RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (2) < 1 [2] >   
  Topic: Helping the Ignorant< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
BWE



Posts: 1902
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 19 2006,20:50   

Quote (TangoJuliett @ June 17 2006,13:47)
Skeptic:
 
Quote
Innovation in science is driven by ideas followed by research but the current environment does not allow progress in this area.  How can any scientist with any ambition or thoughts of professional success stray beyond the dogma.

Here is a link to an article about a scientist who overturned the prevailing scientific 'dogma' in regards to neurogenesis.

http://tinyurl.com/zgvmt

Did she do it by whining and complaining on a public forum?  No.
Did she do it by advocating that the controversy be taught in public schools?  No.
It took about 10 years, but she did it through research and the development and publication of relevant objective evidence.

Go figure...

Goddamnit. That is about the coolest tthing I've seen all week. Is she just all the he11 over the place in science news, scientific American and stuff? OT a little,
Herbert J. Gans “Positive Functions of the Undeserving Poor”
An essay I use in a class I assemble for PSU summer terms provides a sociological parallel. Anybody read it?

And Skeptic,

I have always been on your side. With comments like
Quote
Now, I'm not a scientist like you but I can see the level of merit in your argument. And like you, I'd just like to get them to open their minds and figure out a way to handle guys like you. If they had an effective way of communicating with guys like you then maybe something could happen.
and
Quote
Skeptic,

You are absolutely on track. These guys are all working off the "law" of Evolution much the same way physicists worked off the "Law" of gravity. If only they would just wake up and realize that there is a frameshift in understanding just over the event horizon they would be searching in 5 or more dimentians to find the causes of genetic degenetic-generation and malthusian saltation occurences instead of claiming that random mutation and selective pressure exerted by changing ecosystems, competition for resources and isolated niches with available food and places to raise young in relative safety are mechanisms that can generate upward genetic mobility and  a stratified genetically and specieally grouped biosphere that owes nothing to interactions with non-euclidean and euclidian universes that might intersect in non-dimentional singularities with the specific genomic anomalies exhibited by the various kingdoms and phylums and even down to the species level and below that only lose functionality rather than incorporate new variations and increased genetic information that is implied and implicated by neo-darwinian mysticism and neo-darwinists refusal to think outside of that particular box.

on your side, it was your race to lose. I tried to help but you just couldn't hold the tiger's tail and you got ate. Sorry, but you couldn't have asked for more support from me.

--------------
Who said that ev'ry wish would be heard and answered
When wished on the morning star
Somebody thought of that, and someone believed it
Look what it's done so far

The Daily Wingnut

   
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 19 2006,21:02   

Quote
upward genetic mobility


the "Yuppie" approach to biological research.

:p

Quote
but you couldn't have asked for more support from me.


now, now, baiting the trolls should not be considered "helping the ignorant".

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 20 2006,23:21   

(Apologies for minor derailment)

Skeptic,

It REALLY isn't about bashing, or "we are in possession of the TRUTH", or anything remotely like it.

If 50% of the population of the USA believe that evolutionary biology is a crock then on the issue of the veracity of evolutionary biology yes indeed 50% of the population of the USA are wrong. So what? Is everybody in the USA suddenly a research scientist? Why should people understand something they are continually lied to about and in an education system where teachers hand are tied behind ther backs? It isn't US patronising people, it's YOU. We don't EXPECT everyone to be right about everything all the time. We don't EXPECT everyone to be interested in or to understand the details of complex science. We wouldn't dare patronise people like that. However we DO expect people who wish to comment on science to have the barest modicum of intellectual honesty and ability and to actually know what they are talking about. No too much to ask is it?

Last time I looked, reality wasn't democratic. If it were why don't we repeal the law of gravity? How about the laws of thermodynamics? That would make my job as a synthetic organic chemist easier, after all I wouldn't have to worry about kinetic vs thermodynamic effects in my reactions, I could just get everyone in the lab to vote on the outcome of the reaction being what I want it to be. I could go home early!

But seriously, we are all only human. To be confronted day in day out by people who very aggressively and arrogantly claim all modern science is bullshit, without actually having any basis for knowing whether or not it is in fact bullshit, occasionally gets a bit wearing. Many of the people on this forum are, or have been, academics and/or teachers. One of their jobs (out of the many) is to teach and train the next generation of scientists. We positively WANT to impart information and methodology to hungry students. That's not only part of our jobs, but entirely analogously to parents bringing up kids, a real pleasure when one of our students goes off and discovers something valuable for themselves.

Perhaps what you don't understand about science is that no one really cares WHAT the answer is, they just care HOW you got the answer and that the answer is reliable and reproducible.

You bring up bashing members of religions. Science can be repeated and learnt by ANYONE, in that sense it is 100% egalitarian and democratic. Science and the findings of science are the same for a Hindu as they are for a Muslim, a man or a woman, a paralympian or an olympian, a homosexual or a heterosexual. The inanities of YEC or IDC or homeopathy or any cargo cult/pseudoscientific bunkum are only "reproducible" (and aren't even that to be blunt) to people with a prior commitement, a belief, in these things. How do I know? Because I can demonstrate this is the case unambiguously.

You are sketpical about evolutionary biology? Great! We ALL should be skeptical about everything. What we SHOULDN'T be is skeptical because of some preconcieved notion or belief. We should also be very humble and realise that our personal disbelief is not a sufficient basis for the claim "X is untrue", whatever X might be. We need rational skepticism, not irrational kneejerk gainsaying skepticism.

I have read your thread, and a few other things you have posted and I am sorry to say you were dealt with very nicely to start with. The point that people are making is that on an internet forum things cannot all be done for you, you are going to have to put yourself in the way of the evidence by your own efforts. People can summarise that evidence for you, point you towards it (and they have) but they can't MAKE you read/examine/think about it. YOU have to do that.

What frustrates people is that it is very, very clear you have not and are not doing that. This is frustrating for a number of reasons, not the least because you are clearly an intelligent guy. We hate to see a good mind go to waste! Repetition of the same worn out nonsense is another frustration. Claims that people are adhering to some sort of dogma when they DEMONSTRABLY aren't is extremely irritating because you are effectively questioning people's integrity with no basis in fact for doing so. By the way, the reason so many of us question the integrity of certain YECs/IDCs is precisely because it can be DEMONSTRATED that they have been dishonest/lacking in intellectual intergrity etc. It's what you can demonstrate that counts, not what you believe.

So take the suggestions of people like Wes, who really do know what they are talking about on this issue, and read around the subject more than you clearly have. You might even be pleasantly surprised.

Cheers

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Renier



Posts: 276
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 21 2006,03:08   

Good post Louis!

  
Mr_Christopher



Posts: 1238
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 21 2006,07:00   

What septic, aftard and the other maroons seem to overlook is that evidence wins in science, period.  Nonsense might get some initial attention but in the end the best evidence wins.  Not the bible, not flowerly freshman philosophy nonsense, but evidence.  

The IDC camp has yet to put forth anything remotely scientific (evidence based) while they all whine about the so called "dogma" of science not letting the IDiots play in the same sand box.

Look at King Loser Bill Dembski.  It's been months (6?)  since Kitzmiller, where is the new evidence or scientific experiments they claim are going on and being tested?  Hey Dembski show us your latest ID research that is scientific, evidence based that no one will publish.  Post it on your stupid blog and let us read it, no need to wait for peer review.  Let's see your scientific evidence for ID that no one will publish and we'll judge it for ourselves you big cry baby.

All Dembski does is cry like a little baby because no one takes his nonsense seriously, and no one at UD seems to care that the IDiots have yet to produce a shred of evidence or anything testable.  Does randy, aftard, septic care that the IDiots have yet to produce ANYTHING scientific?  Of course not.  They're too busy pretending to be biology experts and telling real biologists here that they are clueless.

If septic was an actual skeptic he'd be asking Dembski to show some beef over at UD.  He'd be asking Dembski to provide some legitimate scientific evidence for ID.  But no, he's too busy playing biologist here with real biologists while pretending he's a "skeptic".  That's called ass clownery in my book.

I cannot stand the likes of septic, aftard ("I hope you find jesus before it's too late!") and the other semi literate retards that pollute this forum with their anti-science garbage and endless whining about persecution and victimhood.  But I sure get a kick out of reading their daily cry baby nonsense.  

And as far as my potty mouth goes, stop acting like babies and get a thick skin like the rest of us (aka grow up).

SHOW US THE SCIENTIFIC, TESTABLE EVIDENCE FOR INTELLIGENT DESIGN OR SHUT UP PLEASE.

Sheesh...

--------------
Uncommon Descent is a moral cesspool, a festering intellectual ghetto that intoxicates and degrades its inhabitants - Stephen Matheson

  
  34 replies since June 16 2006,11:59 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (2) < 1 [2] >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]