Comments by epeeist

1001. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #167591 by epeeist on April 24, 2008 at 7:26 am

Comment #167578 by Acitta

While the arguments of Lord Winston are not in any way convincing, I am bothered by Dennet's insistence that all religion is impervious to reason. He obviously hasn't read the writings of Nagarjuna. Rational inquiry is central to the Madhyamika school of Buddhism and Madhyamika philosophy is central to the Tibetan Buddhism of the Dalai Lama.

I don't know whether you realise it but you are guilty of equivocation. Are you classifying Buddhism as a religion or a philosophy?

Are (or were) you a Buddhist? Either way you are welcome, when we do get religionists here they are mostly Christians. A new point of view is always nice to have.

1002. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #167577 by epeeist on April 24, 2008 at 7:14 am

Comment #167569 by seeker_of_truth

Feel free to expound on that if you wish epeeist.

I will answer your question, but I do expect answers to a couple I will raise in return. You actually seem to be reasonable, so I don't think it will be a problem.

Begging the question is an informal logical fallacy in which the conclusion is supposed in the premise, it is a form of circular argument.

What I actually think he meant was "raising the question".

I am presuming you are a theist of some kind. Could I ask what kind, and your views on Intelligent Design?

1003. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #167565 by epeeist on April 24, 2008 at 7:04 am

Comment #167556 by seeker_of_truth

If America's Founding Fathers espoused openness to religion, creationism and the Bible being taught in schools, then it beckons the question, Why don't we?

It does beg the question, but not in the way he thinks.

I would also question whether the bible is "the most influential book in Western civilization".

1004. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #167533 by epeeist on April 24, 2008 at 6:34 am

Comment #167531 by Enlightenme

I wanna see your answer to Dinah's Query - it needs answering if we're going to require answers from Wooter surely to god? :)

The moustache is the source of my strength. Without it I would be as an ordinary man.

Actually - the upper lip was always the bit I used to cut when wet shaving.

1005. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #167528 by epeeist on April 24, 2008 at 6:22 am

Comment #167520 by Steve Zara

It shows, at the very least, that God is pretty awful at writing manuals, which is particularly strange considering that he (according to creationists) also made the people who are supposed to understand the manuals.

Oh, come on Steve. You are a programmer, how much fun is there in writing documentation.

Do you think god could put a good entry in for the obfuscated-C competition?

1006. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #167527 by epeeist on April 24, 2008 at 6:19 am

Comment #167518 by Frankus1122

I am sorry that this is a complete highjack of the thread but I am very proud.

I am not sure that it is a complete hijack. We are constantly accused of living miserable, nihilistic lives with no meaning. Personally I think the feeling of joy in helping someone to an achievement is one of the things that gives my life meaning. It sounds as though you have similar feelings.

Anyway, just to show you how fast these guys move, here is a short clip - http://www.nw-fencing.org.uk/index.php?option=com_zoom&Itemid=73&page=view&catid=8&PageNo=1&key=2&hit=1

1007. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #167516 by epeeist on April 24, 2008 at 6:02 am

Comment #167501 by clearmind

Your attacking on religions and their some practices will not make evolution theory true.

Wooter in the Richard Dawkins/Michael Shermer thread you asked me some questions. I gave you some answers that you can see in http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,2484,Interviews-with-Richard-Dawkins-and-Michael-Shermer,Skepticality-The-Official-Skeptic-Podcast,page3#166550

I also asked for answers to some questions of mine. Now I see you in a different thread. Don't you think it is rather rude to shift threads like this when you have been asked in a completely polite manner.

If you don't provide answers then people are going to think that you don't actually have any.

1008. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #167514 by epeeist on April 24, 2008 at 5:54 am

Comment #167507 by colster

Remnant, are you proposing that god wilfully controls the movements of every sub-atomic particle in the entire universe, even those which are billions of light years away from his chosen people?

And if so, how do you reconcile that with people having free will?

And you might also add in, dying in "natural" disasters.

1009. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #167468 by epeeist on April 24, 2008 at 4:46 am

Comment #167459 by decius

@Steve Zara, Diacanu and all the others who have been taken for a ride by TheTruthID.

Not completely convinced about that. It certainly took longer for him to admit that ID isn't science and drop into insult mode than it should have done. But as other posters have noted, we don't necessarily write for the trolls like TTID, remnant and wooter. Much of the explanatory material is for those who come and lurk. The comparison between what we produce and the sheer inability of the likes of TTID to show anything positive for their side should be apparent to anyone with a reasonably open mind.

Fine intellects such as yours are truly wasted on this individual and those like him.

The intelligence of my uncle's pet macaw would be wasted on these people.

1010. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #167374 by epeeist on April 24, 2008 at 1:13 am

Comment #167369 by alovrin

But you just kept on parading your small member in public and everyone left. So now there's just you with your fly undone and your member, not getting the attention it craved, is now shrivelling.

This is called an analogy, you should ask your penis what that means.

I can't be bothered looking back, but it was roughly at the point when he started whining about us only wanting scientific evidence when I accused him of not having any shot in his locker. You might also say his ramrod is limber or that he has no lead in his pencil.

You might need to Google for English folksong for the first two, though I am sure the phrases must have migrated to Australia as well.

1011. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #167370 by epeeist on April 24, 2008 at 1:07 am

Comment #167134 by Steve Zara

Perhaps we could set up a private blog? Should not be too difficult to arrange. Invitations put out on fleabytes...

Blog or Wiki?

If you want to invite me then I am in. Given that I was actually thinking of setting up a domain of my own then I may even host it.

1012. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #167367 by epeeist on April 24, 2008 at 1:05 am

Comment #167108 by MPhil

If your IQ should ever rise to room-temperature (in degrees Celsius)... you may try again.

We were knocking 10 points off his estimated IQ for every time he failed to answer the questions put to him.

Al-Rawandi and I had a minor argument. I was being generous and estimated his intelligence to be that of a small beetle, Al wanted it down at the level of the vegetation that the beetle was eating.

I realise now I was wrong.

1013. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #167003 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 2:33 pm

Comment #166961 by MPhil

even only the comment about the second law of thermodynamics shows what an incredibly ignorant, deluded fool remnant is.

Comes in at number 5 or so in http://www.fstdt.com/fundies/top100.aspx?archive=1

And so to bed.

1014. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #166989 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 2:27 pm

Comment #166968 by TheTruthID

So it is possible for you to accept that there might be a creator of life

A creator? I thought you cdesign proponentsists only talked about designers. I didn't realise you believed in a creator.

As for post #166956 - Harry Kroto (who I have met) is actually a biochemist, so there is probably more of a chance of him having a clue about the ToE than Smalley who was a physical chemist.

1015. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #166967 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 2:12 pm

Comment #166959 by AllanW

My prediction is correct so far; the lying prevaricating wilfully ignorant troll TruthID avoids any substantive response.

I disagree, look at comment #166863.

As far as I am concerned that essentially concedes he has nothing to offer. The consequent searching around for authorities to back him up confirms this.

1016. Investigating Atheism

Comment #166960 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 2:09 pm

Comment #166851 by brian faux

A quick shufti at this site gives the impression that it is written by a bunch of religious types.

Yes, some of the staff seem to either be or have been members of the staff at the Margaret Beaufort Institute, which is a Catholic theological house (not even a college).

1017. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #166938 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 1:55 pm

Comment #166912 by TheTruthID

Nobel prize-winning scientist Charles Townes said, "Intelligent design, as one sees it from a scientific point of view, seems to be quite real."

Bad, bad example. I actually met Charlie Townes when I was doing my Ph.D. As far as I am aware he believes in an initial intelligent design and then evolution carrying it forward from there.

Oh, and Smalley was a co-discover of buckminsterfullerene with Harry Kroto. Not exactly a fan of ID if you want to have a search for some of his views.

1018. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #166926 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 1:45 pm

Comment #166904 by TheTruthID

No one wants to defend one of your own. You keep asking me for reasons why I beleive in ID, and when I quote one of your own, no response.

But one dead physicist hardly justifies your claim of "more and more scientists" does it?

Just to give you an example. My elder daughter went to Cambridge. The Natural Sciences intake there is 600 per year. How many of them do you think believe (and that is exactly the word I want) in ID?

1019. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #166893 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 1:30 pm

Comment #166863 by TheTruthID

That's the problem. Everything to you has to be explained by science, no matter how obsurd it is, strictly because it is your only choice. Well, everyday, more and more scientists are coming to the conclusion that life was created. You can deny and fight it all you want.

So your shot locker is empty, your poker hand consists of a Chinese run.

If you want to replace evolution as a theory then it has to be at least as good an explanation as the current one. It has to make predictions that can be tested and falsified.

All you have done is what Behe was forced to concede at the Kitzmiller-Dover trial. Any definition of science that will let in ID will also allow in astrology. And we all know that astrology is not a science - http://www.cavehill.uwi.edu/bnccde/ph29a/thagard.html

As for your "more scientists are coming to the conclusion that life was created", then I am with Geodesic17 - show me the money. Names and publications please.

1020. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #166873 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 1:19 pm

Comment #166848 by Tyler Durden

Just because you don't understand something does not make it "gibberish". That's the Argument from Personal Incredulity.

In http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,2488,Open-Letter-to-a-victim-of-Ben-Steins-lying-propaganda,Richard-Dawkins,page6#165442
he complains about being directed to a "gibberish" website. I must admit it was I who pointed him there. I did so because he claimed there was not evidence for macro evolution. The site was of course http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

And he pulled the other creationist trick, his response to my post came back within an hour. So either he hasn't got the intelligence or acumen to realise what a treasure the site is or he realised that it would undercut any of his "arguments".

Where's Karda or thisisme? At least they were capable of making an argument, had a modicum of intelligence and a sense of humour.

1021. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #166832 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 12:53 pm

Comment #166776 by TheTruthID

Boy are you misguided.

Below are the links to the last three times I have asked you to justify ID as a science.

Have I seen any responses? No. Am I likely ever to get a response? No. Why not? Because ID is not science.

Hence the prevarications, the evasions, the changes of subject, attempts to shift the burden of proof. You haven't got an answer and your posts are an attempt to hide the fact that this is so.

http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,2488,Open-Letter-to-a-victim-of-Ben-Steins-lying-propaganda,Richard-Dawkins,page11#166579
http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,2488,Open-Letter-to-a-victim-of-Ben-Steins-lying-propaganda,Richard-Dawkins,page8#165782
http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,2488,Open-Letter-to-a-victim-of-Ben-Steins-lying-propaganda,Richard-Dawkins,page6#165459

1022. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #166778 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 12:26 pm

Comment #166773 by Quine

YOKO SUES EXPELLED

Sorry Quine, but the article isn't very accurate. The writer seems to think Ben Stein is a comedian.

1023. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #166771 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 12:24 pm

Comment #166725 by Diacanu

TheTruthID-

Are you going to answer my question?

Unlikely, he hasn't actually answered any questions yet.

I am redoing Gandhi's quotation. My version is "First they come to jeer at you, then they refuse to answer questions, then they quote scripture, then they threaten you with eternal torture, then they are busy and have to leave".

TTID on this thread, Remnant, Artful_Dodger act exactly the same. They have nothing to say. Ignorance Deified (to quote Christopher Hitchens) is a pile of rotting dingos entrails that has the same utility as haruspicy.

Since they won't answer questions and nobody seems to be pressing them particularly hard I am off to the penis theft thread for a little light entertainment.

1024. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166707 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 11:45 am

Comment #166704 by gr8hands

Remnant -- what about all the zombies from Matthew 27?

Can't have been any zombies. There wasn't a mall there. Everybody knows you need a mall for zombies.

Has he actually answered any questions yet, or is it scripture and insults all the way down?

1025. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #166588 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 10:19 am

Comment #166581 by TheTruthID

To All the Ignorant Evolutionists,

Eiseley, Loren C., The Immense Journey (New York: Random House, 1957), p. 199

This would be the Loren Eisley who was given a Phi Beta Kappa Science Prize for his book "Darwin's Century".

Come on TTID. This is just displacement activity. Answer the questions you were asked.

1026. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #166579 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 10:10 am

Comment #166532 by TheTruthID

The scienctific discovery of the complexity of life is the compilation of evidence needed to come to the conclusion of ID. You have it backwards.

TTID, as you are aware scientific theories have several requirements. According to Kuhn these include accuracy, parsimony, consistency with other theories, fruitfulness of other pathways of research. Popper would add testability and falsifiability to these.

Please tell us

What makes ID science? I have given you a starter in the requirements above
What are the predictions that ID makes?
How can one test these predictions?
How can these predictions be falsified?
What tests have been done on ID and what were the results?

Please don't prevaricate, lets have some answers. No evasions, attempts to change the subject, shift the burden of proof etc. Just the common rules that are used in critical dialogue.

1027. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #166573 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 10:04 am

Comment #166564 by Elli

thetruthid: if you are going to claim things are impossible, please learn how to spell the word.

Aside: what is it with fundamentalists and using all-caps? Is there some sort of syntax guide they give out in churches or something?

Not only do they have problems with syntax, spelling, grammar and even using a keyboard they seem to have no appreciation of irony either.

1028. Interviews with Richard Dawkins and Michael Shermer

Comment #166550 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 9:51 am

Comment #166523 by clearmind

How do explain the earth and other planets' rotation and spinning around themselves, their relation between them and the creatures on the earth by sky evolution? (Sky evolution ?) Or again unexplained CHANCES?

Newton's law's of gravity explain the orbits of the planets
The best theory of planetary formation is by astronomer Victor Safronov. This is the Solar Nebular Disk Model and is an accretion model.
I don't know what sky evolution is. However Darwin's theory is that:
1. Living things reproduce
2. The process of reproduction may introduce random mutations.
3. Natural selection, a non-random process means that living things that are better fitted to their environment will tend to have more offspring, while those that are not so well fitted will tend to have fewer offspring

Now, I have answered all of your questions. It is your turn to answer mine.

I will repeat again:

What makes Intelligent Design science?
What predictions does it make?
How can these predictions be tested and falsified?
What tests have been conducted?
What were the results of the tests?

I refer you to my post http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,2484,Interviews-with-Richard-Dawkins-and-Michael-Shermer,Skepticality-The-Official-Skeptic-Podcast,page3#165735 as things you should avoid.

1029. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166518 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 9:33 am

Comment #166514 by Remnant

You never did answer my question...

That is largely because you refuse, or are unable to answer any of ours.

The accepted rules of dialogue are that you answer questions when asked. Once these are answered then you can ask questions in return.

1030. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #166508 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 9:28 am

Comment #166472 by MPhil

I know I do this all the time, but if I may, I'd like to suggest to you the wonderful book

"Ethics - Inventing Right and Wrong" by John Leslie Mackie.

OK, I'm calling you on this.

What percentage are you getting?

1031. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166505 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 9:25 am

Comment #166483 by Remnant

I cannot believe you actually wrote that contradicting and self-defeating statement. "largely unchanged over 500 million years"...."it is a transitional form between worms and arthropods".

Come on Remnant, this is simply displacement activity.

You have been asked questions by a number of people. You haven't even made an effort to answer them.

Steve, Billy and I (and possibly others) have all been through something called a viva voce. We have had to defend our theses in front of both internal and external examiners. No prevarication, no switching topic, no evasions, no pretending about undefined terms.

You have a thesis, answer the questions about it.

1032. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166460 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 8:58 am

Comment #166450

The fall of man and the resulting deterioration of DNA.

Simply not good enough. What do you mean by the "deterioration" of DNA? Can you show it happened? Can you show how it happened?

We need a mechanism, and a mechanism that can be tested. Making an assertion without any evidence is simply handwaving and hoping that we don't notice.

1033. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #166448 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 8:52 am

Comment #166420 by prospero811

So, the question then becomes, "what was that process or mechanism?"

Oh, that's easy. "The Flood"

I didn't say it was sensible. We seem to have a new chew-toy over on the "Lying for Jesus" thread who you might want to put the question to. He goes by the name of "remnant". He is a little busy at the moment trying to justify creationism as a theory.

1034. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166434 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 8:43 am

Remnant - we really are not interested in what you think of the theory of evolution, especially since you haven't a clue about what a scientific theory is in the first place.

Palaeontologists can now predict where fossils will be found, both location and depth. It isn't an exact science and conditions aren't always amenable. But Tiktaalik was found this way as an example.

Other predictions from the theory of evolution include:

Darwin predicted, based on homologies with African apes, that human ancestors arose in Africa. That prediction has been supported by fossil and genetic evidence (Ingman et al. 2000).
Theory predicted that organisms in heterogeneous and rapidly changing environments should have higher mutation rates. This has been found in the case of bacteria infecting the lungs of chronic cystic fibrosis patients (Oliver et al. 2000).
Predator-prey dynamics are altered in predictable ways by evolution of the prey (Yoshida et al. 2003).
Ernst Mayr predicted in 1954 that speciation should be accompanied with faster genetic evolution. A phylogenetic analysis has supported this prediction (Webster et al. 2003).
Several authors predicted characteristics of the ancestor of craniates. On the basis of a detailed study, they found the fossil Haikouella "fit these predictions closely" (Mallatt and Chen 2003).
Evolution predicts that different sets of character data should still give the same phylogenetic trees. This has been confirmed informally myriad times and quantitatively, with different protein sequences, by Penny et al. (1982).
Insect wings evolved from gills, with an intermediate stage of skimming on the water surface. Since the primitive surface-skimming condition is widespread among stoneflies, J. H. Marden predicted that stoneflies would likely retain other primitive traits, too. This prediction led to the discovery in stoneflies of functional hemocyanin, used for oxygen transport in other arthropods but never before found in insects (Hagner-Holler et al. 2004; Marden 2005).

If you want your ideas to be accepted I would have expected you to be able to do make predictions at least as good as these.

1035. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #166419 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 8:32 am

Comment #166408 by fides_et_ratio

And a glimpse of athiest-induced violence, festering away in the dangerous certainty that Winston exposes.

Oh come on, where's the rationality in that statement. Strawman and hasty generalisation.

And wrongly spelled to boot.

1036. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166409 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 8:22 am

Do people know the Gandhi quotation - "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win."

We do seem to get something of the same here:

"First they come to jeer at you, then they refuse to answer questions, then they quote scripture, then they threaten you with eternal torture, then they are busy and have to leave"

1037. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166397 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 8:08 am

Comment #166379 by Remnant

Mat 5:44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

Now I don't hate you, but I do want you to do some good to me.

Last night, before I had to go and hit by 3 foot lumps of steel I asked you some questions. Namely, what makes ID science, what does it predict, how can the predictions be tested and falsified, what tests have been made and what were the results.

I have asked you this several times now without receiving an answer.

So in the spirit of "Ask and it shall be given to you" I would you to be so good as to give me the answers I have asked for.

1038. Responses to 'Gods and Earthlings' by Richard Dawkins

Comment #166377 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 7:52 am

Comment #166350 by Steve Zara

Lord Lawson is a good example of the dangers of those who aren't experts in a subject and with an agenda to sell making public comments about it.

Fixed it for you.

1039. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166357 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 7:35 am

Comment #166342 by gr8hands

Yup, once you start doing the math, using reality, actually thinking about it, you can't help but arrive at the conclusion that it isn't true.

You see that's where your problem is, actually thinking about. You just have to have faith.

That naughty Quine gave a creotard the Sorites paradox in another thread (it actually went "whoosh", straight over his head but that is another matter). If one did the same with "The Flood" you have to wonder how many ad hoc explanations they would have to add in before they started thinking "hang on, this is getting silly". We have had the number of animal "kind" (whatever they are), distances, salt/fresh water fish, the amount of dung, food, dinosaurs, physical impossibility of a wooden boat of the size that is needed. There is loads of other stuff as well, source and sink for the water, the amount of water needed, no genetic bottlenecks, no death of corals, no single layer of sediment, no mixture of fossils etc.

Please tell me that sooner or later this will become so overwhelming that they just have to agree that it couldn't have happened. Please.

1040. Responses to 'Gods and Earthlings' by Richard Dawkins

Comment #166323 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 6:21 am

Comment #166318 by dj2baduk

It's true science does seem to get this A LOT, but then it does encompass so many different subjects which are hard to understand/explain and have been simplified to try to engage the public.

The difficulty is that if you are stuck trying to do something with surface spherical harmonics you rarely get people coming up to you and saying "Well, if you separate it then you can normalise the Legendre polynomial with a metric covariant tensor".

What you are more likely to get is someone saying that electrons go round the nucleus like planets go round the sun, or that you don't even have evidence for electrons.

1041. Responses to 'Gods and Earthlings' by Richard Dawkins

Comment #166309 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 5:45 am

Comment #166300 by Steve Zara

I think only people who speculate with certainty should be ridiculed. But I still feel uneasy about the lack of humility and recognition of ignorance shown by people who feel that they are in a position to speculate. Imagination is a good thing, and to be encouraged, but surely it has to be based on education.

I am just expressing feelings here. I may be way off-base.

You aren't.

I suspect that I may have knowledge of a wider number of areas than you. However, this is obviously shallower than yours in particular fields. As such I have no problems in asking for information, or being wrong and subject to correction.

Ignorance I can cope with, ignorance and arrogance coupled with absolute certainty is something that needs to be stomped upon.

I came across a thing called "Right Man Syndrome" originally put forward by Colin Wilson and A.E. Van Vogt (yeah, right). It is described here - http://www.rightmansyndrome.com/

I am no psychologist, so don't know whether this fits into the mainstream or not. However, a lot of the behaviours seem to reflect those that have been brought here of late.

1042. Responses to 'Gods and Earthlings' by Richard Dawkins

Comment #166295 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 5:19 am

Comment #166283 by phatbat

My point was that you were critisising an 'elitist' attitude in defence of arrogant attitudes. I think we should be arrogant back, and elitist back at them when they do this so they can learn to treat their own knowledge about science or what ever the subject with the caution it deserves.

This was essentially the point I was making last weekend.

There are a number of people on this site who try to explain things, Steve Zara and MPhil would be good examples. It isn't the right tactic with those who don't want to listen.

Instead of trying to defend evolution (for example) we should be pressing for explanations as to what alternative theories the theists have, and what evidence they have for them. Sites like AiG have lots of criticisms of the ToE that can just be fired at the likes of Steve, Billy Sands and MaxD and keep them permanently bogged down in trying to respond. However, they have nothing which shows why ID is a science, any evidence for it, any predictions for it, or any tests of those predictions.

We should be insisting on a critical dialogue, we politely answer their initial questions (assuming they make any), then insist on them answering ours. And we don't accept evasions, attempts to change the subject or simple assertions without evidence. And especially we don't allow them to disappear once the questioning becomes hard for them and then come back another day and pretend that they have nothing to answer for.

1043. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166276 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 4:36 am

Comment #166272 by Philip1978

Though Eddie Izzard was right about how the Flying things and the swimming things get out due to a loophole! (Said in the voice of James Mason, who was playing God) Did Noah really have to collect them as well?

Well yes, because salt water fish can't live in fresh water and vice versa (in general, there are some that can live in both). So he would have to have had some stonking great aquariums on board as well.

The one that gets me is the fact that while he could take only two (or seven) animals on board then how come these were enough to feed the other animals that need live food.

1044. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166274 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 4:32 am

In the holidays during 6th form I worked on a pig farm. Not a particularly big farm, but the amount of shit we had to shovel each day was significant.

You have to feel sorry for Noah and his few companions having to heave dinosaur turds over the side on a daily basis. Given that he seems to have only sailed around a limited area you would expect to find a significant number of coprolites...

1045. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #166260 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 4:16 am

Comment #166253 by irate_atheist

More evidence for the prosecution, perhaps?

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/posted/archive/2008/04/22/brazil-priest-flying-party-balloons-lost-at-sea.aspx

Cue boy scout song:

"Oh you'll never get to heaven in an old Ford car"

1046. Responses to 'Gods and Earthlings' by Richard Dawkins

Comment #166259 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 4:10 am

Comment #166239 by Steve Zara

What I am after is a greater respect for science and scientists. It is my impression that in some countries (the UK is a good example of this), there is actually an anti-intellectual attitude. If you state, truthfully, that you know far more about a science subject than the average person you are considered elitist and putting an inappropriate distance between you and them. This does not seem happen in other areas where skill is required.

Yes, but it is more generic than that. Even claims that you know rather more than the average about music, literature, history or philosophy (as noted by MPhil) gets you tarred with the brush of elitism. Even an interest in cricket (of the non tip-and-run variety) is becoming regarded this way.

Quite honestly if something isn't in "Hello", the Sun (page 3 and back page) then it might as well not exist for many people (yes, I know this is hyperbole).

We need better educators, who can engender an enjoyment of learning. As a corollary this probably means getting rid of the bean counters who regard the aim of school as passing exams and going on to be a productive bean counter.

1047. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166251 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 3:47 am

Comment #166245 by BillySands

Whenever I am on an apologetic web site (or directed to one) the first thing I do is check out what it says about dinosaurs.

My approach is a little more gradual. Lure them in to start with by mentioning the varves in Lake Suigetsu (40,000 counted, one per year). They usually respond with something like Mt. St. Helens laying down multiple varves per year. Then you point out that there are thin and thick varves corresponding to known weather patterns and catastrophic events such as Krakatoa. And how this matches with tree rings. And how it all fits together with ice cores.

They always want to tell me about the unreliability of C14 dating, so I stick to the stuff you can do by simple counting and emphasise the consilience between them. Not only do they have to show why each of the dating methods is wrong, but why they are all wrong by the same amount.

1048. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166243 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 3:25 am

Comment #166238 by BillySands

That means a total of 1 billion species have ever existed (I said it was conservative). Noah is given a week (604800 seconds) to round them up. He is therefore rounding up and placing 1 species on the ark every 600 micro seconds

That is one seriously large boat. Built out of wood wasn't it? That would make it a bit larger than this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyoming_(Schooner)

Of course Noah would have been a better boat builder, the Wyoming sank in heavy seas because of its flexure. Wasn't there something about heavy seas during "The Flood"?

And of course, with that much wood one would expect to find some remnants on Mt. Ararat. I know people have looked for them. It isn't as though wood of this age hasn't been found, for example in the Forbidden City in China. I know this isn't particularly good evidence, since China isn't mentioned in the bible.

Oh, I posted this the other day:

The Bible: Because all the works of science are as nothing to the wisdom of a set of cattle-sacrificing primitives who thought all the species of the world lived within walking distance of Noah's house.

1049. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166204 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 2:01 am

Comment #166196 by Philip1978

I suspect you prefer stories of talking snakes

Please sir, please sir. I like stories about talking snakes. There was this one called Ningizzida in a book called "The Epic of Gilgamesh". He ate from the tree of life and became immortal. He did it when Gilgamesh wasn't looking. Its a very old story, the book I've got said it was written about 2000BC on tablets of stone. Does that make it older than the bible sir?

1050. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166194 by epeeist on April 23, 2008 at 1:39 am

Comment #166174 by alovrin