An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderators: Global Moderators, Discussions Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

What are the facts? Please keep an open mind and read the article first before casting your vote.

While there is certainly proof that mutations do occur in nature; There is absolutely no real evidence to support the theory of evolution at this time (for over the past 150 years of "Dino-digging"). Including the sedimentary column.
17
26%
There probably is evidence to support this theory, yet scientist are at a loss to explain it appropriately.
17
26%
Scientist are great at making shit up when they have no evidence to prove something that is false to begin with.
8
12%
I believe in Santa. He's a real person that lives all the way deep at the north pole and brings me presents every year. The presents prove that he's real. I also leave him milk and cookies to snack on and while I don't ever see him, I just know with all my heart, that he is the one who eats all the cookies and milk. Or, I wish I had a dogasaur like Dino.
23
35%
 
Total votes : 65

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby Metsfanmax on Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:42 pm

Viceroy63 wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote:
Viceroy63 wrote:I personally was very heart broken when I found out the truth. Just being honest here. Why should any child be put through that? Even if it's just a mild heart break? Do we think that perhaps we are preparing our children for the realities of life? By lying to them???


Perhaps now you understand how an atheist feels when he or she sees a helpless child being indoctrinated into a religious worldview.


I know exactly what you are talking about. I feel that way when I see that children are legally brainwashed into the evolution religion world view. It is really very sad!


No, there's a serious difference. Children raised by religious parents are told to accept with unwavering certainty the parents' perspective on how the world works. Children raised by parents grounded in the scientific method are taught to constantly want to learn more about the way the world works, and to question why things are the way they are. Children raised by religious parents, if they are uncertain about the way the world works, are told to read the Bible. Children raised by parents grounded in the scientific method, if they are uncertain about the way the world works, are told to go out there and find out. Children raised by religious parents tend not to ever change their perspective despite any amount of evidence. Children raised by parents grounded in the scientific method, if shown evidence in the fossil record that disproves evolution, would stop believing in evolution.

It is a failure of parenting to instill upon your children unshakeable beliefs that they cannot possibly have the intellectual skills to seriously consider. Good parents teach their children how to think but don't demand that they think the same things as the parents. I don't currently plan on having children, but if I did, I surely wouldn't insist to my child that he or she will burn for eternity in Darwin's prison cell in the sky if he or she doesn't believe in the theory of evolution. I will show him or her the various pieces of evidence that led us to conclude that this is a theory that explains the data we see, I will explain the present limitations as well, and then let my child make his or her own choice.
User avatar
Lieutenant Metsfanmax
Head Thinker
Head Thinker
 
Posts: 3681
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm
Location: NY
Medals: 40
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1)
Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (6) Clan Achievement (2)
General Contribution (5)

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby Viceroy63 on Wed Mar 13, 2013 10:16 pm

Metsfanmax wrote: Children raised by parents grounded in the scientific method, if shown evidence in the fossil record that disproves evolution, would stop believing in evolution.


You mean like in this thread where I have been posting links to the Facts and everyone has stopped believing in the theory of evolution because of the evidence provided?

A victim of brainwashing and programming does not simply change upon being shown the evidence of the truth. It's just human nature! But the brainwashed victim will ignore the evidence provided and fight it to the very end. On this is what the enemy of all creation is counting on. Human Nature! That the brainwashed masses will go fighting to the very end to their final judgement and ultimate destruction. Despite the evidence provided in that final judgment.

That is why topics like these are so important if by chance I can awaken even just one soul to the truth of the matter.

You are absolutely right that organize world religion is no better and also a deception and a brain washing. But I am not talking about organized worldly religion but about the theory of evolution which is also a faith based religion. If you can see the truth in that statement?

The thing about a deception is that when it works, one just never realizes that one is actually being deceived.
Image
An Unproven Hypothesis; The Rise of Ignorance.
Ultimate Proof of Creation. Click the show tab below.
show
User avatar
Major Viceroy63
 
Posts: 1239
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 8:34 pm
Location: Where No One Has Gone Before.
Medals: 17
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Fog of War Achievement (1) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (3) General Achievement (1)
Clan Achievement (1) Training Achievement (2) General Contribution (1)

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby PLAYER57832 on Thu Mar 14, 2013 6:58 am

Metsfanmax wrote:Children raised by religious parents are told to accept with unwavering certainty the parents' perspective on how the world works. Children raised by parents grounded in the scientific method are taught to constantly want to learn more about the way the world works, and to question why things are the way they are. Children raised by religious parents, if they are uncertain about the way the world works, are told to read the Bible. Children raised by parents grounded in the scientific method, if they are uncertain about the way the world works, are told to go out there and find out. Children raised by religious parents tend not to ever change their perspective despite any amount of evidence. Children raised by parents grounded in the scientific method, if shown evidence in the fossil record that disproves evolution, would stop believing in evolution.

Your idea that the 2 are in opposition is a big part of why young earthers are gaining ground. When you insist that it is faith VERSUS attention to proofs, evidence and fact... you set up permission for some people to simply ignore the fact based discussion or to assume if people could be so ignorant of faith and so opposed to it, then they would go to any lengths to disprove faith.

ONLY by acknowleding the validity of each realm, by focusing on the points that can be proven, will science stay on the higher ground. Attempting to claim science is superior to faith is a big reason for the challenge to science.
Sergeant PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 2324
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania
Medals: 30
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4)
Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (4) Ratings Achievement (4)
Training Achievement (1)

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby PLAYER57832 on Thu Mar 14, 2013 7:01 am

Viceroy63 wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote: Children raised by parents grounded in the scientific method, if shown evidence in the fossil record that disproves evolution, would stop believing in evolution.


You mean like in this thread where I have been posting links to the Facts and everyone has stopped believing in the theory of evolution because of the evidence provided?

Since almost all of the evidence you provided doesn't actually counter evolution and the rest has been shown to be fraudulant by reproducable testing, duplicated multiple times...No, not at all like your ideas. Metafax is talking about honest discovery and analysis.


Viceroy63 wrote:The thing about a deception is that when it works, one just never realizes that one is actually being deceived.

This would be the only think keeping you from committing the extreme sins of blasphemy and false testimony.. the slim chance that you have been so decieved.
Sergeant PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 2324
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania
Medals: 30
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4)
Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (4) Ratings Achievement (4)
Training Achievement (1)

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby Metsfanmax on Thu Mar 14, 2013 8:34 am

PLAYER57832 wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote:Children raised by religious parents are told to accept with unwavering certainty the parents' perspective on how the world works. Children raised by parents grounded in the scientific method are taught to constantly want to learn more about the way the world works, and to question why things are the way they are. Children raised by religious parents, if they are uncertain about the way the world works, are told to read the Bible. Children raised by parents grounded in the scientific method, if they are uncertain about the way the world works, are told to go out there and find out. Children raised by religious parents tend not to ever change their perspective despite any amount of evidence. Children raised by parents grounded in the scientific method, if shown evidence in the fossil record that disproves evolution, would stop believing in evolution.

Your idea that the 2 are in opposition is a big part of why young earthers are gaining ground. When you insist that it is faith VERSUS attention to proofs, evidence and fact... you set up permission for some people to simply ignore the fact based discussion or to assume if people could be so ignorant of faith and so opposed to it, then they would go to any lengths to disprove faith.

ONLY by acknowleding the validity of each realm, by focusing on the points that can be proven, will science stay on the higher ground. Attempting to claim science is superior to faith is a big reason for the challenge to science.


Nothing I said has anything to do with rejecting faith. It has to do with not forcing your children to have the same faith that you do; let them develop their own faith, if that is what they choose to do when they are competent enough to make the choice. I am not saying that people should force their children to be scientists either. What I am saying is that one should teach one's child the ability to analyze relevant evidence (whether it be intangible and faith-based or tangible and scientific) and come to a conclusion based on that, and to be properly skeptical whenever coming across new information. Not only is this a reasonable way to live one's life, but also by teaching your children that method of thinking you empower them to be flexible and adapt when fundamental things about their world change. Someone who was taught inflexible rules from a young age (of any flavor) is unable to adapt as easily, and they risk being left behind in a changing society.
User avatar
Lieutenant Metsfanmax
Head Thinker
Head Thinker
 
Posts: 3681
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm
Location: NY
Medals: 40
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1)
Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (6) Clan Achievement (2)
General Contribution (5)

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby PLAYER57832 on Thu Mar 14, 2013 9:16 am

Metsfanmax wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote:Children raised by religious parents are told to accept with unwavering certainty the parents' perspective on how the world works. Children raised by parents grounded in the scientific method are taught to constantly want to learn more about the way the world works, and to question why things are the way they are. Children raised by religious parents, if they are uncertain about the way the world works, are told to read the Bible. Children raised by parents grounded in the scientific method, if they are uncertain about the way the world works, are told to go out there and find out. Children raised by religious parents tend not to ever change their perspective despite any amount of evidence. Children raised by parents grounded in the scientific method, if shown evidence in the fossil record that disproves evolution, would stop believing in evolution.

Your idea that the 2 are in opposition is a big part of why young earthers are gaining ground. When you insist that it is faith VERSUS attention to proofs, evidence and fact... you set up permission for some people to simply ignore the fact based discussion or to assume if people could be so ignorant of faith and so opposed to it, then they would go to any lengths to disprove faith.

ONLY by acknowleding the validity of each realm, by focusing on the points that can be proven, will science stay on the higher ground. Attempting to claim science is superior to faith is a big reason for the challenge to science.


Nothing I said has anything to do with rejecting faith. It has to do with not forcing your children to have the same faith that you do; let them develop their own faith, if that is what they choose to do when they are competent enough to make the choice. I am not saying that people should force their children to be scientists either. What I am saying is that one should teach one's child the ability to analyze relevant evidence (whether it be intangible and faith-based or tangible and scientific) and come to a conclusion based on that, and to be properly skeptical whenever coming across new information. Not only is this a reasonable way to live one's life, but also by teaching your children that method of thinking you empower them to be flexible and adapt when fundamental things about their world change. Someone who was taught inflexible rules from a young age (of any flavor) is unable to adapt as easily, and they risk being left behind in a changing society.

[/quote]

Let’s put it this way. According to you, there is the idea of faith, which must be taught without option.. or the idea that there is no faith, which means options. See the problem?

The real truth is that everyone teaches beliefs to some extent. It doesn’t matter if you start from a fundamental point of “there is God” or “there is no God” or even “I don’t know.. you have to decide”. Ultimately, we teach and then our kids decide on their own.

You ASSUME that there is a dichotomy, that it is possible to teach kids without imparting information that goes beyond what we truly know and into that which we believe. The truth is that is not possible. Instead, what all people do is a combination. We teach our kids to think and reason.. and lay out those things that we consider “not solved” or “open” to discussion, those things that are “not proven by evidence, but believed” , those things that are firmly proven, and those things that lie somewhere in between. Offhand, how to fix a car would be “firmly proven” (essentially.. I don’t do cars). How photosynthesis works is generally “proven”. How to drive a car, what to eat are somewhere in between… partially proven, partially beliefs and partially things that a child might decide to do differently. Which political party one adheres to is closer to something not proven by evidence, just believed. However, every one has some points of just plain, pure, faith.

The key to ANY teaching is to understand where the lines draw. What you are basically saying is that you think that people with faith should leave more questions open, but you say that because of your personal beliefs. You do not say that because of purely objective facts (if you want to discuss that, make it another thread.. maybe the “proof of God” one? ) You say that because your experience, things you feel lead you to think that. Per your earlier statements, it seems you were led to reject much of what your parents’ taught you (or am I confusing you with someone else… for this, really doesn’t matter).

The basic point is that if you were truly “not given an option”, then you would not be able to reach a conclusion that differed from your parents. Yet, you did.
The other point is what option is a parent really going to offer when they believe, with all their heart and sole and logic, that certain actions lead to “being saved” and other actions lead to “heaven” ( grossly simplifying.. let’s not get bogged down in a discussion of those terms, just look at the basic idea). Also, remember that the parents would have come to this thinking through their own process of analyzing and thinking.

Again… this claim that one set of ideas is restrictive and that another is not is just wrong and is exactly what feeds into the fight. I have said this many times before and I will say it again.. challenge someone’s faith, make them defend their faith against science and many will choose faith. That is EXACTLY what young earth distorters do. Notice how few of Vice’s arguments actually address real points that evolutionists think? Notice how he skirts and avoids any mention of real evidence and proof with declarations that its all just fake (but neglects to give any similar analysis to his “evidence”). I have already said that Viceroy does this a bit too patly, but peruse the IRC documents, various creationist-young earth websites and you find that same pattern. Their ideas depend upon declaring this a war AGAINST faith. When you make statements like above, when you allow yourself to become that kind of thinker, then you are very much feeding into their arguments.

And, sadly, you enter down a similar path. That you have, for now, reached similar conclusions to my own does not mean it is a good path. It means we simply happen to each understand that 2 + 2 = 4. But see, I also understand that this only applies in the real world. In the quantum world, just to give an example, that is not necessarily true. Now, certainly, I expect you understand or at least accept quantum physics (at least accept its possible, that it’s a fact based set of ideas, etc.). However, here is the thing….don’t you agree that teaching kids that 2+2=4 is a good thing, a necessary thing without adding in “but in the quantum area” immediately?


Many times, one has to understand the rules before one can understand the exceptions and why they exist.
Sergeant PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 2324
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania
Medals: 30
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4)
Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (4) Ratings Achievement (4)
Training Achievement (1)

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby Metsfanmax on Thu Mar 14, 2013 1:13 pm

PLAYER57832 wrote:
Let’s put it this way. According to you, there is the idea of faith, which must be taught without option.. or the idea that there is no faith, which means options. See the problem?


No, because you have constructed a false dichotomy where the only way to teach the idea of faith to someone is to teach them your specific belief in faith. It is entirely possible to teach the historical importance of faith to a child by describing the various things people have done and thought, based on those beliefs. You would then let the child decide whether they want to hold faith in whatever things you've described. This is no different from describing to a child the various things people have done and thought that led them to believe in evolution, and letting them decide based on what you have told them. It is acceptable to say "this is the result we get from the scientific method" and then let the child decide whether the scientific method is an appealing way for them to live his or her life. It must also be acceptable to say "this is what happens when we hold (religious) faith" and let them decide whether a life of faith is an appealing way for them to live his or her life. Appropriate parenting involves giving your child the tools to be successful in life and make his or her own path; you cannot do this if you teach them that X or Y is true without question.

You ASSUME that there is a dichotomy, that it is possible to teach kids without imparting information that goes beyond what we truly know and into that which we believe. The truth is that is not possible. Instead, what all people do is a combination. We teach our kids to think and reason.. and lay out those things that we consider “not solved” or “open” to discussion, those things that are “not proven by evidence, but believed” , those things that are firmly proven, and those things that lie somewhere in between. Offhand, how to fix a car would be “firmly proven” (essentially.. I don’t do cars). How photosynthesis works is generally “proven”. How to drive a car, what to eat are somewhere in between… partially proven, partially beliefs and partially things that a child might decide to do differently. Which political party one adheres to is closer to something not proven by evidence, just believed. However, every one has some points of just plain, pure, faith.


You're using semantics to try and prove a point that is much more fundamental. There's a difference between fundamentally believing that the human senses can lead us to fundamental truths about the universe (this is obviously a deep metaphysical question), and pragmatically knowing empirical relationships that help one understand the universe better on a day to day level. If knowing that F = ma is going to be true tomorrow just as it was true yesterday is an article of "faith," it's such a trivial article of faith from a pragmatic point of view that everyone shares it.

The key to ANY teaching is to understand where the lines draw. What you are basically saying is that you think that people with faith should leave more questions open, but you say that because of your personal beliefs. You do not say that because of purely objective facts (if you want to discuss that, make it another thread.. maybe the “proof of God” one? ) You say that because your experience, things you feel lead you to think that. Per your earlier statements, it seems you were led to reject much of what your parents’ taught you (or am I confusing you with someone else… for this, really doesn’t matter).


No, I am saying that whenever you teach anyone anything, the point is not to force them to believe the conclusion you draw, but rather to teach them how to make their own conclusions. Those who indoctrinate their children into their own religion actually tend to do the opposite of good teaching, by forcing the conclusions and never showing the child how to make a critical assessment of the issue.

The basic point is that if you were truly “not given an option”, then you would not be able to reach a conclusion that differed from your parents. Yet, you did.


I was indeed given an option. My parents never required my undivided allegiance to their respective religions (perhaps you are confusing me with someone else in this thread?). So I was raised with some religious background but when I was old enough to seriously think about the issue, I was able to make the choice for myself. My point is that many people never get this option. People who are raised by strictly religious parents, and indoctrinated into their beliefs, do not often successfully break away. Those who do are the exception, not the rule.

The other point is what option is a parent really going to offer when they believe, with all their heart and sole and logic, that certain actions lead to “being saved” and other actions lead to “heaven” ( grossly simplifying.. let’s not get bogged down in a discussion of those terms, just look at the basic idea). Also, remember that the parents would have come to this thinking through their own process of analyzing and thinking.


It requires humility and strength to not force your child to believe the same things as you. Nevertheless it is the appropriate thing to do, since your child is not the same person as you. If you strongly believe that the only way for your child to be saved is through belief in your religion, then you should share that with your child and attempt to convince them of your point of view. But you should not do it before the child is old enough to be able to seriously consider the issue.

Again… this claim that one set of ideas is restrictive and that another is not is just wrong and is exactly what feeds into the fight. I have said this many times before and I will say it again.. challenge someone’s faith, make them defend their faith against science and many will choose faith. That is EXACTLY what young earth distorters do. Notice how few of Vice’s arguments actually address real points that evolutionists think? Notice how he skirts and avoids any mention of real evidence and proof with declarations that its all just fake (but neglects to give any similar analysis to his “evidence”). I have already said that Viceroy does this a bit too patly, but peruse the IRC documents, various creationist-young earth websites and you find that same pattern. Their ideas depend upon declaring this a war AGAINST faith. When you make statements like above, when you allow yourself to become that kind of thinker, then you are very much feeding into their arguments.


It is absurd to suggest that we atheists/scientists are the reason why people choose faith. No, the reason these people fall back on faith is that they were indoctrinated by their parents. They havebeen raised from a very young age with the unquestioning assumption that God exists, so that is naturally their default position. I suspect that Viceroy is too deeply embedded into his ideas to be easily extracted. Your argument goes nowhere, because Viceroy clearly wanted to believe from the start that evolution was flawed. What are we supposed to do, just say c'est la vie and move on? No. It is better to challenge him with alternative perspectives. If, at the end, he has still dug in his heels and hasn't changed his mind, so be it. It is cowardly to not even try.

And, sadly, you enter down a similar path. That you have, for now, reached similar conclusions to my own does not mean it is a good path. It means we simply happen to each understand that 2 + 2 = 4. But see, I also understand that this only applies in the real world. In the quantum world, just to give an example, that is not necessarily true.


...yes, even in the 'quantum world', 2 + 2 = 4.

Now, certainly, I expect you understand or at least accept quantum physics (at least accept its possible, that it’s a fact based set of ideas, etc.). However, here is the thing….don’t you agree that teaching kids that 2+2=4 is a good thing, a necessary thing without adding in “but in the quantum area” immediately?


Of course. Good teaching always involves teaching half-truths. I fail to see how this bears on the question of whether you should teach a child to believe the same thing as you, because in religion, there are no half-truths, by construction. You can't believe in God "just a little bit."
User avatar
Lieutenant Metsfanmax
Head Thinker
Head Thinker
 
Posts: 3681
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm
Location: NY
Medals: 40
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1)
Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (6) Clan Achievement (2)
General Contribution (5)

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby Lootifer on Thu Mar 14, 2013 4:19 pm

Viceroy63 wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote: Children raised by parents grounded in the scientific method, if shown evidence in the fossil record that disproves evolution, would stop believing in evolution.


You mean like in this thread where I have been posting links to the Facts and everyone has stopped believing in the theory of evolution because of the evidence provided?

15 seconds on google found this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zuiyo-maru_carcass

I have now checked up on 2 of your pictures; both of which I had to find sources myself because you, or the website who hosted the original articles, did not cite anything remotely reputable in terms of sources.

Both "Facts" as reported by you have found to be false.

Remind me why I should be taking your "Facts" seriously again?
I go to the gym to justify my mockery of fat people.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Lootifer
Discussions Moderator
Discussions Moderator
 
Posts: 718
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:30 pm
Location: Competing
Medals: 15
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Trench Warfare Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) General Contribution (1)

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby PLAYER57832 on Thu Mar 14, 2013 5:11 pm

Metsfanmax wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
Let’s put it this way. According to you, there is the idea of faith, which must be taught without option.. or the idea that there is no faith, which means options. See the problem?


No, because you have constructed a false dichotomy where the only way to teach the idea of faith to someone is to teach them your specific belief in faith. It is entirely possible to teach the historical importance of faith to a child by describing the various things people have done and thought, based on those beliefs. You would then let the child decide whether they want to hold faith in whatever things you've described.

No, teaching about faith is not the same as teaching faith... and that you fail to grasp that is pretty much my point.

Metsfanmax wrote: This is no different from describing to a child the various things people have done and thought that led them to believe in evolution, and letting them decide based on what you have told them. It is acceptable to say "this is the result we get from the scientific method" and then let the child decide whether the scientific method is an appealing way for them to live his or her life. It must also be acceptable to say "this is what happens when we hold (religious) faith" and let them decide whether a life of faith is an appealing way for them to live his or her life. Appropriate parenting involves giving your child the tools to be successful in life and make his or her own path; you cannot do this if you teach them that X or Y is true without question.
No, because science and religion, faith are fundamentally different. Science is based on evidence.
Faith is based on belief, where the evidence ends.

Science actually uses both, as does religion, but not in the way you describe. For science to advance requires someone to have the imagination to think up new ideas and then the faith to follow through and see if the result is as they imagine.

You and Viceroy actually make a similar error. He assumes that because a particular scientist is stuck on an idea, then it must reflect all of science and all of science refuses to accept opposition. In fact, the opposite is true. Similarly, you have somehow convinced yourself that once people have faith, they basically stop thinking and analyzing and comparing. Neither is really true.

Metsfanmax wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
You ASSUME that there is a dichotomy, that it is possible to teach kids without imparting information that goes beyond what we truly know and into that which we believe. The truth is that is not possible. Instead, what all people do is a combination. We teach our kids to think and reason.. and lay out those things that we consider “not solved” or “open” to discussion, those things that are “not proven by evidence, but believed” , those things that are firmly proven, and those things that lie somewhere in between. Offhand, how to fix a car would be “firmly proven” (essentially.. I don’t do cars). How photosynthesis works is generally “proven”. How to drive a car, what to eat are somewhere in between… partially proven, partially beliefs and partially things that a child might decide to do differently. Which political party one adheres to is closer to something not proven by evidence, just believed. However, every one has some points of just plain, pure, faith.


You're using semantics to try and prove a point that is much more fundamental. There's a difference between fundamentally believing that the human senses can lead us to fundamental truths about the universe (this is obviously a deep metaphysical question), and pragmatically knowing empirical relationships that help one understand the universe better on a day to day level. If knowing that F = ma is going to be true tomorrow just as it was true yesterday is an article of "faith," it's such a trivial article of faith from a pragmatic point of view that everyone shares it.

No. It was not the best of examples, but the point is real. The line you draw is not real, it is a one you have found convenient. The real line is that there are some things that have been proven, some things that might be proven and other things that likely will never be proven. At the intersection of the two, things that might be proven, that is where science and religion both can be useful, as long as one understands the limits of each. In the things that likely never will be proven, that is where faith takes over. Science’s “answer” is just to leave it open, but that is not a real answer and in many cases people need/want real answers.

Atheists (not saying that’s you.. cannot remember right now) often think they are getting around this by saying things like “I cannot prove god, so there is just nothing”. However, that is actually a faith statement. If it cannot be proven, it is a statement of faith. In built into that idea is that anything that existed should have proof that is fully evidenced. If you look at most atheistic arguments they tend to go.. either “if god were real, then….[there would be this piece of evidence]” OR “if god were real, then xyz would not happen”. In either case, they have constructed a world and decided that God does not fit. Those with faith do the same thing, but reach a different conclusion.

There is no such thing as just teaching options when it comes to faith. The foundation required to fully understand, like many kinds of understanding requires beginning early. This IS true for science. Science teaching is so heavily infused into our society now that we don’t think much about it, but math, knowing certain names, etc… then on to chemistry, biology, etc, etc, none of that just happens. Once a child understands, then there can be choice, but not until. Once a child understands the basics of science, chemistry, geology and biology, then they are able to challenge things, perhaps even challenge things they were taught was quite true.

You want to criticize faith in the same way that Viceroy tries to criticize evolution.. without first understanding.






Metsfanmax wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
The key to ANY teaching is to understand where the lines draw. What you are basically saying is that you think that people with faith should leave more questions open, but you say that because of your personal beliefs. You do not say that because of purely objective facts (if you want to discuss that, make it another thread.. maybe the “proof of God” one? ) You say that because your experience, things you feel lead you to think that. Per your earlier statements, it seems you were led to reject much of what your parents’ taught you (or am I confusing you with someone else… for this, really doesn’t matter).


No, I am saying that whenever you teach anyone anything, the point is not to force them to believe the conclusion you draw, but rather to teach them how to make their own conclusions. Those who indoctrinate their children into their own religion actually tend to do the opposite of good teaching, by forcing the conclusions and never showing the child how to make a critical assessment of the issue.

That you think this is the best proof that you were not really taught well, just like Viceroy’s arguments are proof that he/she was never taught science well.

Again, both science and faith begin by teaching fundamentals. In both cases, there is a combination of leading the child to understand.. that should be the bulk, and teaching “this is so”. We tell kids that 1 is one, 2 is two objects, etc…. no debate. It is a matter of definition. People who believe in God teach that God is there. No option, it is a matter of definition. When it comes to addition, we take out blocks, point to fingers or other objects and show why 2 + 2 = 4, but it has to start with the definition of 2. Similarly, when kids get older we get into why God did this or that, etc. At some point, most kids truly question God and have more complicated questions. In most cases, for most people the “there is God” gets shifted a tad into various complexities, just like at some point we realize that 2+2=4 can really mean anything from 1.49999999 (etc) to 2.499999999, and a few other caveats. BUT, it all starts with the definite.


Metsfanmax wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
The basic point is that if you were truly “not given an option”, then you would not be able to reach a conclusion that differed from your parents. Yet, you did.


I was indeed given an option. My parents never required my undivided allegiance to their respective religions (perhaps you are confusing me with someone else in this thread?). So I was raised with some religious background but when I was old enough to seriously think about the issue, I was able to make the choice for myself. My point is that many people never get this option. People who are raised by strictly religious parents, and indoctrinated into their beliefs, do not often successfully break away. Those who do are the exception, not the rule.

Sorry, but your understanding of how faith really works is as poor as Viceroy’s understanding of evolution…and it shows.

Metsfanmax wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
The other point is what option is a parent really going to offer when they believe, with all their heart and sole and logic, that certain actions lead to “being saved” and other actions lead to “heaven” ( grossly simplifying.. let’s not get bogged down in a discussion of those terms, just look at the basic idea). Also, remember that the parents would have come to this thinking through their own process of analyzing and thinking.


It requires humility and strength to not force your child to believe the same things as you. Nevertheless it is the appropriate thing to do, since your child is not the same person as you. If you strongly believe that the only way for your child to be saved is through belief in your religion, then you should share that with your child and attempt to convince them of your point of view. But you should not do it before the child is old enough to be able to seriously consider the issue.
This is the difference between having faith and thinking everything is just optional. I grew up in CA, I am certainly familiar with that concept, but it has little to do with real faith. Your failure to understand that is not such a big deal. Your failure to grasp that you don’t understand it is why you are adding to the fight instead of detracting or solving it. You feed directly into the thinking of folks’ like Viceroy because you start from the fundamental idea that faith is just wrong. No matter how you want to paint it up, that is what you think. Its OK for someone to adopt various ideas, like they would different clothing or a political party, but true faith is something you just don’t get.

The thing is that there IS no “alternative”. I want my child to understand what I know, but to say that belief in God is optional is like saying that belief in the number 2 is optional. It really is not.


Metsfanmax wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
Again… this claim that one set of ideas is restrictive and that another is not is just wrong and is exactly what feeds into the fight. I have said this many times before and I will say it again.. challenge someone’s faith, make them defend their faith against science and many will choose faith. That is EXACTLY what young earth distorters do. Notice how few of Vice’s arguments actually address real points that evolutionists think? Notice how he skirts and avoids any mention of real evidence and proof with declarations that its all just fake (but neglects to give any similar analysis to his “evidence”). I have already said that Viceroy does this a bit too patly, but peruse the IRC documents, various creationist-young earth websites and you find that same pattern. Their ideas depend upon declaring this a war AGAINST faith. When you make statements like above, when you allow yourself to become that kind of thinker, then you are very much feeding into their arguments.


It is absurd to suggest that we atheists/scientists are the reason why people choose faith.
I did not say that it is the reason people choose faith. Read it again. I say that your disdain for faith is the reason that people won’t listen to what you call logic. If you wish to talk to someone, don’t challenge their faith. You will lose. You will lose because faith is not, as you think, an option. You can disagree or agree, but understand that or you will, as I said, create more of the divide, create more people who decide that your disdain is reason enough to reject what you say in favor of what people they trust, namely pastors and other “experts” put forward by their church or belief set.

You show them disdain, they show you disdain. NO understanding and the world loses.

Metsfanmax wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
And, sadly, you enter down a similar path. That you have, for now, reached similar conclusions to my own does not mean it is a good path. It means we simply happen to each understand that 2 + 2 = 4. But see, I also understand that this only applies in the real world. In the quantum world, just to give an example, that is not necessarily true.


...yes, even in the 'quantum world', 2 + 2 = 4.

Now, certainly, I expect you understand or at least accept quantum physics (at least accept its possible, that it’s a fact based set of ideas, etc.). However, here is the thing….don’t you agree that teaching kids that 2+2=4 is a good thing, a necessary thing without adding in “but in the quantum area” immediately?


Of course. Good teaching always involves teaching half-truths. I fail to see how this bears on the question of whether you should teach a child to believe the same thing as you, because in religion, there are no half-truths, by construction. You can't believe in God "just a little bit."

As I said above, 2+2=4…… but it can also mean that 1.5000000000000 + 2.49999999999999 = anywhere from 3.5 to 4.49999999999

And yes, there are MANY variables in religion… true religion as opposed to the fiction so many atheists and non believers of other stripes try to pretend faith is.

Just like you cannot rely on evolution deniers to give the honest truth about evolution, you cannot rely upon those who have rejected faith to honestly define what it is, not fully.
Sergeant PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 2324
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania
Medals: 30
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4)
Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (4) Ratings Achievement (4)
Training Achievement (1)

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby PLAYER57832 on Thu Mar 14, 2013 5:12 pm

Oh, by the way, 2 electrons plus 2 electrons don't necessarily equal 4 electrons.
Sergeant PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 2324
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania
Medals: 30
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4)
Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (4) Ratings Achievement (4)
Training Achievement (1)

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby BigBallinStalin on Thu Mar 14, 2013 5:34 pm

player wrote:No, because science and religion, faith are fundamentally different. Science is based on evidence.
Faith is based on belief, where the evidence ends.

Science actually uses both, as does religion, but not in the way you describe. For science to advance requires someone to have the imagination to think up new ideas and then the faith to follow through and see if the result is as they imagine.

You and Viceroy actually make a similar error. He assumes that because a particular scientist is stuck on an idea, then it must reflect all of science and all of science refuses to accept opposition. In fact, the opposite is true. Similarly, you have somehow convinced yourself that once people have faith, they basically stop thinking and analyzing and comparing. Neither is really true.


I agree that scientific/philosophical inquiry reaches a point, after which either (1) a conclusion can become 'sound' through one's faith in it, or (2) the conclusion remains unknown in soundness---which for many is not satisfactory. People prefer seemingly sound conclusions, rather than being prodded into accepting the vagueness of those conclusions.

For example, when Montesquieu wrote of the necessity of checks and balances for a democratic government, he could not prove that such a form government would be superior to the governments of his times (17th century). However, if he maintained that his view was the correct one, then this would be done on the basis of faith.

Of course, we would agree with Montesquieu on his checks and balances doctrine because we enjoy the position of hindsight. Even our belief in the importance of checks and balances maintains the validity/soundness of such a doctrine.

Arguments which exhort policy X in the name of the "common good," "national security," "public safety," or the ever nefarious "helping others," similarly rely upon faith in their final conclusion. If questioned about the problem of #2, they might say, "Never mind the uncertainty and the potential unintended consequences. Policy X is the correct choice." (I wonder: who fits that description?)
User avatar
Colonel BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 3580
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham
Medals: 48
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (1)
Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4)
Tournament Achievement (5) General Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (10)

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby Viceroy63 on Thu Mar 14, 2013 6:19 pm

Metsfanmax wrote:It is absurd to suggest that we atheists/scientists are the reason why people choose faith. No, the reason these people fall back on faith is that they were indoctrinated by their parents. They havebeen raised from a very young age with the unquestioning assumption that God exists, so that is naturally their default position. I suspect that Viceroy is too deeply embedded into his ideas to be easily extracted. Your argument goes nowhere, because Viceroy clearly wanted to believe from the start that evolution was flawed. What are we supposed to do, just say c'est la vie and move on? No. It is better to challenge him with alternative perspectives. If, at the end, he has still dug in his heels and hasn't changed his mind, so be it. It is cowardly to not even try.


And every culture does the same thing with their ideologies as does every parent. This continues on into the Theory of evolution. No parent that believes in the theory of evolution is going to teach their children "Logical Thinking" because the truth is that the theory of evolution is not Logical. A theory is a possible explanation for the observable facts but if the theory can't explain the facts then it is not logical to continue with the theory. And yet it is taught to school children from a very young age to believe in this theory as if it were true.

Every single text book on this subject begins more or less with, "Millions of Years ago, when Dinosaurs ruled the earth..." How is that not "Indoctrinating" our young minds to believe something that has no proof behind it or bases for a foundation? How do young minds question that which is being taught them with such authority? If we really wanted to teach our children "Logical Thinking" then we would not make it against the constitution to teach religion in school since it is already being taught in school. It goes by the name of the religion of the theory of evolution.

To teach "Logical Thinking" one must present all of the theories and present them as such. Theories and nothing more. Schools must then spend as much time teaching Basic theology (The Bible) as they spent teaching any other subject. To say that the theory of evolution is not being taught as fact is absurd. Of course it is. They just don't admit it is. Yet anyone who does not believe in the theory of evolution is immediately look upon as ignorant of the facts. This is clearly not the case.

I presented my case in the OP. The basis for the theory of evolution is set in the rocks and not in a lab. It is the Fossil records that is being used to teach evolution as fact. The fact that the sedimentary column is never found as it is drawn in the text books is not mentioned in the course of teaching the theory as fact. The fact that the exhibits, the fossil records, are also misrepresented or falsified is also not mention in the teaching of the theory as fact. It is all biased towards evolution! And this is how we keep an open mind?

I stated that there is no evidence to support the theory. Obviously Mutation do occur but if this is the evidence then I have already refuted this many times in this thread. The onus of responsibility to prove that I am wrong lies not with me but with those who claim that I am wrong. Yet all that I have seen presented are links to "mutations in a Lab." No one has yet to show the intermediary species that lead from a cow to a whale for example and not be a hoax. Everything in this thread has been digressed from the original intentions of the OP.

I wonder why?
Image
An Unproven Hypothesis; The Rise of Ignorance.
Ultimate Proof of Creation. Click the show tab below.
show
User avatar
Major Viceroy63
 
Posts: 1239
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 8:34 pm
Location: Where No One Has Gone Before.
Medals: 17
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Fog of War Achievement (1) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (3) General Achievement (1)
Clan Achievement (1) Training Achievement (2) General Contribution (1)

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby PLAYER57832 on Thu Mar 14, 2013 6:32 pm

Viceroy63 wrote: This continues on into the Theory of evolution. No parent that believes in the theory of evolution is going to teach their children "Logical Thinking" because the truth is that the theory of evolution is not Logical.
Oh stop already.

First of all, we are still waiting for you to produce even a single piece of evidence that actually disputes the theory of evolution. Just pretending no evidence exists is not enough.

Also, you have not provided any evidence other than your very dicey read of the Bible (one disputed by plenty of true Biblical experts) to support your claim.
Sergeant PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 2324
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania
Medals: 30
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4)
Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (4) Ratings Achievement (4)
Training Achievement (1)

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby Lootifer on Thu Mar 14, 2013 6:42 pm

Regarding you thing about Dinosaurs.

As Player and many others have stated this does not directly disprove evolution. What it potentially does is ask questions of dating techniques (which indirectly impact some supporting evidence for evolution).

Can I suggest that if you want to argue your case effectively (i.e. have people actually listen to you - currently zero people are taking notice of your opinions, they are merely poking holes in your wafer thin conclusions) you should be attacking dating techniques rather than evolution? This is the rational form your argument should take as if you successfully show that dating techniques are flawed then you can then (and not before) develop your argument against evolution.

By scattering consipiracy theory pictures of dinosaurs existing today and then smugly saying "Hah, see, evolution no worky!" you are not making one iota of difference in peoples minds - you are simply making yourself out to be a fool (cue Mark Twain/Abraham Lincoln quote).
I go to the gym to justify my mockery of fat people.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Lootifer
Discussions Moderator
Discussions Moderator
 
Posts: 718
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:30 pm
Location: Competing
Medals: 15
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Trench Warfare Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) General Contribution (1)

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby PLAYER57832 on Thu Mar 14, 2013 6:52 pm

Lootifer wrote:Regarding you thing about Dinosaurs.

As Player and many others have stated this does not directly disprove evolution. What it potentially does is ask questions of dating techniques (which indirectly impact some supporting evidence for evolution).

Can I suggest that if you want to argue your case effectively (i.e. have people actually listen to you - currently zero people are taking notice of your opinions, they are merely poking holes in your wafer thin conclusions) you should be attacking dating techniques rather than evolution? This is the rational form your argument should take as if you successfully show that dating techniques are flawed then you can then (and not before) develop your argument against evolution.

By scattering consipiracy theory pictures of dinosaurs existing today and then smugly saying "Hah, see, evolution no worky!" you are not making one iota of difference in peoples minds - you are simply making yourself out to be a fool (cue Mark Twain/Abraham Lincoln quote).

To do that effectively, he would have to actually understand how those techniques work AND how they are used. He has shown he does neither.
Sergeant PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 2324
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania
Medals: 30
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4)
Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (4) Ratings Achievement (4)
Training Achievement (1)

PreviousNext

Return to Whose Forum is It Anyway?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

Login