I don’t believe that evolution or creationism are either more or less plausable than the other because once you go back far enough, the fundemental questions “where did this god guy come from?” vs “so where did all this matter in space that lead to the perfect conditions to create a planet for life to spring up from come from?” are both impossible. Magic god guys and matter that made up the building blocks of life had to come from somewhere…but how could they have, either of them, initially come from no where at all? Since it’s not possible for either condition to have occured, yet one did, it doesn’t really matter which you believe happened. Tell yourself whichever story makes you happier - God or primordial ooze. Until the issue of “how did something come from nothing?” is resolved one way or the other, I don’t feel I it necessary to take a stand on one side or the other of equally untenable theories.
What’s that the Apathetic Evolutionary school of thought?
You’ve made the common error of combining several seperate areas of science. Evolution deals only with how life changed after it was already here. Evolution does not include the question of where life originally came from. The study of how life arose from nonliving matter is abiogenesis. Abiogenesis does not include the questions of how this planet formed, why the universe mattered out in the way it did, or anything involving the Big Bang. Planetary formation, the uneven distribution of matter in the universe, and the Big Bang are covered by such things as physics, and cosmology.
As far as evolutionary theory is concerned-
There is a planet called Earth.
There is life on Earth.
The origin of the above is of no concern.
Once life was here, it began to change.
Let’s study that.
However, as Doc Cathode notes, you appear to be mostly not well informed about the various disciplines under discussion. I would say your philosophical perspective would most likely come under the heading of apathetic or unconcerned regarding the Theory of Evolution (and surrounding disciplines).
I don’t say that to condemn; I am not persuaded that everyone must study the issues and make judgments, but you do not seem particularly concerned with the issues. (I do hope that you refrain from voting for school board members who wish to impose ID or other forms of Creationism on students.)
There need NEVER have been nothing: the entire ‘problem’ really is one of solely human invention, and IMO is nowhere near as fundamental as many would have it.
Lekatt - to no one’s surprise - has hijacked another potentially interesting thread: Psychic Detectives, Justice and the Law, which originally dealt with the question of the hypothetical effect on the legal system if psychics existed. If a psychic “channelled” a murder victim, would that testimony be admissible in court? Would the word of a psychic be enough to obtain a search warrant? Now the topic is how the NBC show Medium is not an accurate dramatization of how “real” psychics work, while the ABC show Ghost Whisperer is. Thanks again, lekatt, you insufferable twit.
Most of the problem is Czarcasmet al responding to the insanely idiotic (or idiotically insane) of lekatt. C’mon, SDMB, he’s hopeless. Just scroll by his posts. If you don’t look at the poster when reading, at least look before responding. lekatt posts equal nonsense emitting from rectal cavity. Move along.
I share several SDMB-damned beliefs with lekatt, but have never been on the same wavelength with him. Like most in this thread, I have found his debating practices and use of logic far from ideal.
That said, the level of bitterness and willingness to tear down a fellow human being demonstrated in this thread is rather shocking. It really doesn’t become you, people.
In contrast with Liberal, who is truly a master of hijacking and turning threads into “about me,” lekatt’s getting a rise out of you all is due to your extreme desire for a whipping boy. You really are banging your heads against a brick wall.
I wish this were possible, but there are constantly new posters who don’t know lekatt. If no-one responds, they’ll be led to believe that he isn’t spewing bullshit.
The reason I dislike him so is because lekatt has a nasty habit of accusing those who disagree with him of being against religion and then signing his posts “Love”.
Why not stop what? I have tried hard over the years to treat him with the respect and courtesy my religious faith requires me to treat any other human being with. Not doing so is unquestionably sinful, according to my beliefs and I do apologize and atone for doing so when I do it. On the other hand, dealing with some who directly insults me, and saying I’m against religion because I accept evolution and supported Michael Schiavo is something I consider insulting, and then refuses to acknowledge that he’s done so can be incredibly frustrating sometimes.
I try not to Pit him, and I warn him when his behaviour has crossed over the line. Nevertheless, he continues. Nevertheless, he apparently doesn’t understand that he’s capable of insulting people, even when you tell him “If you continue to call me X, I will take it as an insult.” His response is typically something along the lines of, “I wasn’t talking about you, personally.” This isn’t someone new to the boards or someone I interact with infrequently. This is someone who I’ve been in threads with for over four years. I don’t call him an “idiot” in public often, even though I do get fed up with him pretty much every time he and I wind up in the same thread.
I grew up with people telling me it was my lot in life to be insulted and put down and not to do anything about it because it was wrong and it was my own fault. I can’t tell you how good it felt to find out they were wrong, and I don’t have to take being insulted with impunity. lekatt, however, does that. I will try to avoid insulting him because I consider that morally wrong, regardless of what he thinks of my foolish Christian beliefs. However, fallible, mortal human that I am, once every few years, he’s going to go too far.
How could anything I say to him be worse than the damage he’s already done to himself?
Nope. I’m pissed by his repeated use of cites that were debunked the first time he posted them, his repeated posting of false information despite being corrected by several posters (in the Terri Schiavo thread, Lekatt posted several times that nobody had ever heard Terri make her wishes clear and that her husband was lying. She had discussed her wishes with several other people, whose testimony was accepted by the court), he DOES hijack threads- go read the psychic detective thread, he spews hatred and prejudice and signs his posts “Love”
The behavior that you yourself go on to describe in detail.
Sounds like you understand the situation. Now just do what you think you must.
[quote]
On the other hand, dealing with some who directly insults me, and saying I’m against religion because I accept evolution and supported Michael Schiavo is something I consider insulting, and then refuses to acknowledge that he’s done so can be incredibly frustrating sometimes.
[quote]
No doubt. I find the guy frustrating and I agree with him (on the very macro level) about NDEs. He pushes your buttons. Ignore him.
I myself have bowed out of “paranormal” debate completely because of the insults, acrimony, etc. Many people who continue to participate in them seem to enjoy that aspect, which is just as bad as what lekatt is being accused of. I’m not saying that you are like that, however, Siege, but here you are in the Pit, taking your shots at someone who has already been numerous times for the same perceived infractions.
You’ve got to deal with lekatt so that the conflict is resolved, or otherwise acknowledge that you enjoy the conflict.
Everyone here is saying that lekatt isn’t going to change. If that’s the case, then it’s pointless to spar with him (for the nth time) and it’s pointless to Pit him (for the nth time).
I (and countless others) have pointed this out several times about the SDMB (and this pertains to message boards in general). There are people here who get off on the nastiness and the community’s disciplinging of its members. That quality is just as bad as the ones they purport to correct in others.
That would be the very reason to stop saying it, wouldn’t it?
That’s called “disagreement.” Surely you are used to the phenomenon here at SDMB?
I don’t disagree that he is not a great debator. But if you try to fix him micro, you are doing the brick wall thing. Fixing the situation macro means not engaging him.
Yes, I’m not into his vibe. I don’t think it’s truly New Age. But, macro fix, macro fix. Right?
Yes, I agree that there is a need or at least a desire to prevent lekatt from spreading ignorance on the board (I for one really don’t want him representing my side of the argument; just another reason to bow out of the debate: he draws fire and provides ammo at the same time).
In such a case, the use of boilerplate is advised. Make a statement about lekatt’s position, collect the debunking links, and post the same thing every time, don’t engage him, and be done with it.
Or you can enjoy the fun of arguing with someone who has not even 1/10 of your debating prowess and no hope of improvement.
Maybe I should lay my cards on the table about the Pittee while we’re at it. I don’t think he should participate here on SDMB as he now does (i.e., engaging in the paranormal debates). He doesn’t help the cause but rather hurts it. Second, there is a bitter edge to his posting practices that bely the “Love” signature. But he does not seem like a bad guy, and he doesn’t deserve the very personal and gleeful insults we have seen in this thread.