No, it is a polite way of describing what I see in the data and his equations. Kinda like the following.
Posted on 08/27/2009 10:11:05 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Sorry... you misunderstood my remark. I mean no disrespect - but I believe life continues to evolve as it has for eons. There is no need to respond.
No, it is a polite way of describing what I see in the data and his equations. Kinda like the following.
>>I havent run across too many science articles yet, as I find some of that stuff interesting, but mostly stick on the political articles.<<
Most of the scientists and those who understand and follow science were purged a few years ago. Some of us they let back, some just decided they were tired of banging their heads against the brick wall of creationism (and its retarded cousin, ID).
For the most part, articles like this is what passes as “science.” Ocassionally those of us who understand science wil stop by one of these seeming parody threads just to let the world that a these nut cases are a loud but tiny minority and most Conservatives do understand science and not this metaphysical mumbo-jumbo.
If you want a laugh, find some of the threads suggesting that time itself has changed (over time, hehe).
The OP is like that crazy old uncle with Tourette you have to have over on holidays — he blurts out nonsense but can’t really get off the chair cause too much trouble.
Pat his head and agree with him and he’ll wag his tail.
That is one of the first articles I came across in the science keyword. I thought it was a spoof at first.
So what do you think it is now?
Its not science, thats for sure.
As you become accustomed to some of the posters here, should you choose to do so, you will discover that some are interesting conversationalists and prescient observers.
Others are like a one-note chorus of no particular interest, despite the volume of their output.
Yea, I was looking at the original poster history. He posts these type of articles all the time with all the same theme. I wont bother to even debate it anymore because its obvious the guy is fanatical about creationism and evolution. Waste of time even debating, I found out.
Well, these themes are so blindly essentially copied and pasted that little apparent analysis of them is actually done by the poster.
As an inadvertent consequence, evidence or discoveries which contradict the obvious bias is sometimes passed along uncritically, thus weakening the desired case.
It’s amusing to observe, but you are correct in noting that it’s normally a waste of your candle.
The posts I was looking at were almost exclusively from a select few creationist websites. I am wondering now if he gets paid or something by the hit count on those sites. At least that would make sense.
You are not the first to have mused about that. It does give credence to the noteworthy diligence.
I was reading another one of these articles today and saw something interesting. I went back over a couple dozen articles and this poster always “pings” a list of people, who I guess are like minded. There is one that within a few minutes of the original post always posts back the exact same thing (Alamo-Girl— “Thanks for the ping!)
Ive noticed this for every single article he’s posted,a dn this particular person always say the exact same thing, usually within minutes. I think this guy has multiple screennames as well and answers himself with different personas). Just an observation.
It’s a mutual admiration society.
I’m not sure what psychological kick they get out of it. If you really want to study it, it is psychologically interesting.
It would probably be valuable as a source for various mental pathologies. But you will certainly need a strong stomach.
One thing you’ll notice, most of the opposition comes from people who speak only for themselves. Most of the support comes from a steady group of people egging each other on.
None of the “science” threads last long anymore before they are overrun and inundated with Biblical quotations and internecine fractiousness. The science at the root of the thread serves only as a starting point for yet another food fight.
I know I wont be wasting my time on those threads anymore. I didnt realize how prolific his posts are. At least one every single day promoting these select few websites. I still think he gets a check cut for the hits. There is no way one would put up that much time and energy on it unless it really was a pathological obsession, imo.
Maybe I should have said it’s a mutual aberration society.
I have no problem with people who see the world through the prismatic glasses of religious interpretation. What is annoying is the concerted effort to turn every non-religious discussion into a religious conflict.
The attacks against science, and evolution in particular, bring out the worst of illogic and vehement partisanship. In this twisted frame of reference, science is bad because it is a religion, and religion is good because it’s scientific.
In this worldview, evolution is false because certain discoveries have brought new information to our awareness, and the scientist adjusts his theories and suppositions to accommodate the new understanding. But religious dogma is not so facile; it cannot bend to the winds of change and must resist as long as it has strength to do so. It becomes true because it is unchanging, while science is false because it changes.
Worst of all is the treatment of evidence. One would think that a logical chain of evidence would be given careful scrutiny and attention. Well, in a manner it is. It is examined for the slightest possibility of any error, even the carefully calculated odds which prove the validity of the concept, because they are stated as “within a margin of error”, are proclaimed to be wholly false thereby.
... While at the same time, the most tenuous and ludicrous explanations of what might have happened while no one was there to observe it are taken to be virtual divine revelation. No evidence or credence is needed.
This is not the way to appreciate a religious view of the world. It is needlessly contentious and pointlessly argumentative.
A proper religious view acknowledges the wonder and mystery of creation, even when the skeptic raises doubts. Even in the face of logical explanation of mundane happenstance, wonder is still a delight for the inspired.
Years of diligent study may produce an individual trained in optics, capable of designing space telescopes that don’t need bifocals, but the beauty of a rainbow or a sunset will remain.
I myself come from a religious background, but am now agnostic. Im open to all possibilities and respect religious viewpoints. My family is religious and I have religious friends and we get along fine. It seems these threads just serve to fan the flames of argumentation needlessly.
Fanning flames, huh?
Now where have we heard of a place that has eternal flames, which need to be tended, no doubt?
True irony if that turns out to be their sad and ultimate purpose.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.