Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Extract   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9  [ show all ]
InvisibleMr. Mushrooms
Spore Print Collector
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/25/08
Posts: 13,018
Loc: Registered: 6/04/02
Re: Intelligent design is a religion? Not! [Re: GhengisKhan]
    #10378972 - 05/21/09 09:57 PM (14 years, 8 months ago)

:lol:

Thanks.  You know though, cogency depends on credulity.  There's a logical fallacy in there somewhere. :wink:


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleBlimeyGrimey
Collector of Spores
Male


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/24/05
Posts: 3,790
Loc: Puget Sound
Re: Intelligent design is a religion? Not! [Re: Mr. Mushrooms]
    #10379521 - 05/22/09 12:12 AM (14 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Mr. Mushrooms said:
Argument By Fast Talking

If you go from one idea to the next quickly enough, the audience won't have time to think. This is connected to Changing The Subject and (to some audiences) Argument By Personal Charm.

However, some psychologists say that to understand what you hear, you must for a brief moment believe it. If this is true, then rapid delivery does not leave people time to reject what they hear.




That is also called the "Gish Gallop". Named after Duane Gish who uses that exact tactic in his debates against evolution.

Never accept what someone has to say if they are using the "Gish" tactics.


--------------------
Message me for free microscopy services on Psilocybe, Panaeolus, and Gymnopilus species.

Looking for wild Panaeolus cinctulus and Panaeolus olivaceus prints.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineShirakawasuna
Stranger
Registered: 05/17/09
Posts: 66
Last seen: 14 years, 7 months
Re: Intelligent design is a religion? Not! [Re: Mr. Mushrooms]
    #10379835 - 05/22/09 01:44 AM (14 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Mr. Mushrooms said:


If you came here to talk to me you're going to be severely disappointed by your style of posting.  Around here we call it:

Argument By Fast Talking

If you go from one idea to the next quickly enough, the audience won't have time to think. This is connected to Changing The Subject and (to some audiences) Argument By Personal Charm.

However, some psychologists say that to understand what you hear, you must for a brief moment believe it. If this is true, then rapid delivery does not leave people time to reject what they hear.

And

Argument By Question

Asking your opponent a question which does not have a snappy answer, or no snappy answer that the audience has the background to understand. Your opponent has a choice: he can look weak or he can look long-winded.

For example, "How can scientists expect us to believe that anything as complex as a single living cell could have arisen as a result of randomness?" To answer this question requires either a long, boring explanation or a snappy explanation only if the audience is already versed in thermodynamics.

Actually, pretty well any question has this effect to some extent. It usually takes longer to answer a question than ask it.

Variants are the rhetorical question, and the loaded question, such as "Have you stopped beating your wife?" or "Have evolutionary scientists found a continuum of transitional species in the fossil record?"

The Fallacies of Philosophical Debate.





And you'd almost have a point *if* you even took the time to answer the most basic questions and counterpoints repeatedly offered to you.  That I have found many weaknesses in your posts is not a fallacy.  That you don't have enough time to respond to them is not a fallacy, although you sure seem to have enough time to write up tangential responses.  That is the situation as it is: some rather poor arguments on your side, a large number of refutations on our side, and a lot of avoiding answering those refutations.  When you start spending more time complaining about how little time you have than actually answering for the most basic flaws in the reasoning of your posts, it's clear that rationalization or public appearances has taken the place of debate.

Quote:

Mr. Mushrooms said:

Maybe you missed this part:

If someone wants me to respond to a point several criteria should be met, considering I've mentioned several times my time is limited by other priorities:

1)  Be brief.




Nope, I haven't missed your pleading for a refutation that's offered in a few bite-sized chunks.  I wouldn't want to skip over too many errors, lest you think they don't exist.  Then again, I've asked you the same question many times, which highlights the fact that you don't really want that.  I'll ask again: what is a testable hypothesis derived from ID?

Quote:

Mr. Mushrooms said:

This  is even more telling.




Link fail.  It's nice to see that you still think the proper response to a criticism is to 'turn it back around' and provide no defense.  Of course, I haven't claimed to have no time and then spent what appears to be a rather significant amount of time investigating you :wink:.

You know, when Ghengis Khan said to take all the time you need, I had an idea: how about rather than posting inane rationalizations for why you won't answer simple critiques or on rudeness (lol) or making condescending comments with no intent to back them up, you simply do what academic honesty calls for, but do it *slowly*?  You accomplish nothing by posting tangential, poorly-supported nonsense all the while avoiding substantive debate.  Instead, if you don't have time, go ahead and slowly construct your counterarguments with whatever free time you have.  I'll wait.  I only post when you say something ridiculous.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineShirakawasuna
Stranger
Registered: 05/17/09
Posts: 66
Last seen: 14 years, 7 months
Re: Intelligent design is a religion? Not! [Re: Shirakawasuna]
    #10379855 - 05/22/09 01:52 AM (14 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

BlimeyGrimey said:

That is also called the "Gish Gallop". Named after Duane Gish who uses that exact tactic in his debates against evolution.

Never accept what someone has to say if they are using the "Gish" tactics.




Yes, only in the Gish Gallop a large number of claims are said in a short period of time, making it difficult to provide refutations for all of them as each refutation takes longer than each of Gish's claims.  There are several ways that's not the case here.  First, Mr. Mushrooms has quite a few claims which demand attention and he has made a rather large number of them (hint hint).  I have responded, I will admit, fairly voluminously, but I also take care to provide actual arguments for my conclusions and to explain why I think he is wrong.  That is not Gish-like at all, instead it is more the position of the people who have to deal with that tactic.  And rather than running down a list to which no one could possibly reply (there are time limits in debates), Mr. Mushrooms has all the time in the world: I will wait for him to come up with good responses.  I will post very little more so long as he stops making silly claims.  He wastes his own time by *choosing* to post little bits of nonsense rather than address the weaknesses of his claims.

I wouldn't 'point bomb' anyone, in a debate.  From my perspective, essentially every point I have made has been directly related to the topic of this thread and the potential resolution of any differences.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleBlimeyGrimey
Collector of Spores
Male


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/24/05
Posts: 3,790
Loc: Puget Sound
Re: Intelligent design is a religion? Not! [Re: Shirakawasuna]
    #10380130 - 05/22/09 04:16 AM (14 years, 8 months ago)

I wasn't referring to the Gish Gallop to compare it to you.

I was simply stating that what Mr. Mushrooms was describing was called the Gish Gallop.

"Never accept what someone has to say if they are using the "Gish" tactics."

That wasn't directed at you. Its just a general rule of thumb when dealing with people.

This is a long thread and I jumped from page 4 to here.


--------------------
Message me for free microscopy services on Psilocybe, Panaeolus, and Gymnopilus species.

Looking for wild Panaeolus cinctulus and Panaeolus olivaceus prints.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineShirakawasuna
Stranger
Registered: 05/17/09
Posts: 66
Last seen: 14 years, 7 months
Re: Intelligent design is a religion? Not! [Re: BlimeyGrimey]
    #10383493 - 05/22/09 06:50 PM (14 years, 8 months ago)

No worries, I didn't mean to imply that you were accusing me of it, either, BlimeyGrimey.  Just adding in a commentary.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMr. Mushrooms
Spore Print Collector
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/25/08
Posts: 13,018
Loc: Registered: 6/04/02
Re: Intelligent design is a religion? Not! [Re: GhengisKhan]
    #10400773 - 05/26/09 08:17 AM (14 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

GhengisKhan said:

Here is a short attempt at discrediting irreducible complexity, specified complexity, and the explanatory filter:

Irreducible complexity is basically the idea that a complex system fails if one of its parts are absent. And since evolution is a gradual force, ID proponents ask, how could all these parts evolve to work in synchrony? Their argument fails to take into account that the individual parts could have previously evolved for another reason before becoming an integrated part of the complex system (This was shown to be true of the flagella motor in the Dover Trial). ID proponents often use the analogy of the mousetrap that doesn't work without all its parts. But I saw a guy take out one of the parts and use it as a nice tie clip! Also, sometimes in evolution, parts are often removed, leaving a complex streamlined system. [snip]




As I explained in another thread I am reading this link before I reply in detail.  Check it out.  It's quite intense.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9  [ show all ]

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Extract   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* How would one go about testing the Intelligent Design Theory?
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )
dr0mni 11,882 103 05/17/09 02:49 AM
by Darwinian
* humans as intelligent designers OldWoodSpecter 1,542 15 09/12/05 12:04 PM
by BlueCoyote
* Bush Wants Kids Taught 'Intelligent Design' In Biology Class
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )
DiploidM 14,158 102 08/10/05 12:54 AM
by MushmanTheManic
* intelligent design or evolution? tak 2,737 18 08/12/04 12:46 AM
by Strumpling
* Intelligent Design newuser1492 667 2 06/23/05 11:06 AM
by Silversoul
* Intelligent Design
( 1 2 all )
djd586 3,245 22 12/18/03 03:32 PM
by fireworks_god
* I want to debate a "creation scientist".
( 1 2 3 4 ... 11 12 all )
Phluck 16,418 232 12/01/04 04:26 PM
by Diploid
* Stoopid Design
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )
DiploidM 8,613 115 09/30/05 02:52 AM
by Diploid

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
15,567 topic views. 1 members, 4 guests and 4 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.022 seconds spending 0.005 seconds on 13 queries.