|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: taiji2's complaint | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 425 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
What are you going to do when creationists claim natural laws as part of gods' creation. Where will you argue from when they claim your science as their own and propose you have misused it? The same thing that is done now; laugh at them, pat them on the head and then continue dealing with the adults and reality.Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 315 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
What are you going to do when creationists claim natural laws as their own? Well, my plan goes something like this: (1) Ask to see evidence for their claim.(2) Wait for them to produce evidence. (3) Die of old age. During phase 2 of the plan I may intermittently point out that a claim made without evidence is worthless, but I'll try not to be mean about it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
taiji2 Member (Idle past 3492 days) Posts: 124 From: Georgia, USA Joined: |
Dr. Adequate,
Ok, what is your evidence for what existed prior to the big bang. The purpose of debate IS to manifest truth. The purpose of debate is NOT to change someone's mind. The purpose of debate is NOT to tear down a person or make them look bad. The purpose of a debate is NOT to win.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
taiji2 Member (Idle past 3492 days) Posts: 124 From: Georgia, USA Joined: |
jar,
long time no see. that comment was as sensible as your first, welcome to buzzards row. your prattling will be seen with amusement but not much more. The purpose of debate IS to manifest truth. The purpose of debate is NOT to change someone's mind. The purpose of debate is NOT to tear down a person or make them look bad. The purpose of a debate is NOT to win.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 425 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
But it succinctly answered the question you asked.
Perhaps you need to try to find a less sophomoric series of questions.Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 315 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
Ok, what is your evidence for what existed prior to the big bang. I don't have any, which is why I don't claim to know about it. You see how this works? Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
taiji2 Member (Idle past 3492 days) Posts: 124 From: Georgia, USA Joined: |
Ok, what is your evidence for what existed prior to the big bang.
Dr. QAdequate writes: I don't have any, which is why I don't claim to know about it. You see how this works? Thank you for a rare honest answer from this forum. Should I decide to return and reengage the debate, a good place to begin will be at the beginning. There we can both admit we don't have evidence and go forward.The purpose of debate IS to manifest truth. The purpose of debate is NOT to change someone's mind. The purpose of debate is NOT to tear down a person or make them look bad. The purpose of a debate is NOT to win.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 315 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Thank you for a rare honest answer from this forum. You can't even thank me without being snide. You have in fact been answered on this forum in a way that has been completely honest, not to say forthright.
Should I decide to return and reengage the debate, a good place to begin will be at the beginning. Where would that be, then? If we don't know anything about what's before the Big Bang, then are we not obliged to start at the Big Bang?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
taiji2 writes:
Then think harder.
As to changing threads, I can think of no better thread title than taiji2's complaint taiji2 writes:
I'll gladly tell you where my arguments are if you'll discuss a bloody topic. The question you people here need to chew on is that if the natural laws in fact are a creation of god (or what ever term you wish to use), where does that leave your arguments? FYI, this forum has a subsection called The Great Debate for one-on-one discussions. I generally don't approve of such things but I might be willing to do a one-on-one with you if it will stop your whining about being mistreated.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stile Member Posts: 4295 From: Ontario, Canada Joined: |
Hi taiji2,
I wanted to say very I'm sorry for calling you a troll. You do not carry the defining characteristics of such. I never intended to upset you.I do hope you can find a way to stay around for discussion. Adding people is the only way for a discussion board to grow and your ideas are valued. As for your current question to other people:
The question you people here need to chew on is that if the natural laws in fact are a creation of god (or what ever term you wish to use), where does that leave your arguments? I think the answer is quite obvious: It would leave the arguments as being wrong. Of course, that's a really big "if"... and that 'if' is what all the curflufall is about.What do you think the best way is to have a discussion around this particular 'if'?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1285 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
taiji2 writes: The question you people here need to chew on is that if the natural laws in fact are a creation of god (or what ever term you wish to use), where does that leave your arguments? Stile writes: I think the answer is quite obvious: It would leave the arguments as being wrong. I think that answer presumes a lot. First, to accurately answer the question, we need to know, which arguments? There are millions of different arguments on this site. If we assume he's referring specifically to the argument over creationism and evolution, assuming that some deity is responsible for natural laws wouldn't change the argument one whit. The argument is based on evidence we see in nature, and that evidence demonstrates that life evolved on this planet. Whether that evolution followed laws created by a diety, laws that are simply inherent in the nature of reality, or laws created by a 15 year old in a computer lab doesn't change the analysis of the evidence or the conclusions we draw from it. Edited by subbie, : SubtitleRidicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
I think that answer presumes a lot. I'd take it a bit further than that. Regardless of reality, the conversation is on a debate site on which the question of whether God created the universe is a point of contention. Regardless of the truth, or how you came to accept something as truth, if that truth is being debated, don't expect your feelings to protect you from intense probing. That's not what a debate is about. In fact, in a debate, you should post as if the object were to convince a skeptical moderator. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1285 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
You're quite right, of course. I just wanted to take a stab at trying to move the debate forward. We'll see if he was genuine in wanting an answer to his question or simply using the lack of a satisfactory (to him) response as an excuse for stonewalling.
Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10085 Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
There we can both admit we don't have evidence and go forward. How do you go forward without any evidence?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2137 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
How do you go forward without any evidence? Easy! Rely on magic, superstition, wishful thinking, old wives tales, folklore, what the stars foretell and what the neighbors think, omens, public opinion, astromancy, spells, Ouija boards, anecdotes, Da Vinci codes, tarot cards, sorcery, seances, sore bunions, black cats, divine revelation, table tipping, witch doctors, crystals and crystal balls, numerology, divination, faith healing, miracles, palm reading, the unguessable verdict of history, magic tea leaves, new age mumbo-jumbo, hoodoo, voodoo and all that other weird stuff. To this list I would also add philosophy and theology. As Heinlein noted: Theology is never any help; it is searching in a dark cellar at midnight for a black cat that isn't there. Theologians can persuade themselves of anything. 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 "Multiculturalism" does not include the American culture. That is what it is against.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024