# Evolution and science... **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 26, 2005, 5:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-and-science/291979 "2005-02-26T05:18:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 24
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2005, 1:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-and-science/291979/461 "2005-03-19T13:01:23Z")
Lekatt, Dropzone is talking about Nolies, not you. \*\*You’ve \*\* already paid. Sorry if your feelings are hurt that we didn’t all go “ooh” and “aah” upon reading your thoughts, but that’s how it is in Great Debates–you’ve been here long enough to know that. 😉 If you merely wanted admiring “oohs” and “aahs”, you should’ve posted your thoughts in MPSIMS. 😉 And the reason why it didn’t go over bigger than it did is because…we’re sitting around the kitchen table having this terribly serious conversation about Using Science and Logic to Discuss Evolution, and you put your head in the door and witness to us on **your** reasons to believe in a Creator, none of which involve either Science **or** Logic, it’s all about Faith. “Hey, guys!” you tell us brightly. “All you gotta do is just look around at the universe and see what a marvelous place it is, how perfectly designed, how well-ordered! How can you guys _not_ believe in God?” And–maybe it’s just me, but I distinctly heard Robert Goulet singing in the background, "_Every time I hear a newborn baby cry, or touch a leeeeeeeaf, or see the SKYYYYYYYYY…then I know WHYYYYY…IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII…BEEE-LEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEVE…"_ Hence our giggling. But hey, we’re not laughing **at** you, we’re laughing **with** you. 😃 > [@David Simmons](#): > > Please, I beg you, don’t get **lekatt** started on NDEs by discussing them in any way. We won’t get home before breakfast. Sorry, didn’t know that NDEs were his “thing”. 😃 Lekatt, are you aware of [this most excellent venue](http://forums.randi.org/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=15) for discussing NDEs? [throws lamb to tigers] [pulls up lawn chair] 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2005, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-and-science/291979/462 "2005-03-19T13:17:31Z")
> [@Sample\_the\_Dog](#): > > Just curious… > > Why is it that **nolies** , and at least one other poster I can think of who espouses similar positions, is allowed to continually post blatant falsehoods and misrepresent the statements of other dopers? Well, maybe I’m not paying close attention, but I haven’t seen a whole lot of this from Nolies. Got some examples? > [@](#): > > Is it because of guest status? Does that put a poster beyond the reach of banishment? Or is it a warped sensitivity to the subject matter? Normally, yes, someone who comes in here and starts twisting statements around and posting blatant falsehoods gets called on it toot sweet, but you are correct in your perception that Guests tend to be (almost automatically, I am interested to note in the past year) cut a lot of slack, especially if they’re not obviously trolling but are merely obviously clueless. The assumption is that either they’ll disappear after 30 days and thus not be worth the pixels to debunk or otherwise call them on it, or that they **will** pay up, and will then be subject to all the usual Great Debates corrections, up to and including Pit threads in their honor. So either way, it’s usually not worth the effort to get up out of the armchair and post a “hey waitaminnit!” And I haven’t noticed that subject matter dealing with God or evolution gets treated with kid gloves around here. Actually, I’ve **never** noticed **any** subject in GD that gets tiptoed around–folks here have historically been unafraid to peel off the jacket and wade right in at the drop of a SCOTUS cite. ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2005, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-and-science/291979/463 "2005-03-19T14:13:14Z")
> [@Duck Duck Goose](#): > > If there was a “logical conclusion” there, I missed it, sorry. I saw a lot of assumptions, but not a “logical conclusion”. > > “Order” and “cooperation” are assumptions on your part. Other people look at the world and see “chaos”. > > “Order” and “intelligence” are assumptions on your part. Again, other people look at the world and see random chaos. > > This is an assumption on your part, and one which is incorrect. Order can appear through randomness, too: For example, the way pebbles and sand of different sizes sort themselves out at the beach, through nothing more intelligent than wave action and physics. > > This is an assumption on your part, and one which is incorrect. Many intelligent people are also the most disorderly and untidy people. > > This is an assumption on your part, and one which is incorrect. Go through the halls of academe and see how many professors’ desktops are a total mess of undone paperwork. > > This is an assumption on your part. Other people see the order in the universe and see “randomness”, not “guiding intelligence”. > > Right, so it’s your opinion that the world is composed of Intelligent Order. But that’s not a “logical conclusion” that follows a chain of logical reasoning–it’s just a summary of your own assumptions. > > Only if it’s your assumption that what you see around you **was** “created”. If you assume that what you see around you is a “creation”, **then** you look around for a Creator. But if you assume that it sprang into being through randomness, then there’s no place to look for a Creator. > > Many people who are not “spiritual” and who do not believe in a god at all feel “love”. > > Researchers will tell you that NDEs are just a construct of a stressed or dying brain. NDEs, and “feelings of love”, do not prove the existence of God. I said in my post that it was only my opinion, but nice of you to point out my assumptions were assumptions. We humans live with our assumptions daily, most of science and religion and everything else are assumptions. It is only when we start taking our assumptions seriously that we get into trouble. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2005, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-and-science/291979/464 "2005-03-19T15:09:48Z")
Oh, this is ridiculous. The science which makes everything from alarm clocks to atomic bombs work… is just an assumption, just an opinion? I’d put money on the fact that science aproximates the objective Truth far better than your flights of fancy. Sorry, you don’t get to create some wacky fantasy and then claim some sort of odd artistic freedom in the creation of your reality. Without data you’re just telling stories. And while that may be quaint and fun to do around a bonfire in the woods, it’s kinda silly to be doing on the SDMB. ---
**Author:** ![Sample\_the\_Dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8797f3/32.png) [@Sample\_the\_Dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sample_the_Dog)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2005, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-and-science/291979/465 "2005-03-19T15:29:12Z")
> [@Duck Duck Goose](#): > > Well, maybe I’m not paying close attention, but I haven’t seen a whole lot of this from Nolies. Methinks I barked too soon. After all, if **nolies** believes this stuff, and I think s/he’s being honest about what s/he believes, then I reckon I’m in a hard position if I want to insist that s/he’s posting material s/he should have reasonably known to be false. My gripe is with Duane-Gish-esque tactics of ignoring refutations, refusing to look at other poster’s cites, and persisting in rehashing notions that those refutations and cites have ostensibly debunked. To me that qualifies as posting ideas which the poster should know to be false. But yeah, I reckon that box has Pandora’s nametag all over it. Also, as long as this thread is, I may be conflating some material posted here with posts on another parallel thread. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2005, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-and-science/291979/466 "2005-03-19T15:54:33Z")
> [@Duck Duck Goose](#): > > But hey, we’re not laughing **at** you, we’re laughing **with** you. I beg you pardon? I am most clearly laughing **at** his attempts to join this trainwreck. 😉 (And while I realize your “lawn chair” comment was probably directed to activities on Randi’s site, it is still not appropriate to post that on this board.) . > [@Sample\_the\_Dog](#): > > Why is it that **nolies** , and at least one other poster I can think of who espouses similar positions, is allowed to continually post blatant falsehoods and misrepresent the statements of other dopers? Unfortunately, neither falsehoods (regarding a topic of debate) nor misrepresentations of other posters (regarding debate topics) are explicitly against the rules. (It is sufficiently difficult to deternmine what some of these people are saying without attempting to discern whether their misrepresentations are deliberate or formed from their own lack of comprehension.) We pretty much expect that the people who debate dishonestly will have their heads handed to them by the other posters all the while they hide behind their self-erectred facade of false superiorirty where they pretend to themselves that they are “winning.” As long as a poster does not engage in deliberate personal insults or other direct violations of the SDMB rules, the basic options for other posters are to either tediously refute their errors (for the peanut gallery at home) or dismiss and ignore them as not being worth the effort. It is your choice as to which method you prefer to employ. **Lekatt** ’s long history leads me to the conclusion that, since no one will accept his odd statements, no child at home is endangered by his posts and I will not encourage one more ten-page trainwreck attempting to apply logic and knowledge to oppose his firmly cherished beliefs. YMMV, obviously. . **FinnAgain** , you are free to engage **lekatt** if you choose. It is my firm conviction that it will be the most frustrating experience of your SDMB sojourn (possibly of your life). He will not be moved and he will not understand your arguments. If you choose to debate him, keep it polite. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2005, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-and-science/291979/467 "2005-03-19T16:01:04Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > **FinnAgain** , you are free to engage **lekatt** if you choose. It is my firm conviction that it will be the most frustrating experience of your SDMB sojourn (possibly of your life). He will not be moved and he will not understand your arguments. If you choose to debate him, keep it polite. Aye aye Cap’n. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2005, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-and-science/291979/468 "2005-03-19T18:23:10Z")
Judging from how lekatt is ending his posts, I’d say the “love” is gone. ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2005, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-and-science/291979/469 "2005-03-19T19:08:14Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Sorry. Most of us are laughing too hard to get upset by something so impossible, improbable, implausible, and inane. Thanks, I always wanted to be a comedian. However, I don’t agree with the “not upset” part. An average open-minded person can read the opinions of others and not become emotional about it. Accept it or not, question it, or just file it away in their minds for future referance. People who feel threatened by another’s opinions will become angry, hostile, abusive, and/or use condecending laughter to show their distain. People often party and laugh their way through hurricanes, grave yards and horror flicks, hiding the hope that nothing will happen to them. Emotional maturity takes a while to learn. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2005, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-and-science/291979/470 "2005-03-19T19:21:59Z")
Alternatively, I recall the 250 lb. ex-SEAL cop at a wedding who simply laughed off the drunken skinny kid with 6 months’ Tae Kwon Doe “training” who kept “challenging” the cop and claiming that the cop was just afraid to fight him. Your “guaranteed to ruffle the feathers” comment reminded me of the skinny, drunken, clueless kid and prompted my reply. ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2005, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-and-science/291979/471 "2005-03-19T19:32:41Z")
I think lekatt would perhaps be a big help in the Terry Schaivo threads. He could stral project into Terry’s head and let us know what she’s thinking! ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2005, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-and-science/291979/472 "2005-03-19T20:04:21Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Your “guaranteed to ruffle the feathers” comment reminded me of the skinny, drunken, clueless kid and prompted my reply. Well at least we’re being polite 😃 😉 ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2005, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-and-science/291979/473 "2005-03-20T00:52:59Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > Well at least we’re being polite 😃 😉 deja vu 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2005, 5:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-and-science/291979/474 "2005-03-20T05:12:29Z")
Laughing at him is much more polite than beating him to a bloody pulp. I’m talking about the cop at the wedding, of course. All beatings here are bloodless and the beatee usually seems to not know he’s being beaten. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2005, 5:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-and-science/291979/475 "2005-03-20T05:37:42Z")
> [@Apos](#): > > I think lekatt would perhaps be a big help in the Terry Schaivo threads. He could stral project into Terry’s head and let us know what she’s thinking! He says he knows what **tomndebb** feels, so perhaps he can. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2005, 6:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-and-science/291979/476 "2005-03-20T06:32:14Z")
> [@](#): > > Laughing at him is much more polite than beating him to a bloody pulp. Well, and at this point I am really not _debating_ him in any way. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-and-science/291979.md?page=23)