Hey heathens... c'mere. Question.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
05-02-2013, 09:30 AM
Hey heathens... c'mere. Question.
The recent WLC talks got me thinking.

Why do y'all get so worked up over the likes of WLC, Ham, and Humphreys when they "debate" atheists and evolutionists? They are thoroughly dismantled in every way, shape, and form in any argument, but there is continued distress over them.

Doesn't make any sense to me.

See... to me... I think the atheist and secular scientific community should be more up in arms over the likes of Bakker, Collins, and McGrath... actual scientist who believe in God... these men actively contribute to the scientific community. They are a much biggest threat with bringing God into science than the YEC goofballs.

So... why come?

[Image: vjp09.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kingschosen's post
05-02-2013, 09:42 AM
RE: Hey heathens... c'mere. Question.
I think it's just easy to mock their crap. But the fact that WLC, Ham, and Co. are relentless and hypocritical in their spouting of pseudoscience and accusations against actual science gets under many peoples' skin. I get worked up when I watch Dinesh D'Sousa, primarily because my dad wanted me to watch some of his stuff in response to the questions I posed to him in a debate I had with him, and also because he's so vocal about politics and anti-Obama in particular. The shit he says is the shit my father believes, and it's angering.

But, on top of that, the arguments from WLC, Ham, and Co. are the arguments that many Christians offer up in debates, mimicking these folks well-known in the apologetics arena.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like kineo's post
05-02-2013, 09:44 AM
RE: Hey heathens... c'mere. Question.
Because those believers who don't proselytize are okay by me. And I am confident that christians who attempt to walk the path of those scientists who are also believers, are more likely to find reason instead of faith. But as long as they keep their faith out of science and public policy, I have no issue with them. Why assume atheists want to destroy individuals beliefs? Religion is an atrocity I would just as soon do away with, but an individual can do and believe as they please (as long as it doesn't affect me).

Which is why asshats like Ham, Craig, Hovind, etc are so goddamn frustrating. They pretend to debate in order to proselytize and actively seek out the weak-minded to convince and indoctrinate. They attempt to make themselves sound superior and more intelligent by saying confusing things and in convoluted ways. Watch any debate by Craig and he is always Dr. William Lane Craig. Watch any discussion or debate by someone like Dawkins and he is not typically introduced as Dr. Dawkins. Why? Because those discussions do not involve his area of expertise for which he attained his PhD. He is not attempting to fool people into believing what he says simply by using a title that most people recognize as the title of an expert. Which is why any time someone is interviewed for something unrelated to their particular field and they use the title of Dr, I chuckle a little at their insecurity.

Evolve
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 11 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
05-02-2013, 09:48 AM
RE: Hey heathens... c'mere. Question.
1) I've only heard of Collins out of those and he doesn't bother me since I see him as a scientist who happens to be a Christian. I don't see him as trying to push Christianity onto everyone or making facetious arguments in favor of Christianity. I've read "Language of God" and found his arguments about atheism / religion lacking, but at the same time I liked that he was arguing in favor of scientific fact when it disagreed with religious dogma with regard to evolution (though I think he's also incorrect in how he tries to reconcile them). The others I have no knowledge of so I can't say anything.

2) WLC and co I have heard of and they bother me because of the stupidity of their arguments. It's frustrating to listen to them since I'm constantly facepalming and annoyed at the fact that many in the audience will agree with them and think that they won.

3) Unless I'm wrong, I think that Collins & Co. contribute solid scientific work without regard for dogma, so I'm not concerned about their beliefs unless they're interfering with their work or muddying the waters. WLC & Co. are just spouting garbage that furthers the cause of purposeful ignorance on the part of Christians/Creationists - they contribute nothing of value and purely serve to maintain people's existing set of ignorant beliefs.

Better without God, and happier too.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-02-2013, 09:59 AM
RE: Hey heathens... c'mere. Question.
Thanks for the replies. Appreciate it.

So, I guess it just boils down to proselytizing?

That and spouting asinine arguments in hopes that some of it will accidentally stick?

[Image: vjp09.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kingschosen's post
05-02-2013, 10:04 AM
RE: Hey heathens... c'mere. Question.
(05-02-2013 09:59 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  Thanks for the replies. Appreciate it.

So, I guess it just boils down to proselytizing?

That and spouting asinine arguments in hopes that some of it will accidentally stick?
And pseudointellectualism. Trying to appear intellectually superior or the intellectual equivalent, of that of whomever they are "debating."

Evolve
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
05-02-2013, 10:08 AM
RE: Hey heathens... c'mere. Question.
For me, it's because Craig (et al) have followers. People listen to them and think they've found evidence for their faith, then they parrot these guys in their own debates. It's all junk but it attracts gullible followers.

Those other guys don't seem to be debating and accruing gullible followers, so they don't bother me (if they are, I haven't heard of these debates yet so they're still below my radar).

That said, I don't get "worked up" over the debates. I find it sad and a bit frustrating that they can be so deliberately obtuse and, at least in Craig's case, clearly lying (he doesn't use his own arguments to justify his own beliefs and he's said so publicly), and yet people watch their favorite apologist "get dismantled in every way, shape, and form" and walk away believing their favorite apologist won the debate.

"Whores perform the same function as priests, but far more thoroughly." - Robert A. Heinlein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Aseptic Skeptic's post
05-02-2013, 10:43 AM
RE: Hey heathens... c'mere. Question.
(05-02-2013 10:04 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(05-02-2013 09:59 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  That and spouting asinine arguments in hopes that some of it will accidentally stick?
And pseudointellectualism. Trying to appear intellectually superior or the intellectual equivalent, of that of whomever they are "debating."

Yes, pseudo-intellectualism; the arrogance itself is extraordinarily manipulative.... it let's people associate themselves with "being smart" when they are actually letting someone else "be smart" for them. It serves to shore up an extremely insular view.

And yes, Kingsy - it will stick, but rest assured, it is no accident... this behavior is quite calculated and even dictated. Even if it sticks in one person's mind, that seed is planted... you know this... it's what you are obliged to do by your christee doctrine; spread the word.

If this word is so great, it should stand on it's own... otherwise, you have no faith. I think you might agree with that statement, Kingsy.

For me, I couldn't give a fuck what someone believes. However, when anyone deliberately and actively confuses for the singular purpose of spreading an agenda: Fuck. That.

I think in the end, I just feel like I'm a secular person who has a skeptical eye toward any extraordinary claim, carefully examining any extraordinary evidence before jumping to conclusions. ~ Eric ~ My friend ... who figured it out.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like kim's post
05-02-2013, 10:48 AM
RE: Hey heathens... c'mere. Question.
(05-02-2013 10:43 AM)kim Wrote:  
(05-02-2013 10:04 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  And pseudointellectualism. Trying to appear intellectually superior or the intellectual equivalent, of that of whomever they are "debating."

Yes, pseudo-intellectualism; the arrogance itself is extraordinarily manipulative.... it let's people associate themselves with "being smart" when they are actually letting someone else "be smart" for them. It serves to shore up an extremely insular view.

And yes, Kingsy - it will stick, but rest assured, it is no accident... this behavior is quite calculated and even dictated. Even if it sticks in one person's mind, that seed is planted... you know this... it's what you are obliged to do by your christee doctrine; spread the word.

If this word is so great, it should stand on it's own... otherwise, you have no faith. I think you might agree with that statement, Kingsy.

For me, I couldn't give a fuck what someone believes. However, when anyone deliberately and actively confuses for the singular purpose of spreading an agenda: Fuck. That.
[Image: tumblr_mecffj69Wg1qfw2dno1_400.gif]

Very nicely put. *jots that down in journal*

[Image: 3d366d5c-72a0-4228-b835-f404c2970188_zps...1381867723]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cheapthrillseaker's post
05-02-2013, 10:59 AM
RE: Hey heathens... c'mere. Question.
I think, in part, it is because these people, the nut jobs, are more inline with what is believed most Christians. A Christian such as yourself is rare as you undoubtedly know. Only a small percentage accept evolution, the fact that the age of our world is measured in billions of years instead of thousands, and take passages that include talking donkeys and snakes and men living inside whales as literal truth, from a god whom you should be afraid of, but still love and praise. If more Christians used logic then non-religious folks would focus more on them (but would certainly still poke fun at the crazy bunch), but then again if more Christians used logic there wouldn't be nearly as many to poke fun at. Aside from that the crazy Christians still have considerable social and political power. Non-religious folks are more often ridiculed and subjugated to by the loonies, not folks in the scientific community who believe in the existence of a god.

The other 'heathens' gave answers that partially explain it too IMO. Heathen usually means 'pagan' though so I wouldn't call myself one, but I'm answering anyway Tongue

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Dark Light's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: