Here is my question- If you can be taken in by your fellow evolutionists (albeit for a short time) on something like this, then how safe are you from harder to detect faulty arguments?
Attention all you wacky evolutionists!
by AlmostAtheist 43 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Satanus
how safe are you from harder to detect faulty arguments?
Very safe. You guys w faith on the other hand ...
S
-
hooberus
Really, then why don't you point out some flawed arguments (by evolutionists) on this page:
-
AlmostAtheist
You're right hoob, the site is a joke.
I've been trying to nail down an answer to the idiot/spoof question all day, how were you able to determine it? I emailed some of the folks listed on the site, but I haven't gotten a response yet. One address bounced, I guess that ought to be a clue.
Dave
-
Satanus
Hoob
No thanks. I go where i want, not where you want me to. But, you faithful ones, if your faith called for you to drink koolaid, would do so.
S
-
Quotes
"Connection refused when attempting to contact http://objective.jesussave.us/"
Maybe over their bandwidth limit for the day (at this free host)?
:-( -
Quotes
hooberus asked:
=================
Here is my question- If you can be taken in by your fellow evolutionists (albeit for a short time) on something like this, then how safe are you from harder to detect faulty arguments?
=================
With respect, I think you are making a mistake by comparing
(a) not realizing, for a few hours, that this web site is parody, and
(b) years and years (150+ years?) of gradual, self correcting, progessive analysis, which has included eliminating deliberate hoaxes (see below).
It reminds me of how some creationists point to the Pildown man hoax as "proof" that science can be fooled. In reality, the Piltdown hoax proves that science corrects itself. In this case, it took longer than necessary, because "Professional jealousy kept the faked skull and jaw securely locked away from public gaze."
And yet, even though this would have been "perfect evidence" for certain theories, it was rejected and exposed as soon as the scientific community could get their hands on it to examine. Again, I think this case leaves the scientific method in a very positve light. It would have been more convenient for the faked evidence to never be exposed, but it was. That alone demonstrates that there is no conspiracy in science to artificially maintain a theory.
Put another way: there are thousands of "greedy, proud, human/self centred scientists" that would like nothing better than the riches and fame and recognition that would go with legitimately destroying and existing theory and replacing it with their own. There is great incentive for scientists to NOT participate in a cover up.
~Quotes, of the "Just the facts, mamn, just the facts -- Joe Friday" class -
drwtsn32
Here is my question- If you can be taken in by your fellow evolutionists (albeit for a short time) on something like this, then how safe are you from harder to detect faulty arguments?
Oh please! Who said "evolutionists" composed this site anyway? It is simply done by very skilled satirists. Being fooled by a good satirist has nothing to do with being able to detect flaws in a scientific analysis.
-
AlmostAtheist
If you can be taken in by your fellow evolutionists (albeit for a short time) on something like this, then how safe are you from harder to detect faulty arguments?
I still haven't been 100% convinced that the site is a joke, but there's a large part of me saying, "C'mon, fess up! You were had! Admit it." Sooner or later, I probably will.
As for being taken in by it, it isn't exactly something that begs for critical analysis, is it? The question is, "Are these the opinions of a bunch of bible-thumping morons, or the satirical ramblings of one or more skilled writers trying to SOUND like morons?" There's little to go on to nail down the answer.
When faced with an evolution site, there are references to check out, logical arguments to consider, evidence presented, peer review. I don't think you can compare falling for a well-written satire where there is nothing to support believing it or not, with agreeing with a well-expressed argument that presents evidence for consideration.
But in the end, I *am* gullible, so there's that, too.
Dave
-
avishai
Speaking of parody sites....
Another part of their website has them calling another religious satire site a "Hatecrime site" etc. and has them wanting to shut it down.