I take him as representing the @r_speir viewpoint.
2 Likes
âYEC and its critics: is there a way forward?â
Should there be? Itâs only in the still-hyper-religious US that YECs are taken seriously (and thatâs mostly among fellow YECs only, it seems). In the UK, for example, anyone with YEC beliefs would just be considered bonkers.
There are theological discussions to be had, sure. But in terms of scientific discussions on a site like this (which, letâs face it, is NOT where scientific issues get decided), the only way forward would be for YECs/YLCs to actually learn what they are arguing against. That ainât gonna happen.
How many times do we have to inform certain posters about natural selection?
How many times do we have to inform certain posters about nested hierarchies?
And these are just the basics. It astounds me how people who admit that âscience is not my thingâ will nevertheless try to argue the science from a position of almost complete ignorance. The arrogance, the sheer lack of humility, amazing. Would Jesus approve?
9 Likes
This. The only reason to be concerned about YECs is in proportion to the harm they cause to others.
That ainât going to happen.
Every time, apparently.
2 Likes
They say that, but it is not true.
The reality is that evidence that YECs cannot interpret is simply ignored and/or discarded, while they continue to knowingly, falsely, and deliberately claim that they are interpreting all the evidence.
1 Like
Both are true. Evidence that they accept is subject to two interpretations, and other evidence they just ignore or discard.
Yeah, you can try making tritiated versions of artificial vanilla but it just doesnât give it the same beta-particle âkickâ on the tongue as real vanilla.
1 Like
Ha, thatâs funny. 
As we speak, so to speak, Iâm waiting for beta radiation therapy for my Dupuytrenâs contracture.
Yes, that happened. Four years ago. Crom only knows why youâre bringing this up now
2 Likes
One Atheist complains that i have no samples.
Another complains about an old example.
Gentlemen,
Firstly, nothing has changed in 4 years.
Secondly, there is no index for discussions that breakout into Atheism.
When i bump into one, i report it. But only if i continue to get protests that i have no evidence!
You donât, you know. Nothing about atheism in this particular supposed example. Itâs very difficult to take you seriously.
1 Like
Well, actually, no. I am perplexed that you went back four years to resurrect a comment that seems to have no relevance to what anyone is currently discussing, including yourself.
Now you seem to imply that it IS relevant to something we have been discussing, and I remain just as perplexed. The relevance, if any, remains completely unclear.
2 Likes
I suppose you would find just about anything more palatable than the idea that you were mistaken.
3 Likes
It should be noted that the complained-about comment, as well as being 4 1/2 years old, (i) was made by Jonathan_Burke, a Christadelphian not an atheist, who (ii) hasnât been seen on this forum for nearly 3 years and hasnât posted in nearly 4, and (iii) the comment appears to have been censored by moderation (the quote of it shows as having been made on this thread, but there are no surviving posts by Burke on that thread).
This is evidence of ongoing hegemonic hostility of atheists towards YEC (or was it ID, or was it Theistic Evolution â the accusation never stays the same â sometimes not even in the same post)?
Addendum: it should be also noted that (i) Burke does not mention disproving God (hardly surprising admittedly, as heâs not an atheist) & (ii) that, although his tone may be blunt, the actual contents of his comment would not seem at any great variance with the general view that the pro-science community (theistic or atheistic) has of YEC. To impeach these contents, I think youâd first have to demonstrate some piece of distinctively-YEC research that has been of demonstrable, substantive benefit to society.
4 Likes
Tutorial post
The complaint has been made that âthere is no index for discussions that breakout into Atheismâ.
I would point out that this problem can easily solved by using the forumâs âSearchâ function. For example, if somebody wanted to find all the times that Iâve posted claiming to disprove the existence of God, they could type in:
You can, further, order these posts by latest ones first, yielding this list.
Similarly, for Faizal_Ali and for John_Harshman.
Of course this will also include all our mentions of God in other contexts but, if we spend as much time talking about disproving God as it is claimed we do, this should not be a major problem. Further, the search can be narrowed down by inclusion of additional search terms like âexistenceâ, âdisproveâ, etc, etc.
I use this technique all the time in tracking down half-remembered conversations to refresh my memory.
So a lack of an âindexâ cannot be taken as preventing presentation of evidence that atheists on this forum are repeatedly claiming to disprove the existence of God, as part of their counterarguments to Creationist claims.
2 Likes
I think you will eventually find you and your atheist peers arent doing anyone any favors by stubbornly waving the âAâ banner.
Iâd go even further and say that even if there were no facilities to aid one in collecting such evidence, it would still be the claimantâs responsibility to present some, if they wished to make a credible case. That it may be prohibitively tedious in a world without a search button is no doubt a bummer, but surely not anybody elseâs problem. One was, after all, free, to not make claims one felt unable or was unwilling to substantiate, what ever the reason, or admit upon the first challenge that they were not based on external evidence one was willing or able to present.
3 Likes
Gadzooks! It seems that George has found out about our super-secret atheist club room where we hold our super-secret âAâ-banner waving and âwe disprove the existence of Godâ-chanting nights. And after we went to all the trouble of sabotaging the âAtheismâ-index in the Discourse software, & hiding them away from the softwareâs search engine. Curses! Foiled again! Weâll just have to change the locks, secret knocks and secret handshakes.
3 Likes
Well. letâs take stock, shall we? Since your post remains hidden, I will restore the comment you quoted to facilitate discussion:
What we have here: A YEC responding to a comment from a Christian, whose language you described as mild and measured, or words to that effect (going by memory).
The YEC responds by accusing his fellow believer (again, I remind you, not an atheist) of using âinflammatoryâ language, and declaring that he will not read his comment.
It is also puzzling that the comment @r_speir was supposedly responding to be cannot be found. (The link redirects to a completely different comment by someone else entirely.)
To find this comment, you had to go back four years.
Now, for those of us in the back: Could you please explain how the comment you quoted supports your contention that creationists in this group are being dissuaded from accepting evolution because atheists are constantly talking about atheism? Explain it to me like Iâm a very stupid child.
3 Likes
Whoâs waving that banner? You have been able to find no examples, or at least all your claimed examples are nothing of the sort. Talk about stubborn? This is downright pathological.
1 Like