• Information on this archive. See IIDB.org
  • Please join us on IIDB (iidb.org)
    This is the archived FRDB and IIDB forum from prior to about March 2014. It is read only. If you would like to respond or otherwise revive a post or topic, please join us on the active forum: IIDB.

Me, mturner, and a desk full of quarters: a thoroughly irrational post

Miscellaneous Discussions thread archive for the 2nd quarter, 2001.
Locked
Deleted
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2000 6:00 am
Basic Beliefs:
Out Campaign: Real Name:

Post by Deleted » Wed Jun 27, 2001 1:05 am

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by 6days:
I could easily say the same for pretty much every anti-creationist webpage I have seen. Where would it get us? Nowhere. You don't seem to have a desire to discuss the actual issues. You just dismiss it offhand rather than give examples. That is OK because you have never claimed to want to discuss the issue.</font>
Actually, I should admit you are correct. I really don't feel like getting into a knock-down-drag-out fight over evolution at this stage in my life. I'm still reeling from one I had a month or so ago.

"What?" you ask. "Surely this is proof you are too SKEERED to defend your position!"

Well, no, it's really not, although I could see how one would think this.

You see, I countered every straw man of evolution with the real theory.

I gave several examples EACH of natural selection and speciation.

I asked repeatedly for a theory that fit the data as well or better than evolutionary theory. I recieved none.

I explained how rocks and fossils are dated.

I explained that the second law of thermodynamics does not apply to evolution.

I explained that EVOLUTION AND ABIOGENESIS ARE NOT THE SAME FREAKING THING several times. (This is a mistake made by the link you gave me, BTW.)

I explained that evolution does not necessitate atheism.

I explained that evolution does not explain how life itself arose.

I did all of this in the face of an opponent who acted smugly, condescendingly, and rudely towards me at every step of the way. Not once did my opponent apologize, admit their mistakes, or acknowledge my (admittedly strained) attempts at politeness.

I did all of this over the course of a few weeks. Meaning this was a protracted debate.

In short, I burned out. I didn't change my opinion on evolution very much (although I did come to understand it better than before), but I frankly got sick of banging my head against a brick wall.

We defenders of evolutionary theory are human beings. We can only tolerate so much rudeness, so much lying, so much arrogance, so much vitriol* before we hit a breaking point. We are like you in that respect; we simply hit a point at which we realize no one will be convinced, no one will change their minds, no one will appreciate the hours of research I put into making scientifically accurate posts.

And we throw in the towel; not because our opinions have changed, but because we realize yours never will. If you wish to call that a victory -- as I'm sure it seems tempting -- fine. Just know that defeating an opponent psychologically is not the same as defeating his or her viewpoint.

I hope you will understand.

*note: I am not saying all Creationists act in this manner, but many of the ones I've dealt with have. Of course defenders of evolutionary theory have been known to employ less-than-polite tactics, but I'm usually not on the receiving end of that... Image

Deleted
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2000 6:00 am
Basic Beliefs:
Out Campaign: Real Name:

Post by Deleted » Wed Jun 27, 2001 1:05 am

6Days wandered around the Evo forum before he stated all evolutionists are insecure.

(I hate it when I can't think of anything else meaningful to say)

Deleted
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2000 6:00 am
Basic Beliefs:
Out Campaign: Real Name:

Post by Deleted » Wed Jun 27, 2001 2:48 am

5½days

The first post in this thread is a perfect example.

Of exactly what? I am anxious for your enlightenment.

Actually it is you who are confusing naturalism with the scientific method. They are not equal.

Ummmm? Errrrr? Ahhhhhh? Do you mean that I am comparing supernaturalism with superstition and non-critical thinking?
Is this to what you refer?

http://www.freeinquiry.com/naturalism.html

Perhaps you can explain further and help me to appreciate your current beliefs. I feel cheated since I read your references with considerable care but you have obviously not felt that you needed to read mine. Perhaps the following URL will be more definitive about the differences between supernaturalism and the scientific method.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html

Deleted
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2000 6:00 am
Basic Beliefs:
Out Campaign: Real Name:

Post by Deleted » Wed Jun 27, 2001 2:51 am

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by freemonkey:

6days,
Above is the very first response to gcameron after he expressed his frustration. I note that I as write you have a total of 28 posts here; was that your first post ever on these boards?
</font>
Actually his first post was some plagiarised bullshit about coelacanths. Since then he's just gone further and further downhill.


Deleted
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2000 6:00 am
Basic Beliefs:
Out Campaign: Real Name:

Post by Deleted » Wed Jun 27, 2001 3:03 am

6Days is insecure and wants to impress you with his prowess so you will all respect him and think him a very intelligent man. Image

In my line of work I encounter people similar to this fairly often and the best way to deal with their like is to treat them offhandedly, like they are not even worth the bother of talking to.

Hate to say this, but 6Days sticks out very clearly as being someone who fits into that personality type. Rule of thumb: The more insulting he gets, the more frustrated he actually is. Both go hand in hand. Image


-BP

[This message has been edited by Bong Ping (edited June 26, 2001).]

Deleted
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2000 6:00 am
Basic Beliefs:
Out Campaign: Real Name:

Post by Deleted » Wed Jun 27, 2001 4:24 am

What is your line of work BP? Are you in mental health or something? Image

You're right about the best way to deal with him though. DNFTT everyone.

Deleted
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2000 6:00 am
Basic Beliefs:
Out Campaign: Real Name:

Post by Deleted » Wed Jun 27, 2001 6:14 am

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Howard:
Oh please let's keep him here for a while. It's just so refreshing to get such self-righteous arrogance from someone who hasn't offered a lick of evidence for creationism.

By the way 6days, there's a whole forum here on Evolution and Creationism. Why don't you present your evidence and arguments over there and see how many evolutionists you can "break down."
</font>
There is no point in providing you with evidence of creation when you hold evolution so dear to your heart. The first step is to show the problems with evolutionary theories. I started a thread a while back in the Evolution forum about why the Coelacanth and how it presents a problem for evolution.

Deleted
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2000 6:00 am
Basic Beliefs:
Out Campaign: Real Name:

Post by Deleted » Wed Jun 27, 2001 6:19 am

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by freemonkey:
So now you are here defending your own beliefs and your own "proofs". Are you insecure about yourself? What would happen to your life if you were proven wrong? Would you lose your "purpose"?</font>
There is no possible way to disprove the miracles I have seen.

Deleted
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2000 6:00 am
Basic Beliefs:
Out Campaign: Real Name:

Post by Deleted » Wed Jun 27, 2001 6:31 am

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Buffman:
Ummmm? Errrrr? Ahhhhhh? Do you mean that I am comparing supernaturalism with superstition and non-critical thinking?
Is this to what you refer?

http://www.freeinquiry.com/naturalism.html

Perhaps you can explain further and help me to appreciate your current beliefs. I feel cheated since I read your references with considerable care but you have obviously not felt that you needed to read mine. Perhaps the following URL will be more definitive about the differences between supernaturalism and the scientific method.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html
</font>
I never claimed that supernaturalism and the scientific method are the same. I am just saying that naturalistic philosophy is not a necessary component of the scientific method.
As for your flood URL, see this one:
http://www.trueorigins.org/arkdefen.htm

Deleted
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2000 6:00 am
Basic Beliefs:
Out Campaign: Real Name:

Post by Deleted » Wed Jun 27, 2001 6:33 am

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Pantera:
Actually his first post was some plagiarised bullshit about coelacanths. Since then he's just gone further and further downhill.
</font>
Since when was using your own arguments plagarism? I had posted those arguments a few years ago on the Evolution at UTK TOC board, and they are still valid (evolutionists still cannot answer without invoking their double standard).

Locked