Forums | MacLife

Yep, the flat earthers are getting uppity.

Thats OK, we will need someone to bag our groceries in the future.

Jon Voisey wrote:

I compiled this list partially in response to this article but expanded it greatly from what I remember of Dembski's talk and with the help of the endcreationism livejournal group.

If anyone can think of anything else that should be added, let me know.
Steps to making a pro-ID argument:

1. Define Evolution:
- Remind everyone first off, that what you're talking about is a "theory".
- Use a ridiculous strawman argument of what evolution is.
- Use clever analogies that leave out the most important parts of evolutionary theory (hint: The tornado in a junkyard is especially fun).
- Remember to insist that evolution is mostly about how life arose dispite the fact that Darwin's book is entitled the "Origin of Species".
- Use quotes from scientists (preferably out of context) to demonstrate that evolution is fatally flawed. Out of context quotes from Darwin showing he didn't believe his own theory are especially good.
- Point out hoaxes like the Piltdown man, but don't mention that it was scientists that discovered them and not ID supporters.
- Pretend there's no transitionary fossils and repeat that several times.
- Make sure to bring up the Cambrian Explosion and act like it was a week even though it was hundreds of thousands of years. Additionally, imply that it was suddenly like the world was uddenly full of bunny rabbits, kittens and kestrels, rather than tiny worm-like creatures with a rudimentary skeletal structure. Hell, if you even want to say this outright, feel free. Remember, honesty is optional.
- Assert authoritatively that evolution cannot increase the information present in the genome. Whatever happens, do not allow yourself to get pinned down into specifying how to objectively measure this information.
- Use words that anyone can understand, like "common sense", because common sense tells us lots of important things, like the earth is flat. But don't use that example...

2.Define Intelligent Design:
- Remember to as vague as possible. Do not mention what ID actually says about common descent or age of the earth so that fundamentalists won't get offended and will continue giving you funding. Additionally, not adequately explaing yourself will give you the ability to dismiss critics later by insisting that they just don't understand Intelligent Design.
- Insist that it's not creationism because it doesn't explicitly name God.
- Always call it a "theory". People won't know the difference between a scientific theory and a layman's terms one.
- Bring up "irreducible complexity". Remind them of your earlier analogy and then explain things like the flagellum and blood clotting.
- Remind everyone of the "Dissent from Darwinism" list which is growing so wonderfully rapidly! But don't you dare mention any of the lists in opposition.

3. Discuss evolution vs. ID as philosophy systems:
- Start using terms like "Evolutionist" and "Darwinist".
- Give quotes by famous atheist scientists about how easy it is to be an atheist thanks to evolution (ie, Dawkins).
- Explain that this proves evolution is atheistic.
- Give quotes by famous religious scientists about how easy it is to have faith thanks to science (ie, Einstien).
- Explain that this proves not all science is anti-religious (although anything you don't approve of is) so ID must be ok with God.

4. Blame everything that's wrong with the world on Evilution:
- Gay marriage is the fault of Darwinists.
- So is abortion.
- The Holocaust.
- And taking government sponsored prayer out of school.
- And murders.
- Let's not forget drugs.
- And tooth decay.

5. Remind everyone how much better things will be when ID takes over:
- Because crime rates will go down.
- And there will be no more abortion.
- Or homosexuality.
- Or tooth decay.
- Or Holocausts.
- And everyone will be able to pray in school.
- And everyone will want to be Christian!

6. Tell everyone to buy your book:
- Only $29.95.
- Contains lots of full color diagrams.

yes this is sarcasm.

Religion explains why. Science explains how.

I consider anyone who refutes science with the Bible as a person of small faith. Why?

They are anthropomorophizing God. They are so narrow, and small minded, so frightened of things that they can't explain, that the insist that God be modeled after them. Since they can't imagine a universe so grand, they insist on magic.

Science describes the mechanics of how the universe works. There are laws. Things happen in specific ways. Always.

Science doesn't explain why the universe was created, or why the physical laws were created. Science contains the mechanics tools. Its purvue is not to tell us anything but why things work.

Deny the possiblity of evolution then you must also deny the possiblity of physics, math, and all the other physical laws governing the function of this reality.

Creationism is the refuge of people who believe in magic, and conviently use "God" as the explanation for it. I can easily comprehend God making things work, like evolution. Why? Occams Razor.

Evolution doesn't require that magically all creatures are created on Thursday.
It also explains why white moths located in England during the Industrial Revolution turned brown. Not because of getting dirty, but because evolutionary pressure ensured the survival of those that matched the environment.

Go on to the collary argument. There are sects in Christianity that believe in faith healing. The record of successful faith healing is pitifully small. Which can be explained in two ways. A) The world doesn't work that way, or B) People have too little faith.  I'm charitible, I think people have imperfect faith. Otherwise, we would have less use for doctors, dentists, and the like. And into the gap rushes science, healing the sick when possible. Oh yes, and those who argue against evolution should also maintain that steel shouldn't float and men will never leave the ground to soar like birds on the wing.

Why? Because evolution and physics both can be explained using scientific principles. Until there is a proof against evolution, the proofs that have been offered explaining evolution stand. To dismiss them out of hand means that you consider scientific method and principles to be irrelavent. And in the face of all the other evidence, I think that assumption to be false.

Pro_ wrote:

Jon Voisey wrote:

pretty cool stuff

yes this is sarcasm.

Sarcasm?

Actually far too accurate.

That's a keeper! Where did you find it?

Personally I dont think anyone actually believes the ID crap, at least not the leaders of the movement.
They are using it as a way to exert control and as a defining rally point.
Rational, logical, scientific reasoning is a threat to old fashioned, dogmatic mythologies.
What better weapon to use than teenagers, they just naturally feel like they already know everything, feed them some cherry picked facts and easy to regurgitate bullet points and then add a dash or "Fighting the man" and you have your own little self propelled disinformation army.
Its an old tactic and the old saying goes: What you cannot control, disrupt.

Pariah wrote:

Personally I dont think anyone actually believes the ID crap, at least not the leaders of the movement.

I've always wondered about stuff like this. I can't tell if someone is doing something if they believe it or for their own gains. Meh. I lean towards the latter so I used to get told off by my history teacher for being overly cynical...

I wonder if we'll ever have to suffer this ID bullsmurf over here. I doubt they'll suffer it in China.

Pariah wrote:

Yep, the flat earthers are getting uppity.

Thats OK, we will need someone to bag our groceries in the future.

If enough of society turns its back on science and the technology it bears then that could limit economic opportunities for the 'technologists'.

When children are bombarded daily with TV, books, movies, and fairy tales that show magic and are told that Santa is real, why wouldn't they believe in Jesus, the miracles in the Bible, the rise of the dead? When cartoons and movies and even live action movies show that animals think and 'talk' like people, why wouldn't they believe in the serpent in the Bible. When these same media show witches, monsters, mediums why wouldn't they accept angels, demons, Satan, heaven and hell as real? Especially, when parents send them to Sunday school where people they know and trust tell them these things are true. By the time they reach the 'age' for science, even in college, they have been indoctrinated to the max such that it is sacrilege to dismiss the 'truth.' Catholics and Lutherans have their own schools and the children are taught religion with catechism so they won't be infected with anything but the truth of god's existence, his rules, his path to salvation from evil and a place in paradise forevermore. The same techniques are used by the Muslims, the Asian religions, and even aboriginals in so-called 'uncivilized' tribes, native Americans, for example.

Belief in the supernatural is universal and desired because 'life' is unpredictable, dangerous, and terrifying and mankind is puny/impotent when confronted with natural disasters and the unknown. People want control and prayer to a supernatural being who is in control is the answer to peace of mind and worry about being 'puny' and impotent in the face of disaster/crisis. They can 'let god do it,' because it is god's will and they are in god's grace and when it works god has performed a miracle. Thus, we are all god's children and like a good father, he protects us from evil. It is comforting as opposed to 'cold' science that teaches life is happenstance over billions of years according to physical rules of which we are told can be 'false' if ever another can be shown to be a better answer.

Add to this the human desire to be 'chosen' and a member of the 'elite' whom god favors. Isn't it an easy sale to accept the reward of eternal life in paradise with the almighty through 'faith' than simply to rot in the bowels of the earth at death?

If one accepts my premise, it isn't difficult to predict the choice to have faith in the supernatural is preferred over science.

From the article:

Frisby tries to explain that evolution takes millions of years, but Willett isn't listening. "I feel a tail growing!" he calls to his friends, drawing laughter.

The only appropriate response to that is: "Willett, that isn't a tail inside the back of your pants."

Ooh, it's on!

[insert witty retort here]