Re: The problem with all these "Debates".

On Oct 24, 4:29 pm, Kermit <unrestrained_h...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Oct 24, 12:00 pm, mike3 <mike4...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:



On Oct 24, 2:56 am, "Shearwater" <n...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
<snip>

But even when they do not display hostility sometimes you'll attack
first. And how do you _know_ when the ignorance really is _willful_?

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

Mike, mike, mike.... (shakes head) you're new here aren't you?
I suspect you might even be new to the Evolution/ID conflict.
The discussions here can get quite heated.  Perhaps if you lurk
a while longer you'll understand why it is that creationists get
the kind of response you are complaining about.

Actually I have read some. t seems that they go on too long on a
disagreeable argument, and then the people decide to switch to
insults and it has happened even without the post itself containing\
an insult!

Often it seems it's the "atheist" side that switches first, but
sometimes
I've seen the "religious" side do it too (yes I've seen so-called
"Christians"
throw out flames and insults too!). So much for all those claims of
"better morals" (I've heard them from all sides.) and "following your
book". It's easy to claim something, to actually follow it, is much
harder.
And I'll admit, I've not always lived up to the moral codes I set,
it's a
continual process of improvement.

For a perfect example of willful ignorance you might consider
reading about the case of Kitzmiller, et al v the Dover Area
School Board.  I think the Talk.Origins website has some
background on the case and certainly a short Google search
will provide a great many references too.

What about perceived _unwillful_ ignorance -- is that too answered
with just so much hatred and other crap, or is it only when it becomes
willful (i.e. they wilfully refuse to "get the point")?

Kindest Regards,

There are several anti-science posters who post many long threads, but
they are generally polite, and even after hundreds of posts, those
still responding are civil and mostly restrained.


But then how come the "pro-science" posters tend to get impolite and
rude
with them?

Look at threads started by someone(n) or seanpit, for recent examples.
They are determined to not learn, but because they don't call us
names, those regulars here who get too frustrated simply leave the
thread. As for me, I don't expect to ever convince them. (Some can be,
but it's uncommon.)


And that's what I do: if they don't seem to want to be convinced, then
I just
leave the debate.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The problem with all these "Debates".
    ... throw out flames and insults too!). ... The anti-science posters aren't polite, ... I don't expect to ever convince them. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Balls and Vase problem - final solution
    ... that PA (and hence ZFC) is inconsistent. ... a crank or kook of some type, ... And so I will no longer claim that this theory will convince any ... poster to stop using five-letter insults, or four-letter insults, ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Great SWT Program
    ... [insults me and calls me a liar] ... None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at ... I don't have to convince them - they have long since figured this out ... [falsely implies something criminal on my part] ...
    (comp.lang.java.programmer)
  • Re: The problem with all these "Debates".
    ... the kind of response you are complaining about. ... Often it seems it's the "atheist" side that switches first, ... throw out flames and insults too!). ... And I'll admit, I've not always lived up to the moral codes I set, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Thunderfoot vs VenomFangX
    ... On Sep 27, 12:22 pm, Thurisaz the Einherjer ... about a gazillion times on T.O. That; ... "I only post to try to convince people that evolution is correct". ... way to "convince" someone is by using insults. ...
    (talk.origins)