Literal Genesis Trial
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-03-2013, 12:31 PM
Literal Genesis Trial
A California creationist is challenging anyone to disprove the literal interpretation of the book of Genesis, Amanda Holpuch of the Guardian reports.

Here are the rules:

The non-literal Genesis advocate puts $10,000 in escrow with the judge.
The literal Genesis advocate and contributing writer for the Creation Science Hall of Fame, Joseph Mastropaolo, puts $10,000 in escrow with the judge.
If the non-literal Genesis advocate proves that science contradicts the literal reading of Genesis, then the non-literal Genesis advocate is awarded the $20,000.
If the literal Genesis advocate proves that science indicates the literal reading of Genesis, then the literal Genesis advocate is awarded the $20,000.
Evidence must be scientific, that is, objective, valid, reliable and calibrated.
The preponderance of evidence prevails.
At the end of the trial, the judge hands the prevailing party both checks.
The judge is a superior court judge.
The venue is a courthouse.
Court costs will be paid by the prevailing party.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/creationi...z2OxGZH1lh

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-03-2013, 12:51 PM
RE: Literal Genesis Trial
What's the point? I bet the court costs will add up to more than the 10 grand the prevailing party wins.

Besides, how can we be sure we get an impartial judge? Just because the judge is a superior court judge, doesn't mean he or she isn't a creationist fundie too.

Maybe, if I were stinking rich so that losing 10 grand meant nothing to me, or winning 10 grand and then having to pay 15 grand in court costs meant nothing to me, and if I had all the time in the world to devote to this, it would be a fun exercise.

I hope someone cool takes up the challenge. Where's Christopher Hitchens when we need him...

"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
[+] 1 user Likes Aseptic Skeptic's post
29-03-2013, 12:57 PM (This post was last modified: 29-03-2013 01:25 PM by TrainWreck.)
RE: Literal Genesis Trial
I haven't thought about the corruption of court costs for a while - thanks.

And you do not understand the detriment of the excuse, of court costs, to the agenda of atheist organization. Interesting how this was released several days before the Atheist Convention. I came across an announcement on another website listing someone from TTA to be an honored guest???

Anyway, what are your arguments that you do not have the money to put to this challenge?

I think it is a worthy challenge, and important that atheists accept and put forth an effort. I think it is better than the advertising campaign, because eventually we win, because there is no god, and the information of the Bible is of no help to organizations larger than small communities; and the information gathered by science helps organizations of infinite size, as far as we can fortell. We have an over-population problem of stupid people, and I think the Bible only put forth provisions for euthenizing children who were probably, physically challenged, more than those who were mentally challenged, because back then the margin of human error was much wider, and intellectual capacity was not as necessary as it is for the future of Mankind.

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-03-2013, 01:52 PM
RE: Literal Genesis Trial
If you think this is a worthy challenge, then you must be new to this world.

That being said, this thread has already been done:
Man offers 10,000 dollars to anyone who can "disprove" the literal Genesis creation

[Image: atheistsignature.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-03-2013, 02:17 PM
RE: Literal Genesis Trial
Sorry, I did not think to consider the topic "World News."

I like how you reason that it is not a worthy challenge, you are about as intelligent as the others. I gave you my reasoning, and like an idiot atheist, you ignore the arguments, like I'm a nigger??? You better show me some respect.

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-03-2013, 02:52 PM
RE: Literal Genesis Trial
(29-03-2013 12:57 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  And you do not understand the detriment of the excuse, of court costs, to the agenda of atheist organization.

What the hell are you talking about? What don't I understand? What "agenda" of what "atheist organization" are you inventing in your twisted brain? There is no atheist organization and no agenda.

Unless you mean something like Atheist+, an organization in which I do not participate - even if you do mean that organization, or some other similar one, you should probably specify what you're talking about, otherwise you sound like one more crackpot who thinks all atheists belong to some nonexistent generic atheist club of some kind.

(29-03-2013 12:57 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  I think it is a worthy challenge, and important that atheists accept and put forth an effort.

On this we agree, and as I said, I hope someone cool takes up the challenge.

(29-03-2013 02:17 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  I gave you my reasoning, and like an idiot atheist, you ignore the arguments

So now all atheists are idiots? You seem to be an atheist, you mentioned in this thread "there is no god" so apparently you are an atheist, does that make you stupid too?

(29-03-2013 02:17 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  like I'm a nigger??? You better show me some respect.

If you ever had any chance at getting some respect, you lost that chance with this moronic racist line.

You are crazing and revolting.

Get lost.

"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
29-03-2013, 04:11 PM (This post was last modified: 29-03-2013 04:18 PM by yumeji.)
RE: Literal Genesis Trial
(29-03-2013 02:52 PM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote:  On this we agree, and as I said, I hope someone cool takes up the challenge.

Well.. I would like someone to take the challenge as long as they can show the judge to be unbiased or that they will be just simply fair. That is the problem for me, chances are that no matter who they pick, they won't be proficient in both sides so that one side or the other will end up bitching and moaning about the judge being unfair.

Also:
"Evidence must be scientific, that is, objective, valid, reliable and calibrated."

So then the genesis side loses right off the bat. What evidence do the ones on the literal genesis side have that hasn't been brought up, and thoroughly trashed? It's not like they actually have anything new to bring to the table, otherwise you would be hearing about their "evidence" all over the place.

The more I'm thinking about it, the more I feel that it's just a waste of time.

[Image: atheistsignature.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-03-2013, 04:27 PM
RE: Literal Genesis Trial
I explained the reasoning that we have to disprove the validity of the Bible: the information of the Bible is of no help to organizations larger than small communities; and the information gathered by science helps organizations of infinite size.


The only way atheists are going to judge a judge to be unbiased is if the ruling is in favor of the atheists.

What is the litmus test for unbias???

The atheist organization is the whole demographic collection of atheists - ultimately they contribute to the cause of erradicating theism in society. There are formal organizations, and there are informal organizations, such as participating on discussion forms trying to determine the better reason.

You're stupid - staight-up stupid if you cannot recognixe that that is what happens.

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-03-2013, 06:14 PM
RE: Literal Genesis Trial
Not recommended. It's a trap!

I'm inclined to agree with PZ on this one. J. Mastropaolo sure seems like a tar-baby to me.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2...+Comments)

He's not the Messiah. He's a very naughty boy! -Brian's mum
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-03-2013, 08:46 PM
RE: Literal Genesis Trial
It's definitly an atheists trap. PZ says this guy does this all the time = I've never heard his name before, have you?

And if the guy is looney then the judge probably has to reject the trial - right?

This is set-up by the atheist convention.

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: