skyking
Child
By the way the only thing that I have been challenged on was my statement the Dawkins in closed minded.
No you have also been accused of being closed minded and of not knowing what theory actually was due to using it in a way which showed you've no idea what it means in a scientific context, as well as characterising various of us and the scientific community as a whole as closed minded. Nice of you to keep up.
It's been made very clear to you that science changes if shown to be wrong; religion and paranormal remains the same.
Traditional ideas of Creation can be shown to be wrong, people retain other unsubstantiated beliefs associated with it. Paranormal events do not occur under scientific observation, but are treated as credible as those that can.
Yes you are right there is not one chance in hell you could convenience me that Dawkins is not closed minded.
Oh, you're so closed minded skyking!
lovelylil
Come on guys, give skyking a break! Everyone is entitled to thier personal opinions. I don't like Dawkins very much either. Lets face it, he is not everyone's cup of tea. Peace, Lilly
Where has anyone been denied their personal opinions? People's personal opinions have been criticised, but this is a DISCUSSION board! Skyking variously criticises or ignores the scientific method and the results thereof. This doesn't bother me in the slightest, nor any scientist, as the scientific method encourages criticism.
Yet skyking resents having the lack of evidence existing to support his opinions pointed out or having the credulity required to hold such opinions highlighted.
After all life is a constant journey of learning new things.
If only this were true for everyone. For some, it isn't. I don't expect skyking to change his tune.
I do know from experience that such discussions with stalwart supporters of unscientific mumbo-jumbo, (whether it be new-age paranormal rubbish or traditional religious beliefs) is actually of great benefit to many whose opinions shift as they can see the unsupported fanciful nature of such belief systems exposed time and time again in discussion.
You have to realise YOUR reaction to someone who worshipped a small rock they called Henry, whom they credited with Creation, 9/11 and tooth-decay, who held that catsup and plastic were the sole causes of cancer, would be roughly the same as mine to many claims by religious people or paranormalists.
I think people instinctively defend the beliefs of people whose beliefs conform to the same level of viability as those; people who believe in fairies don't throw stone at those who believe in Unicorns or UFO's. This is because people are aware if they critique the belief of someone whose beliefs are as supported or unsupported as theirs they are opening theirs to such criticism.
Obviously this means that scientists defend other scientists; but the scientific method corrects error so the viability of such things is high.
Religious and paranormal belief do not correct their errors; they ignore them or paper-over them.
