1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Argumentum ad populum

Discussion in 'Science and Religion' started by nPeace, Aug 14, 2019.

  1. tas8831

    tas8831 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2018
    Messages:
    2,539
    Ratings:
    +2,066
    [​IMG]
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  2. tas8831

    tas8831 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2018
    Messages:
    2,539
    Ratings:
    +2,066
    Not as often as we hear people say "1 billion Christians cannot be wrong!"

    Michael Crichton the anti-science medical doctor who has never done research? Well, if he says so, it MUST be true!

    You reject the argumentum ad populum, but EMBRACE the argumentum ad verecundiam.

    That is a creationist favorite.
     
  3. tas8831

    tas8831 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2018
    Messages:
    2,539
    Ratings:
    +2,066
    I know you will not do so, for to do so will reveal your level of ignorance/deception, but what do YOU think "peer" means in "peer review"?

    And if "peers" 'getting a vote' is bad, whom do you suggest should 'get a vote'? Anti-science zealots? Religious fanatics? People who think 'dream it up and assert it science' is REAL science? People who think 10 paragraphs of assertions are actually evidence? People who want to be thought of as having expertise on the anatomy and physiology of language but who call the motor speech area "broccas area" and thing creatures can just grown one?

    I remember several years ago when populist right-wing tea bagger Eric Cantor thought 'the people' should have a say in what scientific research proposals get funded, and he put grant application abstracts (just the abstracts) on his website and invited people to chime in.
    Right-wing bible kooks, of course, sought out any abstract with the word "evolution" in it and attacked it. Even Cantor eventually realized that it was a bad idea for the ignorami to 'vote' on scientific projects.




    People who bash science are people that are generally too egotistical, ignorant and unwilling to learn what it takes to actually engage in scientific pursuits.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  4. tas8831

    tas8831 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2018
    Messages:
    2,539
    Ratings:
    +2,066
    How does it occur in an individual?
    And in "less than" two generations - how does that produce a new species?

    If we have mutation in one individual, and it mates with a 'normal' individual, please explain what the odds are that the offspring will possess the new trait.

    I can wait.
    The definition
    Biological evolution, simply put, is descent with modification. This definition encompasses small-scale evolution (changes in gene — or more precisely and technically, allele — frequency in a population from one generation to the next) and large-scale evolution (the descent of different species from a common ancestor over many generations). Evolution helps us to understand the history of life.





    What is "survival of the fittest" in your fantasy?


    It is amazing how you are wrong about pretty much everything your claim re: evolution/biology/genetics.

    But then, you have said you are self-taught.

    The self-taught suffer doubly, both by having a crummy instructor and by getting a sub-par education.
     
  5. tas8831

    tas8831 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2018
    Messages:
    2,539
    Ratings:
    +2,066
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  6. cladking

    cladking Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2018
    Messages:
    1,115
    Ratings:
    +152
    Religion:
    not applicable
    NOBODY gets a vote about reality. We determine reality through experiment, NOT VOTE.

    ...As I said several times before "species" arise suddenly from parents with a shared gene(s) which allowed them to survive a bottleneck brought about naturally which selected for BEHAVIOR.

    When very few individuals survive because of a shared behavior that is unusual to that species they breed a new species.

    I did have a poor teacher but then he had a poor student anyway. I never tried to learn facts but how and why things worked. I am a generalist or as some might say; a nexialist.

    There is no evidence for or experiment that shows gradual evolution. All observed changes in life at every level and type is sudden.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  7. cladking

    cladking Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2018
    Messages:
    1,115
    Ratings:
    +152
    Religion:
    not applicable
    I don't agree with this statement but is is wholly irrelevant. I have never bashed science in my entire life. I have bashed Egyptology but they aren't science at all. I have bashed "soup of the day science" and Look and See Science but they aren't really science either.

    Indeed, the moment someone tells you what is and what is not you can be sure it is not science at all. It is someone's misunderstanding of experiment or statistics. It is someone who is not familiar with metaphysics or epistemology. It is just might be someone who believe that support of peers has a bearing on anything other than their pecking order or funding.
     
  8. cladking

    cladking Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2018
    Messages:
    1,115
    Ratings:
    +152
    Religion:
    not applicable
    But you can't show this in bears, humans, or any higher life form.


    Dog, cats, farm animals, and crops.

    You are making assumptions consistent with Darwin's beliefs.


    Of course I do. But these have very very little effect on change in species.
     
  9. cladking

    cladking Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2018
    Messages:
    1,115
    Ratings:
    +152
    Religion:
    not applicable
    We don't really "decide" to grow a broccas area. In a sense we do because "decide" is just one of those words with an infinite number of definitions and individuals do acquire language through intent. In order to acquire language we "grow a brocas area". This varies in position from individual to individual because we are all at a loss to figure the best place for it. Very few even realize they are doing it of course. When we turn 2 we all start growing billions of connections in the brain. These would all be used to speak metaphysical language but we are force fed modern language and must learn it instead. We grow a Broca's Area which acts as a translator between the digital speech center and the now analog higher brain functions. These higher brain functions used to be digital as well and no translation was required. Babies and ancient people don't think like us but we can no longer teach them metaphysical language so they grow a Broccas area. They grow it because they must. Then they think just like we do; Homo Omnisciencis and we're so proud because we think and therefore exist and we think we're so smart. It's win, win, win and then we hold elections to determine reality and ignore anomalies that are almost invisible anyway since we see only what we believe.

    What's not to be proud of?
     
  10. ecco

    ecco Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2016
    Messages:
    8,241
    Ratings:
    +3,980
    Religion:
    atheist
    So, you have no understanding of what the word "species" means. I didn't think so, but I just wanted you to verify it.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
  11. ecco

    ecco Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2016
    Messages:
    8,241
    Ratings:
    +3,980
    Religion:
    atheist
    We were discussing people's beliefs in gods. So, no I don't have a gem of my own. I'm not one of those people who believe that "my god is better than your god". I'm just one of many people who would point out that that cannot be true.
     
  12. ecco

    ecco Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2016
    Messages:
    8,241
    Ratings:
    +3,980
    Religion:
    atheist
    Example?

    What scientists think is right is usually more right than what scientists/lay people thought was right 100 years ago.


    That's the joy of science. It's also the joy of religious people. Many religious scholars believed the Exodus actually happened - oops.
     
  13. ecco

    ecco Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2016
    Messages:
    8,241
    Ratings:
    +3,980
    Religion:
    atheist
    That's a rather bold statement coming from someone who cannot define "species".

    Actually, it's a rather silly statement coming from someone who cannot define "species".
     
    • Like Like x 2
  14. nPeace

    nPeace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2018
    Messages:
    4,802
    Ratings:
    +1,324
    Religion:
    Follower of Christ
    Since you are the expert here, why don't you tell me a bit more about Chromosome 2.... Like what functions these 2 pairs of Chromosome carried out before they fused, and whether any functions were hindered / obstructed / otherwise.

    Speaking of expert, you are the first person I ever heard with the Chromosome 2 argument (Hmm.. [​IMG] I wonder why...), and your words do sound expertly formulated.
    I don't just take words as Gospel though, especially on debate forums. They usually are mere claims that can be spouted at whim. So...
    Where is your supporting evidence that "we get exact matches with the chimp chromosome that we seem to be "missing""

    I won't hold my breath.

    No matter how many times you repeat that, and how good it sounds to you, I know I am right, and I proved it.
    You just confirmed it, and you can't deny what is written in the science journals.
    The beauty about that, is that that information is just a few mouse clicks away.

    Opinion noted.


    Well thank you, at least, for acknowledging that getting rid of the fossil record is a wise choice for believers in evolution, since it's against the theory... every time we turn around.
    So basically the evolution theory has no supporting evidence, when we look at every one of those you mentioned.

    Let's see... what exactly did I say...
    I suggest you are either lying, or confused. Do you know which it is?
    First you say, I implied what you said...
    It's about you showing your ignorance by implying that "popular opinion" is somehow the same as "scientific consensus".
    Now you say, it is exactly what I said.
    When you make up you mind let me know.

    I won't wait for you though.
    Searching the OP....
    Argumentum ad populum
    When an argument uses the appeal to the beliefs of a group of experts, it takes on the form of an appeal to authority

    Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled.

    Appealing to authority, argument by consensus, consensus fallacy, consensus gentium,... it's all useless, and irrelevant in any debate.

    Yup. You're lying... or confused.
    Unless you are saying that consensus is just 'popular opinion'. :nomouth:
     
    #274 nPeace, Aug 20, 2019
    Last edited: Aug 20, 2019
    • Funny Funny x 1
  15. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    27,433
    Ratings:
    +15,239
    Religion:
    Atheist
    You really should be ashamed of yourself for this post. Now perhaps you do not know what is and what is not evidence. Creationists are terribly afraid to understand that concept. You are more than bright enough to understand it, would you care to discuss it? You are running out of plausible deniability, right now it does appear that you are lying on purpose.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
  16. nPeace

    nPeace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2018
    Messages:
    4,802
    Ratings:
    +1,324
    Religion:
    Follower of Christ
    Here is another expertly formulated speech.
    I'm giving the experts my full attention. Please... tell me...
    Why? What's the reason I should be ashamed?
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  17. Thief

    Thief Rogue Theologian

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    41,512
    Ratings:
    +3,348
    my God is better than your god....because....

    He is bigger, faster, stronger, most intelligent and greatly experienced

    if your god has the same attributes....
    it is the same God
     
  18. nPeace

    nPeace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2018
    Messages:
    4,802
    Ratings:
    +1,324
    Religion:
    Follower of Christ
    I did. Maybe not clear enough to you, but I stated the reason for that.
    Bear in mind, we've been through this before. This is a repeat.
    Let me take into consideration other factors. I'll go slowly.
    Maybe you did not understand that.
    I thought it was simple. Would you like to try again? If you still don't understand, i'll simplify it further.

    In case you don't understand what the above is saying...
    Please read the words that follow, in the post, again.

    What tests can we carry out in order to know what is reality?
    Try this one, and tell me what you come up with.
    Does anyone love you? How would you know? Can you prove it? Do you consider love for others an objective reality or not?
    Is it a reality that a person loves another? Can you demonstrate objectively that two people love each other?

    We can proceed from here.

    Don't know what you mean by that.

    You actually did time travel?
    Nope. Speculating? Is is okay if I speculate also, when giving an answer?

    Or when you ask an Atheist and unbeliever, "Is there a God?" and they say, "Nope."
    Nothing has changed.

    I don't understand the above two statements. They are making no sense to me.
    Truth is the best opinion... of the best informed people from time to time. o_O
    Is reality also relative to what is the best opinion?

    Then how can something that is wrong, be reality? Does reality come and go, according to hat man thinks he knows?

    Oh, I see. So your truth is opinions that are taken by a community, as the best.
    So is it wrong for a person to believes another opinion to be truth, or reality?
    What happens when it is found out that the person(s) who held to a different opinion, were right, and the community opinion was wrong... as has been so often the case?
    What happens to your reality

    I'm sorry blü 2, but this is one of the most :nomouth: things I have ever heard.

    Yes. We can definitely make absolute statements about reality, and if one can accept the crazy idea that reality is the best opinion, they might as well accept this one. Hebrews 3:4
    We often, base reality on what we know, in reality. Is that not true?
    However, there are other ways of determining reality. As I said, there are many.

    Oh. You did not answer my questions here... in the first paragraph.
     
  19. Thief

    Thief Rogue Theologian

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    41,512
    Ratings:
    +3,348
    well......in the scheme of superlatives

    my previous post stands

    if you like your cartoon rebuttal.....
    good luck standing before him
     
  20. nPeace

    nPeace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2018
    Messages:
    4,802
    Ratings:
    +1,324
    Religion:
    Follower of Christ
    I see no need to argue right and wrong here.
    The fact of the matter, is that some knowledge in the past before scientific discovery, was right. Some was wrong. Same as today.
    The only difference today, is improved and advanced instruments for study.
    Similar to when they used reed pens to write, but now use more modern pens. Or when brushes were stiff because of the material used, but now we have softer bristles.

    Study has continued from the start of humanity, and it's an ongoing process, that will not end.
     
Loading...