Go  |
New |
Find |
Notify |
|
Reply |
|
Admin |
New PM! |
|
quote: Originally posted by Pearson29:
He made a documentary last year in which he spent the whole time claiming that there's no evidence to prove that there's any validity in certain alternative ideas, yet he avoided looking at the evidence at every turn. I don't dislike him, I've met him and I think he's actually very smart but he let himself down.
1. That doesn't answer my question. 2. What evidence was he ignoring? |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Pearson29:
He made a documentary last year in which he spent the whole time claiming that there's no evidence to prove that there's any validity in certain alternative ideas, yet he avoided looking at the evidence at every turn. I don't dislike him, I've met him and I think he's actually very smart but he let himself down.
It was entertaining but not well thought out, and you're right he didn't look at any evidence. |
| |
|
|
What evidence did he ignore?
|
| |
|
New Member
|
quote: Originally posted by splatt: quote: Originally posted by Pearson29:
He made a documentary last year in which he spent the whole time claiming that there's no evidence to prove that there's any validity in certain alternative ideas, yet he avoided looking at the evidence at every turn. I don't dislike him, I've met him and I think he's actually very smart but he let himself down.
It was entertaining but not well thought out, and you're right he didn't look at any evidence.
I was disappointed by it. I thought it was going to be more thorough than it was, and there were way too many "givens". |
| |
|
|
Hello, hello, is this thing on?
What evidence did he ignore?
|
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by splatt:
It was entertaining but not well thought out, and you're right he didn't look at any evidence.
He also ignored all the evidence of the flying spaghetti monster. Shoddy piece of work.
Atheism - a non-prophet organisation
|
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by splatt:
It was entertaining but not well thought out, and you're right he didn't look at any evidence.
If something is fake and there is no evidence, what is there to look at. He actually set up an experiment to obtain some evidence on the veracity of water dowsing. Guess what, the test showed the dowsers could no do what they said they could do, when they accepted the challenge.
Atheism - a non-prophet organisation
|
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by splatt:
It was entertaining but not well thought out, and you're right he didn't look at any evidence.
I get the distinct impression that this was the intention of the programme. |
| |
|
|
truth seeker wrote quote: I was disappointed by it. I thought it was going to be more thorough than it was, and there were way too many "givens".
Not just a few "givens" but "way too many givens". What on earth are you on about? |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Pearson29:
I get the distinct impression that this was the intention of the programme.
Could mods please do an IP address check on some of these noobs. A sudden influx of people all of whom ignore the same questions, all of whom seem to just be agreeing with each other and ignoring the more established members, and all of whom are interested in the same thread necromancy has my spidey sense tingling. |
| |
|
|
Luis Garcia, the documentary didn't really go into any of the areas in any depth, that's what I meant. I'm not ignoring you, sorry if I gave that impression.
|
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by splatt:
Luis Garcia, the documentary didn't really go into any of the areas in any depth, that's what I meant. I'm not ignoring you, sorry if I gave that impression.
Apology accepted. Now please could you show me what evidence you think Dawkins ignored? |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by splatt:
Luis Garcia, the documentary didn't really go into any of the areas in any depth, that's what I meant. I'm not ignoring you, sorry if I gave that impression.
Richard Dawkins deliberately failed to ask important questions, and chose instead to simply assert his opinions rather than making a proper documentary. It was a very amateur job but entertaining nonetheless. |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Pearson29: quote: Originally posted by splatt:
Luis Garcia, the documentary didn't really go into any of the areas in any depth, that's what I meant. I'm not ignoring you, sorry if I gave that impression.
Richard Dawkins deliberately failed to ask important questions, and chose instead to simply assert his opinions rather than making a proper documentary. It was a very amateur job but entertaining nonetheless.
The problem with odd ball beliefs such as creationism or dowsing or astrology or the power of pyramids or reiki or chakras is that they are totally absurd and there is not a shred of evidence for them. Consequently, we should just ignore them as the pile of demented garbage that they are. However, we are confronted by the horrifying fact that millions of people happen to believe in such absurdities. Therefore we have a dilemma. We are forced to give these ludicrous beliefs some consideration, not because there is any evidence for them, but just because so many deluded individuals take them seriously. So, if you decide to make a documentary about such things, how can you "ask the right questions" or present any "evidence"? There are no right questions and there is no evidence to present on such stuff. It's just bunk. |
| |
|
New Member
|
quote: Originally posted by Milan K:
The problem with odd ball beliefs such as creationism or dowsing or astrology or the power of pyramids or reiki or chakras is that they are totally absurd and there is not a shred of evidence for them. Consequently, we should just ignore them as the pile of demented garbage that they are. However, we are confronted by the horrifying fact that millions of people happen to believe in such absurdities. Therefore we have a dilemma. We are forced to give these ludicrous beliefs some consideration, not because there is any evidence for them, but just because so many deluded individuals take them seriously.
So, if you decide to make a documentary about such things, how can you "ask the right questions" or present any "evidence"? There are no right questions and there is no evidence to present on such stuff. It's just bunk.
Do you really think that it's more horrfying that some people happen to have odd beliefs than the fact that others have nothing better to do than obsess over those people? I find it quite sad myself how you'd rather spend your time creating an atmosphere of hostility than just saying live and let live. If you're really that willing to let differences of opinion get in the way of friendly conversation then I feel sorry for you. |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Truth.seeker:
Do you really think that it's more horrfying that some people happen to have odd beliefs than the fact that others have nothing better to do than obsess over those people?
I find it quite sad myself how you'd rather spend your time creating an atmosphere of hostility than just saying live and let live. If you're really that willing to let differences of opinion get in the way of friendly conversation then I feel sorry for you.
So the fact that your taxes get wasted on these things, that they cause needless suffering and that people do sometimes die because of this kind of woo doesn't bother you? |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Truth.seeker:
Do you really think that it's more horrfying that some people happen to have odd beliefs than the fact that others have nothing better to do than obsess over those people?
I find it quite sad myself how you'd rather spend your time creating an atmosphere of hostility than just saying live and let live. If you're really that willing to let differences of opinion get in the way of friendly conversation then I feel sorry for you.
Agreed. Apparently it's more important to massage one's overinflated ego by belittling those who commit the crime of having a different opinion, than it is to agree to disagree. |
| |
|
|
quote: So the fact that your taxes get wasted on these things, that they cause needless suffering and that people do sometimes die because of this kind of woo doesn't bother you?
splatt/truth.seeker/pearson29 Any chance of addressing LG's point? Thought not! |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by splatt:
Agreed. Apparently it's more important to massage one's overinflated ego by belittling those who commit the crime of having a different opinion, than it is to agree to disagree.
Sigh. If you would like to present a claim that you think Dawkins specifically missed or didn't address properly, then we have something to discuss. And you will be asked to provide evidence for your claims. If, however, you would like to continue massaging your overinflated ego by pretending that you're right and I'm just "belittling" you by taking your claims seriously enough to ask for evidence of them, then this is going to be painful. |
| |
|
|
.....Breaking news! Mystery solved!
splatt/truth.seeker/pearson29 are the same person (as we suspected). The IT guy at my place can track/check anything!
|
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Truth.seeker:
Do you really think that it's more horrfying that some people happen to have odd beliefs than the fact that others have nothing better to do than obsess over those people?
What you call obsessing, most people would call education. |
| |
|
New Member
|
No, obsessing is much more apt, seeing as you don't seem to be doing much "educating".
|
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Truth.seeker:
No, obsessing is much more apt, seeing as you don't seem to be doing much "educating".
I do what I can. Some people don't seem to be too interested in being educated, though. |
| |
|
New Member
|
The Dawkins was not fair for the peple that he talked with bcause it was ovious how the intentin of the programe was to be in the start of it. If this was not the true then no one would say it but many people sat it.
|
| |
|
|
Fran: whatever point you were trying to make is lost. I truly have no idea what you are trying to say.
Atheism - a non-prophet organisation
|
| |
|
|
