400 replies to this topic

[EHK for Darwin]

CiaranAnnrach, on May 1 2009, 16.20, said:

Aaaaaand all of this is exactly why I said what I first did, about no matter what we say, you won't change your mind. It's quite obvious any further argument we bring to you will be futile, because at this point you're really only seeing what you want to see. I'm sorry, EHK, but you are so overwhelmingly anti-religion that, when it comes to religion, reason simply does not reach you, because you don't actually want to be reached. And I have absolutely little doubts you will go on to call my reasoning flawed, in an attempt to justify your own reasoning.

This is precisely why I will now keep my arguments and opinions to myself, and save myself my breath. Arguing this point further is about as effective as punching a mountain in the hopes it'll move for you. Good luck to anyone else who wants to pick up the torch.

Except that my opposition to religion is entirely based on reason. And there is no problem with my reasoning in this instance. Whether people would be in the 'Yes or not sure' category on relativity isn't terribly important. There is no massive, kneejerk, religiously fueled opposition to relativity anywhere in America. No kid reading about it for the first time in a textbook will have a built in blockade to further study or interest. Scientists won't have to waste time and resources debunking ignorant & fraudulent nonsense related to it. They won't face the threat of ideologically/theologically based barriers to research grants and funding in the field, whether government or private. There is no massive anti-relativity agenda to contend with. The expansion of human knowledge in that field is not hurt by any major artificial societal factors over which there's much disagreement. (aka, everyone agrees we need better schools and that we're slacking in science education.)

Also, I don't think you'd get the same breakdown (no's to the unsure's) in a relativity poll largely because people don't have a major cultural influence that infiltrates every aspect of society telling them to believe otherwise. Whether people have a sophisticated understanding of relativity or not, quite simply they have no reason to say no and not much reason to say maybe/don't know. In the absence of such a blockade, I suspect most people just shrug and say 'sure'.

Edited by EHK for Darwin, 01 May 2009 - 04:36 PM.

[Shryke]

Your opposition to religion is at least 50% pure emotional bile.

For the past like 2 months you've turned any thread with even the barest hint of religion into a polemic on how religion is responsible for whatever societal ill is currently the bee in your bonnet.

[HT Reddy]

EHK for Darwin, on May 1 2009, 22.33, said:

Except that my opposition to religion is entirely based on reason. And there is no problem with my reasoning in this instance. Whether people would be in the 'Yes or not sure' category on relativity isn't terribly important. There is no massive, kneejerk, religiously fueled opposition to relativity anywhere in America. No kid reading about it for the first time in a textbook will have a built in blockade to further study or interest. Scientists won't have to waste time and resources debunking ignorant & fraudulent nonsense related to it. They won't face the threat of ideologically/theologically based barriers to research grants and funding in the field, whether government or private. There is no massive anti-relativity agenda to contend with. The expansion of human knowledge in that field is not hurt by any major artificial societal factors over which there's much disagreement. (aka, everyone agrees we need better schools and that we're slacking in science education.)

Nothing you say is wrong really EHK, but wouldn't you feel better if you just chilled and got over it? Or, actually achieve something to ameliorate the situation which I guess would be more satisfying to you. Yes you're right religion has impeded scientific progress in America (there's no inherent reason why it should do so, but it has in this case), but aren't there bigger issues both in America and worldwide? There's no doubting science education needs improvement in the US, it just, I dunno, feels like your passion is oddly out of proportion with the issue.

[CiaranAnnrach]

Shryke, on May 1 2009, 16.39, said:

Your opposition to religion is at least 50% pure emotional bile.

For the past like 2 months you've turned any thread with even the barest hint of religion into a polemic on how religion is responsible for whatever societal ill is currently the bee in your bonnet.

Not that you're wrong, but to be fair to EHK, GDMisfits pretty much set the ring and then stocked it with a healthy supply of folding chairs and tables for "Wrestlemania, Religion vs Evolution round 5988423" with his initial post. "Creationism Wins"? Really? Is anyone surprised at how it turned out?

[EHK for Darwin]

HT Reddy, on May 1 2009, 16.42, said:

Nothing you say is wrong really EHK, but wouldn't you feel better if you just chilled and got over it? Or, actually achieve something to ameliorate the situation which I guess would be more satisfying to you. Yes you're right religion has impeded scientific progress in America (there's no inherent reason why it should do so, but it has in this case), but aren't there bigger issues both in America and worldwide? There's no doubting science education needs improvement in the US, it just, I dunno, feels like your passion is oddly out of proportion with the issue.

Sure there's bigger issues, but GC ain't exactly exclusively filled with global economic collapse, Darfur genocide (that thing still going on?), AIDS in Africa, and Iraq war threads. The important gets discussed, as does the less important, and the entirely frivolous. Nothing wrong with that. This happens to be an issue I have a fair amount of interest and outrage on. Do you give people shit for their interest in issues that on the grand scheme of things, just aren't terribly important? (I'd argue that religion's negative influence on America and the world is hardly an unimportant issue, but whatever) How many animal rights types have you called out? Or people avidly arguing films and TV while tens of thousands of jobs are being lost and little kids are starving in Burundi? Everyone has their interests...this is one of mine.

As for achieving something to ameliorate the situation, yeah I'd like to. Currently I think I am to a very limited extent. Remember my 'discourses' on mockery and ridicule in previous religion threads, part of the overall strategy and all. I'd like to write a book, but someone's already done that. I'd like to give speeches, but several people already do that. I don't parrot those guys, but I do borrow some points here and there. Overall, I'm not in a position to do much about it. And like the overwhelming vast majority of the people in the world, I likely never will be in a position to exercise serious influence over the major sociocultural currents that push, shove, and guide the world. Its disappointing, but not something I lose alot of sleep over. So like all those other people who are not global movers and shakers, I'll come here and bitch about "shoulds, coulds, and ought to be's" and go about my own life.

If you have some reasonable suggestions about how I might further my 'Crusade', i'd be interested to hear them.

Quote

Your opposition to religion is at least 50% pure emotional bile.

For the past like 2 months you've turned any thread with even the barest hint of religion into a polemic on how religion is responsible for whatever societal ill is currently the bee in your bonnet.

First sentence is bullshit. I have alot of bees in the bonnet, but very few of them do I blame religion for and I've been consistent with those. I've simply talked about the same ones alot because for whatever reason, they've come up alot in these threads lately.

[Shryke]

CiaranAnnrach, on May 1 2009, 18.01, said:

Not that you're wrong, but to be fair to EHK, GDMisfits pretty much set the ring and then stocked it with a healthy supply of folding chairs and tables for "Wrestlemania, Religion vs Evolution round 5988423" with his initial post. "Creationism Wins"? Really? Is anyone surprised at how it turned out?

And someone quickly pointed out that her initial assessment involved some bad misreading of the poll numbers.

EHK went off on his diatribe anyway.

This poll says more about the shittiness of education in the US then about religion.

Edited by Shryke, 01 May 2009 - 05:22 PM.

[HT Reddy]

EHK for Darwin, on May 1 2009, 23.07, said:

Sure there's bigger issues, but GC ain't exactly exclusively filled with global economic collapse, Darfur genocide (that thing still going on?), AIDS in Africa, and Iraq war threads. The important gets discussed, as does the less important, and the entirely frivolous. Nothing wrong with that. This happens to be an issue I have a fair amount of interest and outrage on. Do you give people shit for their interest in issues that on the grand scheme of things, just aren't terribly important? (I'd argue that religion's negative influence on America and the world is hardly an unimportant issue, but whatever) How many animal rights types have you called out? Or people avidly arguing films and TV while tens of thousands of jobs are being lost and little kids are starving in Burundi? Everyone has their interests...this is one of mine.

Well, you of all people would hardly consider what I said to be 'giving you sh*t' :) And, yeh, obviously discussing this is fine; just don't want you to get hypertension unnecessarily is all. Especially as religion means there won't be stem cell therapy to treat it :P

Quote

If you have some reasonable suggestions about how I might further my 'Crusade', i'd be interested to hear them.

Lol I'm not going to give you ideas.

[CiaranAnnrach]

@EHK,

Come on, EHK, you can't deny that your eyes shine with a certain light every time you whip out your trusty Anti-Religion Brand Chainsaw™ to tear into whatever poor sod tries to argue with you on religion. Though, you are at least fair about it and don't try and pen all the worlds issues on religion - just the ones that are associated with religion where it could, in some form or fashion, play a part.

As for what you can do to further your crusade, how about running your own tests and polls? The more information you gather, the more facts you can show, the less likely people will blow off your evidence as just "another religion rant." And, just because other people give speeches and write books, doesn't mean you can't, too. Which, on the topic of books, if you're a fairly good author you can write fiction and/or fantasy books where the criticism of religion is a rider on the story. If the book isn't an obvious attack on religion, the religious people are far more likely to read it, where that criticism will to some degree take root in their minds to potentially flourish at a later date. If I think of anything else, I'll post it or PM it to you, if you're interested.

And, I know this seems ass-backwards, a religious person offering up advice to EHK on how to further his crusade against religion. That feeling of wanting to do something, but not knowing what you can do, just really sucks. Plus, if he can find an out for it, perhaps it won't overflow onto the boards quite so much.

[EHK for Darwin]

Shryke, on May 1 2009, 17.21, said:

This poll says more about the shittiness of education in the US then about religion.

No it doesn't.

[IheartTesla]

Speaking of education, didnt want to start a new thread, but I was reading The Guardian like a good socialist should and came across this bit of news (and a quote)

"In the first place God made idiots. This was for practice. Then he made school boards."
Linky:

Quote

Texas's school board, the State Board of Education (BOE), has been fighting about standards for science textbooks the state buys. Since March, clamorous attention has focused on a proposal to require that texts discuss the "strengths and weaknesses" of evolutionary theory. Everyone knew this was a ploy to get creationist ideas into the classroom. The scientific community was relieved when the BOE finally voted not to include that language – and dismayed when it then voted for amendments that mandate the same thing. The BOE's exuberant chair says he's not afraid to "stand up to the experts."

Quote

In Texas, the governor appoints a BOE member as chair. Republican governor Rick Perry selected Dr Don McLeroy, a dentist and young-earth creationist.

Quote

McLeroy gloats over the idea of textbooks using the Texas standards to discuss the fossil record or the complexity of the cell. "I'm curious to see how they'll cover these subjects. I think the science behind those things is pretty weak." He runs through some creationist favourites – the Cambrian explosion, the flagellum. "They haven't come up with an explanation of the eye. They haven't. They haven't!"

You cant make this shit up.

Edited by cyrano, 01 May 2009 - 05:28 PM.

[Shryke]

EHK for Darwin, on May 1 2009, 18.27, said:

No it doesn't.

25% don't believe in Evolution. These are the (generally religious) crazies.
36% don't know. These are the ignorant/ill-educated. (Look at the education section lower down. The worse their education, the more likely they are to say "I don't know". Meanwhile, Church attendance has little effect on this group.)

36 is greater then 25.

Edited by Shryke, 01 May 2009 - 05:30 PM.

[CiaranAnnrach]

Shryke, on May 1 2009, 17.21, said:

And someone quickly pointed out that her initial assessment involved some bad misreading of the poll numbers.

EHK went off on his diatribe anyway.

This poll says more about the shittiness of education in the US then about religion.

I was the one who posted the bad misreading of poll numbers, and that was done across two different edits within the time frame of 5 minutes, and EHK's post was 3 minutes after my original post. It's very likely EHK opened the thread before the first edit containing the criticism of the misreading came up, and by that time, he had no reason not to start up the religion bit.

Plus, it wasn't until the second page that education system came up at all.

I agree he goes overboard with it usually, but I don't think his initial post and stance in this thread are entirely at fault, given the environment GDMisfits set up with the initial post.

ETA: The poll is a fair criticism of both education and religion. To deny one without denying the other would be deluding ones self, and trying to pick and choose which facts you used and which ones you omitted. EHK, I hope you can at least admit that it is somewhat damning of the education system and the flaws inherent within it, in addition to religion.

Edited by CiaranAnnrach, 01 May 2009 - 05:34 PM.

[EHK for Darwin]

Shryke, on May 1 2009, 17.29, said:

25% don't believe in Evolution. These are the (generally religious) crazies.
36% don't know. These are the ignorant/ill-educated. (Look at the education section lower down. The worse their education, the more likely they are to say "I don't know".)

36 is greater then 25.

I've already explained my reasoning for why that is not the case, either respond to that or don't.

Quote

McLeroy gloats over the idea of textbooks using the Texas standards to discuss the fossil record or the complexity of the cell. "I'm curious to see how they'll cover these subjects. I think the science behind those things is pretty weak." He runs through some creationist favourites – the Cambrian explosion, the flagellum. "They haven't come up with an explanation of the eye. They haven't. They haven't!"

Urge to kill Rising.

[Shryke]

EHK for Darwin, on May 1 2009, 18.31, said:

I've already explained my reasoning for why that is not the case, either respond to that or don't.

It must have gotten buried in the mouth froth. I don't see it.

[EHK for Darwin]

CiaranAnnrach, on May 1 2009, 17.31, said:

I was the one who posted the bad misreading of poll numbers, and that was done across two different edits within the time frame of 5 minutes, and EHK's post was 3 minutes after my original post. It's very likely EHK opened the thread before the first edit containing the criticism of the misreading came up, and by that time, he had no reason not to start up the religion bit.

Plus, it wasn't until the second page that education system came up at all.

I agree he goes overboard with it usually, but I don't think his initial post and stance in this thread are entirely at fault, given the environment GDMisfits set up with the initial post.

Thanks CA. As CA says, I posted my initial mini-rant before the poll numbers were clarified. But as I've gone on at length explaining over a few posts, that clarification doesn't really change all that much.

[HT Reddy]

CiaranAnnrach, on May 1 2009, 23.25, said:

And, I know this seems ass-backwards, a religious person offering up advice to EHK on how to further his crusade against religion. That feeling of wanting to do something, but not knowing what you can do, just really sucks. Plus, if he can find an out for it, perhaps it won't overflow onto the boards quite so much.

Yes it does seem strange. EHK is safe on the board. In the wild he might not be. Don't encourage him.

[CiaranAnnrach]

Shryke, on May 1 2009, 17.33, said:

It must have gotten buried in the mouth froth. I don't see it.

Look at his second or third post.

[CiaranAnnrach]

HT Reddy, on May 1 2009, 17.35, said:

Yes it does seem strange. EHK is safe on the board. In the wild he might not be. Don't encourage him.

Usually the opposite is true. Fear of bodily harm and such. Plus, he's already demonstrated the ability to attend a Catholic Church for a fish fry and come back out alive without being banned from aforementioned church, so I think he'll be fine in the wild.

[HT Reddy]

CiaranAnnrach, on May 1 2009, 23.37, said:

Usually the opposite is true. Fear of bodily harm and such. Plus, he's already demonstrated the ability to attend a Catholic Church for a fish fry and come back out alive without being banned from aforementioned church, so I think he'll be fine in the wild.

What? On no, I meant, EHK is not harmful on the board, whereas he may well be in the real world; poor wording on my part.

[EHK for Darwin]

CiaranAnnrach, on May 1 2009, 17.31, said:

ETA: The poll is a fair criticism of both education and religion. To deny one without denying the other would be deluding ones self, and trying to pick and choose which facts you used and which ones you omitted. EHK, I hope you can at least admit that it is somewhat damning of the education system and the flaws inherent within it, in addition to religion.

That our education system is ailing goes without question. But you simply don't have people coming out in rampant opposition to a scientific theory without some outside impetus. The only one I can find for this is religion. It makes education's job twice as hard because not only must they educate students, they also have to compete with years of indoctrination and misinformation. Not to mention a less quantifiable, but no less disturbing mindset of unthinking, uncritical acceptance of something when there is no evidence to support it and indeed sometimes in the face of massive evidence to the contrary. Instead of being taught from birth to think critically, apply logic, and investigate evidence, kids are taught, at least in some areas, that they must accept unquestionably and believe unconditionally. That is not healthy.

Quote

It must have gotten buried in the mouth froth. I don't see it.

You have a back button.