Welcome to Gaia! ::

Reply The Anti-Creationism Guild
Undermining Prominent Creationists Goto Page: [] [<] 1 2

Quick Reply

Enter both words below, separated by a space:

Can't read the text? Click here

Submit

Mechanism
Crew

PostPosted: Tue Feb 01, 2005 5:55 am


gigacannon

There is no reason why people think that the word of the Bible are morally good. You see, if they were to question their beliefs, then it would be eroding their faith; which is evil. (According to them)

Well, they believe it's morally good because they believe that the Bible is the word of God. That's the part that their faith lies in.
Anyway, I do think it's a sort-of funny type of belief, when part of your belief is that people that doubt of the belief is evil. Theoretically, there is absolutely no way to convince someone like this that they're wrong- it's the perfect belief! (That is, if beliefs that are more resistant to being discarded are better).
Still, my point is that they couldn't directly find a fault with a class on critical thinking, I think, unless, in the class, they were specifically assessing religious beliefs.
PostPosted: Wed Mar 23, 2005 4:16 pm


gigacannon
Don't get angry. Do you want to get angry? No. When something happens you don't like, act rationally. Think, "What can I do to prevent this thing that has made me angry from happening again?" Analyse the situation and determine the best course of action based on previous experience.


Some advice I seriously need to take. I can't help but get angry with creationists... at least, in person. It's easier to talk to them online. Perhaps because they can't interrupt me while I'm talking, or as easily ignore me. Or perhaps it's just 'cos people from my school are dumbasses. Or maybe because I can easily walk away for a minute or two, from the computer, to cool down.

While Honvid makes a lot of absurd claims, I believe these to be the most ridiculous:
1.) Conservation of angular momentum disproves the big bang.
2.) There is a "general theory of evolution." (Is he sure it isn't the Theory of General Evolution, and that there isn't a Theory of Special Evolution to go along with it?)

I wonder if he knows that quantum particles don't "spin" in the same way that macroscopic objects "spin." Sure, he knows the definition of spin in one context, but unless he knows its definition in the context he uses it (ie, to refer to the singularity the universe spawned from... actually, I don't know that it even did "spin", but I'm not an expert on singularities), he shouldn't proclaim intellectual superiority. It seems he does the same with the word "theory"--in layman usage, a theory is an unproven statement, but in scientific usage, it's a coherent paradigm meant to explain certain phenonoma.

Malkuth


Malkuth

PostPosted: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:06 am


Correction: the spin of subatomic particles is angular momentum (as it is with macroscopic objects); but the subatomic particles are point objects, not extended objects, so the angular momentum is intrinsic. It's still angular momentum, however, and angular momentum is still conserved at the quantum level. It seems I've proven nothing in my last post except that I'm confused by quantum mechanics.

I'm curious now as to what the spin of the singularity from which the universe came was. That is, if it had any spin at all.
PostPosted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 4:55 am


I know exactly how little Hovind actually understands about science. He's clearly a layman.

My little tidbits of advice are a part of neo-rationalism. I've been told that my advice is actually found in Buddhist teaching, which raised my opinion of Buddhism slightly.

Contingent, the point about it being impossible to convince somebody they are wrong- beliefs less likely to be discarded are not better. They are what they are.

However, those beliefs are a part of a religion. These beliefs serve as the 'reproductive system' of the religion. Religions perpetuate their own existence over generations by exploiting the weaknesses in people (namely, gullibility). They are, in almost every sense, a virus. They can also be considered a meme virus. However, they do have a physical component.

Bibles spread across the world, sometimes mutating into different languages, (and thus adapting to their environment). They can even mutate into different versions to suit different religions.

Bibles are viruses, and they do evolve. Biological evolution is just a type of evolution; almost anything which humans interact with is a type of virus (in a loose, inorganic term, like computer viruses) and evolution applies to all of it.

gigacannon
Crew


Malkuth

PostPosted: Fri Apr 08, 2005 4:12 pm


...and the instrinsic angular momentum apparently has no analogue to the "extrinsic" angular momentum of extended objects in classical physics, so I was right in the first place by saying that the "spin" of an subatomic particle is different than the "spin" of an extended object. I've corrected a mistake I didn't make. I should perhaps refrain from commenting on quantum mechanics until I actually get a nontrivial understanding of it.

I've just read this on the Panda's Thumb:
http://www.pandasthumb.org/pt-archives/000947.html

Apparently, Honvid is having little kids think that dinosaurs breathe fire. If that doesn't establish him as an idiot, I don't know what will.
PostPosted: Sat Apr 09, 2005 6:11 am


gigacannon

Contingent, the point about it being impossible to convince somebody they are wrong- beliefs less likely to be discarded are not better. They are what they are.

Well, as a belief that is likely to survive and be passed on, it's better.
That's why such beliefs have survived for so many ages; heretics were 'evil'.

Mechanism
Crew


gigacannon
Crew

PostPosted: Sun Jun 04, 2006 6:33 am


I found a video on YouTube for one of Kent Hovind's Seminars. It's two hours long but you will never find Creationism so eloquently argued for and facts so deceptively obfuscated. It makes it quite clear that creationism isn't science, but directly inspired by the Bible alone.

Kent Hovind's Seminar on Creationism.

Man does this guy have a silly voice.
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2006 1:28 pm


gigacannon
I found a video on YouTube for one of Kent Hovind's Seminars. It's two hours long but you will never find Creationism so eloquently argued for and facts so deceptively obfuscated. It makes it quite clear that creationism isn't science, but directly inspired by the Bible alone.

Kent Hovind's Seminar on Creationism.

Man does this guy have a silly voice.

That is... ******** pooor ignorant fools. He is gooood.

And yeah, that voice...

The way he pronounces water...*shudders*

That needs a stickie I think.

Redem
Captain

Reply
The Anti-Creationism Guild

Goto Page: [] [<] 1 2
 
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games
Mini-Games
Play with GCash
Play with Platinum