Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Campfire Soapbox. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Dumbing Down Of America, 2
Topic Started: May 12 2006, 11:46 AM (5,652 Views)
cmoehle
Member Avatar
Chris - San Antonio TX
What, pray tell, after 16 pages of discussion, is this "circumstantial" evidence? Please pick some that has not been explained by evolution.
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order.
--Barry Goldwater
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cmoehle
Member Avatar
Chris - San Antonio TX
Me "Cite some instances [of evolutionary theory being claimed as fact]"

Teryt "I did. You dismissed it."

Debunked you mean? I recall a supposed textbook you'd seen a few years back that you recall, remarkably, stated it was theory. Hardly an instance.
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order.
--Barry Goldwater
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TexasShadow
Member Avatar
Jane
Quote:
 
What, pray tell, after 16 pages of discussion, is this "circumstantial" evidence? Please pick some that has not been explained by evolution.


the appearance of order.
and why should we have to separate it from evolution? evolution is a part of that order. the life of a star or a planet is part of evolution.
Posted Image "A conclusion is the place where you got tired of thinking."
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cmoehle
Member Avatar
Chris - San Antonio TX
"the appearance of order."

For instance? Specifics, please.

Appearances can be decieving.

Why does the "the appearance of order" imply a designer? Intelligence? Purpose?

Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order.
--Barry Goldwater
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
teryt
Member Avatar
Missing in Action Member
cmoehle
May 31 2006, 08:04 PM
Me "Cite some instances [of evolutionary theory being claimed as fact]"

Teryt "I did. You dismissed it."

Debunked you mean? I recall a supposed textbook you'd seen a few years back that you recall, remarkably, stated it was theory. Hardly an instance.

Well there you have it - you have dismissed what I saw. Where can we go from here? We can argue about things, but once you essentually don't believe me ("supposed"), I don't think there's much ground to proceed.

Debunked? I maintain that one small word (mentioning theory) in several thousand words does not a premise make - especially with "young skulls full of mush."
My Boast is Christ :pray:
Soon to have MBA (I'll perhaps be smart then)
Recovering Perfectionist
Christian Hedonist

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cmoehle
Member Avatar
Chris - San Antonio TX
Oh, nice try at histrionics, teryt.

I don't doubt you saw a textbook, I do doubt your memory of it after all these years. You say you recall a single mention that evolutionary theory is theory in a few pages on evolution. That's pretty specific for what is otherwise a vague and blurred memory of little else. You sure it wasn't two, three times theory was stated? Do you recall it saying evolution was a fact? No, it was your perception, another area for doubt--was it the textbook you recall, or your perception? And then from that blur you draw a conclusion about all of evolutionary theory? That I doubt most of all.

It's debunked by my memory, the textbook sitting in front of me, Eric's recall of textbooks.

It's debunked by the fact a textbook is not representative of the scientific study of evolution, but rather the board members who, like those in Kansas, impose their own beliefs on curriculum requirements.
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order.
--Barry Goldwater
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ngc1514
Member Avatar
Member
TexasShadow
May 31 2006, 02:32 PM


my point is: the cartoons are used in scientific presentations. call it editorial bias or ignorance... it exists.

re god of gaps argument.
my point is: the GAP is there. It should be presented that way with a big question mark.

I'm not against teaching evolution in school, but when it comes to teaching that man evolved like any other creature, the teaching should make it clear that we are still looking.... that it's not a KNOWN fact that man evolved. we can say it looks that way, but it's circumstantial evidence. All I want from science is honesty.

Until you can show these "cartoons are used in scientific presentations..." I don't believe it. Prove it.

Just like you have yet to show where science isn't being honest. Prove it.

More wild claims without a hint of evidence to support the claims.

Sorry Jane, but until you provide some substantiation for these claims, I suspect you are making 'em up.

Prove them.

Posted ImageEric
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ngc1514
Member Avatar
Member
teryt
May 31 2006, 03:23 PM
My thesis advisor is fond of saying, "If a preacher says, 'I can prove the existance of God,' or a scientist says, 'Just have faith in my theory,' run from both of them!"

:nono: :devil: :bolt:

How about an example of a scientist asking the scientific community to have "faith in my theory?"

Just one.

Posted ImageEric
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TexasShadow
Member Avatar
Jane
I'm tired of arguing this. :)
Looks like a stand-off to me. :)
Posted Image "A conclusion is the place where you got tired of thinking."
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cmoehle
Member Avatar
Chris - San Antonio TX
Can I suggest for further reading an enjoyable little book about the Theory of Evolution: Evolution : The Remarkable History of a Scientific Theory. The early history is enlightening about other theories of evolution in the scientific community leading up to Wallace, er, Darwin publishing his theory. And the chapter on the Modern Synthesis is a must for anyone still arguing Darwinism.
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order.
--Barry Goldwater
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
teryt
Member Avatar
Missing in Action Member
cmoehle
May 31 2006, 08:41 PM
Oh, nice try at histrionics, teryt.

I don't doubt you saw a textbook, I do doubt your memory of it after all these years. You say you recall a single mention that evolutionary theory is theory in a few pages on evolution. That's pretty specific for what is otherwise a vague and blurred memory of little else. You sure it wasn't two, three times theory was stated? Do you recall it saying evolution was a fact? No, it was your perception, another area for doubt--was it the textbook you recall, or your perception? And then from that blur you draw a conclusion about all of evolutionary theory? That I doubt most of all.

It's debunked by my memory, the textbook sitting in front of me, Eric's recall of textbooks.

It's debunked by the fact a textbook is not representative of the scientific study of evolution, but rather the board members who, like those in Kansas, impose their own beliefs on curriculum requirements.

Well . . . there you go again. I DO remember that one point from the textbook, because when I started reading it, I was struck by the matter-of-fact tone it had towards the theory of evolution. At 1st I thought there was no mention of theory at all, so this caused me to go back & reread it closely to look specificially for the word "theory." That's when I discovered there was ONE mention of it, at the begining. And no, it wasn't in a title or subtitle to a section - it was stated in a sentence, in the middle of a paragraph.

I know what I saw, so you can choose to do with it whatsoever you want. :pistols:

Therefore, I suppose I could say your debunking is quite circumstantial & subjective to your viewpoint (e.g., the non sequitur of your 2nd to last paragraph).

Now saying it's debunked as per your last paragraph is also another logical fallicy on two counts. #1 (hasty generalization - I think) Textbook not equal to scientific study = debunked. #2 (strawman) I never said the textbook was representative of the study of evolution. I was just saying that evolution is largley put forth as being more than a theory, and have provided two examples from my memory. I see it. You, evidently don't.
My Boast is Christ :pray:
Soon to have MBA (I'll perhaps be smart then)
Recovering Perfectionist
Christian Hedonist

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cmoehle
Member Avatar
Chris - San Antonio TX
You debunk your own evidence admitting it clearly stated Evolutionary Theory is a theory and, by omission, not stating it was a fact. Perceptions, textbooks, schoolboards, and all the rest only back up the evidence you present against your case.

Did I say you said textbooks were representative? You made that straw man mistake earlier misreading my words. It's simply a fact textbook represent school boards and not the fields they purport to teach.

So from two (two now?) memories you generalize "largley"? Now there's a hasty generalization.

So what's all this got to do with the credibility of ID?
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order.
--Barry Goldwater
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
teryt
Member Avatar
Missing in Action Member
cmoehle
May 31 2006, 09:41 PM
You debunk your own evidence admitting it clearly stated Evolutionary Theory is a theory and, by omission, not stating it was a fact. Perceptions, textbooks, schoolboards, and all the rest only back up the evidence you present against your case.

Did I say you said textbooks were representative? You made that straw man mistake earlier misreading my words. It's simply a fact textbook represent school boards and not the fields they purport to teach.

So from two (two now?) memories you generalize "largley"? Now there's a hasty generalization.

So what's all this got to do with the credibility of ID?

30,000+ messages - how do you do it!?

I provided two instances from my memory, but I base it upon a lot more observation. Now granted, this still doesn't exclude a hasty generalization, but there are many more than two. Do I want or have the time to provide more evidence? No.

You said a "textbook was not representative to the scientific study of evolution." But you related that to the subject of debunking . . . Take another look at the last two paragraphs you wrote in that message (5/31 @ 8:41 PM). You have to admit there's not much of a debunking leg to stand on there, other than your own subjectivity!

Anyway, the communication itself is getting almost more complicated than the subject - what were we talking about that was so important?
My Boast is Christ :pray:
Soon to have MBA (I'll perhaps be smart then)
Recovering Perfectionist
Christian Hedonist

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cmoehle
Member Avatar
Chris - San Antonio TX
teryt "30,000+ messages - how do you do it!?"

Another diversion from the substance of the topic.


"I provided two instances from my memory, but I base it upon a lot more observation. Now granted, this still doesn't exclude a hasty generalization, but there are many more than two."

But you ignore two things: Questioing of those two (two?) examples and the counter examples of others here in this discussion.


"Anyway, the communication itself is getting almost more complicated than the subject..."

Suggestion: Try focusing on the sustance over digressing on style. Such as "So what's all this got to do with the credibility of ID?"
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order.
--Barry Goldwater
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
teryt
Member Avatar
Missing in Action Member
cmoehle
May 31 2006, 09:41 PM
You debunk your own evidence admitting it clearly stated Evolutionary Theory is a theory and, by omission, not stating it was a fact. Perceptions, textbooks, schoolboards, and all the rest only back up the evidence you present against your case.


Opps - missed this! I said it did NOT clearly state that it was a theory. This point just keeps getting hammered by you, in an apparent attempt to discredit what I said numerous times that the word "theory" was made one time in passing, and never mentioned again.

Alright - ONE MORE TIME (try a little different approach):

Have you ever taught before? It would be like mentioning a word one time, in the briefest manner possible, and then teaching several classes on the subject without mentioning that word again!

People learn through spaced repetition. Once you have several exposures to it, you start to learn it. Also, the more multi-sensory the learning is, the better. Concerning this textbook, perhaps the teacher pointed out that it was a theory, but maybe not. What people (kids especially) will remember is not the 1 word, but the concepts put forth in the other 10,000 words & pictures, etc.

No effective training method I've ever heard of would advocate people remembering 1 word in thousands, without lots of spaced repetition.

Can we let this go now, or would you rather beat this proverbial dead horse some more? :deadhorse:
My Boast is Christ :pray:
Soon to have MBA (I'll perhaps be smart then)
Recovering Perfectionist
Christian Hedonist

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Soapbox · Next Topic »
Add Reply