Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 Religion
 Big Bang (Part 2)
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Previous Page | Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 7

GeeMack
SFN Regular

USA
1093 Posts

Posted - 01/05/2007 :  10:19:27   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send GeeMack a Private Message
There you go, GK Paul, a cause for celebration. Now you can add Kil to your list and claim another victory on your road towards total ignorance. Sever another contact with reality and move deeper into hell.
Go to Top of Page

moakley
SFN Regular

USA
1883 Posts

Posted - 01/05/2007 :  11:13:27   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send moakley a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Fripp

quote:
Originally posted by GK Paul
Just for the record I don't respond to Fripp, GeeMack, Dave W., Half Mooner, Starman, McQ, and Moakley, for reasons I've already mentioned.



(in my best Homer Simpson voice)

WOO HOO! I'm Number One! In your face, all you others!!! Nya nya nya nya.

BTW, moakley you really must ease up on your rampant rudeness. It took me at least seven times before I could almost kind of see what the snivelling little turd construed as rudeness.

Apparently I revealed his source.

Life is good

Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25977 Posts

Posted - 01/05/2007 :  14:29:17   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by GK Paul

Than they don't have to worry about a rebuttal.
It is you who don't have to worry about a rebuttal when you refuse to communicate.
quote:
I did make one exception 2 weeks ago because I used a Dave W. post to answer a question.
Yeah, and back then I thought you were easing up on being so rude, but apparently not.

Do you even remember what it was that I said that got me on your little list? I sure don't.
quote:
The more people throw rude personal comments my way the more encouraged I get that I'm close to the truth.
They also laughed at Bozo the Clown.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

McQ
Skeptic Friend

USA
258 Posts

Posted - 01/05/2007 :  15:07:27   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send McQ a Private Message
I'm just trying to figure out who GK Paul is going to talk to once everyone has made his list. It will be amusing to see him muttering to himself in here.

I don't remember what got me on the list either, but I'm sure it wasn't nearly as rude as some of the stuff he's come out with.


Elvis didn't do no drugs!
--Penn Gillette
Go to Top of Page

Ricky
SFN Die Hard

USA
4907 Posts

Posted - 01/05/2007 :  16:11:31   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Ricky an AOL message Send Ricky a Private Message
This may be getting way off topic, but I believe we already are.

The following quote was posted by Neurosis.

quote:
Intuitive/feeling is worthless. Going with your gut feeling is not scientific or skeptical and the definition of intuition, so it precludes the scientific, empirical, and historical. It is also Faith. Note also that you have NO scientific, empirical, and historical evidence, so you only have faith any way you look at it.


I wouldn't say worthless. In fact, many scientists use intuition to form a hypothesis. I use it myself in math, and heavily while debugging programs when I do not know where the error lies.

However, once one wishes for a theory to be accepted by others, then it is worthless. But it is very important for the process of discovery, just not justification.

Why continue? Because we must. Because we have the call. Because it is nobler to fight for rationality without winning than to give up in the face of continued defeats. Because whatever true progress humanity makes is through the rationality of the occasional individual and because any one individual we may win for the cause may do more for humanity than a hundred thousand who hug their superstitions to their breast.
- Isaac Asimov
Edited by - Ricky on 01/05/2007 16:12:03
Go to Top of Page

McQ
Skeptic Friend

USA
258 Posts

Posted - 01/05/2007 :  16:47:09   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send McQ a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Ricky

This may be getting way off topic, but I believe we already are.

The following quote was posted by Neurosis.

quote:
Intuitive/feeling is worthless. Going with your gut feeling is not scientific or skeptical and the definition of intuition, so it precludes the scientific, empirical, and historical. It is also Faith. Note also that you have NO scientific, empirical, and historical evidence, so you only have faith any way you look at it.


I wouldn't say worthless. In fact, many scientists use intuition to form a hypothesis. I use it myself in math, and heavily while debugging programs when I do not know where the error lies.

However, once one wishes for a theory to be accepted by others, then it is worthless. But it is very important for the process of discovery, just not justification.



Ricky wouldn't it be fair to say though, that when you are using intuition to debug a program, you are using your experience to make educated guesses as to where the problem may be? I think that what we try to chalk up to gut feelings, or intuition, is really just our ability as humans to recognize patterns and make decisions based on experiences. I have no proof of this, just a feeling.

Elvis didn't do no drugs!
--Penn Gillette
Go to Top of Page

Ricky
SFN Die Hard

USA
4907 Posts

Posted - 01/05/2007 :  22:23:27   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Ricky an AOL message Send Ricky a Private Message
Certainly experiences influence our intuition, there is no question about that. But what exactly is the difference between an educated guess and intuition? To me, the lines get blurry there.

Why continue? Because we must. Because we have the call. Because it is nobler to fight for rationality without winning than to give up in the face of continued defeats. Because whatever true progress humanity makes is through the rationality of the occasional individual and because any one individual we may win for the cause may do more for humanity than a hundred thousand who hug their superstitions to their breast.
- Isaac Asimov
Go to Top of Page

Zebra
Skeptic Friend

USA
354 Posts

Posted - 01/05/2007 :  22:59:55   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Zebra a Private Message
Intuition is the sub-conscious recognition of patterns one has seen before (including recall of knowledge one has previously acquired, and rapid connection formation between areas of knowledge) with a resultant "sense" of how to complete the pattern - what to do next, what would be the next best step, etc. The recall and processing are not explicit, and the person may not recognize how they came to the conclusion, but after the fact people can often piece out (far more slowly than in the intuitive moment) what clues they recognized, and what knowledge they have that tells them what those clues mean.

Gary Klein, Ph.D. is one psychologist who has spent years studying intuition, especially rapid, intuitive decision-making by firefighters at fires, and other experts in various fields who have to make rapid, important decisions under stress.

The way Neurosis used "intuition" is different:
quote:
Intuitive/feeling is worthless. Going with your gut feeling is not scientific or skeptical and the definition of intuition, so it precludes the scientific, empirical, and historical. It is also Faith. Note also that you have NO scientific, empirical, and historical evidence, so you only have faith any way you look at it.

Neurosis is explicitly referring to "feelings" based on "NO...evidence". That's not intuition, though at times it may seem like experts using intuition are not using evidence (not so).

The mixup probably comes because people sometimes say they are basing something on "intuition" when really it's "wishful thinking" - they hope it's so. Faith seems like one kind of wishful thinking.

Edited to fix the links & clarify one point.
And edited again to fix 2 stupid typos.

I think, you know, freedom means freedom for everyone* -Dick Cheney

*some restrictions may apply
Edited by - Zebra on 01/05/2007 23:04:19
Go to Top of Page

GK Paul
Skeptic Friend

USA
306 Posts

Posted - 01/07/2007 :  03:21:45   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send GK Paul a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse

quote:
Originally posted by GK Paul
But even if it was by magnetism, they would still have to "feel" the invisible force and thus your claim that feeling is worthless would not apply to the pigeons important skill of finding its way home.

They would use their senses. Some of it is a magnetic sense like a built in compass but why couldn't it be a combination of several senses, like we use hearing and touch to "feel" our way through a room after we've been blindfolded. It's not like the pigeon flies in a straight line...

Is the 2007 World Book the only book you read? How about gather information from more than one source, it might be wrong.

No, I figure I've read at least a thousand books in my life - but none of those books come out with a new edition every year like the World Book does. If you send them convincing evidence that homing pigeons use magnetism, I assume they would put that in their next edition. Credibility is important for them to stay in business.


"Something cannot come from nothing" -- Ken Tanaka - geologist

"The existence of a Being endowed with intelligence and wisdom is a necessary inference from a study of celestial mechanics" --Sir Isaac Newton


GK Paul
Go to Top of Page

Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend

Sweden
9666 Posts

Posted - 01/07/2007 :  04:15:52   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Dr. Mabuse an ICQ Message Send Dr. Mabuse a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by GK Paul
No, I figure I've read at least a thousand books in my life

How many of those were non-fiction?
Your lack of general knowledge in science-stuff makes me wonder...

quote:
- but none of those books come out with a new edition every year like the World Book does.
Wikipedia on-line is updated constantly. I recall reading an article stating that Wikipedia is just as reliable as Encyclopedia Britannica.

quote:
If you send them convincing evidence that homing pigeons use magnetism, I assume they would put that in their next edition. Credibility is important for them to stay in business.
Though I suppose World Book is fairly accurate, when it comes to scientific discoveries, Peer-reviewed publications is what counts.

Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3

"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse

Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder.
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25977 Posts

Posted - 01/07/2007 :  09:38:21   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message
I've got a set of World Books from 1973. In it, they say, "No one knows exactly how pigeons and other birds find their way across several hundred miles of strange territory to reach home." If that is pretty much all they're saying in the 2007 edition, it means that they haven't updated the entry in 34 years, despite tons of research during those years.

And for an encyclopedia, World Book's 1973 edition was pretty poor, since the basics about homing pigeons are simply absent. No average size or weight, lifespan, coloration or other data is present.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

moakley
SFN Regular

USA
1883 Posts

Posted - 01/08/2007 :  11:26:18   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send moakley a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by GK Paul

No, I figure I've read at least a thousand books in my life - but none of those books come out with a new edition every year like the World Book does. If you send them convincing evidence that homing pigeons use magnetism, I assume they would put that in their next edition. Credibility is important for them to stay in business.

In regards to GK Paul the following quote seems appropriate.
quote:
Scarecrow: I don't know... But some people without brains do an awful lot of talking... don't they?


Life is good

Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous
Go to Top of Page

GK Paul
Skeptic Friend

USA
306 Posts

Posted - 01/10/2007 :  07:07:17   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send GK Paul a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse

quote:
Originally posted by GK Paul
No, I figure I've read at least a thousand books in my life

How many of those were non-fiction?
Your lack of general knowledge in science-stuff makes me wonder...

quote:
- but none of those books come out with a new edition every year like the World Book does.
Wikipedia on-line is updated constantly. I recall reading an article stating that Wikipedia is just as reliable as Encyclopedia Britannica.

quote:
If you send them convincing evidence that homing pigeons use magnetism, I assume they would put that in their next edition. Credibility is important for them to stay in business.
Though I suppose World Book is fairly accurate, when it comes to scientific discoveries, Peer-reviewed publications is what counts.

No, I never did like fiction. I think I read one or two Hardy Boys books and that was about it for fiction...

I read a book about Isaac Newton that says nuclear scientists can actually change materials into gold but the expense would not make it worthwhile. So much for people who criticise Newton for looking into alchemy. Those same people would probably laugh at Edison for trying human hair as a conductor in the light bulb.


"Something cannot come from nothing" -- Ken Tanaka - geologist

"The existence of a Being endowed with intelligence and wisdom is a necessary inference from a study of celestial mechanics" --Sir Isaac Newton


GK Paul
Go to Top of Page

tomk80
SFN Regular

Netherlands
1278 Posts

Posted - 01/10/2007 :  07:23:45   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit tomk80's Homepage Send tomk80 a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by GK Paul

quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse

quote:
Originally posted by GK Paul
No, I figure I've read at least a thousand books in my life

How many of those were non-fiction?
Your lack of general knowledge in science-stuff makes me wonder...

quote:
- but none of those books come out with a new edition every year like the World Book does.
Wikipedia on-line is updated constantly. I recall reading an article stating that Wikipedia is just as reliable as Encyclopedia Britannica.

quote:
If you send them convincing evidence that homing pigeons use magnetism, I assume they would put that in their next edition. Credibility is important for them to stay in business.
Though I suppose World Book is fairly accurate, when it comes to scientific discoveries, Peer-reviewed publications is what counts.

No, I never did like fiction. I think I read one or two Hardy Boys books and that was about it for fiction...

I read a book about Isaac Newton that says nuclear scientists can actually change materials into gold but the expense would not make it worthwhile. So much for people who criticise Newton for looking into alchemy.

Since alchemy is nothing like nuclear science, since alchemy is far removed from science in all respects, criticizing Newton for looking into alchemy to turn lead into gold is justified to an extreme. Again, not because it cannot be done, but because of the 'method' he used to try and do it. Alchemy is not, and never has been, science.
quote:
Those same people would probably laugh at Edison for trying human hair as a conductor in the light bulb.


Based on what reasoning did he try to do it. Was his reasoning in it sound? Was it scientific reasoning?

And how does this all relate to homing pigeons and the insufficiency of the World books when compared to the latest, scientific peer reviewed work?

Tom

`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll-
Go to Top of Page

Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend

Sweden
9666 Posts

Posted - 01/10/2007 :  08:31:06   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Dr. Mabuse an ICQ Message Send Dr. Mabuse a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by GK Paul
I read a book about Isaac Newton that says nuclear scientists can actually change materials into gold but the expense would not make it worthwhile. So much for people who criticise Newton for looking into alchemy. Those same people would probably laugh at Edison for trying human hair as a conductor in the light bulb.


Reading so many non-fictional books, do you know how physicists go about changing some other element into gold?
Who wrote that book about Newton anyway?
For someone claiming to read many non-fictional books, your grasp of general (scientifically derived) knowledge seem to be wanting.

If you had read more fiction, you would see that the Bible has much more in common with fiction than with non-fiction. And even more in common with other religious myths.

You know, I once worked with a woman who had no clue what was fiction and what was non-fiction. After a lengthy discussion with her it was clear that she really believed that "Murder on the Orient Express" actually happened and that Agatha Christie was some find of historian/correspondent.
The Swedish word for literary fiction as you would find it in a library marking out that particular section doesn't say "made up stories" but more like "beautiful stories" (as in could-be-real-stories). For someone not native Swedish and very gullible, I still left the discussion with her wondering how the world looked through her eyes...

Just because you're saying that you don't read fiction, GK Paul. How do I know what you read? And just because you're reading fact-books doesn't necessarily mean that you understand what you read. What conclusions did you make from that book saying it that it is possible to transmute another element into gold? Was Isaac Newton on the right track in his alchemy studies?

If the biblical story of the Tower of Babel is true, given that God is spiritual in nature and not physical, what threat could the tower possibly pose to God? I can't imagine. So why stop the people from making it, since when the tower was finished, they would have realised that they made it all in vain. Would it not be punishment alone?
Besides, many buildings have been raised after that, that's been much higher, and no one ever saw God there. Neither on the Eiffel Tower, Empire State Building, nor World Trade Center.
I cannot find any sane reason to believe the story of the Tower of Babel is real, because it contains so many of these logical flaws. Flaws that would make sense if you assume that the story is fictional to begin with, written by a mediocre author who hadn't thought through the implications of the various critical plot-points.

Then, realise that the story originated during the later Bronze-age.


OK, I'm done ranting for now.

Oh yeah...
The story about the female coworker, who believed that "The Murder on the Orient Express" was real, is actually true!


Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3

"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse

Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder.
Edited by - Dr. Mabuse on 01/10/2007 08:32:38
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 7 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.38 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000