|
|
#31
05-06-2006, 01:33 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: $250,000 reward for proving evolution
guesswest,
[ QUOTE ] and as far as I can tell, he's agreeing with you. [/ QUOTE ] I know, and as I said in other words, the fact that he agrees with me based on some gibberish of his, doesn't enhance my credibility. LOL 
|
|
#32
05-06-2006, 09:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $250,000 reward for proving evolution
[ QUOTE ]
That’s just my point. Such a “no standard at all” DOES NOT EXCLUDE setting however high a standard may be necessary to avoid issuing the prize, regardless of whether there is any intention to do so. [/ QUOTE ] If it is your point, you've termed it badly. A standard presupposes some kind of vaguely objective system. Claiming that Hovind's complete lack of objectivity represents some kind of higher standard, which was the original claim I responded to, is obviously false. Claiming that Hovind's complete lack of objectivity allows him to refuse to award the prize is clearly true, but has nothing to do with whether he has a higher standard of proof than scientists in general.
|
|
#33
05-06-2006, 10:00 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $250,000 reward for proving evolution
[ QUOTE ]
guesswest, [ QUOTE ] and as far as I can tell, he's agreeing with you. [/ QUOTE ] I know, and as I said in other words, the fact that he agrees with me based on some gibberish of his, doesn't enhance my credibility. LOL [/ QUOTE ] The two amazing things in this thread are that Sharkey either doesnt see himself in Hovind's attacks on the scientific method or is pretending not to, and that posters other than Midge don't see his almost certain motivation for pretending not to.
|
|
#34
05-06-2006, 12:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $250,000 reward for proving evolution
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] guesswest, [ QUOTE ] and as far as I can tell, he's agreeing with you. [/ QUOTE ] I know, and as I said in other words, the fact that he agrees with me based on some gibberish of his, doesn't enhance my credibility. LOL [/ QUOTE ] The two amazing things in this thread are that Sharkey either doesnt see himself in Hovind's attacks on the scientific method or is pretending not to, and that posters other than Midge don't see his almost certain motivation for pretending not to. [/ QUOTE ] I agree completely with Midge (and you). The fact that Sharkey seems to be turning his back on Hovind only serves to make him a hypocrite.
|
|
#35
05-06-2006, 12:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $250,000 reward for proving evolution
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] That’s just my point. Such a “no standard at all” DOES NOT EXCLUDE setting however high a standard may be necessary to avoid issuing the prize, regardless of whether there is any intention to do so. [/ QUOTE ] If it is your point, you've termed it badly. A standard presupposes some kind of vaguely objective system. Claiming that Hovind's complete lack of objectivity represents some kind of higher standard, which was the original claim I responded to, is obviously false. Claiming that Hovind's complete lack of objectivity allows him to refuse to award the prize is clearly true, but has nothing to do with whether he has a higher standard of proof than scientists in general. [/ QUOTE ] My terminology is correct for what I mean to say. A careful investigator avoids jumping to conclusions. Though there certainly is the appearance of unfair play, it’s bad form to make sweeping statements using information from your “mind reading” skills. It’s better to base one’s case on hard facts. What we can say from the site is that the offer of reward has left an “out” such that, if confronted by the data of a serious researcher, the ante can always be raised to some higher standard not being met. The offer’s ambiguity leaves access to all standards, high and low.
|
|
#37
05-07-2006, 03:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $250,000 reward for proving evolution
Correct me if I am wrong, but I was taught that fruit flys were really good solid evidence that evolution does happen. This may not be what he is looking for, but it's pretty close right?
|
|
#38
05-07-2006, 06:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $250,000 reward for proving evolution
Microevolution definitely happens. Undeniably. However, he specifically excludes that. He includes, however, the big bang and the creation of the planets and a bunch of other stuff that has nothing to do with evolution.
|
|
#39
05-08-2006, 09:02 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $250,000 reward for proving evolution
AKAIK, Hovind groups both biological and cosmic evolution in the same basket - and has admitted that nothing short of recreating the big bang in the lab will suffice as proof. He's an interesting character though, and very intelligent. I still think he's a donk though - like a smooth talking snake-oil salesman [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] Ringo
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
