"The Origin of Specious Nonsense"

dlofnep · 03-11-2012 12:05AM

Galvasean wrote: »

Why a you no post in Palaeontology so much?!?!?

Preaching to the preached there

I'll make a special effort to visit it more often!

[-0-] · 03-11-2012 03:54AM

It would be great if the creationists read this book and tried to refute it. Failure to do so means they fail at life.

http://www.amazon.com/Why-Evolution-True-Jerry-Coyne/dp/B002ZNJWJU/ref=pd_rhf_dp_p_t_1

pauldla · 03-11-2012 08:17AM

[-0-] wrote: »

It would be great if the creationists read this book and tried to refute it. Failure to do so means they fail at life.

http://www.amazon.com/Why-Evolution-True-Jerry-Coyne/dp/B002ZNJWJU/ref=pd_rhf_dp_p_t_1

Some of the user comments there are magnificent. I'll be adding that book to my wishlist. Thanks [-0-]

(Is that meant to be a TIE fighter, btw?)

dlofnep · 03-11-2012 01:43PM

I have read Why Evolution is True from cover to back a number of times - it is the best introductory book on Evolution, and covers a broad range of topics. If you want to argue the evidence which proves why Evolution is indeed true, this is the book for it

It's my favourite book on the topic, including anything by Dawkins.

oldrnwisr · 03-11-2012 03:13PM

darjeeling wrote: »

I'm not religious, and I am a scientist. Unsurprisingly I think that fundamental literalist and pseudo-scientific approaches to the creation myths are wrong-headed. However, I do think the writers of Genesis were onto some key truths in the Adam and Eve myth.

They realised that sin requires understanding and knowledge, for it involves deliberately doing what you know to be wrong. They appreciated that in our potential for sin, we are set apart from less reasoning animals. Pleasingly, they even associated our sinfulness with our expanded crania - the cause of such difficult childbirth to Eve and all women after her ('in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children').

While we now know that we have a very different evolutionary history from that sketched in Genesis and we find the plot devices of the fruit and the serpent to be somewhat ridiculous, I still think the kernel of the myth resonates strongly: we sin when we mistreat others in a way that our evolved intelligence and empathy tell us that we should not.

I must disagree darjeeling. I don't think there is anything laudable in the Genesis narrative at any level. I certainly don't think to paraphrase your post that the authors (or more correctly editors) of Genesis had any understanding or knowledge.

If the authors really had the capacity to latch on to the truths you describe then it wouldn't be filled with the level of ignorance it contains. It wouldn't have the mistakes that it does, like that if you show striped patterns to cattle they'll have striped young:

"Jacob, however, took fresh-cut branches from poplar, almond and plane trees and made white stripes on them by peeling the bark and exposing the white inner wood of the branches. Then he placed the peeled branches in all the watering troughs, so that they would be directly in front of the flocks when they came to drink. When the flocks were in heat and came to drink, they mated in front of the branches. And they bore young that were streaked or speckled or spotted."
Genesis 30:37

or that bats are birds

"And these are they which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls; they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the ospray, and the vulture, and the kite after his kind; every raven after his kind; and the owl, and the night hawk, and the cuckow, and the hawk after his kind, and the little owl, and the cormorant, and the great owl, and the swan, and the pelican, and the gier eagle, and the stork, the heron after her kind, and the lapwing, and the bat."
Leviticus 11:13-19

or that insects have four legs

"All flying insects that walk on all fours are to be detestable to you. "
Leviticus 11:20

So that's a no for knowledge.

Now let's look at understanding.

These people had no capacity for understanding sin either, they certainly had a very poor moral compass what with being ok with animal sacrifice:

"And Abel also brought an offering—fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock. The Lord looked with favor on Abel and his offering"
Genesis 4:4

"He offered a sacrifice there in the hill country and invited his relatives to a meal. After they had eaten, they spent the night there."
Genesis 31:54

and genocide, wiping out innocent men, women and children and animals with no evident capacity for sin:

"So the Lord said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them.”
Genesis 6:7

The god depicted in Genesis (and the rest of the Pentateuch, which is compiled from the same sources) is insecure, petty vindictive, small-minded and vain. There is nothing laudable in Genesis and little of note either except as a reminder of how far we have come from the primitive ignorant barbarism of the tribal goatherders who compiled this book (a word I use in its loosest sense).

Sarky · 03-11-2012 03:19PM

<looks at Leviticus>

God created an awful lot of abominations. Was he a jerk or just lacking in talent?

pauldla · 03-11-2012 03:34PM

Sarky wrote: »

<looks at Leviticus>

God created an awful lot of abominations. Was he a jerk or just lacking in talent?

Well, in fairness to him, what being with that level of power isn't going to go off the rails now and again?

No shrimp!
But...why?
Because I said so! Now, make the funny face again. Now jump on one leg. Bleat! Bleat like a little lamb! Send away all your disabled people, I can't stand them the sight of them. Especially the guys with the crushed testicles, they freak me out. Bring me more ice-cream!

Lev. 11:9–12; Lev. 21:18–23

Bannasidhe · 03-11-2012 03:37PM

pauldla wrote: »

Well, in fairness to him, what being with that level of power isn't going to go off the rails now and again?

No shrimp!
But...why?
Because I said so! Now, make the funny face again. Now jump on one leg. Bleat! Bleat like a little lamb! Send away all your disabled people, I can't stand them the sight of them. Especially the guys with the crushed testicles, they freak me out. Bring me more ice-cream!

Lev. 11:9–12; Lev. 21:18–23

Sometimes when reading that there book I get the distinct impression someone, somewhere, was making it up as they went along....

Galvasean · 03-11-2012 05:12PM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Sometimes when reading that there book I get the distinct impression someone, somewhere, was making it up as they went along....

Mind = Blown :pac:

darjeeling · 03-11-2012 08:02PM

oldrnwisr wrote: »

I must disagree darjeeling. I don't think there is anything laudable in the Genesis narrative at any level. I certainly don't think to paraphrase your post that the authors (or more correctly editors) of Genesis had any understanding or knowledge.

If the authors really had the capacity to latch on to the truths you describe then it wouldn't be filled with the level of ignorance it contains. It wouldn't have the mistakes that it does, like that if you show striped patterns to cattle they'll have striped young:

[..snipped for avoiding mass quoting..]

The god depicted in Genesis (and the rest of the Pentateuch, which is compiled from the same sources) is insecure, petty vindictive, small-minded and vain. There is nothing laudable in Genesis and little of note either except as a reminder of how far we have come from the primitive ignorant barbarism of the tribal goatherders who compiled this book (a word I use in its loosest sense).

Well, I actually referred to one particular myth alone, and not to any of what you've mentioned here. I don't - and haven't said - that I think Genesis is either a source of scientific fact or of morality.

I do though think that some myths are useful shortcuts to thinking about ideas. If we look at the way that artists and dramatists have depicted some familiar myth as a way of getting their audience quickly up to speed with what's going on, and then gone on to explore that myth in a new and unfamiliar way that overturns preconceptions, I think we can see the value of myths.

The Genesis myth about the dawn of humanity is one such example. This year is the 500th anniversary of the Sistine Chapel ceiling frescoes, well known to us now, but shocking in their day for their bold humanist vision. And in our own time, the parallel Promethean myth can provide a germ for sci-fi epics.

This post seems to have taken us some way off where we started, but perhaps that rather proves the point!

murphyaii · 22-01-2013 03:39PM

quote from sir isaac newton

” This thing [a scale model of our solar system] is but a puny imitation of a much grander system whose laws you know, and I am not able to convince you that this mere toy is without a designer and maker; yet you, as an atheist, profess to believe that the great original from which the design is taken has come into being without either designer or maker! Now tell me by what sort of reasoning do you reach such an incongruous conclusion?”

:cool::cool::cool:

Sarky · 22-01-2013 03:44PM

You know Newton was also an alchemist? That's the thing about people who change the world. They're usually batsh*t insane.

Could you try harder plzkthx?

Beruthiel · 22-01-2013 03:46PM

Well that's me questioning everything I've believed up to now....

pauldla · 22-01-2013 03:49PM

murphyaii wrote: »

quote from sir isaac newton

” This thing [a scale model of our solar system] is but a puny imitation of a much grander system whose laws you know, and I am not able to convince you that this mere toy is without a designer and maker; yet you, as an atheist, profess to believe that the great original from which the design is taken has come into being without either designer or maker! Now tell me by what sort of reasoning do you reach such an incongruous conclusion?”

:cool::cool::cool:

Newtown didn't write in bright blue fonts....

seamus · 22-01-2013 03:52PM

If there's a designer, then who designed the designer?

Newton may have been brilliant in many ways, but he was an exceptionally eccentric man, often irrational in non-mathematical matters.

He had a great understanding of the physical but struggled greatly with the philosophical. Possibly because there was no way to express it experimentally or mathematically.

Just because Newton said something, doesn't mean it's right.

22-01-2013 03:56PM

murphyaii wrote: »

quote from sir isaac newton*

*Citation needed

robindch · 22-01-2013 04:00PM

Going into the creationism thread unless anybody has any objections?

Bannasidhe · 22-01-2013 04:04PM

robindch wrote: »

Going into the creationism thread unless anybody has any objections?

Banish it to Room 101 by all means.

Edit: This appears to be the source of that gem of a quote http://www.evolutionnews.org/2005/11/dont_bash_it_til_youve_tried_o001656.html

22-01-2013 04:05PM

I didn't know blue font was a challenge to atheism

mickrock · 22-01-2013 04:06PM

Sarky wrote: »

You know Newton was also an alchemist? That's the thing about people who change the world. They're usually batsh*t insane.

A modern type of alchemy in biology is turning one species into another by blind, undirected means. Sheer folly.

Beruthiel · 22-01-2013 04:07PM

bluewolf wrote: »

I didn't know blue font was a challenge to atheism

It's not.

Everyone knows that it's black, with a hint of purple running through it.

Bannasidhe · 22-01-2013 04:08PM

bluewolf wrote: »

I didn't know blue font was a challenge to atheism

Well green ink is a challenge to sloppy historical writing so....

22-01-2013 04:08PM

Beruthiel wrote: »

It's not.

Everyone knows that it's black, with a hint of purple running through it.

A challenge?

kiffer · 22-01-2013 04:09PM

28064212 wrote: »

*Citation needed

In fairness I can imagine him saying it along with "Cats have magical powers".
It doesn't matter who said what, it only matters what you can prove.

If some one proves a mathematical theorem it doesn't matter to maths if they are a jerk or the nicest person in the world... they'd still be right.
Similarly someone can be right about a hundred things and wrong about a hundred other things.
The fact that they have been right or wrong before doesn't make them right or wrong now.

22-01-2013 04:14PM

kiffer wrote: »

In fairness I can imagine him saying it along with "Cats have magical powers".
It doesn't matter who said what, it only matters what you can prove.

Oh I know that, but the OP's seemingly sole reason for believing the initial premise is based on who said it. If Newton didn't say it, then the whole argument for the OP falls over, without even needing to get into the numerous fallacies contained within the statement.

And given the only "original" source I can find that claims Newton said it is a creationist book written by a couple who believe the sun revolves round the earth, I think the claim is doubtful at best

EDIT: Dammit robin, now you subscribed me to this thread *Unfollows*

robindch · 22-01-2013 04:14PM

There we go. Banished.

Sarky · 22-01-2013 04:16PM

mickrock wrote: »

A modern type of alchemy in biology is turning one species into another by blind, undirected means. Sheer folly.

You haven't bothered your arse to read up on biology or evolution like we recommended, have you? Why are you so happy to remain ignorant?

Beruthiel · 22-01-2013 04:19PM

Sarky wrote: »

Why are you so happy to remain ignorant?

I've heard it's bliss.

Delirium · 22-01-2013 04:20PM

robindch wrote: »

There we go. Banished.

:eek::eek:

mickrock · 22-01-2013 04:24PM

Sarky wrote: »

You haven't bothered your arse to read up on biology or evolution like we recommended, have you? Why are you so happy to remain ignorant?

You're getting worked up because, deep down, you know what I said might be true.

"The Origin of Specious Nonsense"

Comments