Comments by 5keptical

Comment #258895 by 5keptical on October 2, 2008 at 1:20 pm

Rational_Skeptic: I remember listening to that CBC program... try looking in the archive for the "Ideas" show. It may have been one of the Massey lectures.

There was another excellent lecture (by King?) with the major theme that "we are the stories we tell ourselves". Everybody has a view of themselves, part of an internal narrative that defines who or what they are.

You won't be able to change a creationist's mind until you can address the problem that evidence that contradicts that story just won't be accepted because it breaks their core view of who they are.

And it's clear from the Glen's account that creationists as a group work very hard to keep that association strong, coupling it with social shunning and bullying.

Thus xtian scientist like Miller are probably very important in reducing the fundamentalist influence on mainstream xians.

But it may also mean that once a certain point has been reached only massive de-programming can bring a fundamentalist out of the fundamentalist mindset.

2. Darwin still causing waves after 150 years

Comment #189016 by 5keptical on June 5, 2008 at 8:01 am

I like the following succinct response to the cretinists dodge that scientists need as much faith as the

"I don't have to believe, I can check!"

I don't have to have faith that a building will stand up... I can measure and test and determine. I can even go back and redo each of the experiments and findings of decades of engineers and scientists that are used to construct that building. The same goes for evolution.

And you, mr faithhead could do so as well - if you made the effort. Therein lies the difference.

3. The Challenge of the New Creationism

Comment #187512 by 5keptical on June 2, 2008 at 9:19 am

For those having problems playing the video, try using VLC ( http://www.videolan.org/vlc/ ).

After installing the appropriate version, copy the link and use an open VLC player to access the stream.

BTW, I found VLC to be far more reliable and able to open a far greater variety of videos than any other player, plus it's free software under the GNU license.

4. A natural selection

Comment #179994 by 5keptical on May 14, 2008 at 4:28 am

The United Church of Canada is quite progressive and hence is reviled by most of the others.

A friend's marriage ceremony was presided over by a long-time friend of the family who is an openly gay female minister of the UC.

Not every "religious" person is closed-minded or non-rational (it just seems that way sometimes...)

5. Anti-Evolution Film Misappropriates the Holocaust

Comment #175118 by 5keptical on May 4, 2008 at 1:18 pm

I concur with windweaver.

Al Rawandi clearly has some ideological axe to grind.
Bye-bye Al, you've dropped below my credibility limit.

6. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #168591 by 5keptical on April 25, 2008 at 8:18 am

Comment #168524 by 5keptical

This thread should be preserved to illustrate the tactics of the IDiots and how not to deal with them.

As should your post.

Just to clarify, are you agreeing with with my post, or are you saying it is another example of how not to deal with the IDiots? If the latter, why so?

7. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #168524 by 5keptical on April 25, 2008 at 7:23 am

This thread should be preserved to illustrate the tactics of the IDiots and how not to deal with them.

All TruthID and his ilk are doing are throwing stones at evolution (and religions are very experienced and comfortable with stoning things challenge their insular beliefs)

The only necessary response is point out that disproving evolution (1 + 1=2.0000001) does not provide any evidence for ID (1 + 1=999). Stop there

Get their notion of what they believe in and treat that to scientific scrutiny and rational thought. Stop being on the defensive all the time.

Note that TruthID never, ever responded to requests for his definitions and actually shut up for a while until folk started feeding him again.

TruthID:

In your own words, what does ID postulate? (i.e. do you understand what you cut and paste from ID sites)
Present one testable, falsifiable hypothesis arising directly from ID. (i.e. you understand something about how science works)
Present evidence supporting that hypothesis (i.e. some science has been done)

Still waiting.

8. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #167886 by 5keptical on April 24, 2008 at 12:01 pm

TruthID:

In regards to your agriculture analogy, does not intelligence come into play?

It's an analogy. One uses analogies to explain concepts, not as evidence. This is a Fallacy of Necessity (among others).

Try again:

1. In your own words, what does ID postulate? (i.e. do you understand what you cut and paste from ID sites)

2. Present one testable, falsifiable hypothesis arising directly from ID. (i.e. you understand something about how science works)

3. Present evidence supporting that hypothesis (i.e. some science has been done and reality does not contradict your hypothesis)

Still waiting.

9. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #167836 by 5keptical on April 24, 2008 at 11:17 am

epeeist

5keptical (fingers have problems with this, American spelling with a 5 on the front).

Canadian.. please! The username Skeptical was taken so the "leet" (or L337) speak idiom of using '5' instead of 'S' let me get around that.

And BTW, thirty years ago I was on a varsity fencing team. Sadly, women and those pesky new-fangled computers distracted me from my true calling.

10. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #167774 by 5keptical on April 24, 2008 at 10:15 am

HTruthiness is back and we have another opportunity to observe the wild TARD (Theist Against Rational Discourse) in action. Don't rise to the bait, let's see how long he can avoid answering a direct question.

TruthID:

1. In your own words, what does ID postulate? (i.e. do you understand what you cut and paste from ID sites)

2. Present one testable, falsifiable hypothesis arising directly from ID. (i.e. you understand something about how science works)

3. Present evidence supporting that hypothesis (i.e. some science has been done)

Still waiting.

11. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #167622 by 5keptical on April 24, 2008 at 8:09 am

All this talk of creating a separate space for rational discourse is all very well and good, but feeds into the IDiot's notion of science as populated by elitist snobs afraid to confront their critics. Not rational - but that takes training that many don't have and some are incapable of.

The lurkers and observers of these conversations are more important than those incapable of rational discourse.

We can view this site as living laboratory of how to deal with the rhetorical devices of the IDiots, and by example show others how to do it.

For example, I'm very interested in the little experiment with TruthID. After repeated requests to provide specifics about the nature of ID, the little s/he/it has dissappeared.

If this approach works (and is not just a proof by exhaustion), we should try it with others and perhaps it will not take 500 comments to deal with them.

12. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #167382 by 5keptical on April 24, 2008 at 1:21 am

Gentlemen! Gentlemen!

As fun as it might be to poke fun at the fundies, it only fuels their ire. You're focusing on the bluster instead of the man behind the curtain.

Be disciplined. Be relentless. Pull back the covering to expose the fearful, bible-clutching and hate-filled thinking they all share.

I'm off to bed here in Vancouver, but Truthy... we're all still waiting....

1. In your own words, what does ID postulate? (i.e. do you understand what you cut and paste from ID sites)

2. Present one testable, falsifiable hypothesis arising directly from ID. (i.e. you understand something about how science works)

3. Present evidence supporting that hypothesis (i.e. some science has been done to show that reality is not at odds with your models)

13. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #167356 by 5keptical on April 24, 2008 at 12:11 am

Ok folks, imagine this if you will...

TruthID hunched over the keyboard, fingers flying, sweat dripping while s/he/it skims through site after cretinous site desperately searching for something solid from the ID drivel.

The brow is furrowed... there's nothing s/he/it can cut and paste! There's nothing to just blindly deny with falsehoods and deception.

S/he/it tries to string together a coherent sentence or two to communicate what ID actually means - only to discover s/he/it doesn't actually know!

And that's just the first question!

Please try again...

1. In your own words, what does ID postulate? (i.e. do you understand what you cut and paste from ID sites)

2. Present one testable, falsifiable hypothesis arising directly from ID. (i.e. you understand something about how science works)

3. Present evidence supporting that hypothesis (i.e. some science has been done)

14. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #167350 by 5keptical on April 23, 2008 at 11:24 pm

Quine: See - you can't argue with the irrational.

Diacanu: Do you think TTID's prevarications are endless? How many more times can he avoid answering?

TruthID:
There is only one alternative to evolution. And that is ID

Another logical fallacy: The False Dilemma

Please try again...

1. In your own words, what does ID postulate? (i.e. do you understand what you cut and paste from ID sites)

2. Present one testable, falsifiable hypothesis arising directly from ID. (i.e. you understand something about how science works)

3. Present evidence supporting that hypothesis (i.e. some science has been done)

Still waiting.

15. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #167338 by 5keptical on April 23, 2008 at 11:05 pm

TruthID:
Can't understand what I have presented? Why don't you go to the Fisher Price forum. It might be more to your liking

Ad hominem - try again. Cut and paste from your own comments if you think they actually address the following questions:

1. In your own words, what does ID postulate? (i.e. do you understand what you cut and paste from ID sites)

2. Present one testable, falsifiable hypothesis arising directly from ID. (i.e. you understand something about how science works)

3. Present evidence supporting that hypothesis (i.e. some science has been done)

Still waiting.

16. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #167327 by 5keptical on April 23, 2008 at 10:48 pm

Hey TheTruthID:

1. In your own words, what does ID postulate? (i.e. do you understand what you cut and paste from ID sites)

2. Present one testable, falsifiable hypothesis arising directly from ID. (i.e. you understand something about how science works)

3. Present evidence supporting that hypothesis (i.e. some science has been done)

Still waiting.

17. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #167310 by 5keptical on April 23, 2008 at 9:55 pm

Why is everyone still engaging this truthID person? Is anything useful coming out of this?

Yes!

TruthID is a particularly rabid example of the rhetorical tactics we face from the gibbering ID proponents.

Recognize them early and realize defending rational thought is not going to work. They have no evidence, they have no theory. Attack that.

In your own words, what does ID postulate?
Present one testable, falsifiable hypothesis arising directly from ID.
Present evidence supporting that hypothesis

Insist on this. Don't be diverted. Watch them run.

18. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #167301 by 5keptical on April 23, 2008 at 9:21 pm

Wow... You all have more patience than I.
There is only one response to TruthID... don't respond to the trolling, just keep repeating:

Hey TruthID:

- Present one testable, falsifiable hypothesis arising directly from ID.

- Present evidence supporting that hypothesis

19. Evolution fray attracts top scientist

Comment #162980 by 5keptical on April 17, 2008 at 6:36 pm

Next time somebody pipes up about "teaching the controversy", respond with:

"Great idea! Your church gets millions of dollars in tax breaks. To continue getting those breaks, every time your pastor gives a sermon about your god, he also has to mention that people disagree with this idea and cover the Mormon, Muslim, Buddhist, Flying Spaghetti monster and atheist versions...."

20. Two More Fleas

Comment #145897 by 5keptical on March 18, 2008 at 9:29 am

Folks, clearmind is just a troll. Stop feeding him.

He has constipation of the mind leading to diarrhea of the mouth (or keyboard in this case).

There should be a succinct checklist (something like this one: <http://craphound.com/spamsolutions.txt> used when people keep making the same bad suggestions to control spam), that we can trot out to underline the consistency of their lies, propaganda and illogic.

21. The business of natural selection

Comment #144185 by 5keptical on March 15, 2008 at 9:31 am

A friend of mine was using neural-networks (or variations thereof) over 10 years ago and was quite successful with it (became a vice-president in a financial firm due to his system's performance compared to others at the time).

The use hasn't died a quiet death - the specifics of their modeling software are trade secrets - the more information one gives out, the more others will know how you will react to the market, so the techniques are not publicized.

All the players use prediction software (though now it's probably moved on to Bayesian networks) and the models have to be constantly refined to take into account that others are using similar techniques - i.e. it must constantly evolve in a changing environment.

22. Out of the Blue

Comment #140692 by 5keptical on March 8, 2008 at 11:06 am

It looks like they're doing some interesting science... perhaps.

The write-up emphasizes the more outlandish claims of the researchers but that may not be what the research actual shows.

I hope so, because it appears to be another case of a computer science transplant that figures he just has to find the right set of axioms for these silly biological systems to fall in line... but again that could just be the write-up.

More interesting for me will be the quality of the comments here... let's see what you got folks!