Posted on 07/24/2003 1:55:39 PM PDT by Mr.Atos
I was just lisening to Medved debating Creationism with Athiests on the air. I found it interesting that while Medved argued his side quite effectively from the standpoint of faith, his opponents resorted to condescension and beliitled him with statements like, "when it rains, is that God crying?" I was reminded of the best (at least most amusing)debate that I have ever heard on the subject of Creationism vs Evolution, albeit a fictional setting. It occurred on the show, Friends of all places between the characters Pheobe (The Hippy) and Ross (The Paleontologist). It went like this...
Pheebs: Okay...it's very faint, but I can still sense him in the building...GO INTO THE LIGHT MR. HECKLES!!
Ross: Whoa, whoa, whoa. What, uh, you don't believe in evolution? Pheebs: Nah. Not really. Ross: You don't believe in evolution? Pheebs: I don't know. It's just, ya know, monkeys, Darwin, ya know, it's a, it's a nice story. I just think it's a little too easy.
Ross: Uh, excuse me. Evolution is not for you to buy, Phoebe. Evolution is scientific fact. Like, like, the air we breathe, like gravity... Pheebs: Uh, okay, don't get me started on gravity.
Ross: You uh, you don't believe in gravity? Pheebs: Well, it's not so much that ya know, like I don't *believe* in it, ya know. It's just...I don't know. Lately I get the feeling that I'm not so much being pulled down, as I am being pushed.
Ross: How can you NOT BELIEVE in evolution? Pheebs: [shrugs] I unh-huh...Look at this funky shirt!!
Ross: Well, there ya go. Pheebs: Huh. So now, the REAL question is: who put those fossils there, and why...?
Ross: OPPOSABLE THUMBS!! Without evolution, how do YOU explain OPPOSABLE THUMBS?!? Pheebs: Maybe the overlords needed them to steer their spacecrafts!
Pheebs: Uh-oh! Scary Scientist Man!
Pheebs: Okay, Ross? Could you just open your mind like, *this* much?? Okay? Now wasn't there a time when the brightest minds in the world believed that the Earth was flat? And up until what, like, fifty years ago, you all thought the atom was the smallest thing, until you split it open, and this like, whole mess o' crap came out! Now, are you telling me that you are so unbelievably arrogant that you can't admit that there's a teeny, tiny possibility that you could be wrong about this?!?
Pheebs: I can't believe you caved. Ross: What? Pheebs: You just ABANDONED your whole belief system! I mean, before, I didn't agree with you, but at least I respected you. Ross: But uh.. Pheebs: Yeah...how...how are you gonna go in to work tomorrow? How...how are you gonna face the other science guys? How...how are you gonna face yourself? Oh! [Ross runs away dejected] Pheebs: That was fun. So who's hungry?
This is sad, because g3k is one of a handful of creationists who likes to debate science. There is a remarkable contrast between the way Andrew handles himself and the way gore handles himself. Its partly a matter of patience. A matter of assembling the sources and arguments before posting. A matter of speaking directly to the content of the opposing post.
And having a thick skin. I can understand the anger at being ridiculed, but if someone ridicules your ideas you need to come back with ideas -- another source, a better explanation, another approach.
A most excellent book, by Ursula Le Guin. The ultimate Murphy's law story, and a morality play on the "be careful what you ask for, you may just get it" lesson.
We have people eager and willing to debate that. And you have allies on this thread.
That may be due to the fact that I have not been constantly made the local pack's fire hydrant by some, although that has been attempted.[clack][clack].
Thank you, but I do fire back.
Fair enough, but I am going to appeal to gore one more time. If your ideas are being ridiculed, stand up for them by re-explaining them. That does not include blanket statements that major evo scientists are racists, communists, nazis. Not only is that a gross exaggeration, but it is also completely irrelevant. If the ideas are bad, attack the ideas with better ideas.
But not in absusive or ridiculing manner, which is important. A debate with you is never frustrating, in that sense.
Are you denying my "allegation"?
Just as soon as we all get out of therapy...
Most of us don't try to collect a Nobel for our mangled version. We can't float on air. When the scientific literature doesn't support what we said--maybe even directly contradicts it--the literature wasn't written by liars. To stay square with the facts, we have to be able to be wrong. We hope our pants never fall down in public, but if they do, we can't be shy about pulling them back up.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.