Joined: Jan. 2006
Hmmm. I guess I am thinking of a more nuanced issue. Obviously personal attacks are mean, but there is a gray area- e.g. dembski? Dave Scot? But sometimes the only way to cope with an idea that floats so far out in the ether that grasping it is anti-productive is to point out why it is funny, or tragic or whatever. It seems like a lot of us take ourselves pretty seriously here and also most of the creationists etc. do too. So what is the role of humor, which can and often does include ridicule, mockery, sarcasm and etc.? I grew up waaaaay out in the boonies and ridicule was pretty common but it wasn't really intended to make you shut up, it was more intended to get you to laugh at yourself. For me this is easy, for people of different dispositions it is relatively hard. So here are just a few quick examples I found:
My point in linking to my other post ( http://brainwashedgod.blogspot.com/2005....in.html ) is that I and many others are simply mentally masturbating, following unwarranted assumptions to forgone conclusions and congratulating ourselves on our cleverness. (re: the link to the politics ignoring facts etc. article http://www.livescience.com/othernews/060124_political_decisions.html ) I am worse about this than many of the thoughtful people here but there is a general undertone.
In no way am I saying that the scientific method is biased to forgone conclusions but people, in defending their “side” apparrently are. I didn’t realize that I was actually getting off on it. I supose I subconsciously knew because I mostly comment to amuse myself but that particular comment was a doosie. Jeez that was like having Sarah Jessica Parker and Agelina Jolie together, y’know?
Bury your head in your ass if you wish. Just do not expect people here to agree with you burying their children’s heads the same way; Especially at taxpayers expense.
Great analysis. Had creationists any honor, they would be embarrassed to be part of such a movement.
But, that aside, I’d really like to see/hear/otherwise be given the details of this little get-together. I suppose you should invite some creationists to an equally rigged “debate” similar to the ones they have, and then ridicule them when they won’t show, though.
You know, just to use language they understand. I’m not bitter or anything.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaa…. Are you part of Larry’s crack legal team?
You can’t file suit until the policies are actually drawn up and codified. Duh.
Yes, I think we will see more “naked” creationism. Whereas the KKK, errr, CCC over in Kansas invited B.Dembski to represent intelligent design, the CCC over here in Davis, CA, invited Reasons To Believe (www.reasons.org) to present their “testable creation model.” This model, however, was a list of metaphors and predictions (some of which were identical to those made by evolution) for “testing” the bible. They literally said that they can put gOD in a test tube!
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