Freethought & Rationalism Archive

pz · 09-01-2002, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Albion:
Erm - has he ever explained why ID critics use stereotypes but he doesn't? I mean, his whole post is perpetuating the steretype that people who disagree with him all use stereotypes. Can't he see that he's doing it too?

No.

Albion · 09-01-2002, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Come to think of it, there have been impediments to science caused by materialists who refused to back down. I'm thinking, for example, of the early resistance to plate tectonics. As you see, the new idea in that case was a materialistic explanation itself. But the fact remains that the opponents also were materialists.

Yes, they were materialists, but they backed down in the face of hard evidence, even if it took a while. Lynn Margulis's ideas about endosymbiosis were accepted after mtDNA evidence had been obtained. Philip Gingerich has gone on record that he's changed his mind about the ancestry of whales as a result of finding ankle bones from the intermediate species. This stuff that scientists never change their minds is a blatant exaggeration - as well as looking pretty silly next to their other complaint that science isn't to be trusted because, unlike scripture, it changes every ten minutes.

Edited to add the quote from page 1 that I was responding to. Sorry - didn't mean to interrupt the flow, but I saw that post on page 1 and responded without realising how early it was.

[ September 01, 2002: Message edited by: Albion ]

Dr.GH · 09-01-2002, 10:26 AM

You make good points, no appology needed.

Principia · 09-01-2002, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Albion:
Erm - has he ever explained why ID critics use stereotypes but he doesn't? I mean, his whole post is perpetuating the steretype that people who disagree with him all use stereotypes. Can't he see that he's doing it too?

He spouts the typical Christian response: he is merely giving his critics "a taste of their own medicine." So much for turning the other cheek...

EDIT: oh crap, did I say "typical" right before "Christian" Shoot, yet another stereotype.

[ September 01, 2002: Message edited by: Scientiae ]

Principia · 09-01-2002, 01:23 PM

The ARN IDists keep complaining about overhelming numbers of ID critics, so I decided to tabulate the membership as of August 2002. Specifically, I counted membership if the poster declared his position or decided to interpret evidence definitively for one side or another in the Intelligent Design Forum.

The ID count at ARN (since 8/02):
Mike Gene
mturner
bertvan
warren_bergerson
nobody
Vividbleau
askfifi
Jack
leonard
Bilboe
JeffM
Arm
Rob Lazar
Rock
Quicksilver
RFH
jazzraptor
Principle of Least Action
Leo
DTB
Stuart Harris
Stephen Bennett
baryonyx
RogerRabbitt
Noisy
scilvr
dennist
RalphW
MicahSparacio
SirRobPeel
IDJon
Geoff

The ID critic count (since 08/02):
Jesse
Myrmecos
brauer
Art
niiicholas
rafe gutman
Ivar
charlie d
zygotecowboy
pz
JP
Ex_YEC_er
Dr. GH
RBH
Erik
dayton
Mike B
Llanite Dave
Grape Ape
aptamer
The Pixie
Principia
Aahz
Theo the Creo
Wyrdsmyth
sfs
Another
Mesk
NeilUnreal
Zeke
RB
Beast
djmullen
DavidHume
Rolf Aalberg
Bryan
Lucia
DrLao

ID total: 32
ID critics: 38

Recently departed:
IDists: Light Panther, mb, Douglas, DNAUnion, creationist
ID critics: Richiyaado

[ September 01, 2002: Message edited by: Scientiae ]

pz · 09-01-2002, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Scientiae:

ID total: 27
ID critics: 31

This is completely meaningless, since once mturner and nobody get their moderator powers, those 31 will be up against the wall and bang, gone.

Principia · 09-01-2002, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pz:


This is completely meaningless, since once mturner and nobody get their moderator powers, those 31 will be up against the wall and bang, gone.

Well, the data is good for a rebuttal whenever this particular whine comes up again. The perception I believe is of the 'regulars' slowly being depleted in the ID camp. But even then, I don't think the numbers are too far off.

Don't worry about nobody. If he drives enough people away, the ID critics would simply get the message and walk away. There are plenty of balancing acts -- including possible moderator(s) who happen to be Darwinists.

EDIT: I also believe the worry for the IDi[s]ts isn't so much the quantity of people on their side, but the quality. Just look through their list to check for people who 1) has a clue or 2) isn't blinded by their own religion or 3) isn't a drive-by shooter.

[ September 01, 2002: Message edited by: Scientiae ]

pz · 09-01-2002, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Scientiae:
I also believe the worry for the IDi[s]ts isn't so much the quantity of people on their side, but the quality. Just look through their list to check for people who 1) has a clue or 2) isn't blinded by their own religion or 3) isn't a drive-by shooter.

Oh. So the count is actually 31 to 0.

leonarde · 09-01-2002, 04:28 PM

Posted by pz:

Quote:

This is completely meaningless, since once mturner and nobody get their moderator powers, those 31 will be up against the wall and bang, gone.

Isn't this being a little previous???
Consider:

1)mturner doesn't want to be a moderator.

2)he hasn't (to my knowledge) been asked to be
a moderator.

3)he merely fantasized about what he WOULD do
if a moderator.(Even this we don't have to take
literally since many fantasies aren't acted upon)

4)since there are FAR FAR more people banned at
II in a given year than at ARN, it ill behooves
a moderator at the former to tsk-tsk about some
(entirely hypothetical)bloodbath of banning at the
latter at some future date.

Cheers!

Principia · 09-01-2002, 04:42 PM

Quote:

leonard(e): 4)since there are FAR FAR more people banned at
II in a given year than at ARN, it ill behooves
a moderator at the former to tsk-tsk about some
(entirely hypothetical)bloodbath of banning at the
latter at some future date.

Really? And just where is your evidence for that?

But, let's take this all in proportion, shall we? How many active posters are at ARN compared to Infidels? How many fundie Christian trolls (like you) visit ARN as opposed to Infidels?

But you are quite right about mturner and nobody 'fantasizing' about being moderator. They sure needed an ego inflation over there... Why, nobody even volunteered to understand a scientific <a href="http://www.arn.org/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=13;t=000301" target="_blank">terminology</a> today. How pretentious.

[ September 02, 2002: Message edited by: Scientiae ]

09-01-2002, 01:23 PM	#165
Principia Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: anywhere Posts: 1,976	The ARN IDists keep complaining about overhelming numbers of ID critics, so I decided to tabulate the membership as of August 2002. Specifically, I counted membership if the poster declared his position or decided to interpret evidence definitively for one side or another in the Intelligent Design Forum. The ID count at ARN (since 8/02): Mike Gene mturner bertvan warren_bergerson nobody Vividbleau askfifi Jack leonard Bilboe JeffM Arm Rob Lazar Rock Quicksilver RFH jazzraptor Principle of Least Action Leo DTB Stuart Harris Stephen Bennett baryonyx RogerRabbitt Noisy scilvr dennist RalphW MicahSparacio SirRobPeel IDJon Geoff The ID critic count (since 08/02): Jesse Myrmecos brauer Art niiicholas rafe gutman Ivar charlie d zygotecowboy pz JP Ex_YEC_er Dr. GH RBH Erik dayton Mike B Llanite Dave Grape Ape aptamer The Pixie Principia Aahz Theo the Creo Wyrdsmyth sfs Another Mesk NeilUnreal Zeke RB Beast djmullen DavidHume Rolf Aalberg Bryan Lucia DrLao ID total: 32 ID critics: 38 Recently departed: IDists: Light Panther, mb, Douglas, DNAUnion, creationist ID critics: Richiyaado [ September 01, 2002: Message edited by: Scientiae ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-01-2002, 10:26 AM	#163
Dr.GH Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Dana Point, Ca, USA Posts: 2,115	You make good points, no appology needed.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.