home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   talk.philosophy.humanism      Humanism in the modern world      22,193 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 21,888 of 22,193   
   Malte Runz to All   
   Re: What if atheists could somehow be pr   
   05 Oct 14 14:23:38   
   
   XPost: alt.atheism, alt.agnosticism, sci.skeptic   
   XPost: alt.christnet   
   From: malte_runz@forgitit.dk   
      
   "felix_unger"  skrev i meddelelsen news:c9buv6F3hbsU1@mid.individual.net...   
   >   
   > On 05-October-2014 11:20 AM, Malte Runz wrote:   
   >   
      
   (snip)   
      
   > > We gain nothing by rendering definitions meaningless, and that's what he   
   > > is doing.   
   >   
   > I do nothing of the sort. ...   
      
   If a grainy image of an out of focus blob in sky and the testimony of   
   tormented souls is 'evidence that Aliens have visited Earth' in the same way   
   that DNA constitutes evidence for evolution, then it is exactly what you are   
   doing.   
      
   > ... I simply use the normal definition of evidence, as I have told you   
   > repeatedly, so you should bloodywell know by now!   
      
   A strange 'footprint' and the bloody carcas of deer in the forrest is not   
   evidence for Bigfoot. It's evidence of peoples vivid imagination, if nothing   
   else.   
      
      
   > > He ends up having to defend the possible existence of Dog-Heads   
   >   
   > Lets suppose that we want to discuss the existence of your dogheads. What   
   > are we going to say we will do? will we say.. "Let's discuss the reports   
   > of/about, the sightings of, any testimony about, the writings about, any   
   > documents relating to, the oral tradition about, any known interactions   
   > with, any artifacts of, the habitats of, and anything else we can think of   
   > relating to, the dogheads." of course not! ...   
      
   We should, though, because it would show us that there really isn't any   
   evidence at all.   
      
   > ... we would simply say "Let's examine the EVIDENCE for the dogheads"   
   > which would encompass all of that! duh!   
      
   And we would be wrong. Grainy blobs and smears in the mud can be   
   /interpreted/ to be evidence of pretty much anything. I see confirmation   
   bias everywhere!   
      
      
   --   
   Malte Runz   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca