All Forums > SimLeague Football > NFL > Makes me sick...
2/6/2013 9:05 AM
So the "scientific community" is what dictates truth? Even though all of their findings are based on man-made tests and human interpretations of their findings? humans with flaws, agendas, etc?
2/6/2013 9:08 AM
Why are we talking about this when we could talk about Bar Rafaeli?
2/6/2013 9:11 AM
If you have evidence that challenges the consensus, feel free to provide it. You act like there's some grand conspiracy among scientists when, in reality, every scientist has a huge incentive to prove everyone else wrong. That's how you become rich and famous in science. If you could prove that the entire fields of biology, chemistry, geology, and physics were wrong you'd win a Nobel Prize. Colleges would be named after you. Your children would never have to work a day in their lives.
2/6/2013 9:12 AM
I'm guessing you are arguing with bad_luck here, jtpsops. Don't bother. It's not worth your time. If God appeared in front of the world in a physical form and said he created the universe and its 10,000 years old and everyone else agreed they had seen God and heard God do this, bad_luck would STILL argue that it never happened and the earth is 4.5 billion years old.

Why? Because he's not only stubborn but can't see past his own agendas and beliefs. Keep in mind you're dealing with an atheist, so as you pointed out he will look for things to support the atheist agenda. Wait, we're not allowed to point out he might have an agenda. Only those who oppose him can have agendas. My bad.

2/6/2013 9:45 AM (edited)
Posted by deathinahole on 2/6/2013 9:08:00 AM (view original):
Why are we talking about this when we could talk about Bar Rafaeli?
Biz doesn't think she's as hot as his wife. I call BS and formally request a pic.

I love my wife. I think she's beautiful. I would never leave her for Bar or anyone else. But I'm not blind. And neither is she. I can air that she isn't a supermodel and she can admit that I'm not Ryan Gosling.
2/6/2013 9:15 AM
Posted by bistiza on 2/6/2013 9:12:00 AM (view original):
I'm guessing you are arguing with bad_luck here, jtpsops. Don't bother. It's not worth your time. If God appeared in front of the world in a physical form and said he created the universe and its 10,000 years old and everyone else agreed they had seen God and heard God do this, bad_luck would STILL argue that it never happened and the earth is 4.5 billion years old.

Why? Because he's not only stubborn but can't see past his own agendas and beliefs. Keep in mind you're dealing with an atheist, so as you pointed out he will look for things to support the atheist agenda. Wait, we're not allowed to point out he might have an agenda. Only those who oppose him can have agendas. My bad.

You're guessing? We know you unblocked me and quoted my post. Don't play dumb

If new evidence was presented that proved a young earth, that's what I would go with.
2/6/2013 9:17 AM
Posted by bad_luck on 2/6/2013 9:11:00 AM (view original):
If you have evidence that challenges the consensus, feel free to provide it. You act like there's some grand conspiracy among scientists when, in reality, every scientist has a huge incentive to prove everyone else wrong. That's how you become rich and famous in science. If you could prove that the entire fields of biology, chemistry, geology, and physics were wrong you'd win a Nobel Prize. Colleges would be named after you. Your children would never have to work a day in their lives.
Majority rules?  
2/6/2013 9:29 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/6/2013 9:17:00 AM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 2/6/2013 9:11:00 AM (view original):
If you have evidence that challenges the consensus, feel free to provide it. You act like there's some grand conspiracy among scientists when, in reality, every scientist has a huge incentive to prove everyone else wrong. That's how you become rich and famous in science. If you could prove that the entire fields of biology, chemistry, geology, and physics were wrong you'd win a Nobel Prize. Colleges would be named after you. Your children would never have to work a day in their lives.
Majority rules?  
Physical evidence rules, until proven differently.  In my opinion.

Also, the idea that the people who believe in evolution wouldn't change their minds if scientists agreed that the age of the world was wrong, is incorrect.  
2/6/2013 9:30 AM
Posted by bad_luck on 2/6/2013 9:17:00 AM (view original):
Posted by bistiza on 2/6/2013 9:12:00 AM (view original):
I'm guessing you are arguing with bad_luck here, jtpsops. Don't bother. It's not worth your time. If God appeared in front of the world in a physical form and said he created the universe and its 10,000 years old and everyone else agreed they had seen God and heard God do this, bad_luck would STILL argue that it never happened and the earth is 4.5 billion years old.

Why? Because he's not only stubborn but can't see past his own agendas and beliefs. Keep in mind you're dealing with an atheist, so as you pointed out he will look for things to support the atheist agenda. Wait, we're not allowed to point out he might have an agenda. Only those who oppose him can have agendas. My bad.

You're guessing? We know you unblocked me and quoted my post. Don't play dumb

If new evidence was presented that proved a young earth, that's what I would go with.
If I were to guess, BL, you're not actually blocked.
2/6/2013 9:30 AM
Did you conduct these studies?  Can you conduct these studies?

Or are you just taking the word of someone else?

Isn't that kind of like religion?
2/6/2013 9:43 AM
I hate to be anywhere near the same side of the fence as jtpops and biz but the other side seems to think saying "SCIENCE!!!" ends the discussion.    It doesn't.  You're simply believing what you were taught to be true.   I don't think anyone on this board has the ability to carbon date a rock.

2/6/2013 9:46 AM
Posted by burnsy483 on 2/6/2013 9:29:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/6/2013 9:17:00 AM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 2/6/2013 9:11:00 AM (view original):
If you have evidence that challenges the consensus, feel free to provide it. You act like there's some grand conspiracy among scientists when, in reality, every scientist has a huge incentive to prove everyone else wrong. That's how you become rich and famous in science. If you could prove that the entire fields of biology, chemistry, geology, and physics were wrong you'd win a Nobel Prize. Colleges would be named after you. Your children would never have to work a day in their lives.
Majority rules?  
Physical evidence rules, until proven differently.  In my opinion.

Also, the idea that the people who believe in evolution wouldn't change their minds if scientists agreed that the age of the world was wrong, is incorrect.  
Exactly. Show me some evidence that all scientists are wrong and you'll have my attention.
2/6/2013 9:47 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/6/2013 9:30:00 AM (view original):
Did you conduct these studies?  Can you conduct these studies?

Or are you just taking the word of someone else?

Isn't that kind of like religion?
Yes, I'm taking the word of people who conduct these studies.  Science is a means of attempting to prove the reasons why things happen in the world.  When the scientific community agrees wholeheartedly about something, I will believe them.  I also believe the Earth is round, that the Earth revolves around the sun, and that I need oxygen to breathe.  If the scientific community conducted studies and realized that we aren't breathing oxygen to survive, but a different gas, I would also believe them.  
2/6/2013 9:52 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/6/2013 9:43:00 AM (view original):
I hate to be anywhere near the same side of the fence as jtpops and biz but the other side seems to think saying "SCIENCE!!!" ends the discussion.    It doesn't.  You're simply believing what you were taught to be true.   I don't think anyone on this board has the ability to carbon date a rock.

Yes, but there are people who can carbon date a rock.  Are there people who can show me that the world is 10,000 years old?  Why would I disagree with scientists?

Someone also needs to explain to me the idea of how God created the world in a series of Earth days, when an Earth day didn't exist yet.  Do creationists not believe in metaphors? Why is it so much more unlikely that the Bible means a "day" in the sense of a multi-million year "day?"

I thought I was done with this...dammit.
2/6/2013 9:55 AM
Posted by Jtpsops on 2/6/2013 8:17:00 AM (view original):
Tec - if one makes the argument in point 1, then they have to apply it with both sides. You don't think science/tests/experiments are created and conducted by people with agendas? One group "creates a story" to explain how we got here, the other "creates science" to explain how we got here.

That's been the point this entire thread. No one here knows the scientists that conducted these studies (most probably can't even understand the studies themselves). No one knows with certainty that results weren't created to "prove" a certain viewpoint. One can't say the Bible was created after the fact to support the Christian/Creationist view, and then act like it's impossible that certain scientific "evidence" could not possibly also have been created after the fact to support the Evolutionist viewpoint.
Of course some "scientists" have agendas, and like to selectively present and interpret "evidence" in the way that best fits their agendas.  The whole debate going on today around global warming / climate change is the perfect example of that.

But a lot of science stands on it's own and is generally accepted as "truth", or at least as close to truth as we can get.  Unless and until a better, more accurate "truth" is discovered.  One doesn't have to fully understand the how's and why's at the sub-particle level behind gravity to accept the idea that if I throw a baseball up in the air, it's eventually going to come back down to the ground because of gravity.

As to your point about creationsim, and how scientific evidence could have been created after the fact . . . well, that all comes down to an individuals ability to think critically.  Assuming that one believes that there is a supreme, all powerful being who made the heavens and the earth in seven days, and all this happened approximately 10,000 years ago, one might want to question why all this assumingly "false" evidence which points to an older earth is out there . . . why does "God" want to trick us?  Is it to test one's faith?  Is that the "God" you believe in?

So in the end, it all comes down to the ability to think critically, see all sides of the argument, and make a decision as to what makes the most sense.

Of course, people like bistiza believes he is the only person in these forums capable of critical thinking, and that anybody else whose decision comes down with the majority is just a brainless sheep incapable of independent thought.  And I think that way of thinking says a lot more about people like him than it does about anybody else.
of 60
All Forums > SimLeague Football > NFL > Makes me sick...

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.