RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (5) < [1] 2 3 4 5 >   
  Topic: The De-tard, like trying to drink all the beer< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,08:47   

crossposted to TSZ thread
Quote


I was thinking of stephen, wasn't aware of mandi.  

so we have one good example of someone de-tarding within the history of this board.  

what we still haven't demonstrated is whether that de-tard was

Quote
on the basis of [your] online dialogue


It's hard to imagine ID without the internet, indeed that is about the only place it exists.  

A theoretically possible mythic beast that is often hailed in story and song, but all reports and observations of this purported being have turned out to be the rotting corpse of Creationism, being animated by dominionist political tools.

Mike Elzinga likes to toodle about this non-stop, how he has been watching the creationists since before creation and it's all a Duane Gish Henry Morris rehash mashup and nothing new has come from this since.




If the only positive examples of de-tard, In the Time of Swamp, which we can provide are Stephen Elliot (who I hope will chime in) and one other blogger then I offer the consideration that detard doesn't really happen because of anything we do here or anyone else on the internet.

Consider the tards that have scrawled upon the walls of all the science blogs you have ever read.  Now, say slowly and aloud "Creationists do not change their minds on the basis of arguments on blogs."  Can you say it and believe it?

I'd love to be convinced that i am wrong.  But since motive is important, and apparently one of the limited set of the topics for which "there is a place" here to discuss, I'd like to say that if you think you are performing a social benefit by internetting creationist retards onto their own petard then you are taking yourself too seriously.

And i say that in love, dear tardahols.  Hi, I'm Erasmus, FCD and I am a tardaholic.

Edited by Erasmus, FCD on Sep. 26 2012,09:48

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,08:55   

Keiths has provided a reasonable answer
here

Quote
Well, we do it for amusement, of course, but some of us also do it for the onlookers.  Seriously.

I grew up an evangelical creationist and had to grow out of it in my teens.  Those were difficult years. It would have done me a world of good if I could have gone online and seen creationist arguments getting trounced on the Internet.

We may never persuade the hardened tards, but there are kids out there who are brainwashed, like I was, but smart enough to know a good argument when they see one.  They are still reachable.


What I am questioning is the assumption that brainwashed kids are coming to UD and TSZ and reading the esoterically misrepresented obfuscations and costuming of "god dunnit".  

No way are you doing this "for the kids".  Unless you are trying to steal FtK from Rich.

How many kids do you think have read upright bi-tard's  spammiotic horseshit?  I know how many I think have.

What evidence is there that youth de-tard occurs as a consequence of of internet responses to Discovery Institute?

Edited by Erasmus, FCD on Sep. 26 2012,09:56

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
k.e..



Posts: 2883
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,09:23   

Dear lord man have you lost your marbles?

If what you are suggesting were possible, it could be worse than the end of the British Raj in India.



Think of all that privelage wasted on the great unwashed?

Free thinking isn't for THEM.

What you need my boy is a good round with Mr Leathers.

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"Abbie Smith (ERV) who's got to be the most obnoxious arrogant snot I've ever seen except for when I look in a mirror" DAVE TARD
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3558
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,09:41   

I think of UD as the Wedge Document for any future Dover trial. There was a year or so after Dover (AD?) When UD tred to maintain the fiction that they were about science rather religion, but that is gone.

The Adam and Eve fiasco was icing.

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,09:53   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 26 2012,10:41)
I think of UD as the Wedge Document for any future Dover trial. There was a year or so after Dover (AD?) When UD tred to maintain the fiction that they were about science rather religion, but that is gone.

The Adam and Eve fiasco was icing.

agreed.

and you know that they won't de-tard.  even gpuccio aint gonna de-tard.  

and as a tardaholic i am happy to say that I am glad there will always be tards to lick.

but do you think that daily internetting them into hilarious logical contradictions, or goading them to deny empirical science solely on the basis of their magick beliefs, is providing a social benefit.  

I don't think so, but in this thread I would like for people to provide examples of de-tarding.  What we should want to do is to determine whether there is any correlation between de-tard and the strength and presentation of arguments offered against some form of creationism.  

Because I don't think anyone is going to provide much of that.  And I note that I am not denying that de-tard is possible, I am questioning specifically the notion that de-tard occurs as a consequence of the valiant deeds of these noble and courteous internetting white-knight defenders of science.

anyone have anything empirical?  or hell, testimony?  I can tell you how I de-tarded but it's the same old shit for you too probably.  I think PZ's "why i am OP" shitkick is lamer than all hells and i never read his blag anyway but my prediction* is that if you compiled them all that the motiviation for those de-tards have very little to do with seriously considering internet arguments with tards

*where "prediction" = "speculation"

Edited by Erasmus, FCD on Sep. 26 2012,10:55

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Soapy Sam



Posts: 510
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,10:02   

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Sep. 26 2012,08:47)
crossposted to TSZ thread
 
Quote


I was thinking of stephen, wasn't aware of mandi.  

so we have one good example of someone de-tarding within the history of this board.  

what we still haven't demonstrated is whether that de-tard was

 
Quote
on the basis of [your] online dialogue


It's hard to imagine ID without the internet, indeed that is about the only place it exists.  

A theoretically possible mythic beast that is often hailed in story and song, but all reports and observations of this purported being have turned out to be the rotting corpse of Creationism, being animated by dominionist political tools.

Mike Elzinga likes to toodle about this non-stop, how he has been watching the creationists since before creation and it's all a Duane Gish Henry Morris rehash mashup and nothing new has come from this since.




If the only positive examples of de-tard, In the Time of Swamp, which we can provide are Stephen Elliot (who I hope will chime in) and one other blogger then I offer the consideration that detard doesn't really happen because of anything we do here or anyone else on the internet.

Consider the tards that have scrawled upon the walls of all the science blogs you have ever read.  Now, say slowly and aloud "Creationists do not change their minds on the basis of arguments on blogs."  Can you say it and believe it?

I'd love to be convinced that i am wrong.  But since motive is important, and apparently one of the limited set of the topics for which "there is a place" here to discuss, I'd like to say that if you think you are performing a social benefit by internetting creationist retards onto their own petard then you are taking yourself too seriously.

And i say that in love, dear tardahols.  Hi, I'm Erasmus, FCD and I am a tardaholic.

I think you're right - I talk as if I think minds can be changed, but I certainly don't believe it, and I don't do it in the hope of 'saving' someone. I just like ideas, and argue for (what I see as) good ones and against (what I see as) bad ones. No point being cleverer than the rest of the world if you don't get a chance to show it!  ;)

--------------
Evolutionists trust entropy for creation of life but are like men who horse a crocodile to get across a river - niwrad.

The organism could already metabolize citrus. Joe G

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3304
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,10:05   

I don't know if this helps, but if every time tard appears, it gets hammered, then anyone who looks for it will see the counter points.

I don't have any examples of this being the case, but I sure as hell don't want to see tard being promoted without counterpoints.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Lou FCD



Posts: 5378
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,10:19   

I'll say that I de-tarded slowly, in the early '90s, before there was much of a public internet presence. It definitely began before I was surfing the web.

After having been tossed out of BlowJobU, I spent some time with my mom, who I hadn't seen but once since I was 5. That meant running into my Uncle Bob, a loud and rather strident atheist and anti-theist. I didn't listen much to what he said at the time, but my BJU experience was festering, and our really passionate arguments were not helpful to my faith. It was probably years later, once I was no longer calling myself a Christian (probably still a theist of the vaguest sort though) maybe, when some of the things he said began to sink in. I'm old and didn't keep a play-by-play journal, sadly.

But all that said, it was bumping into the BadAstronomy website (which led in turn to the discovery of the Panda's Thumb just about when the Dover trial started) that got me sorted out on critical thinking, science, religious belief, etc. And knowing how way leads on to way, here I am, sighing ages and ages hence, as it were.

Did I de-tard online? Hmmm.. probably not so much. In that sense, I'd say that my experience is a data point in 'Ras' favor. But online discussions certainly catalyzed the last bit of the reaction.

Edited to reverse the order of the last two sentences for the sake of clarity.

Edited by Lou FCD on Sep. 26 2012,11:23

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,11:11   

Detardation rarely involves a 'road to Damascus' moment. More often it's a gradual process unfolding over multiple years with multiple causes, as in Lou's (and my) case.

What happens is that the cognitive dissonance builds up until it crosses the threshold of intolerability.  At this point the victim must shed some of his or her more tardacious beliefs in order to get comfortably back below the threshold.  Things stabilize for a while until the CD creeps back up above the threshold again and more tardaciousness must be jettisoned.

No single factor, including online dialogue, is decisive, but they all contribute to the process.

My point is that although we cross swords with the tards primarily for fun, it's worthwhile to argue carefully and with an eye toward the audience.  We are adding straws to the camel's back.

Edited by keiths on Sep. 26 2012,09:51

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,11:19   

Quote
My point is that although we cross swords with the tards primarily for fun, its worthwhile to argue carefully and with an eye toward the audience.  We are adding straws to the camel's back.


I am suggesting that this is more or less equivalent to a religious belief.  It seems for those who hold it, that it *must* be true.

But there is precious little evidence that the camel's back breaks on account of straws.

I admit it's hard to get a handle on this because (like you point out) de-tard happens gradually.  But this may be for social/psychological reasons rather than the development or maturation of a robust understanding of how the claims of particular species of tard are contradicted by the empirical evidence.

I think when you say "it's worthwhile to argue carefully with an eye towards the audience" that the "worth" is something you personally value, like intellectual integrity, and not a social benefit of say "less tard in the world".

Absolutely agreed that constructing an argument is a pleasurable activity, and fully agreed that T.A.R.D. warrioring can keep you sharp.  But, so what? It doesn't reduce the amount of tard in the world (it multiplies it) and i think it doesn't reduce the number of creationists in the world either.

tone trolling is lame i don't care if it is joe felsenstein doing it.

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,11:38   

To observe someone in flagrante detardo, check out JLAfan2001 in this thread at UD.

Note the lame attempts by the UDers to assuage his or her doubts.

Best wishes to you, JLAfan2001.

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,11:51   

Quote (keiths @ Sep. 26 2012,12:38)
To observe someone in flagrante detardo, check out JLAfan2001 in this thread at UD.

Note the lame attempts by the UDers to assuage his or her doubts.

Best wishes to you, JLAfan2001.

your sock detector doesn't go off on that thread?

mine does!  If i were to sock up and go visiting the tardbin that is precisely the hat I would wear.

 
Quote

77
JLAfan2001September 2, 2012 at 11:08 am

Timaeus

Sorry for the late reply. I think tjguy echoes my thoughts as you already know. Yes, I am beginning to reject the faith primarily based on what science is uncovering but also what you are bringing up too. You seem to reject a literal reading of Genesis while others don’t. What makes your reading more valid than a literalist? If we all have our different views of scripture then where does truth lie in all of it? It becomes as subjective as atheism. Why does CS Lewis or GK Chesterton have it right and Ham or Morris doesn’t? I had no idea that ID proponents reject the flood. That makes me question the bible even more. Why do we accept the creation and flood accounts as stories and not the gospels? Jesus was real, sure, but maybe the accounts are exaggerated especially if they were written some 40 years later. This is why athiests laugh at theists. The evidence is piling up that the bible isn’t true and theists continue to make excuses. If Adam and Eve was mythical then why did Jesus die? If not for penal substitution then why? I can give you my email address but I’m almost looking for you to convince me now that Christianity is right rather than looking to change what I believe. What makes you so convinced that God is real?




If i am wrong I would love to know!  JLAfan2001 you out there?

ETA:  note the mastery of the tard, JLAfan2001 convinces several different posters to write an enormous amount of material in response to several innocently posed questions or comments.  classic tard mining tactic to expose the seams quickly and to allow the continuous mining machine to strategically reposition in order to auger the deepest possible amount of tard from the face of the deposit.

ETAA:  I don't have a method for detecting false-positives here so maybe this is confirmation bias.  After all, Poe and it is UD.  But I'd just say, further, that if JLAfan is real (and my general de-tard hypothesis is correct) then his propensity to question is what is driving de-tard, not so much as the answers.

Edited by Erasmus, FCD on Sep. 26 2012,12:59

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,12:18   

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Sep. 26 2012,09:19)
I am suggesting that this is more or less equivalent to a religious belief.  It seems for those who hold it, that it *must* be true.

Them's fightin' words, 'Ras. Swords or pistols?  Or Royal Wulffs?
Quote
But there is precious little evidence that the camel's back breaks on account of straws.

I was quite happy as a kid with my creationism and my Christianity. I had no reason to abandon either, and plenty of reasons not to.  Logic and evidence made the difference.

Don't forget what a cocoon many young evangelicals live in.  The Internet is often the first place they encounter reasonable, intelligent people who don't believe the horseshit. I think it's a very good thing that when they go to UD or similar places, they see that it's the godless evilutionists who are making the intelligent, sensible arguments.

Edited by keiths on Sep. 26 2012,10:19

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Amadan



Posts: 1244
Joined: Jan. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,12:19   

Tard is an attribute of Movement Conservatism. People do not leave Movement Conservatism because someone explains that 2 + 2 does not equal Baby Jesus. They leave it because they change their perception of the leading figures, because they are drawn to life in the real world, because they cease to identify with their peers as strongly as they used to, because they are not naturally susceptible to authoritarianism, or for a variety of other reasons.

Mocking and debunking tard is a good healthy pastime that might occasionally reinforce latent doubts in a few fundies, but I'd be pretty sure that those most likely to harbour those doubts are, at best, onlookers rather than participants. I would say that the strongest impetus for detardation comes from within the fundie tent rather than from outside.

I hope nobody ever classifies tard-baiting as anything other than a sport. Nothing would kill the thrill as thoroughly as ascribing notions of 'social benefit' (or even 'community service' - which brings up connotations of scrubbing off graffiti and of the Probation Act).

--------------
"People are always looking for natural selection to generate random mutations" - Densye  4-4-2011
JoeG BTW dumbass- some variations help ensure reproductive fitness so they cannot be random wrt it.

   
Glen Davidson



Posts: 752
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,12:41   

Josh McDowell famously said:

 
Quote
“Now here is the problem,” said McDowell, “going all the way back, when Al Gore invented the Internet [he said jokingly], I made the statement off and on for 10-11 years that the abundance of knowledge, the abundance of information, will not lead to certainty; it will lead to pervasive skepticism. And, folks, that’s exactly what has happened. It’s like this. How do you really know, there is so much out there… This abundance [of information] has led to skepticism. And then the Internet has leveled the playing field [giving equal access to skeptics].”
Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news.......dQHa.99


It does appear that atheism has at least gained energy from the internet, but not so clear that it has especially gained much for science or shown much more than that a lot of them aren't much better than fundamentalists.  Not that I care, I'm just godless, not really concerned about others' godlessness.

Still, I like to see McDowell at least scared of the internet.  WTF does he really know, though?  I don't know, it may be that the less ignorant tards really might have a better handle on whether or not the web is a serious weapon against their ignorance, however it'll never be easy to trust what they say.

Then there's the question of snark about creationism/ID by commenters really has any effect, even IF the web overall diminishes the tard.  Sure, the information about evolution is out there, it's just that good information coming from universities and places like Talkorigins might be the real powerhouses, not sport had at the expense of tards.

What I think is likely the case is that politicians contemplating the value to their careers of mandating the Dark Ages probably do fear the gibes and contempt of net denizens.  Plus, I rather suspect that the possible impact of a travesty like Expelled was diminished by the fisking it took on the internets, especially since it was so Godwinesque and generally stupid twaddle.  

On the whole there seems little possible downside to exposing the idiocy of ID/creationism, but it's still not so clear that there's a whole lot of upside, either.

Glen Davidson

--------------
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

   
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,13:36   

Quote
Them's fightin' words, 'Ras. Swords or pistols?  Or Royal Wulffs?


i was hoping we would have a go at it but you are too violent, darwinist.  i aint no puppy. this is what it will look like, a sissy slapfest only we'll make out afterwards



Quote
I think it's a very good thing that when they go to UD or similar places, they see that it's the godless evilutionists who are making the intelligent, sensible arguments.


ahem, "it's the godless evilutionists who are making the intelligent, sensible arguments [in your perception]"

I happen to share your perception, for reasons that reach back to why we value science as the way of knowing.  Most of the tards at UD would disagree with this perception, and do.

I suggest that to this fresh-faced young fish these tard wars are opaque.  There is no moral or ethical high ground when you are wrestling a pig, any more than there is when you are discussing science with a creationist.

Just because you value logic and evidence now, post-de-tard, doesn't imply that this why you de-tarded.

We often take it for granted that the direction of causality is as you describe, but I think we do that on the basis of a miniscule or absent amount of evidence.  So far we have only provided 2 cases of de-tarding In The Time of Swamp.  And an absolute shit ton of tard has gone through the pipes in that time

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,13:41   

Glen, the Expelled case is very interesting to consider in light of De-tard hypotheses

How many people have you seen say "Well I was convinced at first but then I read Expelled Exposed and now I changed my mind"

People who were susceptible to Expelled, IMO, were not likely to detard in the first place.  But I could be very wrong about this!  Anyone have any linkies to folks who rejected expelled on the basis of internetting?

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,14:13   

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Sep. 26 2012,11:36)
Just because you value logic and evidence now, post-de-tard, doesn't imply that this why you de-tarded.

I think you're misunderestimating the power of logic and evidence.  People do sometimes change their minds for no reason other than "old belief doesn't make sense; new one does".

In my case, one of the things that got the ball rolling was arguing religion with a Mormon friend.  I would come up with these knockdown arguments against Mormonism,  only to realize that the same arguments were fatal to my own evangelical faith.

Add thirty years or so, and here I am in the fever swamp with the rest of you crocodiles.

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Glen Davidson



Posts: 752
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,14:49   

I decided to see if the NCSE had any data on the effect of media fighting creationism.  I didn't bother to see if there was anything on web snarks, of course, but there is something on the effect of Judgment Day upon college students.

Doesn't tell us all that much about how the general public is affected, which I suspect was a good deal less (not many watched, and one wonders how many of those weren't already decidedly in either of the two main factions).  But then, laughing at creationists on the web is more likely to be affecting college students, too, than the general public.

Anyhow, there are few data out there at all, and at least this is something real, however limited.

Glen Davidson

--------------
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

   
midwifetoad



Posts: 3558
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,15:45   

I see only one really good reason for engaging in the argument regarding design, and that is self-education.

Although there is a lot of repetition in the online debate, I find that the creationist quote mining occasionally brings up nuggets that I haven't encountered or don't fully understand. So I have to read about them. Sometimes this takes weeks or months. Sometimes there are layers of understanding.

The other aspect of self-education is learning to express the argument.

I see this as a win-win situation. Regardless of whether the onlookers learn anything, I do.

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,15:50   

Quote (Glen Davidson @ Sep. 26 2012,15:49)
I decided to see if the NCSE had any data on the effect of media fighting creationism.  I didn't bother to see if there was anything on web snarks, of course, but there is something on the effect of Judgment Day upon college students.

Doesn't tell us all that much about how the general public is affected, which I suspect was a good deal less (not many watched, and one wonders how many of those weren't already decidedly in either of the two main factions).  But then, laughing at creationists on the web is more likely to be affecting college students, too, than the general public.

Anyhow, there are few data out there at all, and at least this is something real, however limited.

Glen Davidson

very interesting.  thanks!  i wonder what it would look like if you followed up a year or two later.

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,15:51   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 26 2012,16:45)
I see only one really good reason for engaging in the argument regarding design, and that is self-education.

Although there is a lot of repetition in the online debate, I find that the creationist quote mining occasionally brings up nuggets that I haven't encountered or don't fully understand. So I have to read about them. Sometimes this takes weeks or months. Sometimes there are layers of understanding.

The other aspect of self-education is learning to express the argument.

I see this as a win-win situation. Regardless of whether the onlookers learn anything, I do.

agreed.  and learning how to insult your opponent graciously is an important skill!  LOL

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
JohnW



Posts: 2234
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,16:01   

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Sep. 26 2012,13:51)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 26 2012,16:45)
I see only one really good reason for engaging in the argument regarding design, and that is self-education.

Although there is a lot of repetition in the online debate, I find that the creationist quote mining occasionally brings up nuggets that I haven't encountered or don't fully understand. So I have to read about them. Sometimes this takes weeks or months. Sometimes there are layers of understanding.

The other aspect of self-education is learning to express the argument.

I see this as a win-win situation. Regardless of whether the onlookers learn anything, I do.

agreed.  and learning how to insult your opponent graciously is an important skill!  LOL

As is learning when not to bother being gracious*.



*Yes, Joe.  That would be you.

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it.
- Robert Byers

  
Soapy Sam



Posts: 510
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,16:24   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 26 2012,15:45)
The other aspect of self-education is learning to express the argument.

I see this as a win-win situation. Regardless of whether the onlookers learn anything, I do.

+1. There are probably better ways of gaining an education, but my understanding of the role of sex, 'search space', entropy, protein motifs, the structure and mechanism of the genetic code, speciation, the selection/drift continuum, and many other things besides, have been enhanced greatly by watching Creationists bullshit their way through the material, and engaging the debate myself. Even Joe has provided insight, despite - rather because of - being so obviously, consistently and blisteringly wrong. Shit arguments can lead to better ones.

--------------
Evolutionists trust entropy for creation of life but are like men who horse a crocodile to get across a river - niwrad.

The organism could already metabolize citrus. Joe G

  
MichaelJ



Posts: 455
Joined: June 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,16:31   

I agree that being here hones our own skills. I think that starting somebody on the path of reality probably occurs elsewhere. It could be a creationist commenting in a blog on sewing or cameras etc.

I think these people aren't as committed and because we have heard all of the arguments before it usually means that they shut up after a couple of exchanges or say something lame like "I still believe it anyway".

What I have noticed over the years is that if a creationist pipes up now it isn't just me but they usually get snarky comments from a bunch of other people. I think that the internet can be a lonely place for creationists if they venture out of their friendly confines.

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3558
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,18:15   

That's interesting, because I have never felt lonely being the only evo on a hostile site.

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
Soapy Sam



Posts: 510
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,18:46   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 26 2012,18:15)
That's interesting, because I have never felt lonely being the only evo on a hostile site.

Not lonely, but it can be damned hard to offer sensible, thought-out and researched answers to a large, baying crowd detecting fresh meat who consider the entire gamut fair game and themselves as expert as one would need to be. Trying to be honest and accurate - and being called a cowardly liar for your trouble! - takes a lot more effort than just saying stuff.

--------------
Evolutionists trust entropy for creation of life but are like men who horse a crocodile to get across a river - niwrad.

The organism could already metabolize citrus. Joe G

  
Tracy P. Hamilton



Posts: 1237
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,20:14   

Reminds me of the old days.  The not so old days, every Fall you would get new freshman at Cedarville college posting to this new-fangled talk.origins electronic thingy, with all of the printed crap from the faux scientists Morris and Gish.

They still publish Acts and Facts.  Jeebus, talk about being out of touch.  Almost as comical as Dishonesty Institute facebook.  God knows what their tweets are like.

Edited by Tracy P. Hamilton on Sep. 26 2012,20:14

--------------
"Following what I just wrote about fitness, you’re taking refuge in what we see in the world."  PaV

"The simple equation F = MA leads to the concept of four-dimensional space." GilDodgen

"We have no brain, I don't, for thinking." Robert Byers

  
Tracy P. Hamilton



Posts: 1237
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,20:18   

For the record, I de-tarded in 1980 AND I can drink all the beer.  Having about 20 oz of this: http://www.ratebeer.com/beer....1

12%

--------------
"Following what I just wrote about fitness, you’re taking refuge in what we see in the world."  PaV

"The simple equation F = MA leads to the concept of four-dimensional space." GilDodgen

"We have no brain, I don't, for thinking." Robert Byers

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,20:23   

Quote (Soapy Sam @ Sep. 26 2012,19:46)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 26 2012,18:15)
That's interesting, because I have never felt lonely being the only evo on a hostile site.

Not lonely, but it can be damned hard to offer sensible, thought-out and researched answers to a large, baying crowd detecting fresh meat who consider the entire gamut fair game and themselves as expert as one would need to be. Trying to be honest and accurate - and being called a cowardly liar for your trouble! - takes a lot more effort than just saying stuff.

it's important to remember that it's all about the LULZ

pretending like there is some sort of substance to critique therefore good faith internetting discussion is possible with ID creationists is a huge error IMO

that's a very different thing from fisking the tard.

look at wes on dembski:  fisks the tard, brutally and without remorse, in print, with citations and leaves it up for dembski to run away from.

that's a totally different from trying to get KF to admit he is a lying dooshbag on UD where he can be lord of the flies gilligan bob marley gk chesterton version.

So, although I may have not been as clear on this in this thread as I was in my head, i think fisking the tard is great.  i guess what i am getting at is that there are a lot of smart people wasting a great deal of time and effort to fruitlessly yet systematically expose the Wizard in the arguments made by some very obtuse, dishonest and stubborn stupid fucking creationists.

And I have done it too.  And I hopefully will in the future.  But I am about convinced that "wasting a great deal of time and effort" is a pretty good descriptor, if your objective is to detard more tards.

oh shit this is now framing

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2012,21:29   

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Sep. 26 2012,21:18)
For the record, I de-tarded in 1980 AND I can drink all the beer.  Having about 20 oz of this: http://www.ratebeer.com/beer.......er....1

12%



--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2120
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2012,00:17   

I always preferred a breakfast of champignons.

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

  
Soapy Sam



Posts: 510
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2012,03:44   

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Sep. 26 2012,20:23)
             
Quote (Soapy Sam @ Sep. 26 2012,19:46)
             
Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 26 2012,18:15)
That's interesting, because I have never felt lonely being the only evo on a hostile site.

Not lonely, but it can be damned hard to offer sensible, thought-out and researched answers to a large, baying crowd detecting fresh meat who consider the entire gamut fair game and themselves as expert as one would need to be. Trying to be honest and accurate - and being called a cowardly liar for your trouble! - takes a lot more effort than just saying stuff.

it's important to remember that it's all about the LULZ

pretending like there is some sort of substance to critique therefore good faith internetting discussion is possible with ID creationists is a huge error IMO

that's a very different thing from fisking the tard.

look at wes on dembski:  fisks the tard, brutally and without remorse, in print, with citations and leaves it up for dembski to run away from.

that's a totally different from trying to get KF to admit he is a lying dooshbag on UD where he can be lord of the flies gilligan bob marley gk chesterton version.

So, although I may have not been as clear on this in this thread as I was in my head, i think fisking the tard is great.  i guess what i am getting at is that there are a lot of smart people wasting a great deal of time and effort to fruitlessly yet systematically expose the Wizard in the arguments made by some very obtuse, dishonest and stubborn stupid fucking creationists.

And I have done it too.  And I hopefully will in the future.  But I am about convinced that "wasting a great deal of time and effort" is a pretty good descriptor, if your objective is to detard more tards.

oh shit this is now framing

One can see it as a two-way troll. There's no substance on their side, but it can be fun to stir the nest and watch 'em scurry. They, equally, think that is exactly what they are doing with the 'science side' - getting us to expose what any 'educated person' can see is a hollow sham.

Trying to get KF to admit he's a douche is impossible, but getting him to show what a douche he is, complete with bullet points - piece of cake! Meantime, someone like Joe is a past master at provoking a response. One of his stupid, repetitive points is trigger enough to try and give a sensible answer from a scientific standpoint - even though you know who you're talking to, and what you might as well be doing instead. I think it is the troll-ey attitude, rather than the fundamental wrongness of the arguments or any belief/desire that minds may be changed, that sucks me in.

I don't think I'm doing anything with any wider import than joining a debating society.

--------------
Evolutionists trust entropy for creation of life but are like men who horse a crocodile to get across a river - niwrad.

The organism could already metabolize citrus. Joe G

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2012,09:03   

If I am wrong, and internetting tards has a tangible social benefit, then I want tax credit.  Help Me Obama!

Keiths says (and I summarized but don't think misrepresented!)

Keiths de-tarded a long time ago.  Keiths thinks it is good to de-tard. We should encourage others to de-tard.

I have said I de-tarded and I think it is good.  I am questioning the basis of the suggestion that we should encourage others to de-tard.

Glen said

Quote
It does appear that atheism has at least gained energy from the internet, but not so clear that it has especially gained much for science or shown much more than that a lot of them aren't much better than fundamentalists.  


word

"gained for science" is kinda squishy!  i can at least search for science much more easily because of the internet.  

leaving aside the question of whether it is "good" for someone to de-tard (possibly as a result of internetting with tards), we only have two examples from the Time Of The Swamp of this happening at all.  We would have to conclude that de-tard because of anti-tard internetting is extremely rare, even if under-reported for some reason.

Quote
Not that I care, I'm just godless, not really concerned about others' godlessness


I agree.  I asked, isn't encouraging others to de-tard, if that is my internetting objective, being concerned about others' godlessness?


it might be!  



--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Southstar



Posts: 150
Joined: Nov. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2012,09:51   

If I may give my 2 cents worth.

For me this blog has been a lifesaver in more ways.

1) It gives you access to resources and you can discuss or see discussed tard arguments that otherwise would be difficult for an unlearned person.
2) It exposes fallacies in the tards. Sure one might not fall immediately but at least he is exposed to a truthful argument and people fundamentally are suckers for the truth.
3) It personally helped me in debating on other forums to help detard some people or at least initiate them on the path to detardation.
4) It has helped me to learn alot more about biology and evolution in general.
5) It's plain fun!

Also I think that it is important to note that there are many shades of tard, deep tard is perhaps not saveable, but lightly exposed tard is very saveable. And for all tards just the fact of presenting another verifiable opinion (unlike theirs) could be the spark to enlightment. Remember deep tards have to lie...

--------------
"Cows who know a moose when they see one will do infinitely better than a cow that pairs with a moose because they cannot see the difference either." Gary Gaulin

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2012,10:24   

Southstar

I'd say

1 Hell Yeah
2.  It does but I will never agree that "people fundamentally are suckers for the truth".  In fact I would argue that "people fundamentally are suckers for tard"
3.  Maybe, but even if it's true that you are pushing tards towards de-tard, is that a good thing.  If so, why?
4.  Hell Yeah
5.  SHIT yeah

do you have any examples of a verifiable de-tard event where the de-tard occurred as a dependent outcome of internetting tards?

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3558
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2012,12:31   

Since people are confessing their personal de-tard experiences, I might as well jump in.

Some time around 1956, (when I was 11) Life Magazine ran a series called the Epic of Man, which included a discussion of human evolution. By coincidence I was in confirmation class in the Episcopal Church. My older sister helpfully informed me that the age for this class had been moved down so as to catch kids before they -- I'm not sure what she said here, but the meaning I remember was -- before they caught on. This is important because it is indicative of my family's lack of commitment to religious inerrancy.

There was a period of a few months where I toyed with the notion that fossils were tricks played by Satan. I found a paperback in the supermarket titled Religion Made Simple. (The Made Simple series was the precursor to the For Dummies series.)

So I read a brief outline of all the world's major religions and concluded I was a pantheist. That was pretty much the end of any belief in the details of revealed religion. This was by age 12. Because my family didn't push belief, I had nothing to rebel against, and I never developed any hostility to religion. I just take it as something like politics, only not as important.

I didn't think seriously about the creationism debate until I encountered the Gould articles in Natural History. I ran into them within a few months after they started. Since then I've been hooked.

I did have a college class in History of Science, which spent a few weeks on Darwin and Wallace, but creationism wasn't on the table.

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
Southstar



Posts: 150
Joined: Nov. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2012,12:47   

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Sep. 27 2012,10:24)
2.  It does but I will never agree that "people fundamentally are suckers for the truth".  In fact I would argue that "people fundamentally are suckers for tard"
3.  Maybe, but even if it's true that you are pushing tards towards de-tard, is that a good thing.  If so, why?
4.  Hell Yeah
5.  SHIT yeah

do you have any examples of a verifiable de-tard event where the de-tard occurred as a dependent outcome of internetting tards?

Quote
2.  It does but I will never agree that "people fundamentally are suckers for the truth".  In fact I would argue that "people fundamentally are suckers for tard"


No I think people who fall for the tard argument are mostly  ignorant and lazy so they are happy to live their merry little lives in the belief that all has been created. Let's face it, the tards have all the answers. It's easy. Science is hard work and you don't have all the answers.
It's only when one starts seeing that little things don't add up and has the courage to dig further that one is on the road to detardation.

Quote
3.  Maybe, but even if it's true that you are pushing tards towards de-tard, is that a good thing.  If so, why?


Well none of us would care at all if all religious fanatics would just say, "just ignore reality, you'll never find a dammed clue to anything there, you got to just believe." (Which worked fine till around the 19th century) The problem is they are saying science is out to lie, their argument is: reality is telling you the truth you just got to see it our way (which is: ignore anything and everything that doesn't agree with what we think the old book says.)

So is it right to wake Neo up from the Matrix?

Quote

do you have any examples of a verifiable de-tard event where the de-tard occurred as a dependent outcome of internetting tards?


Yes my brother who was getting sucked into Jehovas witnesses sect and at least 4 other people that were on the their forum.

--------------
"Cows who know a moose when they see one will do infinitely better than a cow that pairs with a moose because they cannot see the difference either." Gary Gaulin

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2012,12:55   

linky?

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3558
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2012,14:11   

I think you are all ignoring the role played by family and friends.

We are, for the most part, not isolated  and independent thinkers. We live in families and communities, and we tend to be careful about expressing thoughts that are antithetical to the community's. I hate drawing political parallels, but many types of communities promote an Us vs Them mindset. Political parties, unions, churches, sports teams. I think of the governing principle as tribalism.

For a creationist to question faith means apostasy and excommunication. Possibly the loss of family and friends. It is not simply an intellectual exercise like understanding calculus or electronics.

This is why creationists can become competent engineers and technicians. These activities can be compartmentalized. They are not threatening unless they conflict with tribal demands.

This is why many Catholics can accept common descent, old earth, and most of evolution. Because after a long history of conflict with science, the Catholic church has become somewhat careful about disagreeing with well established findings. The tribal norms do not demand science denial.

I suspect this tribal phenomenon is why some atheists become evangelical atheists. The pain of separation from family or friends promotes a sense that the abandoned faith is not merely wrong, but evil. I never experienced that separation, and my lack of religion is not accompanied by strong emotions.

Edited by midwifetoad on Sep. 27 2012,14:12

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
MichaelJ



Posts: 455
Joined: June 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2012,17:01   

I think that there is another useful function of ATBC is that it keeps the UD inmates insane. Don't forget that prior to Dover the MSM and quite a few of the chattering classes took ID seriously. Half of the articles on the PT was bemoaning bad journalism. Dover put paid to this and relegated ID to the creationists.

Now some unfortunate theist might meet one of the UDers on another forum and might half convince them the ID is Real™ science and not creationism. However, visiting UD and seeing the anti-materialism rants would quickly show them that ID is just creationism.

If they weren't goaded by us they might be able to maintain a pseudo-scientific facade.

Also the UDites are scared to move outside of their safe haven.

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2012,17:25   

well, what got me thinking about this was the near total absence of de-tarding events in the blog cloud associated with PT, TO, ATBC, UD, TT, etc etc

That, and Joe Felsenstein and Mark Frank smelling each other's queefs at TSZ like there are genuine criticisms at UD when we all know that it's a hick backwater of the internet known for authoritarian dramas and windowdressing tranmaws and dead psuedoscientific theories

many of you have provide reasons why 1) we might consider de-tarding to be "good" or desirable (because the truth is better than a lie, de-tarded people might behave in ways we value) or 2)  internetting tards is a good thing for you (makes you sharp, you've learned a lot, it's more fun than beating puppies simply for enjoying the sense of power, etc.).

but that's not what i am looking for.  i agree, in principle, that internetting tards should yield de-tarding and that there are many reasons that de-tarding events might yield favorable social outcomes....

but DO THEY?

We don't see de-tarding.  Why?  midwifetoad has a plausible explanation above here, that de-tarding might be cloaked (not reported)  or stifled (flowers but doesn't fruit) due to social stigma.

but this is the internet.  shouldn't we see some anon de-tarding, since the stigma is more or less removed when you are anon?  

Think of all the creationists who have left here, vanquished, leaking from the puncture wounds of dozens of teeth.  None of them ever said "Golly gee you assholes are right about a few things thanks for straightening me out"

None that I know of.

Edited by Erasmus, FCD on Sep. 27 2012,18:27

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2012,19:11   

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Sep. 27 2012,15:25)
but this is the internet.  shouldn't we see some anon de-tarding, since the stigma is more or less removed when you are anon?  

Think of all the creationists who have left here, vanquished, leaking from the puncture wounds of dozens of teeth.  None of them ever said "Golly gee you assholes are right about a few things thanks for straightening me out"

I'll repeat my two points:  1) detardation is almost always a gradual process, and 2) there is rarely a single, isolated cause.

#1 means that you won't see detardation in the immediate aftermath of an Internet discussion, even if that discussion had a detardative impact.  (Plus the fact that even pseudonymous commenters are loathe to admit error.)

#2 means that you'll rarely find ex-tards identifying a single reason for their detardation.  In my case, I credit conversations with friends (including the Mormon I mentioned earlier), voracious reading, and just plain thinking about the issues.  They all contributed.  

You typically hear people say things like "I just came to realize over time that my position didn't hold up to scrutiny."  What they don't say is "On September 27th at UD, Erasmus FCD defeated my last argument in favor of intelligent design and I became a Darwinist."  That doesn't mean that your argument didn't have an impact.

I think a well-presented argument on the Internet can be just as effective, and sometimes even more effective, than the same argument in a book.  More effective because: a) Some tards will never pick up the book, so if they don't see the argument online, they'll never see it; b) When they're reading a book, they can come up with a bogus counterargument, and there's no one to push back; online, there is give-and-take; and c) an argument is more persuasive when you see that neither you nor your friends and allies are able to poke holes in it.

Let me stress yet again that I think Internet debates are primarily for fun.  I just think that if we're going to all the trouble of debating in the first place, we might as well do it well and with some care.  It might just help somebody.

A tard is a terrible thing to waste.

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5378
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2012,19:31   

It would be interesting to be able to check up on all the past UDidiots, the ones that have gone missing. I wonder if any of them have detarded and slunk away in embarrassment at ever having been sucked into that mess.

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Timothy McDougald



Posts: 1008
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2012,20:47   

Quote (Lou FCD @ Sep. 27 2012,19:31)
It would be interesting to be able to check up on all the past UDidiots, the ones that have gone missing. I wonder if any of them have detarded and slunk away in embarrassment at ever having been sucked into that mess.

Yeah, I have often wondered about Lee Bowen. He was a regular on UD. He once showed on my blog and disappeared from the scene shortly thereafter.

PS: Never try to post a picture when using a cell phone to comment

--------------
Church burning ebola boy

FTK: I Didn't answer your questions because it beats the hell out of me.

PaV: I suppose for me to be pried away from what I do to focus long and hard on that particular problem would take, quite honestly, hundreds of thousands of dollars to begin to pique my interest.

   
midwifetoad



Posts: 3558
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2012,21:09   

During the weasel wars there was a UD denizen who programmed a number of alternate versions of weasel. I haven't seen him in a while.

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10116
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2012,21:13   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 27 2012,21:09)
During the weasel wars there was a UD denizen who programmed a number of alternate versions of weasel. I haven't seen him in a while.

Atom

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2012,21:16   

Quote (afarensis @ Sep. 27 2012,18:47)
Quote (Lou FCD @ Sep. 27 2012,19:31)
It would be interesting to be able to check up on all the past UDidiots, the ones that have gone missing. I wonder if any of them have detarded and slunk away in embarrassment at ever having been sucked into that mess.

Yeah, I have often wondered about Lee Bowen. He was a regular on UD. He once showed on my blog and disappeared from the scene shortly thereafter.

PS: Never try to post a picture when using a cell phone to comment

Do you mean Lee Bowman?  He's been on christianpost.com lately.

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Timothy McDougald



Posts: 1008
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2012,21:27   

Quote (keiths @ Sep. 27 2012,21:16)
Quote (afarensis @ Sep. 27 2012,18:47)
Quote (Lou FCD @ Sep. 27 2012,19:31)
It would be interesting to be able to check up on all the past UDidiots, the ones that have gone missing. I wonder if any of them have detarded and slunk away in embarrassment at ever having been sucked into that mess.

Yeah, I have often wondered about Lee Bowen. He was a regular on UD. He once showed on my blog and disappeared from the scene shortly thereafter.

PS: Never try to post a picture when using a cell phone to comment

Do you mean Lee Bowman?  He's been on christianpost.com lately.

Yes I did. Thanks. Wondered what happened to him.

--------------
Church burning ebola boy

FTK: I Didn't answer your questions because it beats the hell out of me.

PaV: I suppose for me to be pried away from what I do to focus long and hard on that particular problem would take, quite honestly, hundreds of thousands of dollars to begin to pique my interest.

   
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2012,21:29   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Sep. 27 2012,19:13)
 
Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 27 2012,21:09)
During the weasel wars there was a UD denizen who programmed a number of alternate versions of weasel. I haven't seen him in a while.

Atom

Atom tha Immortal, aka George Montañez. He's now at Carnegie-Mellon getting his PhD, praise the Lord:
Quote
I was thrilled. I had not expected to receive a second fellowship, especially after all the good blessings I had received my final semester of school.  It reminded me that the Lord can make your path straight when you follow him and that he's always faithful to provide for all needs.


--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2012,21:53   

Quote (Lou FCD @ Sep. 27 2012,20:31)
It would be interesting to be able to check up on all the past UDidiots, the ones that have gone missing. I wonder if any of them have detarded and slunk away in embarrassment at ever having been sucked into that mess.

i suppose in my model de-tarding comes with admitting it out loud.  and i suppose that i think de-tarding is more or less inevitable for some people and more or less impossible for some people (part of the reason why i think internetting the tard has little or no effect on how many people de-tard)

there may be folks who have de-tarded who have bounced from these hallowed walls of these hallowed halls, but none have returned to mention it.

and i think that they would. because you would, and everyone else would.  if you've been here at all then you appreciate that sort of thing.

i don't think it really happens.  but i want to be wrong!

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Glen Davidson



Posts: 752
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2012,22:42   

I think that a meaningful success of detarding, or at least in disillusioning, the more science-type Christians who once had hopes for ID, has occurred.  And that has been important in isolating ID into a few pockets of yes-men here and there.  Here's this from Darrell Falk (Biologos, in case anyone doesn't know):

 
Quote


There are few things that we would like more than this. Johnnyb is right. We are almost on the same page in so many respects. Many of the leaders in evolutionary creation have been tangentially associated with the ID movement. Bill Dembksi asked me to be an ISCID Fellow and I accepted almost 10 years ago. About 4 years ago, I asked to have my name removed.

I recently attended a meeting with a small group of leaders of the TE/EC perspective. Someone asked for a show of hands of those who attended the “Mere Christianity” conference in 1996 at Biola. Several raised their hands.

So why did we become disillusioned? That’s the question I’ll leave unanswered right now. However, my prayer would be that John 17 will yet become a reality given that we have so much in common.


At UD

I recall Dembski posting--I believe it was on UD--once about someone he met up with after a while of not seeing him(?) who admitted that he'd tired of ID, because of a lack of any real research prospects coming from it (from sketchy memory, understand).  Dembski even seemed to ask some right questions in that post, before yet again ignoring the fact that ID has never been and never will be science.

Pointing out ID's failures has to have helped to disillusion thinking people re ID, but again I have no idea what role web criticisms have had, let alone comments on the various fora.  You'd like to think that people could see through pseudoscience without much trouble, yet it's not clear that they would, and I rather suspect that at least the more scholarly criticisms of ID on the net and elsewhere must have helped.  It's always hard, of course, to disentangle the myriad factors leading to outright detardation, or even to mere disillusionment after a period of hope.

Glen Davidson

--------------
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 10116
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2012,00:11   

Using Laplace's rule of succession, the odds of someone calculating the CSI of anything tomorrow is 0.019%, based on the introduction of CSI in "the Design Inference" on Sept 13, 1998.

look - a real probability calculation about CSI, from the evolution camp!

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3558
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2012,03:22   

One question I find myself asking is whether there is anyone in the creationist/ID camp who can write an accurate, coherent description of evolution as understood by biologists. I haven't seen one.

By contrast, Darwin rather consistently put forth the strongest opposition case before beginning his argument. This is simply an indication of confidence and personal character.

The day I see an ID advocate begin his presentation  by forcefully presenting the case for evolution is the day I begin to worry.

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
Quack



Posts: 1755
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2012,04:02   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 28 2012,03:22)
One question I find myself asking is whether there is anyone in the creationist/ID camp who can write an accurate, coherent description of evolution as understood by biologists. I haven't seen one.

By contrast, Darwin rather consistently put forth the strongest opposition case before beginning his argument. This is simply an indication of confidence and personal character.

The day I see an ID advocate begin his presentation  by forcefully presenting the case for evolution is the day I begin to worry.

That's also one of my "problems". Creationists insist on criticizing and rejecting something they don't understand and knows extremely little about. And when they think they know, most of the time they are wrong.

They won't educate themselves in the subject. I think they find the subject frightening; it might have consequences they are not ready to face. For some, like what it would do to them, $$$-wise.

Edited for typos.

Edited by Quack on Sep. 28 2012,10:32

--------------
YEC creationists denigrate science without an inkling of what their lives would be without it. YEC creationism is an enrageous, abominable insult to the the human intellect.
                                                         Me.

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5378
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2012,04:14   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 28 2012,04:22)
One question I find myself asking is whether there is anyone in the creationist/ID camp who can write an accurate, coherent description of evolution as understood by biologists. I haven't seen one.

By contrast, Darwin rather consistently put forth the strongest opposition case before beginning his argument. This is simply an indication of confidence and personal character.

The day I see an ID advocate begin his presentation  by forcefully presenting the case for evolution is the day I begin to worry.

I think that while that's possible on paper, on the ground it's just never going to happen. In order to be able to forcefully present the case for evolution, one almost has to understand the nature and value of evidence, and one who understands the nature and value of evidence is going to see right through the tard.

The only way I see your scenario happening is in the case of a flat-out con man, milking the rubes a la "Buy my book". Behe may fall into this category, but he's never going to go down your road for fear of losing customers. So again, possible on paper, but ain't gonna happen.

And to be clear, the reverse is not necessarily true. The "Buy my book" con does not necessarily entail the understanding of the nature and value of evidence, or of evolution. I'd put Dembski in this category. He knows he's peddling bullshit, but he's never impressed me as someone who understands the meaning of evidence. Anything is evidence if enough people say it's evidence. Someday, IDC will be REAL SCIENCETM!

But the con may not even imply seeing through the tard.

O'Leary is an interesting case. She's conning the hell out of the rubes, but I don't think she sees through the tard, either. It's not so much that she believes it all, it's more that she just doesn't fucking care. She parrots, she sells books. In the end, Jesus is happy and her pocketbook is full. Good enough. Who cares about understanding the arguments, right?

Or this whole post of mine could be so much pre-coffee, faux-intellectual, pseudo-philosophic wankery, a bit of self-indulgent entertainment to stir the brain cells from slumber before I head to Fort Fisher to chase some Melanerpes erythrocephalus with a Canon at dawn.

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Amadan



Posts: 1244
Joined: Jan. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2012,11:36   

Quote
In the long run, matters of truth are always functions of social relations. People are moved to change their minds—or to refuse to do so—depending upon the social resonance of what they are being asked to change. Who advocates or adopts the change is as important as what the change itself is. [...] Whose claim to enhanced social authority was strengthened if the new claim was accepted’? Whose beliefs and practices would now be denigrated as foolish or superstitious? Whose assertion about the nature of God would be affirmed or denied?


Sarah Gronim, Everyday Nature: Knowledge of the Natural World in Colonial New York.

via Unreasonable Faith

He concludes with a line that echoes my own view:

Quote
One of the ways that Creationists can hold out against an overwhelming scientific consensus against them is by turning the argument from a “fact vs. fiction” debate to an “us vs. them” debate. The argument becomes less a matter of evidence and reason and more of a matter of competing authorities and personal identities.


--------------
"People are always looking for natural selection to generate random mutations" - Densye  4-4-2011
JoeG BTW dumbass- some variations help ensure reproductive fitness so they cannot be random wrt it.

   
midwifetoad



Posts: 3558
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2012,14:01   

Hence the Hitlerization of evolution. A version of shouting, "Squirrel"!

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
Soapy Sam



Posts: 510
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2012,16:03   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 28 2012,03:22)
One question I find myself asking is whether there is anyone in the creationist/ID camp who can write an accurate, coherent description of evolution as understood by biologists. I haven't seen one.

By contrast, Darwin rather consistently put forth the strongest opposition case before beginning his argument. This is simply an indication of confidence and personal character.

The day I see an ID advocate begin his presentation  by forcefully presenting the case for evolution is the day I begin to worry.

I wouldn't worry ... if they understand evolution and still offer a convincing case for an alternative, then I would be obliged to put my road-dusty materialist nag out to pasture. I am very interested in what is true (to the extent that my feeble synapses can discern that). Contrary to what those fucking morons who shout 'ideology!' think. If we live in a God-created universe, and the only possible way a universe could exist is by being God-created, then living inside that universe with a conviction that it can't be so would be just embarrassing.

But ... in all honesty and sincerity, I don't think it is so. Not just because I understand evolution.

I am interested in how many here testify to some kind of fundamentalist history. For me, I have simply never bought the God idea, so no emotional struggle was required to understand science. I think I asked him for a hamster once - and got one. But I am perhaps less qualified than most to comment on the notion of 'de-tard', since it is not an experience I have been through.

--------------
Evolutionists trust entropy for creation of life but are like men who horse a crocodile to get across a river - niwrad.

The organism could already metabolize citrus. Joe G

  
MichaelJ



Posts: 455
Joined: June 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2012,18:10   

I think that it is a mistake to expect the vocal tards to change. I read somewhere that once a person has vocalised their position it is very hard to get them to shift. I think it is the lurkers who are the ones who get deconverted or even get stopped from falling into trap in thinking that ID is anything but bad theology

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2012,21:32   

Quote (MichaelJ @ Sep. 28 2012,19:10)
I think that it is a mistake to expect the vocal tards to change. I read somewhere that once a person has vocalised their position it is very hard to get them to shift. I think it is the lurkers who are the ones who get deconverted or even get stopped from falling into trap in thinking that ID is anything but bad theology

I believe that we all have said something more or less similar, i.e. that we believe that to be a rational possibility, but I have labored to draw attention to the lack of evidence supporting the hypothesis that de-tard happens as a result of these discussions.

it's almost completely faith-based.  but there are only 2 examples which have been offered so far.  out of years and years and years of licking the hair off the tard

Edited by Erasmus, FCD on Sep. 28 2012,22:33

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2012,22:14   

Here's what I'm getting at:  it might be that the biggest annual changes in the number of de-tards, relative to the tards, would be due to recruitment and mortality, not changing from one group to the other.

And if that is true, then I think several other things are also true.

first, there will always be tard.  competing magic vs. not-magic explanations for duh universe aren't just going to go away because all of  a sudden tards give a shit about something like that.  it's likea two-party system, an evolutionarily stable strategy.  science and faith like host and parasite.




two the tard will never change.  Even though it was better back in the goodle days (le afdave por exemplor) when they spoke portugese at the tower of bible it is still the same  shitty arguments parasitizing the epistemic capital of methodological naturalism

three the tard will always change.  Even though it's the same old shit from way back before the goodle days (et tu, materialist) when they had the old time epicurean democritean matter matters, science has progressed.

yet the tard parasitizes that progress, to advance arguments that were not even possible for tards to consider much less,  discover,quantify, formulate and falsify.  

the tard changes with science, for if there were no science to deny, tard would be simple ritual and punishment

four motives are pretty much the only fucking thing worth talking about, so get over yourselfs

Edited by Erasmus, FCD on Sep. 28 2012,23:30

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
sparc



Posts: 1697
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2012,23:46   

I don't expect many to de-tard. Especially, if they are beyond a certain age. TARD belongs to a person's religious beliefs and feelings which are both part of the personality which develops latest in early adult years. To change this usually requires some incident in personal l life. Just reading science will not suffice. I guess it is much easier to go in the other direction and usually contains some delusional Damascus road experience. In addition, Christians are prepared to welcome seekers.  E.g., GilDodgen. However, for the time being going TARD in adulthood seems to be some US specialty.  Maybe it is due to the 30 year war which ended with the “cuius regio, eius religio” rule but where I live people would be embarrassed by publicly outing themselves as born again Christians especially, when crying and whining is involved. Unfortunately, this doesn’t mean that the public is scientifically more literate. TARD just comes as eso-, new age, scifi TARD. However, these forms are much less virulent than the Only One Truth TARD© because these guys just don’t care about science and aren’t interested in the science curriculum at all.

--------------
"[...] the type of information we find in living systems is beyond the creative means of purely material processes [...] Who or what is such an ultimate source of information? [...] from a theistic perspective, such an information source would presumably have to be God."

- William Dembski -

   
Cubist



Posts: 349
Joined: Oct. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 29 2012,05:03   

It's all well and good to question the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of particular modes of de-tardification, but let's not lose sight of one very important fact:
De-tardification does happen.
We can argue over how frequently it occurs, whether de-tardification occurs often enough to overcome the recruitment efforts of existing tards, and a host of other questions… but given the known and cited instances, we can't argue that de-tardification does, in fact, happen. And since it does happen, it's fair to ask how does it happen? There are fat-and-happy tard who stay fat-and-happy tards, and there are fat-and-happy tards who break free of the tard; what makes the difference between them?
Looking at the personal testimonies of people who have successfully broken free of the tard, there's one factor which is common to most (if not all) of these stories: The person was exposed to the truth, and they found that they couldn't stand the conflict between the truth they were exposed to and the Truth they had been brainwashed into believing. And what does internet de-tardification consist of?
Exposing people to the truth.
So it seems to me that in the absence of hard data, we should tentatively accept the null hypothesis—which is, in this case, that internet de-tardification does help people overcome their former tard-y state. Whether or not this is a good thing, well, I think it is, but that's one of those questions that can be argued.

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3558
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 29 2012,07:01   

Consider the alternative, that no one on the internet opposed the Discovery Institute. Or no blogs responding to creationist claims. No parodies of the creation museum.

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 29 2012,08:40   

Quote (Cubist @ Sep. 29 2012,06:03)
It's all well and good to question the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of particular modes of de-tardification, but let's not lose sight of one very important fact:
De-tardification does happen.
We can argue over how frequently it occurs, whether de-tardification occurs often enough to overcome the recruitment efforts of existing tards, and a host of other questions… but given the known and cited instances, we can't argue that de-tardification does, in fact, happen. And since it does happen, it's fair to ask how does it happen? There are fat-and-happy tard who stay fat-and-happy tards, and there are fat-and-happy tards who break free of the tard; what makes the difference between them?
Looking at the personal testimonies of people who have successfully broken free of the tard, there's one factor which is common to most (if not all) of these stories: The person was exposed to the truth, and they found that they couldn't stand the conflict between the truth they were exposed to and the Truth they had been brainwashed into believing. And what does internet de-tardification consist of?
Exposing people to the truth.
So it seems to me that in the absence of hard data, we should tentatively accept the null hypothesis—which is, in this case, that internet de-tardification does help people overcome their former tard-y state. Whether or not this is a good thing, well, I think it is, but that's one of those questions that can be argued.

Of course there is de-tarding. The question I have been hoping to answer is "Does de-tarding happen because of internetting tards".

That answer seems to be No, qualified with "it takes a village and internetting the tards might sometimes be the last straw"

I would suggest that instead of "de-tards were exposed to the truth and couldn't stand the conflict" vs "tards are not exposed"  or "tards are exposed but compartmentalized the conflict", that the common factor among de-tards is that they were suspicious of the tard in the first place.  there might be a more or less deterministic rate of de-tarding no matter what other factors are involved.

I think the appropriate null hypothesis is that "internetting does not cause de-tard", and we haven't seen any evidence that it does, really.  

Consider the sheer volume of tard you've seen on the internet. It's pretty pathetic that only two examples of de-tard are the fruit of all that labor, and the relationship with internetting the tard for those two is at least questionable

Edited by Erasmus, FCD on Sep. 29 2012,09:44

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 29 2012,08:42   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 29 2012,08:01)
Consider the alternative, that no one on the internet opposed the Discovery Institute. Or no blogs responding to creationist claims. No parodies of the creation museum.

Yes I like that.

I offer the possibility that were this the case, nothing would be different in terms of

1.  sheer number of tards
2.  rates of de-tard

Of course we would have to test these hypotheses and I am eager for the opportunity.

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 29 2012,08:47   

Quote (sparc @ Sep. 29 2012,00:46)
I don't expect many to de-tard. Especially, if they are beyond a certain age. TARD belongs to a person's religious beliefs and feelings which are both part of the personality which develops latest in early adult years. To change this usually requires some incident in personal l life. Just reading science will not suffice. I guess it is much easier to go in the other direction and usually contains some delusional Damascus road experience. In addition, Christians are prepared to welcome seekers.  E.g., GilDodgen. However, for the time being going TARD in adulthood seems to be some US specialty.  Maybe it is due to the 30 year war which ended with the “cuius regio, eius religio” rule but where I live people would be embarrassed by publicly outing themselves as born again Christians especially, when crying and whining is involved. Unfortunately, this doesn’t mean that the public is scientifically more literate. TARD just comes as eso-, new age, scifi TARD. However, these forms are much less virulent than the Only One Truth TARD© because these guys just don’t care about science and aren’t interested in the science curriculum at all.

i don't have any robust comparative methods for comparing the other species of tard so i just ignored the woo.  but if woo overlaps with tard, and "de-tarding" is the intellectuall exercise that would encourage "de-woo" then there may be an even stronger case that internetting the tard doesn't cause de-tard but may cause trophic shifts from tard to woo LOL

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 1956
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 29 2012,10:28   

Quote (afarensis @ Sep. 27 2012,18:47)
Quote (Lou FCD @ Sep. 27 2012,19:31)
It would be interesting to be able to check up on all the past UDidiots, the ones that have gone missing. I wonder if any of them have detarded and slunk away in embarrassment at ever having been sucked into that mess.

Yeah, I have often wondered about Lee Bowen. He was a regular on UD. He once showed on my blog and disappeared from the scene shortly thereafter.

PS: Never try to post a picture when using a cell phone to comment

I spend an inordinate amount of time responding to newspaper articles, and subsequent discussions about ID, and creationism. Lee shows up quite often and is as full of ID creationist bullshit as ever.

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
Cubist



Posts: 349
Joined: Oct. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 29 2012,11:36   

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Sep. 29 2012,08:40)
Quote (Cubist @ Sep. 29 2012,06:03)
…in the absence of hard data, we should tentatively accept the null hypothesis—which is, in this case, that internet de-tardification does help people overcome their former tard-y state.

The question I have been hoping to answer is "Does de-tarding happen because of internetting tards".

There is a certain amount of ambiguity in the phrase "because of". If you're asking whether de-tardification ever happens solely and entirely as a result of internet de-tard activity—that is, whether or not de-tardification happens because of internet de-tard and only internet de-tard—the answer is almost certainly "of course not". But if that's what you're asking, is there anything which de-tarding can rightly be said to occur "because of"?
If, on the other hand, you're asking whether internet de-tard activity is a contributing factor to de-tardification, I honestly don't see how the answer can be anything but "of course it is". To be sure, this doesn't address the question of how effective internet de-tard is, nor the question of how effective internet de-tard might be by comparison with other techniques. But since there are genuine examples of ex-tards who credit internet de-tard activity as having helped them along on their journey away from the Tard Side, the efficacy of internet de-tard activity must be greater than zero.

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 29 2012,12:31   

Quote (Cubist @ Sep. 29 2012,12:36)
But since there are genuine examples of ex-tards who credit internet de-tard activity as having helped them along on their journey away from the Tard Side, the efficacy of internet de-tard activity must be greater than zero.

Do you have examples?  That's what I was gunning for here.

Agreed that cause and effect here is dodgy.  And the converse of this is that we know of no one here who has tardicated to the tard side since the time of the swamp.

ETA if it's not statistically significantly different from zero then pretenses to the contrary about how it "must make a difference because after all I detarded" are more or less faith-based statements.  

That is a fascinating result to consider.  I like it. Glen said "other people's godlessness is not my business" and I think I am sufficiently de-tarded to where I understand how that is probably the zenlike state where we can be most effective, IF there is any effect.

Edited by Erasmus, FCD on Sep. 29 2012,13:34

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3558
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 29 2012,16:07   

Tard is Republican. Woo is Democrat.

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 29 2012,16:46   

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Sep. 29 2012,06:40)
I would suggest that... the common factor among de-tards is that they were suspicious of the tard in the first place.

I don't think so.  In my case, for example, I assumed that the tard was true, because my parents, my pastor, and many people I respected told me it was true.

It wasn't until I started learning science that I realized, to my discomfort and distress, that there was a conflict between science and my religion.  And my initial response was not to become suspicious of the tard.  I doubled down on the tard and became suspicious of the science!

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 29 2012,16:47   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 29 2012,14:07)
Tard is Republican. Woo is Democrat.

And woo-tard is Libertarian.

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Soapy Sam



Posts: 510
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 29 2012,17:07   

Quote (keiths @ Sep. 29 2012,16:46)
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Sep. 29 2012,06:40)
I would suggest that... the common factor among de-tards is that they were suspicious of the tard in the first place.

I don't think so.  In my case, for example, I assumed that the tard was true, because my parents, my pastor, and many people I respected told me it was true.

It wasn't until I started learning science that I realized, to my discomfort and distress, that there was a conflict between science and my religion.  And my initial response was not to become suspicious of the tard.  I doubled down on the tard and became suspicious of the science!

Interesting - did you take your convictions online? (I'm not looking for links!).

BTW My vote, should anyone care, for pending de-tard is Sal Cordova. The rest? Nevah!

--------------
Evolutionists trust entropy for creation of life but are like men who horse a crocodile to get across a river - niwrad.

The organism could already metabolize citrus. Joe G

  
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 29 2012,20:35   

Quote (Soapy Sam @ Sep. 29 2012,15:07)
Interesting - did you take your convictions online? (I'm not looking for links!).


No, I detarded long before I got my first Internet connection.  It's a shame.  I think the Internet would have sped up the process significantly.

Quote
BTW My vote, should anyone care, for pending de-tard is Sal Cordova.


Yeah, I can imagine that happening.  He'll still be a douche, though.

My vote is for vjtorley.  He's smart enough to know, at some level, how lame the pro-tard arguments are.  On the other hand, he also uses his intelligence to fool himself via rationalizations.  The resulting high levels of cognitive dissonance are building up in him like the stress on a thrust fault.  When the fault finally gives, he'll be one of those rare birds who detard overnight.

Edited by keiths on Sep. 29 2012,18:36

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 29 2012,20:56   

Quote (keiths @ Sep. 29 2012,21:35)
Quote (Soapy Sam @ Sep. 29 2012,15:07)
Interesting - did you take your convictions online? (I'm not looking for links!).


No, I detarded long before I got my first Internet connection.  It's a shame.  I think the Internet would have sped up the process significantly.

Quote
BTW My vote, should anyone care, for pending de-tard is Sal Cordova.


Yeah, I can imagine that happening.  He'll still be a douche, though.

My vote is for vjtorley.  He's smart enough to know, at some level, how lame the pro-tard arguments are.  On the other hand, he also uses his intelligence to fool himself via rationalizations.  The resulting high levels of cognitive dissonance are building up in him like the stress on a thrust fault.  When the fault finally gives, he'll be one of those rare birds who detard overnight.

agreed that this model is more or less accurate

if the phenomenon is more prevalent than i have assumed then the question is "why don't we hear about de-tard"

presumably all of us would (and have) admitted this.  but it may be that time lapse is greater. i am not sure.  but i wonder if someone de-tards and can't admit it, have they really de-tarded.

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Glen Davidson



Posts: 752
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 29 2012,23:02   

To me it seems more or less inevitable that we'll not know what effect internet anti-tard arguments, evidence, snark, and cajoling will do.  I mean, how many people will ever say, well, I did believe in IDiocy, or at least hoped it was correct, but internet snarks made me uneasy enough to start paying attention to the actual arguments and evidence presented, until I finally studied evolution--like I should have from the beginning--and finally realized that it's justified science like ecology and meteorology?

Most people simply won't start the story of how they arrived at a position by noting that they were made to feel stupid by what are often fairly juvenile tactics (by myself included, of course).  Sure enough, a few would, realizing that the barren wasteland of creationism that they once accepted had to be matched by some jeers and cajoles for them to start to fear that it really was stupid, but the majority will tell a "better story" about how they sorted through things in an effort to be completely honest intellectually.  We at least do know that the treatment of Sternberg as a purveyor of idiocy (legitimate, of course) apparently troubled him enough to whine like a martyr, as well as to embellish his "martyrdom."  He's almost certainly too far gone to ever admit what a jerk he really is/was, for that matter.

People will often admit to being persuaded to study, rarely to being shamed into it.

And this is going to be the case wherever people's appallingly stupid ideas are ridiculed.  We feel that such ridicule works--not commonly on the committed (vocally committed, especially, as stated earlier in the thread), but on those still capable of persuasion--and seem to have an evolutionary sense that it is so (also a dicey claim when we can't test it), but has ridicule plus argumentation and persuasion ever been shown to work anywhere except in rather contrived psychological experiments?  "In the field" it's always going to be tough to test whether or not it is effective, but it seems that we're going to more or less accept that it does to some useful (yet quite possibly fairly small) extent because of how our brains work.

Not all things are going to be capable of being shown to work--at least in the general population.  Probably tests could be contrived to see how well internet tactics work, but, practically these would almost certainly have to be among fairly select portions of the population (college students being typical), and of short duration (yes, how long did "Judgment Day" persuade college students in the study?).

We probably are stuck just using our sense of how people are persuaded with varying amounts ridicule, encouragement, argumentation, and informing them of very basic facts, like how one actually arrives at reliable information (not by speculating that a designer will design within all of the expected limits of evolution, notably).  That's what we've done in the past, and it's what we're largely stuck with now, if with a little bit more objective information showing that pretty much all of the persuasive tactics work at least in limited tests.  

Common sense certainly can be wrong, but it's right often enough to go with when the specifically desired supporting data don't exist--and when we know both from experience and from limited data that those are still teachable are sometimes persuaded to think by carrots, by sticks, and by combinations of those and the evidence and inference from that evidence.

Glen Davidson

--------------
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

   
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 30 2012,03:23   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 29 2012,17:07)
Tard is Republican. Woo is Democrat.

!!!




what glen said,also

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 30 2012,12:07   

Quote (keiths @ Sep. 27 2012,17:11)
I'll repeat my two points:  1) detardation is almost always a gradual process, and 2) there is rarely a single, isolated cause.

#1 means that you won't see detardation in the immediate aftermath of an Internet discussion, even if that discussion had a detardative impact.  (Plus the fact that even pseudonymous commenters are loathe to admit error.)

#2 means that you'll rarely find ex-tards identifying a single reason for their detardation.  In my case, I credit conversations with friends (including the Mormon I mentioned earlier), voracious reading, and just plain thinking about the issues.  They all contributed.  

You typically hear people say things like "I just came to realize over time that my position didn't hold up to scrutiny."  What they don't say is "On September 27th at UD, Erasmus FCD defeated my last argument in favor of intelligent design and I became a Darwinist."  That doesn't mean that your argument didn't have an impact.


A recent detard story fits the mold:
Quote
"No it was very, very gradual. Actually there's not really one single moment where I can look back and say ah, that was the moment. It was kind of a slow progression," Teresa MacBain shared about her loss of faith with CP in a phone interview on Tuesday...

Unable to point to one specific incident that made her change her mind about God and the Bible, MacBain chronicled the train of thought that led her from the Christian faith to her secularist reasoning today.

"It's just theological. I had no problems with the church or the structure or the organization. There are basically four steps that occurred over a long period of time. One was the contradictory nature of the Bible; the lack of scientific or historical foundation or accuracy, which took me a very, very long time to come to terms with. That was the starting point I guess when I realized that that wasn't true, that the Bible wasn't true. From there I moved to thinking about all of the religions in the world and how people basically associate, in most cases, with one religion or another based upon their own culture and how they were raised," she said.

"So I kind of moved into a position where I thought that all religions were equally valid and that it kind of depended on who you were and how you were raised but that we were all on the same journey. From there I moved to the question of the existence of hell and trying to understand how a supreme being could create humans that according to the Christian Bible are very weak and finite, as compared to God. How that creature, being, entity, whatever you want to call it, could punish them eternally in such a horrible and torturous place as hell. So that was kind of a third discovery."


--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 30 2012,12:39   

I tried to set up these points so that "de-tarding" didn't mean "denying all gods" or some synonym for atheism, but instead was explicitly denying that there is any factual, philosophical or theoretical basis for creationism.  

I have not been very clear with this and it's hard to draw a bright line there anyway. But my comments have been more or less directed at this concept of de-tard and not the idea of losing religious beliefs in general

Edited by Erasmus, FCD on Sep. 30 2012,13:39

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Cubist



Posts: 349
Joined: Oct. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 30 2012,18:18   

Just checked the Talk.origins Archive website. The Posts of the Month include a few examples of successful de-tarding, for which internet de-tard activity was a non-trivial contributor.

One in which losing the tard did not entail losing the religion:
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins....03.html

One in which losing the tard was more-or-less accompanied by losing the religion:
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins....03.html

A collection of links to de-tarding testimonies which, while prolly not involving internet de-tard activity in specific, appear to support the hypothesis that exposure to the truth is a significant contributing factor to successful de-tarding:
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins....02.html

  
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 30 2012,18:38   

Quote (Cubist @ Sep. 30 2012,16:18)
the hypothesis that exposure to the truth is a significant contributing factor to successful de-tarding

That's the key.  Exposure to truth, expressed clearly and logically, with lots of supporting evidence.  The venue is much less important.

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 30 2012,19:16   

Quote (Cubist @ Sep. 30 2012,19:18)
One in which losing the tard did not entail losing the religion:
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins....03.html

fascinating, that's  exactly the sort of story I had in mind.  But I wonder if rubystar re-tarded.  It would seem so, in this thread

https://groups.google.com/forum......i31HPIJ

Quote

It was fallacious of me to take such liberties in the way I assumed Genesis to merely be symbolic. I've learned
that the questions surrounding it are much more complex than that, and require much deeper study. While I still accept evolution as a valid scientific theory and valid subject of study, I regret to think I may have steered others from
properly respecting the very Bible I base my belief system upon. There is symbolism in Genesis, but I no longer
hold many of the same opinions I once did about it as noted in the POTM. I believe there was an Adam now, for example, though I believe he was both a literal person and a symbol of mankind. Other such opinions have also, shall I say, 'evolved'. Please understand that I will continue to pursue the proper way to synthesize good faith and good
science and have and likely will make misjudgements along the way.


however the t.o. essay seems to place Rubystars directly in the camp of "de-tarded because of internetting the tards" although in her[?] case she was the tard who was slaying all those evilutionists.

her comments about athiests in forums and not agreeing that her religious beliefs are irrational make me think that this de-tard thing wasn't permanent.  either way, a very interesting set of links.  Gracias!

Edited by Erasmus, FCD on Sep. 30 2012,20:19

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 30 2012,19:26   

Which raises another interesting question: How many ex-tards relapse?

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Southstar



Posts: 150
Joined: Nov. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 01 2012,09:39   

In my experience in debating in Italian forums, all the detard events I witnessed were by lurkers or people who posted very few times and I was aware of them only because they PM me, thanking me and asking me to go on.

I think it has to do with how strongly you were tarded, the more fundamentalist the more likely it is that when you de-tard you won't admit it to anyone (and sometimes not even themselves). I'm willing to bet that there are many tards out there that know perfectly well how things went, but are surrounded so they keep up the lie or just ignore the issue. So you won't get any feedback from these guys.

Further I bet many tards think that admitting to the de-tard event is equivalent to refuting their entire faith (which is a lot bigger than just accepting evolution). I think it's important to note that should science be wrong about evolution it would mean new science, new theories, new discoveries and generally happy scientists. Should science be right (and we know it is) it means the collapse of a faith, culture and way of life for many fundamentalists.

--------------
"Cows who know a moose when they see one will do infinitely better than a cow that pairs with a moose because they cannot see the difference either." Gary Gaulin

  
JohnW



Posts: 2234
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 01 2012,11:34   

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Sep. 29 2012,06:42)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 29 2012,08:01)
Consider the alternative, that no one on the internet opposed the Discovery Institute. Or no blogs responding to creationist claims. No parodies of the creation museum.

Yes I like that.

I offer the possibility that were this the case, nothing would be different in terms of

1.  sheer number of tards
2.  rates of de-tard

Of course we would have to test these hypotheses and I am eager for the opportunity.

We also need to consider the rate of tard production (tardogenesis?)

Nothing we do will shift the hardcore tards.  They didn't get where they are via reason and evidence, and they're not going anywhere else that way.  They're all either pure culture-warriors who neither know nor care about science (Denyse) or are deluded about their scientific abilities to the point of mental illness (batshit77).  Either way, they're hopeless cases.

But I like to think we can have some effect on the newbies: people who've heard about IDC online or at church and like the sound of this new science which proves Jesus.  We won't stop them all, but we're probably stopping some.

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it.
- Robert Byers

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 01 2012,13:07   

Quote (JohnW @ Oct. 01 2012,12:34)
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Sep. 29 2012,06:42)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 29 2012,08:01)
Consider the alternative, that no one on the internet opposed the Discovery Institute. Or no blogs responding to creationist claims. No parodies of the creation museum.

Yes I like that.

I offer the possibility that were this the case, nothing would be different in terms of

1.  sheer number of tards
2.  rates of de-tard

Of course we would have to test these hypotheses and I am eager for the opportunity.

We also need to consider the rate of tard production (tardogenesis?)

Nothing we do will shift the hardcore tards.  They didn't get where they are via reason and evidence, and they're not going anywhere else that way.  They're all either pure culture-warriors who neither know nor care about science (Denyse) or are deluded about their scientific abilities to the point of mental illness (batshit77).  Either way, they're hopeless cases.

But I like to think we can have some effect on the newbies: people who've heard about IDC online or at church and like the sound of this new science which proves Jesus.  We won't stop them all, but we're probably stopping some.

Do you think the n00b tardz are going to wade through 900 fucking comments at UD and several hundred at TSZ in order to try to make a judgment call on whether gpuccio is an obstinately deluded fool?

me, i doubt it!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v....3USKEKw

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Zachriel



Posts: 2596
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 01 2012,13:11   

We fight them here so that we don't have to fight them there.



--------------
Tard Acquisition and Repository Department

   
midwifetoad



Posts: 3558
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 01 2012,13:18   

Quote
We fight them here so that we don't have to fight them there.


Somehow that sounds backwards. :p

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3558
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 01 2012,13:19   

Quote
900 fucking comments at UD


Most of them are scroll-bys.

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 01 2012,13:26   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Oct. 01 2012,14:19)
Quote
900 fucking comments at UD


Most of them are scroll-bys.

hell yeah, but what I am getting at is that I suspect they are scrollbies for these hypothetical n00bs, too.

there ain't no accounting for taste, that much I know for sure.  i think i prefer the nasty and brutish tard to this effete evanescent flavor.

it would be worth it though if gpuccio suddenly said "you're right, this is bullshit and I now admit it".  odds on that I give 1:6

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5378
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 01 2012,14:16   

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Sep. 30 2012,20:16)
 
Quote (Cubist @ Sep. 30 2012,19:18)
One in which losing the tard did not entail losing the religion:
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins....03.html

fascinating, that's  exactly the sort of story I had in mind.  But I wonder if rubystar re-tarded.  It would seem so, in this thread

https://groups.google.com/forum......i31HPIJ

   
Quote

It was fallacious of me to take such liberties in the way I assumed Genesis to merely be symbolic. I've learned
that the questions surrounding it are much more complex than that, and require much deeper study. While I still accept evolution as a valid scientific theory and valid subject of study, I regret to think I may have steered others from
properly respecting the very Bible I base my belief system upon. There is symbolism in Genesis, but I no longer
hold many of the same opinions I once did about it as noted in the POTM. I believe there was an Adam now, for example, though I believe he was both a literal person and a symbol of mankind. Other such opinions have also, shall I say, 'evolved'. Please understand that I will continue to pursue the proper way to synthesize good faith and good
science and have and likely will make misjudgements along the way.


however the t.o. essay seems to place Rubystars directly in the camp of "de-tarded because of internetting the tards" although in her[?] case she was the tard who was slaying all those evilutionists.

her comments about athiests in forums and not agreeing that her religious beliefs are irrational make me think that this de-tard thing wasn't permanent.  either way, a very interesting set of links.  Gracias!

Again, and with a nod to both my own story and the story of Mandi's detardation, it may be that rubystar's story is not yet finished. The long, slow process of detarding is one filled with back and forth for some of us.

 
Quote (keiths @ Sep. 30 2012,13:07)
Quote
"No it was very, very gradual. Actually there's not really one single moment where I can look back and say ah, that was the moment. It was kind of a slow progression," Teresa MacBain shared about her loss of faith with CP in a phone interview on Tuesday...

Unable to point to one specific incident that made her change her mind about God and the Bible, MacBain chronicled the train of thought that led her from the Christian faith to her secularist reasoning today.

"It's just theological. I had no problems with the church or the structure or the organization. There are basically four steps that occurred over a long period of time. One was the contradictory nature of the Bible; the lack of scientific or historical foundation or accuracy, which took me a very, very long time to come to terms with. That was the starting point I guess when I realized that that wasn't true, that the Bible wasn't true. From there I moved to thinking about all of the religions in the world and how people basically associate, in most cases, with one religion or another based upon their own culture and how they were raised," she said.

"So I kind of moved into a position where I thought that all religions were equally valid and that it kind of depended on who you were and how you were raised but that we were all on the same journey. From there I moved to the question of the existence of hell and trying to understand how a supreme being could create humans that according to the Christian Bible are very weak and finite, as compared to God. How that creature, being, entity, whatever you want to call it, could punish them eternally in such a horrible and torturous place as hell. So that was kind of a third discovery."

I kind of did the details in approximately the reverse order, but there was a lot of reaching back, grasping at straws of my former tardlife, along my travels from fundy tard to vague tard to woo tard to newageyallreligionsaretrue tard, to tard-free. It's really fucking hard to let go, when you're risking eternal torture, your family ties, the entirety of your social existence. I wouldn't write Rubystar off just yet.

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Lou FCD



Posts: 5378
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 01 2012,14:19   

Quote (keiths @ Sep. 30 2012,20:26)
Which raises another interesting question: How many ex-tards relapse?

My gut says, "All of them. Temporarily."

It also says, "Once you realize it's bullshit, you can never go home."

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 01 2012,14:28   

Quote (Lou FCD @ Oct. 01 2012,15:19)
 
Quote (keiths @ Sep. 30 2012,20:26)
Which raises another interesting question: How many ex-tards relapse?

My gut says, "All of them. Temporarily."

It also says, "Once you realize it's bullshit, you can never go home."





LOL well i was trying to avoid the generalization "tard= religious beliefs" for lots of reasons

but of course there are many places where religious beliefs intersects tard, and although I don't have religious beliefs I don't think I'll go so far to label all religious beliefs "tard".  

Most tard seems to be an intersection of religious beliefs, theories of identity and cultural inertia.  Also pathological psychoses

Edited by Erasmus, FCD on Oct. 01 2012,15:31

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5378
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 01 2012,14:38   

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Oct. 01 2012,15:28)
Quote (Lou FCD @ Oct. 01 2012,15:19)
   
Quote (keiths @ Sep. 30 2012,20:26)
Which raises another interesting question: How many ex-tards relapse?

My gut says, "All of them. Temporarily."

It also says, "Once you realize it's bullshit, you can never go home."





LOL well i was trying to avoid the generalization "tard= religious beliefs" for lots of reasons

but of course there are many places where religious beliefs intersects tard, and although I don't have religious beliefs I don't think I'll go so far to label all religious beliefs "tard".  

Most tard seems to be an intersection of religious beliefs, theories of identity and cultural inertia.  Also pathological psychoses

See, for me there is no real way to separate the two. They are part and parcel of the same thing. Of course, I can't speak for anyone but me, but there y'go.




...and wherever you go, there y'are.

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 01 2012,15:25   

Don't you know many people with religious beliefs that are not creationists, under your definition of creationist?

I think "t.a.r.d." as in The Argument Regarding Design is a good descriptor of creationism, and i agree that you could talk me into accepting that it describes most religious beliefs, but I don't think I could agree that it describes all religious beliefs.  

What I have found immensely enjoyable, of late, is that T.A.R.D. also describes the fake climate skeptics.  And they behave the same was as the other creationists.  

I s'pose the best barometer of "Whether internetting tards causes them to de-tard" would be a metric of how many folks abandon creationisms yet don't abandon their religious beliefs altogether.

It's hard to get data on that one.  Easier to find those who have abandoned religious beliefs altogether because they are usually vocal and pissed off about it.  Why de-tards aren't is what is curious.

Edited by Erasmus, FCD on Oct. 01 2012,16:30

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5378
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 01 2012,15:27   

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Oct. 01 2012,16:25)
Don't you know many people with religious beliefs that are not creationists, under your definition of creationist?

No.

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 01 2012,15:31   

Quote (Lou FCD @ Oct. 01 2012,16:27)
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 01 2012,16:25)
Don't you know many people with religious beliefs that are not creationists, under your definition of creationist?

No.

so, theistic evolutionists are creationists?

what about john kwoks deity?

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 01 2012,15:32   

I'm willing to include the folks who wish to save the phenomenon by appending "because God said so" to the end of every scientific explanation, because they don't deny the explanation.

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
JohnW



Posts: 2234
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 01 2012,16:27   

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Oct. 01 2012,13:25)
What I have found immensely enjoyable, of late, is that T.A.R.D. also describes the fake climate skeptics.  And they behave the same was as the other creationists.  

Many of them are the other creationists.

It's crank magnetism: if you can't understand and/or bring political/cultural filters to one area of science, you'll you'll do it others.  Look how many outbreaks of UFO/Turin Shroud/altmed/... nonsense we see on UD.

Tard comes in clusters.

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it.
- Robert Byers

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5378
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 01 2012,16:38   

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Oct. 01 2012,16:31)
Quote (Lou FCD @ Oct. 01 2012,16:27)
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 01 2012,16:25)
Don't you know many people with religious beliefs that are not creationists, under your definition of creationist?

No.

so, theistic evolutionists are creationists?

what about john kwoks deity?

That wasn't the question.

You asked if I knew many people with religious beliefs that are not creationists.

The answer to that question hinges on my definition of "many" as well as "creationist".

As for the kwokinator, specifically, I don't know his thoughts on deities. I just know enough to file him under "stupid, dishonest git".

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 02 2012,08:53   

i think we could make an argument for internetting the tard "in the public good", independent of whether it de-tards.

known tards, like our favorites, are willing, able and attempting to insert their tard in new places.  much like a juvenile primate, this urge to insert the tard* into every nook and cranny is a very deep and consuming impulse in these tards.  



So if you tie them up in their house on their computer a-drankin them big gulps and hosanna-ing at their monitor about how much you need jesus therefore the universe is designed, they can't be out mucking about with real things that matter like education or stuff smart people know about.

Quote
Quote
tldr is if gordon e mullings is onefisting a manifesto from atop his rock then he can't be a constitutional threat


Quote
tldr is if joetard has a LTER**  then he doesn't have time to go to IDEA Day***





OK if this then I argue that implies interetting tards provides a material social benefit, namely wasting the time of virulently stupid and pathologically insane people with an enormous capacity for tard production.

What's the most effective way to make them waste their time while still maximizing the LULZ?







*as the one of the dumbest tards no one named, mynym, used to say: "the merge to urge" lel

** with watermelons and ticks, what is ice, climb it science, barahomominology and informaticsisms

*** or fuck with the people in his local school board who likely have a restraining order against him already

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 02 2012,08:54   

Quote (JohnW @ Oct. 01 2012,17:27)
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 01 2012,13:25)
What I have found immensely enjoyable, of late, is that T.A.R.D. also describes the fake climate skeptics.  And they behave the same was as the other creationists.  

Many of them are the other creationists.

It's crank magnetism: if you can't understand and/or bring political/cultural filters to one area of science, you'll you'll do it others.  Look how many outbreaks of UFO/Turin Shroud/altmed/... nonsense we see on UD.

Tard comes in clusters.

Totally---  and just because you are inoculated to one strain doesn't guarantee you are not infectable

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 02 2012,09:11   

Quote (Lou FCD @ Oct. 01 2012,17:38)

fair enough it wasn't very clear anyway LOL

but thinking about how you answer "are theistic evolutionists* creationists?" might explain how one might view the de-tard spectrum differently than another.

I don't really know many "theistic evolutionists" but I do know a few.  I don't understand religious beliefs so I can't be sure about any of it but I think I understand why the fundies view it as some kinda hippy dippy noo age bullshite



but that just says more about how well I know what fundie tards think than it does about theistic evilutionists

*i know there is no meaningful answer to this so i am not looking to fap about it

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
dvunkannon



Posts: 1377
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 02 2012,09:49   

Hopefully relevant comments:

1 - I de-tarded and left the practice of Orthodox Judaism at about the same time. Modern Orthodoxy has a "Torah U'Maadah" (basically Revealed Truth and Science) theme that kept me going in the religion for a while. I was living in the center of the Yeshiva University world that focused on thinkers like Maimonides, who the YU crowd thought of as an ultra-rationalist though he still accepted biblical literalism.

2 - I de-tarded mostly in reaction to the more virulent creationists I was exposed to, and needing to make choices about what to tell my children about the world.

3 - I enjoy jousting with tards on the internet. I've learned a lot, which is the best part.

4 - I'm spending more time now at WUWT tweaking climate tards. No need to sock up. From what I've seen there, climatard is mostly motivated by political concerns related to loss of privilege. And some deep paranoia. Some of those climatards really are convinced that all scientists are Liberals taking orders from Moscow Central. Pure 50s John Bircher vital bodily fluids bullshit. None appeal to their religion, God has given us dominion, etc.

5 - I don't expect any climatard I have an exchange with to de-tard, just retire to smoldering resentment and silence. The social value beyond my own entertainment value comes entirely from the onlookers, and WUWT has way more onlookers than UD. I do have a hope that climatard is easier to de-tard than creotard. There is more cause and effect to the science, and you can rub their noses in the effects more easily than with evolution.

--------------
I’m referring to evolution, not changes in allele frequencies. - Cornelius Hunter
I’m not an evolutionist, I’m a change in allele frequentist! - Nakashima

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5378
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 02 2012,10:45   

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 02 2012,10:11)
         
Quote (Lou FCD @ Oct. 01 2012,17:38)
See, for me there is no real way to separate the two. They are part and parcel of the same thing. Of course, I can't speak for anyone but me, but there y'go.

fair enough it wasn't very clear anyway LOL


I think it was probably me that was being unclear.

         
Quote (Lou FCD @ Oct. 01 2012,17:38)
See, for me there is no real way to separate the two. They are part and parcel of the same thing. Of course, I can't speak for anyone but me, but there y'go.


For me, in my life, they came together as a package. That makes it very hard for me to wrap my head around one without the other. I don't get the point of positing a hands-off deity. I get that some people do it, I sort of passed that way on my way to where I am, but I don't understand why they linger there. For me, in my life straight-up atheism is a natural conclusion of a process. Stopping half-way was just not tenable, anymore than stopping a rollercoaster half-way down the first big hill. Can it be done? Sure. But why would I do that?

The idea of a deity, most especially the Christian one since that's the one we deal with, comes with baggage: namely intervention in the natural world. Seems to me that there are four options for him. 1) He intervenes detectably. 2) He intervenes undetectably. 3) He doesn't intervene. 4) He doesn't exist. Functionally,options 2, 3, and 4 are equivalent. If Yahweh intervenes detectably in the natural world, why can't we detect him? If not, he's superfluous. "I have no need of that hypothesis," as it were.

         
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 02 2012,10:11)
but thinking about how you answer "are theistic evolutionists* creationists?" might explain how one might view the de-tard spectrum differently than another.


I suppose, in a very extended sense, I'd regard TE and/or deism as forms of creationism in an esoteric philosophical discussion over wine and crackers, but not in the vernacular sense that we use it here. I would certainly not file either of those under T.A.R.D..

       
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 02 2012,10:11)
I don't really know many "theistic evolutionists" but I do know a few.


     
Quote (Lou FCD @ Oct. 01 2012,16:27)
     
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 01 2012,16:25)
Don't you know many people with religious beliefs that are not creationists, under your definition of creationist?

No.


To elaborate and clarify the answer I gave to the question you posed, I just don't know many devotees of TE or deism. One, IRL, as far as I know, and even that one is a guess based on the fact that I heard him mention once that he took his family to church.

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 02 2012,10:11)
*i know there is no meaningful answer to this so i am not looking to fap about it

I, on the other hand, am always up for a good arm-chair philosophical wank over the aforementioned wine and crackers (preferably, with cheese). I don't get out much.

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 02 2012,11:48   

Quote (dvunkannon @ Oct. 02 2012,10:49)
Hopefully relevant comments:

1 - I de-tarded and left the practice of Orthodox Judaism at about the same time. Modern Orthodoxy has a "Torah U'Maadah" (basically Revealed Truth and Science) theme that kept me going in the religion for a while. I was living in the center of the Yeshiva University world that focused on thinkers like Maimonides, who the YU crowd thought of as an ultra-rationalist though he still accepted biblical literalism.

2 - I de-tarded mostly in reaction to the more virulent creationists I was exposed to, and needing to make choices about what to tell my children about the world.

3 - I enjoy jousting with tards on the internet. I've learned a lot, which is the best part.

4 - I'm spending more time now at WUWT tweaking climate tards. No need to sock up. From what I've seen there, climatard is mostly motivated by political concerns related to loss of privilege. And some deep paranoia. Some of those climatards really are convinced that all scientists are Liberals taking orders from Moscow Central. Pure 50s John Bircher vital bodily fluids bullshit. None appeal to their religion, God has given us dominion, etc.

5 - I don't expect any climatard I have an exchange with to de-tard, just retire to smoldering resentment and silence. The social value beyond my own entertainment value comes entirely from the onlookers, and WUWT has way more onlookers than UD. I do have a hope that climatard is easier to de-tard than creotard. There is more cause and effect to the science, and you can rub their noses in the effects more easily than with evolution.

all this

thanks for sharing and i can't get enough of the climate tards.  somebody should be studying these people

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 02 2012,11:55   

Quote (Lou FCD @ Oct. 02 2012,11:45)
I, on the other hand, am always up for a good arm-chair philosophical wank over the aforementioned wine and crackers (preferably, with cheese). I don't get out much.

LOL Floyd Lee is hanging around the wall on PT looking for a boyfrind, he'd love to tell you about it



--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5378
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 02 2012,12:18   

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Oct. 02 2012,12:55)
Quote (Lou FCD @ Oct. 02 2012,11:45)
I, on the other hand, am always up for a good arm-chair philosophical wank over the aforementioned wine and crackers (preferably, with cheese). I don't get out much.

LOL Floyd Lee is hanging around the wall on PT looking for a boyfrind, he'd love to tell you about it

lol, again I was unclear. I should have added, "...with someone in possession of a brain."

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 04 2012,11:07   

The Debunking Handbook

I am not sure if we've read this.  I wonder how it might alter your strategies for internetting the tards.


Quote
If facts cannot dissuade a person from their preexisting
beliefs - and can sometimes make things
worse - how can we possibly reduce the effect of
misinformation? There are two sources of hope.
First, the Worldview Backfire Effect is strongest
among those already fixed in their views. You
therefore stand a greater chance of correcting
misinformation among those
not as firmly decided about hotbutton
issues. This suggests that
outreaches should be directed
towards the undecided majority
rather than the unswayable
minority.
Second, messages can
be presented in ways that
reduce the usual psychological
resistance. For example,
when worldview-threatening
messages are coupled with
so-called self-affirmation,
people become more balanced
in considering pro


Edited by Erasmus, FCD on Oct. 04 2012,12:08

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
dvunkannon



Posts: 1377
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 04 2012,13:00   

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Oct. 02 2012,12:48)
Quote (dvunkannon @ Oct. 02 2012,10:49)
Hopefully relevant comments:

1 - I de-tarded and left the practice of Orthodox Judaism at about the same time. Modern Orthodoxy has a "Torah U'Maadah" (basically Revealed Truth and Science) theme that kept me going in the religion for a while. I was living in the center of the Yeshiva University world that focused on thinkers like Maimonides, who the YU crowd thought of as an ultra-rationalist though he still accepted biblical literalism.

2 - I de-tarded mostly in reaction to the more virulent creationists I was exposed to, and needing to make choices about what to tell my children about the world.

3 - I enjoy jousting with tards on the internet. I've learned a lot, which is the best part.

4 - I'm spending more time now at WUWT tweaking climate tards. No need to sock up. From what I've seen there, climatard is mostly motivated by political concerns related to loss of privilege. And some deep paranoia. Some of those climatards really are convinced that all scientists are Liberals taking orders from Moscow Central. Pure 50s John Bircher vital bodily fluids bullshit. None appeal to their religion, God has given us dominion, etc.

5 - I don't expect any climatard I have an exchange with to de-tard, just retire to smoldering resentment and silence. The social value beyond my own entertainment value comes entirely from the onlookers, and WUWT has way more onlookers than UD. I do have a hope that climatard is easier to de-tard than creotard. There is more cause and effect to the science, and you can rub their noses in the effects more easily than with evolution.

all this

thanks for sharing and i can't get enough of the climate tards.  somebody should be studying these people

WUWT has analogs for many of our favorite UD characters.

Joe G = Smokey
FtK = Pamela Gray, Lucy Skywalker
DaveScot = DaveScot

However, most are versions of Barrogant Barry Arrington. Some are cranks who contribute a response to almost every OP, pushing their version of Climate Time Cube - think BA^77 without quotes and music videos. There is no KF yet!

--------------
I’m referring to evolution, not changes in allele frequencies. - Cornelius Hunter
I’m not an evolutionist, I’m a change in allele frequentist! - Nakashima

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 04 2012,13:33   

I am waiting for them to follow PeeZus's lead and start "Why I am a tard Skeptic™".

Edited by Erasmus, FCD on Oct. 04 2012,15:01

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
JohnW



Posts: 2234
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 04 2012,13:56   

Quote (dvunkannon @ Oct. 04 2012,11:00)
There is no KF yet!

Have patience.

He's given us 24 hours to solve all the outstanding issues with abiogenesis, or ID wins by default.  So he'll have some time on his hands tomorrow.

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it.
- Robert Byers

  
Tracy P. Hamilton



Posts: 1237
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 04 2012,14:31   

Quote (dvunkannon @ Oct. 04 2012,13:00)
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 02 2012,12:48)
Quote (dvunkannon @ Oct. 02 2012,10:49)
Hopefully relevant comments:

1 - I de-tarded and left the practice of Orthodox Judaism at about the same time. Modern Orthodoxy has a "Torah U'Maadah" (basically Revealed Truth and Science) theme that kept me going in the religion for a while. I was living in the center of the Yeshiva University world that focused on thinkers like Maimonides, who the YU crowd thought of as an ultra-rationalist though he still accepted biblical literalism.

2 - I de-tarded mostly in reaction to the more virulent creationists I was exposed to, and needing to make choices about what to tell my children about the world.

3 - I enjoy jousting with tards on the internet. I've learned a lot, which is the best part.

4 - I'm spending more time now at WUWT tweaking climate tards. No need to sock up. From what I've seen there, climatard is mostly motivated by political concerns related to loss of privilege. And some deep paranoia. Some of those climatards really are convinced that all scientists are Liberals taking orders from Moscow Central. Pure 50s John Bircher vital bodily fluids bullshit. None appeal to their religion, God has given us dominion, etc.

5 - I don't expect any climatard I have an exchange with to de-tard, just retire to smoldering resentment and silence. The social value beyond my own entertainment value comes entirely from the onlookers, and WUWT has way more onlookers than UD. I do have a hope that climatard is easier to de-tard than creotard. There is more cause and effect to the science, and you can rub their noses in the effects more easily than with evolution.

all this

thanks for sharing and i can't get enough of the climate tards.  somebody should be studying these people

WUWT has analogs for many of our favorite UD characters.

Joe G = Smokey
FtK = Pamela Gray, Lucy Skywalker
DaveScot = DaveScot

However, most are versions of Barrogant Barry Arrington. Some are cranks who contribute a response to almost every OP, pushing their version of Climate Time Cube - think BA^77 without quotes and music videos. There is no KF yet!

Densye O'Leary = John O'Sullivan (O'MG)
DLH = David L Hagen

--------------
"Following what I just wrote about fitness, you’re taking refuge in what we see in the world."  PaV

"The simple equation F = MA leads to the concept of four-dimensional space." GilDodgen

"We have no brain, I don't, for thinking." Robert Byers

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 11 2012,17:13   

Jerry Coyne tries the de-tard

This is absolutely worth watching, for the LULZ as well as an example of why trying to talk sense to creationists is usually a massive assplosion of FAIL

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 1956
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 16 2012,10:55   

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 11 2012,15:13)
Jerry Coyne tries the de-tard

This is absolutely worth watching, for the LULZ as well as an example of why trying to talk sense to creationists is usually a massive assplosion of FAIL

My biggest problem with that video was how severly edited it obviously was. For that matter, why Jerry Coyne was nattering on about wooden boat design was totally obscure.

I have been playing on the YouTube comments section for the last few days. It seems ready to die out. The alpha-asshole creationist Phil is apparently a member of the Caleb Foundation. They are the Irish creationist outfit that recently got a display on the "flood model" into the Giant's Causeway displays.

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
midwifetoad



Posts: 3558
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 28 2012,07:57   

Pat Robertson. Who woulda guessed?

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
stevestory



Posts: 8896
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 28 2012,10:58   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 26 2012,10:41)
I think of UD as the Wedge Document for any future Dover trial. There was a year or so after Dover (AD?) When UD tred to maintain the fiction that they were about science rather religion, but that is gone.

The Adam and Eve fiasco was icing.

What's this about an adam and eve fiasco?

   
midwifetoad



Posts: 3558
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 28 2012,11:02   

Quote (stevestory @ Nov. 28 2012,10:58)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 26 2012,10:41)
I think of UD as the Wedge Document for any future Dover trial. There was a year or so after Dover (AD?) When UD tred to maintain the fiction that they were about science rather religion, but that is gone.

The Adam and Eve fiasco was icing.

What's this about an adam and eve fiasco?

The recent human origins book tauted by the DI. Axe and whatshername.

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
Kattarina98



Posts: 1255
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 28 2012,11:09   

The fun with Adam and Eve starts here:

http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin....y207049

--------------
Barry Arrington is a bitch.

  
stevestory



Posts: 8896
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 28 2012,11:23   

Quote (Kattarina98 @ Nov. 28 2012,12:09)
The fun with Adam and Eve starts here:

http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin....y207049

ah, thanks. I wasn't sure. Thought it might have been a reference to that vjtorley threat from august where JLAFan sock-puppeted their faces off.

btw, whichever one of you is jlafan, excellent work.

   
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 29 2012,02:31   

A nice detardification story at Jerry Coyne's blog.

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4362
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 02 2012,20:38   

Quote (keiths @ Nov. 29 2012,02:31)
A nice detardification story at Jerry Coyne's blog.

Thanks Keiths - Great Story!  

I wonder if we will ever hear the "Finally Got Over Teh Stupid" stories of GEM of ICKY, GildO and Barry Arington?

--------------
Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10

Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08

UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

  
  123 replies since Sep. 26 2012,08:47 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (5) < [1] 2 3 4 5 >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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