Read Books By AWers!

Welcome to the AbsoluteWrite Water Cooler! Please read The Newbie Guide To Absolute Write

editing for authors ad

A publisher or agency using Google ads to solicit your novel probably isn't anyone you want to write for.


Go Back   Absolute Write Water Cooler > Writing Genre > Science Fiction/Fantasy > Science Fact
Register FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-04-2012, 06:13 PM   #26
Abderian
practical experience, FTW
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 193
Abderian is well-respected
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeshatBooks View Post
Sadly, Abderian, you have read what you wanted to read, not what I have written. I did not say that evolutionary scientists were doubting evolution, I said that they had doubts about the mechanisms, and that this demonstrated that the theory is unproven. The standard scientific method is to start from observations, state an hypothesis, derive experiments to test the hypothesis and validate predictions. When has that ever been done for GTE? If the mechanisms are unknown, how can one perform scientific experiments? So many like to claim that the General Theory of Evolution is scientifically proven, but no-one can attest to any scientific experiments that demonstrate that proof.
I am open to believing that GTE is true, it is just that there is no scientific proof. SETI researchers like to believe that alien intelligence exists, but again, there is no scientific proof.
Belief in evolution is faith, because there is no scientific proof for it. If you disagree, offer that proof.
Yes, you've got it right about standard scientific method. Which is why starting from the premise that a book written a few thousand years ago is the litereal truth about the origin of life on this planet is not scientific method.

Peshat Books seeks to challenge secular issues such as evolution on their own merits as genuine scientific theories (or otherwise), to demystify Holy Scripture, and to invite others of a similar mind to join the conversation on alternate interpretations that contend with orthodox Christian beliefs.

Now please stop pretending that you aren't a Creationist who is simply trying to attack evolutionary theory because it contradicts your belief system.

Last edited by Abderian; 05-04-2012 at 06:19 PM.
Abderian is offline  
Old 05-04-2012, 06:15 PM   #27
Abderian
practical experience, FTW
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 193
Abderian is well-respected
Is there no way to get this thread deleted? The OP is clearly has an agenda that is nothing whatsoever to do with writing science fiction. This forum is not a site for evangelists to spout their religious beliefs.
Abderian is offline  
Old 05-04-2012, 07:11 PM   #28
RichardGarfinkle
Shipping Tropos
AW Moderator
 
RichardGarfinkle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Around a star
Posts: 7,516
RichardGarfinkle is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsRichardGarfinkle is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsRichardGarfinkle is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsRichardGarfinkle is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsRichardGarfinkle is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsRichardGarfinkle is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsRichardGarfinkle is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsRichardGarfinkle is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsRichardGarfinkle is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsRichardGarfinkle is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsRichardGarfinkle is so great that we've run out of appropriate compliments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abderian View Post
Is there no way to get this thread deleted? The OP is clearly has an agenda that is nothing whatsoever to do with writing science fiction. This forum is not a site for evangelists to spout their religious beliefs.
That is true, and it might be worth locking the thread. But deleting it removes valuable information for people coming later. Like who the OP is, the information you gleaned from the site, and what the arguments made for and against are.

This stuff keeps coming up. It's good to have the arguments and information available rather than having to rebuild everything from scratch.
__________________
Evolution: Survival of that which fits well enough, enough times in enough situations.

Overdue Considerations -- my blog


Now on Smashwords
RichardGarfinkle is offline  
Old 05-04-2012, 07:29 PM   #29
Alessandra Kelley
Sophipygian
AW Moderator
 
Alessandra Kelley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Posts: 10,135
Alessandra Kelley is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAlessandra Kelley is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAlessandra Kelley is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAlessandra Kelley is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAlessandra Kelley is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAlessandra Kelley is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAlessandra Kelley is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAlessandra Kelley is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAlessandra Kelley is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAlessandra Kelley is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAlessandra Kelley is so great that we've run out of appropriate compliments
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeshatBooks View Post
OK, quote where I have done that?
Why do people assume that just because they have doubts about evolution theory, they automatically advance creationism? In logic, that is called the logical fallacy of the false alternative. Perhaps you are not aware that Francis Crick, co-discoverer of the double helix, also expressed doubts about GTE and favoured panspermia, that life came from another planet. Why are people not able to debate the mechanisms of evolution without resorting to God and creationism?
The problem with that particular hypothesis is, how did life on the other planet get started? All it is doing is shifting the starting point conveniently away from Earth. But it never accounts for how life got started in the first place, wherever it may have been.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abderian View Post
Is there no way to get this thread deleted? The OP is clearly has an agenda that is nothing whatsoever to do with writing science fiction. This forum is not a site for evangelists to spout their religious beliefs.
AW doesn't delete threads. There are some pretty revelatory old things to read around here.
__________________
Don't be so proud of this teleological terror you've constructed.


Alessandra Kelley, Fine Art, Illustration, and Egg Tempera Instruction
"Confessions of a Postmodern Pre-Raphaelite" -- my blog
Alessandra Kelley is offline  
Old 05-04-2012, 07:44 PM   #30
Shadow_Ferret
Did I do that?
 
Shadow_Ferret's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: In a world of my own making
Posts: 22,957
Shadow_Ferret is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsShadow_Ferret is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsShadow_Ferret is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsShadow_Ferret is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsShadow_Ferret is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsShadow_Ferret is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsShadow_Ferret is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsShadow_Ferret is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsShadow_Ferret is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsShadow_Ferret is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsShadow_Ferret is so great that we've run out of appropriate compliments


I've never understood the argument that because there might be debate and differing theories on how the mechanism behind evolution works that that somehow invalidates that evolution is a Scientific fact.
__________________
Twitter | Pinterest | WordPress | Tumblr

“I love words but I don’t like strange ones. You don’t understand them and they don’t understand you. Old words is like old friends, you know ‘em the minute you see ‘em.” -- Will Rogers

"Blame it on my ADD, baby." -- AWOLNATION
Shadow_Ferret is offline  
Old 05-04-2012, 09:12 PM   #31
Friendly Frog
practical experience, FTW
 
Friendly Frog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Belgium
Posts: 645
Friendly Frog is a shiny, shiny jewelFriendly Frog is a shiny, shiny jewel
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeshatBooks View Post
Isn't it interesting how many people immediately bring God and creationism into the argument even when it was not initially raised.
Probably because there is no scientific basis to reject evolution on. But religion keeps trying, so where you find people saying evolution doesn't exist or work or is a faith of its own, you will more often than not find religion behind it. The site that has the same name as your username appears to confirm it. To be honest, I was kind of curious when you would start promoting your own book.

What is interesting is that germ theory, despite being another scientific theory, never seem to attract as much people trying to disprove it as evolution does.

Also, panspermia does not say life originated on another planet, but that the building-blocks of life may have come from out of space which would include meteors, planetoids and other matter. (Meteors have been said to contain aminoacids, the building blocks of life, but not living organisms. Don't know whether that was eventually confirmed.) The panspermia only speaks about how life could have arrived on the planet, it says little or nothing about evolution.
Friendly Frog is offline  
Old 05-04-2012, 09:26 PM   #32
FalconMage
Sockpuppet
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Midwest, USA
Posts: 218
FalconMage is on a distinguished road
I'm pretty convinced that this isn't an attempt at discussion, but a form of hit farming for his site. I haven't gone, and now refuse to do so. And with that, I'm done.
FalconMage is offline  
Old 05-04-2012, 09:56 PM   #33
BigWords
Geekzilla
 
BigWords's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: inside the machine
Posts: 10,682
BigWords is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsBigWords is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsBigWords is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsBigWords is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsBigWords is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsBigWords is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsBigWords is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsBigWords is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsBigWords is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsBigWords is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsBigWords is so great that we've run out of appropriate compliments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abderian View Post
Certainly, there are additional layers not understood by the original recipients, but this can never invalidate the simple truth, else God is not trustworthy.[/I]
(bolding mine.)

OT

As I understand religious teaching, we are made in God's (or the gods') image. Fine. Lets deal with that for just a second. Human beings have the capacity for falsehood, therefore - being in the image of the creator(s) - they, also, must have the capacity for falsehood. We already know that God(s) have a weird sense of humor, if they indeed exist, as we can look at the duck-billed platypus and have a good chortle, so God(s) must have the capacity for deception and falsehoods. God(s), as far as I am concerned, is/are most certainly untrustworthy.

/OT
__________________
The blog, which may not be updated regularly enough. -- I'm linking to other AW blogs here. -- There's some nonsense here when I can be bothered.
Don't hold your breath...

Quote:
Originally Posted by AbielleRose View Post
Dude, I am not that flexible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aliwood View Post
The SFF Review Educational Supplement is now open. I'll be listing books, podcasts, online courses and anything else that aims to help the SFF writer improve their skills, provided they're free. (the books, podcasts, online courses and anything else, not the writers)




The British Comics Database is growing. Or mutating. I'm not quite sure which, yet.
BigWords is offline  
Old 05-04-2012, 10:31 PM   #34
Alessandra Kelley
Sophipygian
AW Moderator
 
Alessandra Kelley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Posts: 10,135
Alessandra Kelley is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAlessandra Kelley is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAlessandra Kelley is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAlessandra Kelley is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAlessandra Kelley is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAlessandra Kelley is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAlessandra Kelley is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAlessandra Kelley is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAlessandra Kelley is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAlessandra Kelley is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAlessandra Kelley is so great that we've run out of appropriate compliments
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigWords View Post
(bolding mine.)

OT

As I understand religious teaching, we are made in God's (or the gods') image. Fine. Lets deal with that for just a second. Human beings have the capacity for falsehood, therefore - being in the image of the creator(s) - they, also, must have the capacity for falsehood. We already know that God(s) have a weird sense of humor, if they indeed exist, as we can look at the duck-billed platypus and have a good chortle, so God(s) must have the capacity for deception and falsehoods. God(s), as far as I am concerned, is/are most certainly untrustworthy.

/OT
First off, your quote is of Abderian quoting PeshatBooks, which Abderian unfortunately did in a way which was not obvious. But the quote is PB's.

I have a very religious Christian friend, whose sincerity and thoughtfulness I do not doubt, who has shown me by example about his god: That one can have faith in God, but that as a limited human one does not necessarily understand God. That the obvious meaning is not always true. That people should not stop thinking for themselves just because someone says they can trust God. That only a foolish person would declare that they understand God.
__________________
Don't be so proud of this teleological terror you've constructed.


Alessandra Kelley, Fine Art, Illustration, and Egg Tempera Instruction
"Confessions of a Postmodern Pre-Raphaelite" -- my blog
Alessandra Kelley is offline  
Old 05-04-2012, 10:41 PM   #35
BigWords
Geekzilla
 
BigWords's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: inside the machine
Posts: 10,682
BigWords is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsBigWords is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsBigWords is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsBigWords is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsBigWords is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsBigWords is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsBigWords is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsBigWords is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsBigWords is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsBigWords is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsBigWords is so great that we've run out of appropriate compliments
The line bugged me, and I should have paid more attention to the attribution. The whole "complete trust" moment in any religious conversation - where the infallibility and complete benevolence are oft highlighted - really, really gets to me. I love the idea that we can't possibly know what goes on in a deity's thought process, and the assumption of qualities we cannot know (the trustworthy part, in this instance) is one of my trigger issues. There are a few religions which encourage the questioning of the motives of God(s), and those - for me, anyway - see to have a more logical process of belief than the big monotheistic religions.

And I seem to have derailed this thread enough for one day...
__________________
The blog, which may not be updated regularly enough. -- I'm linking to other AW blogs here. -- There's some nonsense here when I can be bothered.
Don't hold your breath...

Quote:
Originally Posted by AbielleRose View Post
Dude, I am not that flexible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aliwood View Post
The SFF Review Educational Supplement is now open. I'll be listing books, podcasts, online courses and anything else that aims to help the SFF writer improve their skills, provided they're free. (the books, podcasts, online courses and anything else, not the writers)




The British Comics Database is growing. Or mutating. I'm not quite sure which, yet.
BigWords is offline  
Old 05-05-2012, 12:10 AM   #36
AceTachyon
Odd person
 
AceTachyon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The Lair, CA
Posts: 6,211
AceTachyon is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAceTachyon is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAceTachyon is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAceTachyon is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAceTachyon is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAceTachyon is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAceTachyon is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAceTachyon is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAceTachyon is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAceTachyon is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAceTachyon is so great that we've run out of appropriate compliments


Your turn, Peshat.
__________________
--Ace

AceTachyon is offline  
Old 05-05-2012, 12:11 AM   #37
AceTachyon
Odd person
 
AceTachyon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The Lair, CA
Posts: 6,211
AceTachyon is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAceTachyon is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAceTachyon is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAceTachyon is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAceTachyon is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAceTachyon is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAceTachyon is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAceTachyon is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAceTachyon is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAceTachyon is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsAceTachyon is so great that we've run out of appropriate compliments
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigWords View Post
And I seem to have derailed this thread enough for one day...
You could always talk about kilts, sir....
__________________
--Ace

AceTachyon is offline  
Old 05-05-2012, 01:14 AM   #38
RichardGarfinkle
Shipping Tropos
AW Moderator
 
RichardGarfinkle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Around a star
Posts: 7,516
RichardGarfinkle is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsRichardGarfinkle is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsRichardGarfinkle is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsRichardGarfinkle is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsRichardGarfinkle is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsRichardGarfinkle is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsRichardGarfinkle is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsRichardGarfinkle is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsRichardGarfinkle is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsRichardGarfinkle is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsRichardGarfinkle is so great that we've run out of appropriate compliments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow_Ferret View Post


I've never understood the argument that because there might be debate and differing theories on how the mechanism behind evolution works that that somehow invalidates that evolution is a Scientific fact.
I think this comes from the diametrically opposed views of doubt in belief and science. For people whose views are founded in belief, doubt and opposing views are signs of weakness. The true believer has no doubts.

In science the challenge of reasoned doubt backed up with sound theory and evidence refines the science being doubted and produces stronger and deeper understanding. Thus what is strength in science looks like weakness to belief.

Sadly, a lot of people, even those without strong religious convictions accept the idea that solidity of belief is strength of understanding. So it's hard to make clear why the rigor of challenge in science makes the theories stronger, and shows the accuracy of the theories that stand up to the challenge.

The other problem with this is that it takes understanding to know whether or not a challenge is meaningful. In most sciences that understanding takes a lot of time and effort to learn, and a lot of people haven't spent the time and effort, so they can't tell whether an argument actually is a real challenge or not.

Note: I used the word belief not faith since the most faithful person I know has no trouble with doubt, since he doesn't think his limited human understanding encompasses all.
__________________
Evolution: Survival of that which fits well enough, enough times in enough situations.

Overdue Considerations -- my blog


Now on Smashwords
RichardGarfinkle is offline  
Old 05-05-2012, 01:45 AM   #39
Mara
Clever User Title
 
Mara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 1,964
Mara has a double-platinum reputationMara has a double-platinum reputationMara has a double-platinum reputationMara has a double-platinum reputationMara has a double-platinum reputationMara has a double-platinum reputationMara has a double-platinum reputation
I noticed that in his sea of quoted posts, he didn't address mine.

Jesus wasn't a fan of superstition, and he definitely wasn't a fan of dishonesty. Or of people who claimed him when convenient (such as on this guy's website) and denied him when it might make them look bad (such as in this conversation.) Oh, and I believe that people who cynically tried to make a buck and get fame off of Christianity were not especially held in high regard, either. See Simon the Sorceror.

I particularly love the post where this guy demands someone buy and read his book before they can argue with him. Seriously, how blatant can you get?
__________________
I can never remember to update this signature.
Mara is offline  
Old 05-05-2012, 02:02 AM   #40
Once!
Still confused by shoelaces
 
Once!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Godalming, England
Posts: 1,422
Once! has earned our admirationOnce! has earned our admirationOnce! has earned our admirationOnce! has earned our admiration
Surely the difference is this ...

Science looks at the evidence and advances a theory. Science doesn't say that this theory is the final word on the matter. It's just the best explanation that we can come up with to fit the evidence we have.

By contrast, religion says that we already have an explanation and it is the final word. Everything else must be wrong.

There is overwhelming evidence that the world wasn't created in six days, that woman was not created from Adam's rib and that the earth isn't flat. We can see evolution in action. Astronomy shows us that the stars are quite clearly moving outwards from a fixed point and time in space, which ... ahem ... kind of points to a big smoking gun called the big bang.

Okay, so science doesn't understand everything. We are still refining and improving our theories as more evidence comes to light. Isn't that what rational beings do? Does it mean that the basic theories were wrong? Of course it doesn't.

BTW, Dawkins annoyed the hell out of me because I found many of his arguments to be poorly reasoned. Not the best advert for atheism. He is far stronger when he demonstrates evolution than when he tries to disprove the existence of God. But he doesn't annoy me half as much as the anti-Dawkins industry with their almost total lack of logic and objectivity.
Once! is offline  
Old 05-05-2012, 02:07 AM   #41
Pthom
practical experience, FTW
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 7,017
Pthom is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsPthom is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsPthom is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsPthom is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsPthom is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsPthom is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsPthom is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsPthom is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsPthom is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsPthom is so great that we've run out of appropriate complimentsPthom is so great that we've run out of appropriate compliments
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeshatBooks View Post
Isn't this a writers' forum, with promotion of one's work a valid activity?
This particular forum, "Science Fact," is only for discussing facts of science.

There is another forum for book promotion. It is here.

I am closing this thread, because it has ceased to be a discussion of facts, and has even ceased to be a discussion of scientific theory. Take arguments and personal attacks/defenses elsewhere, folks.
__________________
~ Vita Brevis, Ars Longa ~
Pthom is offline  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Custom Search

If this site is helpful to you,
Please consider a voluntary subscription to defray ongoing expenses.

Buy Scrivener 2 for Mac OS X (Regular Licence)


All times are GMT +4.5. The time now is 06:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.