Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Tristan Scott · 05-10-2002, 01:52 PM

I bit 2 bullets and took 0 hits.

gus · 05-10-2002, 10:07 PM

I made it through unscathed. Although I would agree that some of the questions were perhaps worded poorly, and a couple of my answers were more what I leaned toward as opposed to how I cleary felt given the question.

I'm an atheist, BTW.

Someone7 · 05-10-2002, 10:36 PM

I took this test awhile ago, and also posted it on a forum, much like Kenny has done.

Zero hits, zero bullets for me. And yes, it is possible for theists to take this test and also take zero hits and zero bullets (if anyone is wondering). I have a theist friend at another forum that did so.

Ron Singh · 05-10-2002, 10:47 PM

I found a lot of the deductions derived from the supposed 'contradictions' rudimentary. I bit the bullet once, and did the other things twice.

Samhain · 05-10-2002, 11:07 PM

In the same boat as a lot of the others, bit 2 bullets, 0 direct hits. Didn't agree with the logical validity of the bitten bullets either. Bit bullets on 15 & 16.

Marduk · 05-11-2002, 06:21 AM

1 hit, 0 bullets, TPM Award weeeeee!

vixstile · 05-11-2002, 06:29 AM

0 hits

1 bullet

Clutch · 05-11-2002, 07:10 AM

Zero and zero.

Automaton: I think you just parsed the evolution question in a way they did not intend. They say "may be false in some details", and presumably mean may be. Which any scientifically minded person will grant, without thereby asserting that it *is* false in some details. Still, it might have been clearer had their mention of evolutionary theory's *truth* been replaced with some reference to warrant or justification, just to preserve the symmetry of the question. They really wanted to ask the following, I think: Is ET the reasonable thing to believe, even granting arguendo that some of its current details are unsettled?

That's how I took it, anyhow, and got out unscathed.

Automaton · 05-11-2002, 07:54 AM

Clutch: Oh, I see that now. <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> I took another meaning from "may", as in, "England may be cold, but it's still a nice place to live."

Clutch · 05-11-2002, 09:37 AM

Automaton, yep. They courted that ambiguity.

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

05-10-2002, 01:52 PM	#21
Tristan Scott Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Southwest USA Posts: 4,093	I bit 2 bullets and took 0 hits.

05-10-2002, 10:07 PM	#22
gus Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Indianapolis Posts: 21	I made it through unscathed. Although I would agree that some of the questions were perhaps worded poorly, and a couple of my answers were more what I leaned toward as opposed to how I cleary felt given the question. I'm an atheist, BTW.

05-10-2002, 10:36 PM	#23
Someone7 Banned Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Florida Posts: 376	I took this test awhile ago, and also posted it on a forum, much like Kenny has done. Zero hits, zero bullets for me. And yes, it is possible for theists to take this test and also take zero hits and zero bullets (if anyone is wondering). I have a theist friend at another forum that did so.

05-10-2002, 10:47 PM	#24
Ron Singh Regular Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Fremont, CA Posts: 163	I found a lot of the deductions derived from the supposed 'contradictions' rudimentary. I bit the bullet once, and did the other things twice.

05-10-2002, 11:07 PM	#25
Samhain Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Southern California Posts: 7,735	In the same boat as a lot of the others, bit 2 bullets, 0 direct hits. Didn't agree with the logical validity of the bitten bullets either. Bit bullets on 15 & 16.

05-11-2002, 06:21 AM	#26
Marduk Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: the 10th planet Posts: 5,065	1 hit, 0 bullets, TPM Award weeeeee!

05-11-2002, 06:29 AM	#27
vixstile Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: California Posts: 2,029	0 hits 1 bullet

05-11-2002, 07:10 AM	#28
Clutch Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Canada Posts: 3,751	Zero and zero. Automaton: I think you just parsed the evolution question in a way they did not intend. They say "may be false in some details", and presumably mean may be. Which any scientifically minded person will grant, without thereby asserting that it is false in some details. Still, it might have been clearer had their mention of evolutionary theory's truth been replaced with some reference to warrant or justification, just to preserve the symmetry of the question. They really wanted to ask the following, I think: Is ET the reasonable thing to believe, even granting arguendo that some of its current details are unsettled? That's how I took it, anyhow, and got out unscathed.

05-11-2002, 07:54 AM	#29
Automaton Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 717	Clutch: Oh, I see that now. <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> I took another meaning from "may", as in, "England may be cold, but it's still a nice place to live."

05-11-2002, 09:37 AM	#30
Clutch Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Canada Posts: 3,751	Automaton, yep. They courted that ambiguity.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.