Reply to article by: Stuart Grey <stuart.grey@nospam.comcast.net>
Date written: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 23:17:54 -0700
MsgID:<Te-dnX-oOpk44KLenZ2dnUVZ_s-dnZ2d@comcast.com>

Reply to article by: Stuart Grey <stuart.grey@nospam.comcast.net>
Date written: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 23:17:54 -0700
MsgID:<Te-dnX-oOpk44KLenZ2dnUVZ_s-dnZ2d@comcast.com>

Many people don't want to or are incapable of reason. To be blunt, we 
are not long out of the trees and the small fraction of intelligent 
people dragged many stupid apes out of the trees too early; people who 
should have remained in the trees.

To be blunt in return, people never dragged apes out of trees to become people.
Modern day homo sapeins did not evolve from apes, they evolved from
neanderthals.

The theory is that humans and chimps had a common ancestor. The trees in 
which the proto humans lived died due to climate changes, and the new 
enviroment requires a lot of bipedal motion.

My point being that it was the high end of the bell curve that developed 
tools and rational thought.

That isn't a theory. It is a fact that humans and chimpanzees had a common
ancestor. And there is no theory about development being the result of a bell
curve distribution.

so the scientists also tried an appeal to politics because believers
will listen to politics.

How was an appeal to authority (in the philosophy context) an appeal to 
politics?

It wasn't. It was an appeal, not an appeal to authority.

If I say "believe me because I am a scientist" that is an appeal to 
authority, even if I do it for political reasons.

It doesn't matter what you say, it only matters what The Campaign
to Defend the Constitution said and that is not even remotely close to what they
said. It is a bold-face lie to claim they ever said that.

Even if, why would people in the right listen to people on the left, 
just because the people on the left say they're authorities? They didn't 
listen to them the FIRST time. They are not going to start doing so now.

That's your opinion and not everyone has the same opinion you do.

I recognize that most people are not rational. However, that is besides 
the point.

That does not change the fact that "people on the right will never listen to
people on the left, even if the people on the left say they're authorities" is
your personal opinion and not a fact.

But in no way, shape, or form are scientists using
their appeal to politics as an appeal to authority because it isn't a reason, it
is a plead.

That is irrational. They are not making an appeal to authority because 
it's not an appeal, it a plea that people should listen to them because 
they are scientist; that is, authorities.

That is ignorant of the facts. They are not saying "evolution is correct because
we are authorities on the topic", they are simply making a request for science
to continue to be taught in the classrooms.

They are saying ID is not science and that the ignorant masses should 
believe them because they are authorities. They appeal to their own 
authority because they don't care to spend the time trying to teach what 
is and what isn't science to a bunch of superstitious nitwits who hold 
science in contempt. I can't say I blame them. It would be a waste of time.

The letter says nothing of the kind. That is a lie. You want to see the letter?
Clearly you haven't read it so here it is:
http://www.defconamerica.org/our-issues/Defending-Science/Govs_letter_with_signaturesFINAL_LETTER.pdf

Now everyone can see what a liar you are. Why do you want to lie for ID? What
benefit is ID going to bring you?

In science, there is nothing but reason. If they are making a plea based 
on anything else, then they are not being scientist. In the scientific 
world, you use reason. Anyone who doesn't use reason doesn't matter. In 
science, other people's opinions don't matter. Science is for reasoned 
people and not for the irrational.

You have no clue what they are doing.

Most people can't understand the concepts, and they don't matter. Like I 
said, they SHOULD teach ID in school.

You have yet to give an intelligent reason why it should.

I just told you.
1) The smart kids will learn not to take things on authority, because 
the authority is being irrational.

Like I said, that isn't an intelligent *reason*, that is the logical fallacy of
ad hominem.

2) It doesn't matter what you try and teach the stupid ones.

That's bigotry, not reason.

It won't matter what the kids who can't reason think; they are never 
going to be rational.

Teaching the ID will only make it worse because ID is based on blind stupid
faith instead of reason.

People who cannot reason are not going to be better off with science. 
Leave them to religion; it's all they can understand.

Religion is organized superstition, hence the reason religion has never done
anything of lasting good for humankind. We'd be better off if no one practiced
or believed in any religion.

There is a whole bunch of anthropology behind what I said that I don't 
expect you to understand.

There is no anthropology behind what you've said and I don't expect you to ever
demonstrate any proof behind it.

The kids who can reason are going to say; "Hey, the teacher is full of 
shit. Having the authority of being a teacher doesn't mean that you're 
right. Authorities will tell you any number of irrational things due to 
their own hidden agendas."

What hidden agenda is behind evolution?

Generally, there is no hidden agenda behind evolution.

Then don't pretend there is.

Now, go back and look at what I said.

You have "authorities" telling you about God, and they have a hidden agenda.

What "hidden" agenda?

You have "authorities" telling you about global warming, and they have a 
hidden agenada.

What "hidden" agenda?

You have "authorities" telling you that racial diversity is good, and 
they have a hidden agenda.

What "hidden' agenda?

The list goes on and on.

The unfactual nonsense is the only thing that is going on and on in your
assertions. You are just making this up as you go along. Like your bold-face lie
of what was in the Letter to the Governors.

Sometimes, there is even a hidden agenda when people tell you the truth! 

Yes, but you have yet to prove that an agenda exists. I'm certainly not going to
take your word on it, since your word is not trustworthy.

However, they don't need to appeal to authority to do that, they can 
appeal to reason.

Take your own advice, please.

Both the far left and the far right has used evolution 
to champion their causes, for example. These are cases of hidden agendas 
using something that's true.

What "causes"? What "hidden agendas"? You're just talking make beleive nonsense.

It really doesn't matter since the believers are bound to lose, again, just as
they always have in the past ever since the Scope's Monkey Trial. The problem
just is that believers are sore losers so they keep trying to shove their stupid
nonsense down everyone's throat anyway.

Yes. We all have our stupid nonsense we're trying to shove down 
everyone's throat.

No. You do, I don't.

The right wants to tell us that evolution and physics is wrong, and that 
we were created by God in God's image.

What God?

You're kind of dense.

Which word didn't you understand in "What God"? Are you going to answer that
question or are you going to resort to the immature logical fallacy of ad
hominen again and again?

The left wants to tell us capitalism and freedom is evil, slavery to the 
state is the way to go, that all races have equal intelligence and thus 
any demographics that shows a lack of minorities in certain groups is 
proof of racism, and that the world is warming due to greedy capitalist.

The right lies to me to get me to feel better about myself, and the left 
lies to me to try and make a slave out of me.

What a bunch of paranoid and propagandistic nonsense.

Humm. No rational rebuttal, as I expected.

There is nothing rational to respond to where nothing rational was given in the
first place. You clealy do not know the difference between stating a fact and
stating a make believe opinion. Everything you stated in the prior paragraphs is
a grocery store tabloid opinion and not a verifiable statement of fact.

If I must be lied to, I'd rather be lied to by the right.

You must like be lied to.

I'd rather the Christian tell me that I'm God like (and please drop 10% 
of my income into the plate every sunday) than some socialist tell me my 
rights don't matter, I'm an evil white man, that the reason they gave 
the job I'm best qualified to do to a minority was that all races have 
equal intelligence distributions and that I and my boss are sexist and 
racist, and that we have to shut down the western world because of 
global warming and they ship my job off to some turd world nation.

You are off topic. Nobody wants to hear you whine and complain just because you
are no match for minorities or women.

Some liars are more vicious than others. Socialist are liars of the 
worst type. It seems when teh socialist tells lies, they are sticking 
the knife in your back. And that is something I really hate.

Give us a *factual* example (you do know what "factual" is yet -- or don't you?)

If religion is the condom against socialism, I'm all for it.

Religion is a condom for common logical sense and you are all for it.

The Sage

=============================================================
My Home Page      :           http://members.cox.net/the.sage

"All those painted screens erected by man to shut out reality
       -- history, religion, duty, social position --
          all were illusions, mere opium fantasies"
         John Fowles, The French Lieutenant's Woman
=============================================================