My word, that represents a new low for whob. If all he can do is turn around and try and make a serious accusation like that simplyt because just about everyone else see what he spwes as total gibberish... then that is truly feeble. It is sheer desperation.
The only self-deluded one here is whob, who abandons all logic and rationality when it comes to this subject to try and make it fit his skewed beliefs.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
My word, that represents a new low for whob. If all he can do is turn around and try and make a serious accusation like that simplyt because just about everyone else see what he spwes as total gibberish... then that is truly feeble. It is sheer desperation.The only self-deluded one here is whob, who abandons all logic and rationality when it comes to this subject to try and make it fit his skewed beliefs.
It's easier to drop the "group think" bomb and leave, cry out that others can't think for themselves, or insult people and try and get a cheap laugh than to defend your belief system. Especially when the last time you defended it you had to resort to lies and misrepresentation of the truth to try and prove a point.
Too bad that no one found it funny and just found it highly pathetic - and sad - that he could not come up with anything better with which to defend his beliefs than to accuse all of us of groupthinking.
But then again, since we all agree on this, he's probably going to come in and accuse us of 'groupthink' again! Oh dear.
But then again, I see this groupthink logic works both ways -- never has he accused anyone who agrees with HIM of groupthink, I have noticed.
Originally posted by Lana
Too bad that no one found it funny and just found it highly pathetic - and sad - that he could not come up with anything better with which to defend his beliefs than to accuse all of us of groupthinking.
Instead of defending his beliefs I believe he started a new thread where people could defend their beliefs in how "Humanism/Neo Darwinism and their Manifestos..How have they benefited modern society? "
Maybe it is a valid attempt at understanding. But I have a feeling that it is more of an attempt to put those who believe in evolutionary theory on the defensive in order that their points can be attacked from the safe position of not having to defend creationism. But I could be wrong.
Originally posted by Tptmanno1
I love how the only think Who can post is some childish remark about us being groupthinker's or whatever the hell the plural is. When the true irony is that all of it points right back to him and even though he will probably read what I am writing right now he wont take the time and effort to actually try and prove me wrong or dissuade me, just post some other pointless thing that has nothing to do with anything and doesn't have any bearing on what we are talking about...
Bring it on...
Rules 1,5, and 7 proven above....
(1) An illusion of invulnerability, shared by most or all the members, which creates excessive optimism and encourages taking extreme risks.(ie "Bring it on"..I'm ready for ya..lol)
(5) Direct pressure on any member who expresses strong arguments against any of the group's stereotypes, illusions, or commitments, making clear that this type of dissent is contrary to what is expected of all loyal members.
(7) A shared illusion of unanimity concerning judgements conforming to the majority view (partly resulting from self-censorship of deviations, augmented by the false assumption that silence means consent).(ie He won't try to respond or prove me wrong..that means..I'm right!!!)
Originally posted by Ushgarak
My word, that represents a new low for whob. If all he can do is turn around and try and make a serious accusation like that simplyt because just about everyone else see what he spwes as total gibberish... then that is truly feeble. It is sheer desperation.The only self-deluded one here is whob, who abandons all logic and rationality when it comes to this subject to try and make it fit his skewed beliefs.
Rules 4 and 8 proven by above quote..
(4) Stereotyped views of rivals and enemies as too evil to warrant genuine attempts to negotiate, or as too weak and stupid to counter whatever risky attempts are made to defeat their purposes.(ie "new low for whob..he spews gibberish..etc"😉
(8) The emergence of self-appointed mindguards - members who protect the group from adverse information. that might shatter their shared complacency about the effectiveness and morality of their decisions.
*note..The OP represents the "mindguard" in this particular scenario...
Originally posted by Lana
Too bad that no one found it funny and just found it highly pathetic - and sad - that he could not come up with anything better with which to defend his beliefs than to accuse all of us of groupthinking.But then again, since we all agree on this, he's probably going to come in and accuse us of 'groupthink' again! Oh dear.
Rule 2 proven by above...
(2) Collective efforts to rationalise in order to discount warnings which might lead the members to reconsider their assumptions before they recommit themselves to their past policy decisions.
*in this case..the warning being..that the group embodies what is known as a group think process.
Originally posted by KharmaDog
Instead of defending his beliefs I believe he started a new thread where people could defend their beliefs in how "Humanism/Neo Darwinism and their Manifestos..How have they benefited modern society? "Maybe it is a valid attempt at understanding. But I have a feeling that it is more of an attempt to put those who believe in evolutionary theory on the defensive in order that their points can be attacked from the safe position of not having to defend creationism. But I could be wrong.
Rules 3 and 6 proven....
3) An unquestioned belief in the group's inherent morality, inclining the members to ignore the ethical or moral consequences of their decisions.
***note..Science is based on the "logical inference" that the evidence points too, not one's personal "belief."
(6) Self-censorship of deviations from the apparent group consensus, reflecting each member's inclination to minimise to himself the importance of his doubts and counter-arguments.
Ex of Rule 6 translated from K-dog's post..
K-Dog: Maybe he is trying to get an understanding..but wait...then again he's not..he's trying to challeng our Belief!!!
Perhaps you all should re-examine the content of what you've just posted..using the rules that I supplied to you in my previous post..
Moving on...K-Dog...why not just go to the thread that I've created..and discuss the the other topic. As of now..by giving no response to the subject of the "Humanism/Neo Darwinism" thread..I'm assuming you/others can not come up with any real benefits..I could be wrong however..but if I am...post your response in the correct thread, and I will be happy to disccuss..
Originally posted by whobdamandog
Ex of Rule 6 translated from K-dog's post..K-Dog: Maybe he is trying to get an understanding..but wait...then again he's not..he's trying to challeng our Belief!!!
Perhaps you all should re-examine the content of what you've just posted..using the rules that I supplied to you in my previous post..
So we should all re-examine our posts to your standard? Compelling arguement.
Originally posted by whobdamandog
Moving on...K-Dog...why not just go to the thread that I've created..and discuss the the other topic. As of now..by giving no response to the subject of the "Humanism/Neo Darwinism" thread..I'm assuming you/others can not come up with any real benefits..I could be wrong however..but if I am...post your response in the correct thread, and I will be happy to disccuss..
I have avoided going to your thread, other than that one post, because I have very little interest to hear what you have to say. This is for two reasons. First being that in the past you have proven to be a childish and irrational person who when things don't go their own way either complain that everyone is rallying agains them or posts childish rebuttles. Second reason being that you have been exposed as one who lies and distorts information to try prove your point. A debate with such a person is useless as nothing you say can be respected as it may all be based on a lie once again.
As for others not posting in your thread it may be ore because they see the futility of dealing with such a person also or the fact that you have lost alot of respect on this board with your behaviour or any number of reasons. Or they may see it as the trap that I think it may be, if that is the case, why bother with the childishness?
Whatever their reasons for not participating, I doubt it is because can not come up with any real benefits, but if that makes you feel better about yourself and your beliefs, then feel free to believe it.
whob, you are just going to take whatever we say and make it fit your crappy lazy attacks on us. It's truly contemptible.
If there are stereotypes here around you, then it is simply because you have created them by always acting the same way.
All anyone has to do is read your posts to see how much ill-0informed, irrational gibberish they contain. You condemn yourself further every time you speak.
All you can do in this thread, which contains a perfectly valid satiricial refutation of your views, is moan and whine like child crying out "Everyone is all against, me, waaaaaaaaaaaah...". As yerssot says, it is just an enormous dodge, it is very cowardly, and it has no redeeming value whatsoever.
And you expect anyone to take you seriously? You expect your silly little rules and throwaway uses of the word 'proof' to make any difference to how dumb you look or how poor your arguments are? You make out my comments to be some sort of evasive tactic. In fact, they are the simpler option- the shoe fits.
There is no value or sense or logic or purpose in anything you are posting. If you want to be negotiated with, post something worthy of negotiation and reason to comments made about it rationally and with proper use of logic. Crying into a thread like this with ridiculous comments like the ones you have made above serve only to prove why everything said about you here is, in fact, not the product of some crappy phenomenon that in the La-La land you like to inhabit is the reason everyone is against you...
... but is in fact simply the truth. Everyone is against you, whob (as opposed to being so much against plenty of other people who hold similar views to you around here) because you are being such a continuously unreasonable person. When so many people are against you like that- look at your own behaviour, not ours.
Do not just keep coming into threads quoting rules like that and expect them to be treated as intelligent posts, whob.
You are a dreadful ambassador for your views, and just by posting here in the way you are, you are turning people away from your views towards those of others. They all see how irrational, ridiculous and ineffectual you are, and the straightforward conclusion from that is that you are wrong. You are killing the idea of Intelligent Design as an acceptable concept simply by your conduct in defence of it. You are making it happen. Start engaging intelligently instead of with the posts you have made here, and that might stop, but there is little hope for you and your views otherwise
That's also total gibberish. You do not need a witness to Evolution to make it a working theory.
Seriously, some people HAVE to make a proper effort to understand how science works. The entire point of what the original post was satirising was the idea that something can be seen as invalid simply because no-one can go back and observe it again. That is what it is saying- even though the effect that broke the kneecap is now unobservable, the evidence obviously points to such a breakage being the cause and to disbelief it on such grounds is ludicrous. That you missed that is a very bad statement on your ability to understand.
There is plentiful evidence for Evolution, from the fossil record to island biosphered. We are suffused in it. It is all around us. All behaviour we obsevre from animals is consistent with it. The scientific community is united in its acceptable of the broad idea- much as it mauls itself arguing over the details.
The lack of a time travel machine to direclty witness it is totally irrelevant. The theroy stands- by any measure of rational science, it is good.
Unlike ID, which is not scientific at all, simply a philisophival belief on the engine behind evolution.
The ignorance shown by some as to the nature of the scientific method astounds me.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
That's also total gibberish. You do not need a witness to Evolution to make it a working theory.Seriously, some people HAVE to make a proper effort to understand how science works. The entire point of what the original post was satirising was the idea that something can be seen as invalid simply because no-one can go back and observe it again. That is what it is saying- even though the effect that broke the kneecap is now unobservable, the evidence obviously points to such a breakage being the cause and to disbelief it on such grounds is ludicrous. That you missed that is a very bad statement on your ability to understand.
There is plentiful evidence for Evolution, from the fossil record to island biosphered. We are suffused in it. It is all around us. All behaviour we obsevre from animals is consistent with it. The scientific community is united in its acceptable of the broad idea- much as it mauls itself arguing over the details.
The lack of a time travel machine to direclty witness it is totally irrelevant. The theroy stands- by any measure of rational science, it is good.
Unlike ID, which is not scientific at all, simply a philisophival belief on the engine behind evolution.
The ignorance shown by some as to the nature of the scientific method astounds me.
My response was a criticism of the "wit" displayed by Darth Revan.
There is physical proof of the process of evolution in the examples I gave above. And what difference does the fact people saw it make? People are probably the most fallible of all sources as far as sicence is concerned.
The only proof after the kneecap breaking incident that it happened is the broken kneecap and the implement that obviously caused it. You ndon't need a witness to know what happened.
The same principle applies to evolution. The details are far more complex than a simple leg breaking, but the basic situation is identical. Everything we see and observe is consistent with evolution. It is also being continuously improved abd revised as more information comes to light, but never has the basic idea been contradicted. And if it ever was? Then if the science shows that, so be it. But as it stands... the science shows evolution.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
There is physical proof of the process of evolution in the examples I gave above. And what difference does the fact people saw it make? People are probably the most fallible of all sources as far as sicence is concerned.The only proof after the kneecap breaking incident that it happened is the broken kneecap and the implement that obviously caused it. You ndon't need a witness to know what happened.
The same principle applies to evolution. The details are far more complex than a simple leg breaking, but the basic situation is identical. Everything we see and observe is consistent with evolution. It is also being continuously improved abd revised as more information comes to light, but never has the basic idea been contradicted. And if it ever was? Then if the science shows that, so be it. But as it stands... the science shows evolution.
What probably amuses me the most about this thread is that if whob had created a thread in this manner, there would be hell to pay. In fact, it, and he, would be bashed to no end and the thread would more likely than not be closed for trolling.
If whob gets negative reactions then it is because of the pointless and irrational way that he posts- his posts in this thread which have no value to them whatsoever are a case in point, That's why there would be a difference. As it is, the thread on Humanism he just opened started with a fair point and so long as he stays that way I'll debate in it in kind. But don't go thinbking that any difference in attitude is down to anything else other than the behaviour of whob himself.
All proof can be construed as different things, That is irrelevant. What is relevant is that the best explanation of all observed evidence at this point is in Evolution- in one of many forms, Evolution being a broad sphere. Does that make it 100% perfect? No. It will be forever be revised and improved and no-one can say how much more we will know in, say, a century. One of the central tenets of science is to be always open to a superior explanation if it can be demonstrated to be so; this is what makes science different from faith, which believes in a single explanation regardless of where the evidence points. This is the largest fundamental difference between evolution and faith and why attempts to label evolution as a faith are futile.
But it IS science. It is following the exact scientific process, and that is why it is taught in science class.
ID is philosophy only. There is nothing wrong with philosophy, but it is an idea that does not follow the sceintific process. No evidence for it exists at all, only conjugation. It might be right, but then so might Descartes' idea of a Demon controlling everyone. Until evidence following the scientific process for them emerges, Descartes and ID don't belong in science.
So when comparing the two, on scientific terms, evolution wins, and that is the crux of the whole point. They are not altneraitve ideas- they are fundamentally different things.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
If whob gets negative reactions then it is because of the pointless and irrational way that he posts- his posts in this thread which have no value to them whatsoever are a case in point, That's why there would be a difference. As it is, the thread on Humanism he just opened started with a fair point and so long as he stays that way I'll debate in it in kind. But don't go thinbking that any difference in attitude is down to anything else other than the behaviour of whob himself.
I'm sure you'll respond to that as "evolution has proof, intelligent design does not; it's entirely different when comparing that to the beliefs of Islam".
No, it is not. If the thread were on the beliefs of Muslims vs. evolution, the thread-starter would be flamed. You cannot deny this.
I'm not debating the relative merits of evolution and intelligent design (and, God--that is, if He even existed 🙄 --forbid that I mention creationism). I'm sighing in exasperation at what our society has bred.
A. I liked that, made me laugh.
B. What are you talking about, FeceMan? Whob talks shit pretty consistently
C. I haven't seen many Muslim - Evolution debates, nor Muslim - ID debates. Not saying they're not out there, but I wouldn't find a satire of that nearly as funny because I haven't seen any Muslim arguments against evolution, to be honest.
Will someone explain to me how what I posted was trolling? I thought it was funny. Just because you didn't, and it made you angry, doesn't mean I was purposely trying to piss you off.
And as long as we're talking about Muslims, who's to say the ID Advocate in the joke wasn't a Muslim? You act as if people must think it's funny because they don't like Christians, when it never actually specified any religious beliefs.
Originally posted by Darth Revan
Will someone explain to me how what I posted was trolling? I thought it was funny. Just because you didn't, and it made you angry, doesn't mean I was purposely trying to piss you off.And as long as we're talking about Muslims, who's to say the ID Advocate in the joke wasn't a Muslim? You act as if people must think it's funny because they don't like Christians, when it never actually specified any religious beliefs.
It isn't, people just have a poor idea of what "trolling" actually is.
Originally posted by crazylozer
LOL to Intelligent Design.On a different note, have you ever actually met one of those people who go door-to-door? Seeing them try to disprove science on a regular basis is some good old-fashioned real world comedy.
It is funny, but it's sad too. See, so many people here in the United States believe in this crap that they are getting together and trying to take us back 100 years. That's why I get so pissed about the debate, what it represents. I have no concern for what someone else believes, until it gets in the way of life in this country....in this world for that matter. And this argument reminds me of that, everytime I read a thread about it.
I don't care if you believe that Santa Claus created the world, or lightening striking primordial goo and then we showed up was how it all started. I certainly look down on the idea of creationism and intelligent design, but not on the people who feel it's how they want to explain this world to themselves. But, so often, people that lend it credibility take it so far that they think Louisiana was wiped out by Jesus because it was a sinful place...they don't want human beings in this country to have equal rights....they want Jesus rules to govern our way of life....they want god to sit on the supreme court
It makes me sick.