilized" and "savage" refer to cultural levels, not evolutionary ones. A third term in that series would be "barbarian."
Sorry to disappoint you.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1

This message is a reply to:
 Message 543 by Faith, posted 02-16-2014 6:59 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 545 by Faith, posted 02-16-2014 8:04 PM Coyote has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 545 of 824 (719706)
02-16-2014 8:04 PM
Reply to: Message 544 by Coyote
02-16-2014 7:53 PM


Re: Trashing Darwin?
The context suggests evolutionary differences, and I won't be disappointed if that's not what he meant, but it reads like that to me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 544 by Coyote, posted 02-16-2014 7:53 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 546 by Coyote, posted 02-16-2014 8:22 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 558 by Percy, posted 02-17-2014 7:35 AM Faith has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2105 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 546 of 824 (719707)
02-16-2014 8:22 PM
Reply to: Message 545 by Faith
02-16-2014 8:04 PM


Re: Trashing Darwin?
The context suggests evolutionary differences, and I won't be disappointed if that's not what he meant, but it reads like that to me.
The terms savage, barbarian, and civilized were in common usage in the 19th century and described cultural conditions.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1

This message is a reply to:
 Message 545 by Faith, posted 02-16-2014 8:04 PM Faith has not replied

  
DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3101 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


(1)
Message 547 of 824 (719708)
02-16-2014 8:23 PM
Reply to: Message 543 by Faith
02-16-2014 6:59 PM


Re: Trashing Darwin?
As I read this he is saying there is at present not a very wide gap between the negro and the gorilla,
You are reading a lot into this. He is saying there is a gap, he does not specify how wide it is, just that in the future, there may be even a wider gap.
and implying another evolutionary gap between the negro and the civilized races, which he hopes [abe:] will come to an end as the civilized races eliminate the savage races and become even more civilized. That's how I read what he wrote. [/abe]
He never says anything about "hoping" that the civilized races will eliminate the savage races. He speculates that this may happen in the future based on the observation of the colonization of less civilized cultures in Africa, Australia and other location. He is not providing a justification for this, he is just stating the obvious. That more "civilized", more accurately technologically advanced, cultures displace or exterminate less "civilized" cultures, just as the Europeans did with Native Americans, Africans and Australian Aborigines.
Typical spin from you, reading into it what you want it to say.
Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World
"In coming to understand anything we are rejecting the facts as they are for us in favour of the facts as they are. - C.S. Lewis, An Experiment in Criticism

This message is a reply to:
 Message 543 by Faith, posted 02-16-2014 6:59 PM Faith has not replied

  
shalamabobbi
Member (Idle past 2848 days)
Posts: 397
Joined: 01-10-2009


Message 548 of 824 (719709)
02-16-2014 8:31 PM


What he promotes as important competes with other things that are important. He promotes science to a level that reduces other important things to almost nothingness.
Wouldn't it be cool if we could divide our country in two, those who side with Ham/marc and those who side with Nye. Let each side prosper and make progress in accord with their talents and abilities. This debate would finally come to an end along with the retarding religious influence that currently gets a free pass in the US.

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


(1)
Message 549 of 824 (719717)
02-17-2014 1:23 AM
Reply to: Message 543 by Faith
02-16-2014 6:59 PM


Re: Trashing Darwin?
quote:
One more time: I get it from the quote from Darwin himself, just read it as it seems to present itself to me, as implying an EVOLUTIONARY distance between the civilized races and the "savage" races, which he hopes will be ended with an even higher evolution of the civilized making an even wider gap between them and the baboon "instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla. "
Even if that's the intended meaning, it would still only reflect existing views. However, you must ALSO note this part:
At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated.
The loss of chimpanzees and gorillas would indeed widen the evolutionary "gap" between humans and living apes, just as Darwin said.
quote:
Darwin himself may not have had racist attitudes. The point is that this paragraph reads to me as implying that his THEORY assumes evolutionary differences (which today we'd call genetic differences) between human groups.
Faith I understand that you wish to smear the theory more than the person (not that that makes it any less immoral). However there's simply nothing there to back up your claim. The idea of racial differences isn't even clearly expressed, let alone attributed to the cause.
If Darwin WISHED to claim that racial differences were derived from theory then there would be an explicit claim. Although how he could make such a claim is something of a mystery - and one that you really should have considered if you actually cared about the truth. However, you have no explicit claim from Darwin, you have no understanding of how the theory even could be inherently racist, you have nothing to back your smear.
How about actually showing some honesty and retracting your obviously false claims ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 543 by Faith, posted 02-16-2014 6:59 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 550 by Faith, posted 02-17-2014 1:49 AM PaulK has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 550 of 824 (719718)
02-17-2014 1:49 AM
Reply to: Message 549 by PaulK
02-17-2014 1:23 AM


Re: Trashing Darwin?
Oddly enough I have NO wish in this matter at all, I merely honestly read that paragraph to imply that the differences between the civilized and savage races are evolutionary differences, same as they are between humans and apes. Honestly that's the truth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 549 by PaulK, posted 02-17-2014 1:23 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 551 by PaulK, posted 02-17-2014 2:24 AM Faith has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


(2)
Message 551 of 824 (719719)
02-17-2014 2:24 AM
Reply to: Message 550 by Faith
02-17-2014 1:49 AM


Re: Trashing Darwin?
quote:
Oddly enough I have NO wish in this matter at all, I merely honestly read that paragraph to imply that the differences between the civilized and savage races are evolutionary differences, same as they are between humans and apes. Honestly that's the truth.
But that isn't all. That's not even the main issue I was objecting to.
You're trying to tar the Theory of Evolution as racist.
e.g. you claimed:
The point is that this paragraph reads to me as implying that his THEORY assumes evolutionary differences (which today we'd call genetic differences) between human groups.
Differences are generally observed (or in this case "observed" through the lens of preexisting racial views) rather than derived from theory.
IF we had a VERY good idea of the evolutionary relationship between two populations AND the selective pressures on them we MIGHT be able to come up with some (uncertain) predictions about the differences between them, but that's rarely the case and observation is so much easier.
So, there's really no way that you could get the idea that Caucasians are superior to Africans from the theory. The most you could do is to START with the idea of racial superiority and then appeal to the theory to "explain" it. But then the racism wouldn't be coming from the theory...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 550 by Faith, posted 02-17-2014 1:49 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 552 by Faith, posted 02-17-2014 2:26 AM PaulK has replied
 Message 559 by Percy, posted 02-17-2014 7:39 AM PaulK has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 552 of 824 (719720)
02-17-2014 2:26 AM
Reply to: Message 551 by PaulK
02-17-2014 2:24 AM


Re: Trashing Darwin?
The point was that the PARAGRAPH presents the THEORY in that light. Everything I've said is based on how I read what that paragraph says. It suggests to me that that was DARWIN's view of the theory at that time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 551 by PaulK, posted 02-17-2014 2:24 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 553 by PaulK, posted 02-17-2014 2:33 AM Faith has replied
 Message 561 by saab93f, posted 02-17-2014 8:25 AM Faith has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 553 of 824 (719721)
02-17-2014 2:33 AM
Reply to: Message 552 by Faith
02-17-2014 2:26 AM


Re: Trashing Darwin?
quote:
The point was that the PARAGRAPH presents the THEORY in that light. Everything I've said is based on how I read what that paragraph says. It suggests to me that that was DARWIN's view of the theory at that time.
There's nothing in the paragraph to suggest that the differences are derived from the theory and not simply assumed, or held to be observed.
(Indeed it should be obvious to anyone familiar with the actual theory that the loss of chimps and gorillas etc would be far more significant to opening up an evolutionary gap between humans and the surviving apes.)
So can you explain why you are reading the paragraph as claiming something which it clearly doesn't say, and can't be true anyway ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 552 by Faith, posted 02-17-2014 2:26 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 554 by Faith, posted 02-17-2014 2:51 AM PaulK has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 554 of 824 (719722)
02-17-2014 2:51 AM
Reply to: Message 553 by PaulK
02-17-2014 2:33 AM


Re: Trashing Darwin?
Well, I've already indicated what I see in the paragraph that suggests Darwin has an evolutionary explanation for the differences between the races as he has for the differences between the species.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 553 by PaulK, posted 02-17-2014 2:33 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 555 by PaulK, posted 02-17-2014 3:31 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 556 by Tangle, posted 02-17-2014 3:53 AM Faith has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 555 of 824 (719723)
02-17-2014 3:31 AM
Reply to: Message 554 by Faith
02-17-2014 2:51 AM


Re: Trashing Darwin?
quote:
Well, I've already indicated what I see in the paragraph that suggests Darwin has an evolutionary explanation for the differences between the races as he has for the differences between the species.
Which wouldn't be racist in any way. The racism comes from the false idea that one race is better than another, which you can't get from the ToE.
But you claimed that the differences were assumed from the theory, which isn't true.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 554 by Faith, posted 02-17-2014 2:51 AM Faith has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024