RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (2) < 1 [2] >   
  Topic: ID terms explained, with real life examples< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
timothya



Posts: 264
Joined: April 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2013,05:22   

Being utterly wrong about science equals being right about theology:

An Orthodox Rabbi Ventures into the World of Evidence

Nope. Your premises are wrong, so your conclusions are wrong.

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4936
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2013,06:38   

Quote (timothya @ Oct. 14 2013,05:22)
Being utterly wrong about science equals being right about theology:

An Orthodox Rabbi Ventures into the World of Evidence

Nope. Your premises are wrong, so your conclusions are wrong.

What I was told long ago was that wrong premises mean that the conclusions are unsupported by the proffered argument and that whether the conclusion happens to be true or not is a different matter.

The linked article offers, so far as I can tell, an assertion rather than a conclusion.

The rabbi also doesn't venture into evidence. The rabbi simply applies the standard proof-texting, analogizing, and invention of irrelevancies that antievolutionary theologians commonly bring to a discussion of science, and then wonder why their "arguments" are not immediately accepted and acclaimed.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
Henry J



Posts: 5172
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2013,11:51   

Quote
What I was told long ago was that wrong premises mean that the conclusions are unsupported by the proffered argument and that whether the conclusion happens to be true or not is a different matter.

Not to mention that a conclusion isn't itself invalidated by an invalid argument for that conclusion.

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11127
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 01 2014,22:40   

Crosspost:

http://theskepticalzone.com/wp....?p=3785

--------------
"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

  
Arctodus23



Posts: 322
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 01 2014,23:16   

New "Scientific" Volume passes censorship. Nothing NEW

The IDists are at it again. But this time, with the wonderful story of the "scientific" volume that passes through "censorship" (i.e. peer-review, where every bit of your crap is reviewed for any sight of errors, and there's a LOT, if not, ALL errors in ID creationism).

--------------
"At our churchís funerals, we sing gospel songs (out loud) to God." -- FL

"So the center of the earth being hotter than the surface is a "gross
violation of the second law of thermodynamics??" -- Ted Holden

   
stevestory



Posts: 11166
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 02 2014,11:19   

Isn't that the book where the IDiots rented a room at Cornell, then told Springer that Cornell had a scientific symposium about ID, and Springer found out it the IDiots were liars, and cancelled the book, and they found a new publisher?

   
JohnW



Posts: 3092
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 02 2014,11:30   

Quote (stevestory @ Jan. 02 2014,09:19)
Isn't that the book where the IDiots rented a room at Cornell, then told Springer that Cornell had a scientific symposium about ID, and Springer found out it the IDiots were liars, and cancelled the book, and they found a new publisher?

That's the one.  The room was in the Department of Hotel Management, if I remember correctly.

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

There isn't any probability that the letter d is in the word "mathematics"...  The correct answer would be "not even 0" - JoeG

  
Kattarina98



Posts: 1267
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 02 2014,12:18   

ID:

No matter what experiment you show them that is evidence of an evolutionary process, it is actually evidence for ID, because the experiment itself - concept and technical implementation - was intelligently designed.

--------------
Barry Arrington is a bitch.

  
hotshoe



Posts: 42
Joined: Nov. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 02 2014,23:44   

Quote (Arctodus23 @ Jan. 01 2014,23:16)
New "Scientific" Volume passes censorship. Nothing NEW

The IDists are at it again. But this time, with the wonderful story of the "scientific" volume that passes through "censorship" (i.e. peer-review, where every bit of your crap is reviewed for any sight of errors, and there's a LOT, if not, ALL errors in ID creationism).

This is the bit that first caught my eye (my bold):
Quote
You see, originally Biological Information: New Perspectives was set to be published by Springer, but Springer illegally violated the book's publication contract by cancelling it ...

I had no idea it was illegal to cancel a business contract.   Gosh, what do you suppose the criminal penalty for canceling a contract could be? Just life in prison or is it a capital case?

That, plus the minor stupidity that the book is not the possessor of the contract -- the authors/corporation are/is the possessor(s) of the contract -- and I had to quit reading before I broke something.

Goddamned Casey Luskin. What a stooge.

  
Quack



Posts: 1961
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 03 2014,02:55   

Quote
In fact, attacks on academic freedom are a very important part of the story behind the publication of Biological Information: New Perspectives, and it's a story that now deserves to be told truthfully. This I will do in forthcoming articles.
No comment.

--------------
Rocks have no biology.
              Robert Byers.

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3668
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 03 2014,07:52   

Quote (Kattarina98 @ Jan. 02 2014,12:18)
ID:

No matter what experiment you show them that is evidence of an evolutionary process, it is actually evidence for ID, because the experiment itself - concept and technical implementation - was intelligently designed.

If that was the case, then why aren't slot machine engineers all wealthy?

The slot machines are designed, so the designer must know everything about them right? If slot machine engineers can't predict every spin, then (gasp) something else must be going on!?!?!?

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

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

   
fnxtr



Posts: 2951
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 03 2014,11:23   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Jan. 03 2014,05:52)
Quote (Kattarina98 @ Jan. 02 2014,12:18)
ID:

No matter what experiment you show them that is evidence of an evolutionary process, it is actually evidence for ID, because the experiment itself - concept and technical implementation - was intelligently designed.

If that was the case, then why aren't slot machine engineers all wealthy?

The slot machines are designed, so the designer must know everything about them right? If slot machine engineers can't predict every spin, then (gasp) something else must be going on!?!?!?

Because SLOT machines are magic and life violates SLOT... or something.

--------------
"[A] book said there were 5 trillion witnesses. Who am I supposed to believe, 5 trillion witnesses or you? That shit's, like, ironclad. " -- stevestory

"Wow, you must be retarded. I said that CO2 does not trap heat. If it did then it would not cool down at night."  Joe G

  
  41 replies since Oct. 05 2013,21:21 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (2) < 1 [2] >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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