quote:

Originally posted by Spacey Orange i think so. do you?

Are you the exception to the rule?

Last edited by igottaknow on Aug-25-2005 at 20:06

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu Unfortunately, the concept of "IQ" is quack science. -N

The IQ test serves its purpose - testing for left-sided brain power (logic). However, logic and rational thinking only make up 1 aspect of "true" intelligence.

Being emotionally stable, havign social abilities, painting, creating music, etc., can also be considered intelligence.

quote:

Originally posted by igottaknow Are you the exceptioon to the rule?

___________________
UnauthorizedTranceAddict Youtube Channel where I post older mixes from the TA DJ Promotion Forum

My mixes:

Still up:1:2

Down:3:4:5

Is this just another reason to blame as why Americans are so stupid?

quote:

Originally posted by Subey Evolutionist thinks: a) Creationist has huge holes in their logic b) They can not see those holes, even when I point them out c) There are no holes in my logic. The enlightened Envolutionist says to himself: "What if there are holes in my logic that I can't see?" The enlightened Evolutionist then enters limbo and begins constructing a hole detector. The enlightened Evolutionist then uses that hole detector on the theory of evolution and learns... That would be telling.

I have only skimmed the other posts, so I hope I'm not being redundant here, but in general I think your post is great. However, I think you miss the category "rational enlightened Evolutionist"(REE), which I think of myself as belonging to. The REE recognizes that he might be wrong about the validity of the theory, but he does not use this as an excuse to put it on the same epistemic level as creationism or any other theory in which he can see holes. To put it in another way: He does not "enter limbo". He keeps acting as an Evolutionist, except that he is mentally ready for abandoning this explanation the moment evidence tells him that it is wrong. A non-enlightened evolutionist, on the other hand, would cling to evolution in face of new evidence, just as creationists cling to creationism even though evidence show them that they cannot be in the right.

On topic: I distinguish between believing in something supernatural and being religious. If you're religious you take on values, follow habits, and accept explanations from a third party (neither God nor you) without questioning these values, habits, and explanations. A religious person (according to this definition), I would label as stupid. No matter if his beliefs where incidentally true.

occrider: I thought you were going to gradually pull out of these discussions. They've got you!

Reposted from a response I made last week:

--

It's really best not to try to force evolution-deniers to observe scientific reason. When you feel tempted, just cite the first couple links:

God and Evolution:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-god.html

From usenet:
news:talk.origins @ Google:
http://groups.google.ca/group/talk.origins?lnk=lr&hl=en

Talk Origins newsgroup website:
http://www.talkorigins.org/

For the rest of us:
Arguments against Creationism -- including "What is Creationism?"
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/...eationists.html


Requisite Reading List

Introductions

Evolution is a Fact and a Theory:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html

Five Major Misconceptions about Evolution:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html

Evolution and Philosophy:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolphil.html


Biology

Introduction to Evolutionary Biology:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq...to-biology.html

Probability of Abiogenesis FAQs:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/

Fossil Hominids FAQ:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/

Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html

Observed Instances of Speciation
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html

29+ Evidences for Macroevolution:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

___________________

Join the campaign to ban political sigs in the Political Discussion / Debate forum!

quote:

Originally posted by Spacey Orange

you posted after my edit so you lose

quote:

Originally posted by metalgearsolid Is this just another reason to blame as why Americans are so stupid?

americans are stupid but thats besides the point what you should be pondering are religious types more stupider

quote:

Originally posted by trancaholic

I think you are missing the innovation I am adding; though I can't word it much differently I will try.

Creationism vs Evolution is besides the point.

**
1)
The proponents of the view that opposes my own "Warp and distort the evidence, and are incapable of seeing this".

2)
My view is superior to theirs because I do not "warp and distort the evidence"
**

quote:

Originally posted by trancaholic he is mentally ready for abandoning this explanation the moment evidence tells him that it is wrong.

BUT and this is the big butt this assumes your mind does not "warp and distort" when clearly minds do this. You should desire a "warp detector".

Saying that they are warped because of religion is not the basis of a functioning "warp detector" since it emphasizes your established perspective over theirs.

The correct foundation of such a device would be to start with "they are warped because they are human. I too am human".
**
[edit: Reality is closed to a pre-warp species... embrace warp technology ]

___________________
Светопресавление
your pearl casting hero

Last edited by Subey on Aug-27-2005 at 15:41

quote:

Originally posted by igottaknow americans are stupid but thats besides the point what you should be pondering are religious types more stupider

They're the most dumbest.

quote:

Originally posted by igottaknow americans are stupid but thats besides the point what you should be pondering are religious types more stupider

and fat. dont forget fat.