I didn't know whether this belonged in the science or religion forum.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GN9zpf5cT0M
| Kirk Cameron wrote: |
On November 21st 2009, the world will celebrate the 150th year since the publication of Charles Darwin's book origin of species.
Now when my friend Ray Comfort heard about this, and that the book was public domain, he actually wrote a 50 page introduction for the book which gives the history of evolution, a time line of Darwin's life, Adolf Hitler's undeniable connection with the theory, Darwin's racism, his disdain for women and Darwin's thoughts on the existence of god, and put them in the book.
It also lists the theory's many hoaxes. It exposes the unscientific belief that nothing created everything. etc. etc. |
Sheesh. Unfortunately, there are certainly many idiots running around. Let's analyze some of what Mr. Cameron wrote...
| Kirk Cameron wrote: |
| On November 21st 2009, the world will celebrate the 150th year since the publication of Charles Darwin's book origin of species. |
Ok. Nothing wrong here.... Let's move on...
| Quote: |
| Now when my friend Ray Comfort heard about this, and that the book was public domain, he actually wrote a 50 page introduction |
Woah...Woah...Woah! And Comforts qualifications are???
| Quote: |
| for the book which gives the history of evolution, a time line of Darwin's life, Adolf Hitler's undeniable connection with the theory, Darwin's racism, his disdain for women and Darwin's thoughts on the existence of god, and put them in the book. |
This pretty much pisses me off... Christians love to try and connect evolution to Hitler in a disgusting attempt to make Christians think that only evil people can believe the theory when it actually doesn't even attack the theory... That's almost like an ad hominen attack (not exactly, but similar)...
| Quote: |
| It also lists the theory's many hoaxes. It exposes the unscientific belief that nothing created everything. etc. etc. |
The same hoax and "belief" that created all of the medicines and technologies that we take for granted today? The same hoax that eradicated smallpox and increased the human lifespan about three times? I need to stop before I get myself all mad... I always have a nice chuckle when people play Darwin off as this crazed lunatic trying to create perfect people. Never mind this:
| Quote: |
| Darwin was interested by his half-cousin Francis Galton's argument, introduced in 1865, that statistical analysis of heredity showed that moral and mental human traits could be inherited, and principles of animal breeding could apply to humans. In The Descent of Man Darwin noted that aiding the weak to survive and have families could lose the benefits of natural selection, but cautioned that withholding such aid would endanger the instinct of sympathy, "the noblest part of our nature", and factors such as education could be more important. When Galton suggested that publishing research could encourage intermarriage within a "caste" of "those who are naturally gifted", Darwin foresaw practical difficulties, and thought it "the sole feasible, yet I fear Utopian, plan of procedure in improving the human race", preferring to simply publicize the importance of inheritance and leave decisions to individuals. |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin
-.-
Also a nice chuckle when the attack is "something cannot come from everything, you contradict your own science." Sorry, you're the one who believes it came from nothing; I do not. [MOD - it clearly doesn't belong in the science forums, so I think your choice was correct - Bikerman]
They are still trying the same aren´t they....
looking forward to some hilarious debunks. On a side note both of them are embarrasing to the human intelect.....
I'm sorry to bump a two month old thread, but I felt the need to add an update to this discussion. In the video (or maybe another video I watched), it was mentioned that they were going to be handing out these books for free at UC Berkley. Well I guess they have now made it down south because today, their faculty (or volunteers, or whatever) were at UC Riverside with boxes of these books handing them out for free. I was approached and I proceeded to cuss the guy out. I am not usually a rude person, but this situation makes me really mad. You have many scientists who dedicate their lives to making our lives better! You then have someone who's criminally uneducated who wants to set us back to the stone age and convince people to discredit this wonderful process that makes our lives better... You then deface a valuable science book with your garbage. That's essentially what I told the guy (however I excessively used the f**k, mother******, b****, etc.). After I cussed him out, and calmed down, I debated him for about 20 minutes to no success. It was a typical creationism vs. reason debate. He was using typical arguments. It was essentially a waste of my time. At the very end, I made the person mad by refusing to take the book home to read. I told him that I wouldn't waste my time with that piss stain but that I would maybe have taken it if I didn't already own an unaltered version of The Origin of Species.
| Afaceinthematrix wrote: |
| I'm sorry to bump a two month old thread, but I felt the need to add an update to this discussion. In the video (or maybe another video I watched), it was mentioned that they were going to be handing out these books for free at UC Berkley. Well I guess they have now made it down south because today, their faculty (or volunteers, or whatever) were at UC Riverside with boxes of these books handing them out for free. I was approached and I proceeded to cuss the guy out. I am not usually a rude person, but this situation makes me really mad. You have many scientists who dedicate their lives to making our lives better! You then have someone who's criminally uneducated who wants to set us back to the stone age and convince people to discredit this wonderful process that makes our lives better... You then deface a valuable science book with your garbage. That's essentially what I told the guy (however I excessively used the f**k, mother******, b****, etc.). After I cussed him out, and calmed down, I debated him for about 20 minutes to no success. It was a typical creationism vs. reason debate. He was using typical arguments. It was essentially a waste of my time. At the very end, I made the person mad by refusing to take the book home to read. I told him that I wouldn't waste my time with that piss stain but that I would maybe have taken it if I didn't already own an unaltered version of The Origin of Species. |
I like learning and if had the opportunity to walk the grounds at UC Riverside or Berkley I would use intelligence to persuade and not go MAD. I’ve always liked americans but not the ones that resort to madness with their gun talk, their foul language and their hostile attitudes. You are a blight to the land. I can respect different points of view but these kind of posts simply devalue any point that is being made. Shame on you!
________________________________________________________
God creates creatures of love. Foul men make monsters for war. | Bluedoll wrote: |
| Afaceinthematrix wrote: | | I'm sorry to bump a two month old thread, but I felt the need to add an update to this discussion. In the video (or maybe another video I watched), it was mentioned that they were going to be handing out these books for free at UC Berkley. Well I guess they have now made it down south because today, their faculty (or volunteers, or whatever) were at UC Riverside with boxes of these books handing them out for free. I was approached and I proceeded to cuss the guy out. I am not usually a rude person, but this situation makes me really mad. You have many scientists who dedicate their lives to making our lives better! You then have someone who's criminally uneducated who wants to set us back to the stone age and convince people to discredit this wonderful process that makes our lives better... You then deface a valuable science book with your garbage. That's essentially what I told the guy (however I excessively used the f**k, mother******, b****, etc.). After I cussed him out, and calmed down, I debated him for about 20 minutes to no success. It was a typical creationism vs. reason debate. He was using typical arguments. It was essentially a waste of my time. At the very end, I made the person mad by refusing to take the book home to read. I told him that I wouldn't waste my time with that piss stain but that I would maybe have taken it if I didn't already own an unaltered version of The Origin of Species. |
I like learning and if had the opportunity to walk the grounds at UC Riverside or Berkley I would use intelligence to persuade and not go MAD. I’ve always liked americans but not the ones that resort to madness with their gun talk, their foul language and their hostile attitudes. You are a blight to the land. I can respect different points of view but these kind of posts simply devalue any point that is being made. Shame on you!
________________________________________________________
God creates creatures of love. Foul men make monsters for war. |
I don't think showing frustration with openly idiotic creationists is akin to making war. | Bluedoll wrote: |
I like learning and if had the opportunity to walk the grounds at UC Riverside or Berkley I would use intelligence to persuade and not go MAD. I’ve always liked americans but not the ones that resort to madness with their gun talk, their foul language and their hostile attitudes. You are a blight to the land. I can respect different points of view but these kind of posts simply devalue any point that is being made. Shame on you!
________________________________________________________
God creates creatures of love. Foul men make monsters for war. |
I don't need that "shame on me" thank you very much. Science makes all of our lives better. It has cured diseases such as polio and increased the human life span about three times. You then have a group of people with crazy beliefs that want to get this wonderful thing that makes my life better out of schools! Even though biology has done so much to make our lives better, these morons are purposely lying and selling (in this case, giving away) disinformation and setting us down a road that will lead to everyone's demise... They do this (trying to ruin all of our lives) simply for their crazy bronzed age beliefs. How selfish and anti-social of them! I had every right to get angry because what they're doing directly affects me and everyone else in society. So I don't need you to put shame or other crap on me.
As you just said, God may create creatures of love, but he certainly doesn't show any love with all those people he killed in the Bible (and when I pointed this out to the guy, he justified it by saying that God can do whatever he wants and I pointed out to him that he was being morally despicable). | Afaceinthematrix wrote: |
| I'm sorry to bump a two month old thread, but I felt the need to add an update to this discussion. In the video (or maybe another video I watched), it was mentioned that they were going to be handing out these books for free at UC Berkley. Well I guess they have now made it down south because today, their faculty (or volunteers, or whatever) were at UC Riverside with boxes of these books handing them out for free. I was approached and I proceeded to cuss the guy out. I am not usually a rude person, but this situation makes me really mad. You have many scientists who dedicate their lives to making our lives better! You then have someone who's criminally uneducated who wants to set us back to the stone age and convince people to discredit this wonderful process that makes our lives better... You then deface a valuable science book with your garbage. That's essentially what I told the guy (however I excessively used the f**k, mother******, b****, etc.). After I cussed him out, and calmed down, I debated him for about 20 minutes to no success. It was a typical creationism vs. reason debate. He was using typical arguments. It was essentially a waste of my time. At the very end, I made the person mad by refusing to take the book home to read. I told him that I wouldn't waste my time with that piss stain but that I would maybe have taken it if I didn't already own an unaltered version of The Origin of Species. |
People write books and people read them. Then they decide for themselves what they wish to believe and what they want to focus on in the future. If you feel strongly about something you can do something about it . You can write about it.
You are completely missing my point. I don’t care if you are frustrated or what you need! You are ‘mad’ because someone wrote a book that you don’t agree with. If you don't agree with something you can write a book with the opposite idea or a book report.
What you do is get mad and write complete garbage. Because it is garbage I wouldn’t support your cause even if I agreed with some of it. Smarten up and write something worth reading. You can take your anger, deposit it in a toilet along with your lousy words and what you stand for. Take that!
God is a friend of mine and I do believe he is wonderful creator. The one that is being morally despicable is you! If you have problem with my posts why don’t you go and cry on your mothers breast.
________________________________________
Love is battlefield | Bluedoll wrote: |
People write books and people read them. Then they decide for themselves what they wish to believe and what they want to focus on in the future. If you feel strongly about something you can do something about it . You can write about it.
You are completely missing my point. I don’t care if you are frustrated or what you need! You are ‘mad’ because someone wrote a book that you don’t agree with. If you don't agree with something you can write a book with the opposite idea or a book report.
What you do is get mad and write complete garbage. Because it is garbage I wouldn’t support your cause even if I agreed with some of it. Smarten up and write something worth reading. You can take your anger, deposit it in a toilet along with your lousy words and what you stand for. Take that!
God is a friend of mine and I do believe he is wonderful creator. The one that is being morally despicable is you! If you have problem with my posts why don’t you go and cry on your mothers breast.
________________________________________
Love is battlefield |
I don't care if someone has a different opinion than me on something. I also don't care if they write a book on it. I simply won't read the book. What I do care about is when someone sells disinformation that will set us back to the stone ages. I believe that you're the one who doesn't understand what I am saying. I am mad because this is something that directly affects me and everyone else in society! These morons are trying to openly stop production in science and keep important discoveries from happening. These are probably the same people who are proponents of stem cell research, despite the huge possibilities.
And excuse me? How am I the one who's being morally despicable? I'm not the one who's condoning or endorsing the ruthless murder of the first born child of every Egyptian, global mass genocide from a great flood, the destruction of Soddomm and Gomorah, etc. Anyone who worships a god that does that and calls that god a loving god and tries to base their morality on that god is, in my opinion, morally despicable and completely sick and anti-social.[MOD - I am watching this thread closely. So far it has strayed towards personal abuse, but I don't judge that it has yet crossed the line. Please ensure that it does not. Bikerman]
Now, on the substantive point - Comfort is a well know fundamentalist creationist, as is his 'co-author' Kirk Cameron. Clearly neither of them has any scientific credentials (or knowledge, judging from what I have heard from Comfort), so any revised version of 'Origin' that they have 'authored' will, undoubtedly, be scientifically dubious (even if you ignore the fact that they have a creationist agenda).
They are clearly within their rights to distribute their nonsense ('Origin' has been out of copyright for some time) and, whilst I deplore their attempt to brainwash US students, I strongly suspect that the majority will see straight through it. My guess is that only students who already have creationist beliefs will be interested in their 'magnum opus'.
Watch this space I guess....
You know, Afaceinthematrix, if you really want to undermine Comfort's publicity stunt - which i think is a worthwhile endeavour - you can try one of the following options. The first option is definitely safer, but the latter packs a powerful wallop.
First, in any case, get yourself a copy of Comfort's edition of Origin of Species. Read it through - both Comfort's 50 page intro and the Darwin text itself (to verify that he hasn't bastardized it; it was originally written in English, so there is no need for Comfort to have edited one single word of Darwin's). Then write your own intro to the Comfort edition of Origin of Species; probably the cheapest way to do that is to put your intro online and hand out cards with the URL to anyone who takes a copy of the book.
So what to put in your intro? Well....
Option A
Identify all of the specious bullshit in Comfort's intro (and any notes he has throughout the text), and pick out his major arguments. Some we can already guess at: ad hominem attacks against Darwin, and claims that Hitler's racial purity theories come from Darwin.
Then in your own intro, dismember Comfort's arguments, claim by claim. It won't be hard; the man has the intellect of an unripe tomato. Don't try to go claim/counter-claim with Comfort - he'll just repeat his points ad nauseum louder and more strident than you - instead, deconstruct the form of Comfort's arguments. For example, point out that even if Darwin was the biggest bastard that ever lived, that has no bearing on the truth of his theory: you could offer Einstein as a counter-example - Einstein cheated on every woman he ever had a relationship with, at one point carrying on an affair with his own cousin, and he discarded most of his children like old garbage and even at one point terrorized his wife with a list of "conditions" she would have to follow or he would divorce her (she had to do his laundry, make his meals on time, and keep his study clean, etc.)... is General Relativity in doubt because Einstein was a prick?
Option B
Go after Comfort directly.
Question his competence in Darwinian scholarship, or the theory of evolution. Use Comfort's own record as evidence of his incompetence: the banana affair works well, for example.
Be vicious. Point out the fact that he has no education of relevance. Point out his repeated intellectual dishonesty, including making claims he cannot follow through on (like in the Nightline debate, where he claimed he would not resort to scriptures, then did), or the stunt he pulled with Thunderf00t. Hunt down the nastiest quotes and things the guy has done and put them to paper.
Then give the reader an honest synopsis of Darwin's life, and direct them to read the text of the book. Let them decide who to trust.
| Indi wrote: |
| probably the cheapest way to do that is to put your intro online and hand out cards with the URL to anyone who takes a copy of the book. |
Although probably a difficult task, the fun thing to do would be: Follow your idea with handing out cards. But instead of handing them out at random, find everywhere Comfort's cronies are going to be handing out their nonsense (probably largely on college campuses) and go stand right next to them when handing out your cards. | Indi wrote: |
You know, Afaceinthematrix, if you really want to undermine Comfort's publicity stunt - which i think is a worthwhile endeavour - you can try one of the following options. The first option is definitely safer, but the latter packs a powerful wallop.
First, in any case, get yourself a copy of Comfort's edition of Origin of Species. Read it through - both Comfort's 50 page intro and the Darwin text itself (to verify that he hasn't bastardized it; it was originally written in English, so there is no need for Comfort to have edited one single word of Darwin's). Then write your own intro to the Comfort edition of Origin of Species; probably the cheapest way to do that is to put your intro online and hand out cards with the URL to anyone who takes a copy of the book.
So what to put in your intro? Well.... |
You know, I was thinking that. I was thinking that I should actually read Comfort's writings. I am completely disappointed with myself that I didn't end up keeping the book they handed to me. Instead, I told them that I already owned a real copy of the book and that I didn't need Comfort's garbage.
Also, I am sure that Comfort did edit some of Darwin's work because I own On the Origin of Species and the version that the Creationist handed me, even with Comfort's 50 page introduction, was significantly shorter.
| Quote: |
Option A
Identify all of the specious bullshit in Comfort's intro (and any notes he has throughout the text), and pick out his major arguments. Some we can already guess at: ad hominem attacks against Darwin, and claims that Hitler's racial purity theories come from Darwin.
Then in your own intro, dismember Comfort's arguments, claim by claim. It won't be hard; the man has the intellect of an unripe tomato. Don't try to go claim/counter-claim with Comfort - he'll just repeat his points ad nauseum louder and more strident than you - instead, deconstruct the form of Comfort's arguments. For example, point out that even if Darwin was the biggest bastard that ever lived, that has no bearing on the truth of his theory: you could offer Einstein as a counter-example - Einstein cheated on every woman he ever had a relationship with, at one point carrying on an affair with his own cousin, and he discarded most of his children like old garbage and even at one point terrorized his wife with a list of "conditions" she would have to follow or he would divorce her (she had to do his laundry, make his meals on time, and keep his study clean, etc.)... is General Relativity in doubt because Einstein was a prick? |
I do agree that deconstructing the form of an argument is better because the Creationist is more likely to get it. Actually, I did do that quite a bit. I argued with the guy for about 20 minutes (after I cussed him out). I deconstructed his argument forms. I used all of the techniques taught in any basic logic class about showing how an argument can be considered invalid. Unfortunately, he (and this woman he was with but that didn't talk nearly as much) just didn't get it. One example was this:
Creationist: If God doesn't exist, where did the universe come from?
Me: First off, you're assuming that nothing is a default over something. How can nothing exist? Those two words contradict each other. Besides, we can stand here all day debating the formation of the universe but given that neither of us have a Ph.D. in physics, we are not qualified. So I'll just ask you a question, "Where did God come from?"
Creationist: God has always existed.
Me: Ok, then the universe has always existed.
Creationist: But where did it come from?
Me: Where did God come from?
Creationist: God has always existed!
Me: Do you seriously not see the flaw in your logic?
Creationist: No. I have no flaws. I just have the truth.
Me: You seriously don't see it? How can God always exist but the universe cannot have always existed?
Creationist: I don't know how God operates.
Another example was one that you mentioned. What about Hitler's undeniable association with the theory of evolution? Well I simply responded with two points (well I actually responded with one, and then asked a question). The first point was the one you probably expect: Hitler's association says absolutely nothing about the validity of the theory or the massive amounts of evidence. So that argument is flawed. Furthermore, you must accept that it's flawed or else you may have trouble answering my next question: What about Hitler's undeniable association with Christianity? His response: Hitler wasn't a Christian.
So I did try to reconstruct his arguments. I was going at them from the core but Mr. Creationists' logic skills were so poor that he couldn't even see the massive contradiction in existence that I pointed out to him. We also spent some time on actual arguments where my claims were brought by deaf ears.
| Quote: |
Option B
Go after Comfort directly.
Question his competence in Darwinian scholarship, or the theory of evolution. Use Comfort's own record as evidence of his incompetence: the banana affair works well, for example.
Be vicious. Point out the fact that he has no education of relevance. Point out his repeated intellectual dishonesty, including making claims he cannot follow through on (like in the Nightline debate, where he claimed he would not resort to scriptures, then did), or the stunt he pulled with Thunderf00t. Hunt down the nastiest quotes and things the guy has done and put them to paper.
Then give the reader an honest synopsis of Darwin's life, and direct them to read the text of the book. Let them decide who to trust. |
I wouldn't want to go to Comfort directly. I saw how miserable any attempts would be by watching the Thunderf00t debate (by the way, for anyone who's interested, Thunderf00t just uploaded a new video yesterday about this whole situation and he does call Comfort and Cameron out on much of their bullshit). Over the past few days I've realized that it's probably more productive to put my efforts into doing something like option A, and preventing this kind of nonsense from spreading than to waste time with people that are so far down the line that they'll most likely never come back. My friend (Xanatos - he used to post here if you remember him) simply looked at the guy and said, "I don't need any of your Creationist bullshit" and he kept walking and then he waited for me about 100 feet away. He said that he gets tired of dealing with people that are too far down the line to even consider other viewpoints.
I'm beginning to think that he's right. Option A seems much more productive. However, I missed my easiest chance. If I had thought about doing something like that two months ago, I could have had something prepared for Wednesday when they were actually at my school! But I didn't know they'd be coming by. Cameron, in the video, mentioned going to UC Berkley. My guess is that they probably had volunteers (because I know their style - they won't go anywhere themselves unless they have a camera and an easy way to emotionally rape some random person) hit up all ten campuses in the "UC System."
