More On Conspiracy Theories and Emotional "Thinking"
This article will probably cost me some friends.
In the past couple of years, I feel like I have learned ten years worth of information. And quite a bit of it is people-related. Humans are an odd bunch, the more I learn about them, the more questions I have. Ken Ham's saying applies here:
In the past couple of years, I feel like I have learned ten years worth of information. And quite a bit of it is people-related. Humans are an odd bunch, the more I learn about them, the more questions I have. Ken Ham's saying applies here:
Some people believe things by "thinking" with their emotions, and they cannot handle facts or people who dare to disagree with them. Case in point, this exchange with Hassan, an evolutionary misotheist who jumped into the middle of some comments on Facebook. I hope my students from "Logic Lessons" can spot the flaws. Pardon the goofy spacing, I got tired of fighting with Blogger's reformatting:
Evolution and selective breeding are 2 different things. Look at what they've done to the German Shepard in the last decade, they,ve changed it's line completely by shortening the back legs.
Yes. Selective breeding can be considered micro-evolution under intelligent design. And micro-evolution does occur in nature, within genetic limits.
Evolution is going on all the time: [Link posted.]
Yes, but nothing is changing into something else. The illustration shows the ambiguity of the terms. People see micro-evolution and assume macro-evolution is true on that basis, which is false. Similarly, "natural selection" has been used to mean evolution, but that is not hte case. [Illustration posted.]
It doesn't "change into something else". Dogs don't give birth to cats. Ah crap I give up. Yeah yeah, we just suddenly appeared with dinosaurs. The gospel according to Fred Flintstone.
So, you're going to be insulting and resort to straw man arguments? Good, it's best that you give up. Especially when science is working against you.
No, it's more like giving upon arguing with a schizophrenic who insists that the voices are real. You have no interest in real science and would rather believe that an invisible sky man always existed and one day out of all eternity he decided to create billions upon billions of galaxys with untold solar systems just so he could populate ours so his creations could worship him. And all the magic dude can come up with now is showing up as a bad image on burnt toast? No thanks, I'd rather believe in Odin and the Ice Giants, they make more sense than a 6,000 yr old planet.
Face it, you gave bad science and extrapolations. When called on your fallacies, you responded with abuse, ad hominems, more straw man fallacies, assertions... let me guess, you're a "thinker", right?
Here's a suggestion: Look at the articles linked on this page and see if you can show where the science behind them is flawed. Of course, saying, "They're wrong because they do not support my personal biases and presuppositions" does not count.
In another section, he wrote, yeah, it's much easier to believe in magic. Then he experienced the banhammer.
Plenty of flaws in logic, lots of emotion, no actual thought.
Then I had an encounter with Little Timmeh that happened while I was composing this article:
Hilarious! Time to grow up and accept reality.
And what scientific reasons to you have for childish ridicule?
The fact that science has mountains of accumulated evidence - you have childish stories. Your beliefs deserve all the ridicule they get.
I don't care about your illogical genetic fallacy and self-justifications for your childish ridicule. I want to know where you can find scientific errors in the post you are mocking. [I was in a hurry and forgot to specifically add that he is simply making assertions.]
Using grown up words doesn't excuse the fact you have a childish belief system. See ya later chuckles, I have better things to do with my time....like being part of the real world.
This is part of the reason that the modern atheist movement is failing: They are obstreperous, recalcitrant, vituperative and lacking in the ability to reason. I doubt that they think that people will be swayed by their invective. Instead, I believe that they want to build up their egos by attacking other people.
So much for people who appear unable to think rationally. Moving on...
It seems that lately, I have been encountering some intelligent, well-reasoned people who inexplicably shut off their brains in order to believe the most ridiculous things without evidence. They are able to refute atheism with logic and on a philosophical basis, show fallacies in evolution, give sound theological and scientific reasons to believe what Scripture says about a young Earth, but they believe really goofy things. Especially conspiracy theories. When they believe that stuff, I think it taints their presentations of things that are true — and important.
The 9-11 "Truthers". There are variations, but they believe that the US Government intentionally killed over 3,000 of our own people in a "war for oil". This crap is very, very irritating to me because it is so mind-numbingly stupid! It has been disproved for years, and even without reading the refutations, a regular guy can realize the logistics of keeping so many people quiet for so long, and the nature of the human conscience — it's astonishing to me that anyone can believe that rubbish. And offensive because they are impugning the characters of many good people.
By the way, this is not about preference. If the King James Version is your Bible of choice, you like it best, fine, go for it.
Paulbots. This is a disparaging term for Ron Paul supporters. When I listen to a Paul supporter call a Conservative talk show, they preach like Obama zombies about how Ron Paul is going to save the world, how Romney is just as bad as B. Hussein Obama, deny anti-Semitic remarks and writings from Ron Paul, disparage Israel, bash George W. Bush — but do not offer anything of substance. In addition, they have their own conspiracy theories, such as "Ron Paul is actually winning, but people in power have already decided that Romney is going to be the candidate so votes and delegates are being hidden". Sure, Pal.
I know people who believe all of the above, and more, yet profess to be Bible-believing Christians. Amazingly, they act like angry atheists when promoting their views! That hurts their credibility.
It is indeed unfortunate that people will "think" (and vote!) with their emotions instead of their minds. Now, I know that emotions are a part of who we are. But we cannot let our feelings run the show for us.
