How to control the people : Keep them stupid and uninformed

[IronWing]

This thread makes me think of this quote:

"Never argue with an idiot. They will bring you down to their level and beat you with experience."

Do you have the first clue why you believe this theory or is it just what you've been told?

I provisionally accept the theory because my experience with arguing with idiots conforms with the tenets of the theory.

 

[buckshot24]

I provisionally accept the theory because my experience with arguing with idiots conforms with the tenets of the theory.

More empty bluster.

 

[ch33zw1z]

More empty bluster.

Describing religion again I see.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Quite the admission.

Only in your world on complacent belief, without any evidence to present to support it.

 

[buckshot24]

Describing religion again I see.

Whether or not religion is empty bluster doesn't change the fact that you have no evidence for your belief in the power of mutation and selection being sufficient to do what the theory requires.

 

[buckshot24]

Only in your world on complacent belief, without any evidence to present to support it.

This why I'm challenging you. You just accept by faith that mutation and selection can do what it needs to do. There is no demonstrable evidence that it can. You're trying to turn the tables because you know it's an article of faith.

 

[agent00f]

Lose?

I'm using Buckshot.
While I don't expect him to accept what I post here he can't help but retain some real facts. Each one a seed that has the possibility of becoming a root that cracks his foundation of his ignorance.

It's also good to meet BS with facts for others reading along who maybe on the fence.

So as I've said several times. My responses aren't necessarily only for the ones they seem directed at.

Ponder this post for why that's hardly the most effective strategy: https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/the-fall-of-cnn-fake-news.2509743/page-13#post-38960789

Correcting is for mistakes and not pathological liars. Buckshot can effectively string people along because they assume his ilk are just uninformed.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Whether or not religion is empty bluster doesn't change the fact that you have no evidence for your belief in the power of mutation and selection being sufficient to do what the theory requires.

You really still don't understand the difference between religious belief and the scientific method?

The same question you've been asking the entire time has been discussed at length with you by multiple people.

As I said many pages back, you are being willfully ignorant.

The scientific method provides a system to verify hypotheses. It doesn't claim belief at any stage of the process. Either a hypothesis is proven, or it's found incorrect. The findings documented and taken into account for further hypotheses.

Religion offers no such verification. Just plain ole belief, which acts on basic human emotion.

I'm sorry you can't understand the difference between the two, and I'm even more sorry if you intentionally are.

As someone who prefers to not blindly believe, I leave my mind open to new ideas and concepts.

 

[ch33zw1z]

This why I'm challenging you. You just accept by faith that mutation and selection can do what it needs to do. There is no demonstrable evidence that it can. You're trying to turn the tables because you know it's an article of faith.

Not at all. read above.

I don't need to turn any tables. Your incessant squabbling of the same specific point is only to validate your own personal fears that your belief may not be true. It's definitely not verified fact.

The challenge is not ours. It's your own.

 

[buckshot24]

You really still don't understand the difference between religious belief and the scientific method?

The same question you've been asking the entire time has been discussed at length with you by multiple people.

As I said many pages back, you are being willfully ignorant.

The scientific method provides a system to verify hypotheses. It doesn't claim belief at any stage of the process. Either a hypothesis is proven, or it's found incorrect. The findings documented and taken into account for further hypotheses.

Religion offers no such verification. Just plain ole belief, which acts on basic human emotion.

I'm sorry you can't understand the difference between the two, and I'm even more sorry if you intentionally are.

As someone who prefers to not blindly believe, I leave my mind open to new ideas and concepts.

Why are you continually trying to conflate the two then? You are blindly believing that mutation and selection is an adequate mechanism for producing the things we see in living systems.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Why are you continually trying to conflate the two then? You are blindly believing that mutation and selection is an adequate mechanism for producing the things we see in living systems.

Show me where I blindly believe in any post.

It is you who wants to conflate religion and science, which is preposterous, but not surprising. As I've said before, I argued the same points youre attempting, as a younger man.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Why are you continually trying to conflate the two then? You are blindly believing that mutation and selection is an adequate mechanism for producing the things we see in living systems.

You still haven't answered the question of what bar needs to be crossed for you to accept it as truth, scientific or otherwise. Until you answer that question, no response given to any question you have is sufficient, and thus is a waste of bits.

 

[ch33zw1z]

You still haven't answered the question of what bar needs to be crossed for you to accept it as truth, scientific or otherwise. Until you answer that question, no response given to any question you have is sufficient, and thus is a waste of bits.

He can ask God when he meets her.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

He can ask God when he meets her.

Gonna be disappointed when it's a middle eastern chick.

 

[buckshot24]

You still haven't answered the question of what bar needs to be crossed for you to accept it as truth, scientific or otherwise. Until you answer that question, no response given to any question you have is sufficient, and thus is a waste of bits.

I did answer you on that. I said I don't know.

Would you agree that the slight modification of an enzyme's active site inhibiting an antibiotic from binding allowing survival isn't an adequate example of how mutation and selection could create something like sexual reproduction or nervous systems? You can change the active site of enzymes forever and its never going to create these complex codependent systems. Would you agree that this example given here is inadequate?

 

[buckshot24]

Show me where I blindly believe in any post.

It is you who wants to conflate religion and science, which is preposterous, but not surprising. As I've said before, I argued the same points youre attempting, as a younger man.

Then why do you believe mutation and selection could build, say, the Krebs cycle?

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

I did answer you on that. I said I don't know.

Would you agree that the slight modification of an enzyme's active site inhibiting an antibiotic from binding allowing survival isn't an adequate example of how mutation and selection could create something like sexual reproduction or nervous systems? You can change the active site of enzymes forever and its never going to create these complex codependent systems. Would you agree that this example given here is inadequate?

The closest that gets to an answer is stating that there's nothing you would find acceptable, as you're too soaked in religitis to actually use the brain that nature evolved for you (irony).

No, I wouldn't, as it's a solid example of how a natural process can mutate to an altered form in order to enhance it's capacity to survive. Do that a few trillion more times, and you will end up with all sorts of fun stuff, including sexual reproduction and a nervous system.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Then why do you believe mutation and selection could build, say, the Krebs cycle?

where did I say I "believe" that?

There ya go again, conflating the topics of religion and science.

Is it a reasonable to speculate that mutation and selection spit out aerobic organisms on a planet full of oxygen? Sure, but that's not raw "belief" such as you have.

 

[buckshot24]

The closest that gets to an answer is stating that there's nothing you would find acceptable, as you're too soaked in religitis to actually use the brain that nature evolved for you (irony).

The answers given have been inadequate.

No, I wouldn't, as it's a solid example of how a natural process can mutate to an altered form in order to enhance it's capacity to survive. Do that a few trillion more times, and you will end up with all sorts of fun stuff, including sexual reproduction and a nervous system.

Blind faith! An active site changing is never ever ever going to do anything other than have a different shaped active site allowing or preventing binding. This just shows me that your bar is far too low because you don't like the implications of it not being true. You're brainwashed.

 

[buckshot24]

where did I say I "believe" that?

There ya go again, conflating the topics of religion and science.

Is it a reasonable to speculate that mutation and selection spit out aerobic organisms on a planet full of oxygen? Sure, but that's not raw "belief" such as you have.

You can't demonstrate that it did so belief is all that is left.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

The answers given have been inadequate.

Blind faith! An active site changing is never ever ever going to do anything other than have a different shaped active site allowing or preventing binding. This just shows me that your bar is far too low because you don't like the implications of it not being true. You're brainwashed.

There's no such thing as an acceptable answer to you, because you've refused any response before it's been given. You're unteachable in this regard.

You state a thing as being true despite all evidence to the contrary, then upon evidence being presented, you state 'not good enough'. There is no acceptable answer for you, so stop asking the question.

 

[ch33zw1z]

You can't demonstrate that it did so belief is all that is left.

There ya go again, conflating religion and science, with a side of willful ignorance.

Bible thumpers use this tactic all the time to try and "prove" that science relies on the same tenets as they do. It's simply not true, and shows a willful misunderstanding of the scientific method.

I'm done here, as you don't have any interest other than confirming that your beliefs are just and true.

 

[buckshot24]

There's no such thing as an acceptable answer to you, because you've refused any response before it's been given. You're unteachable in this regard.

You state a thing as being true despite all evidence to the contrary, then upon evidence being presented, you state 'not good enough'. There is no acceptable answer for you, so stop asking the question.

Make a reasonable extrapolation then. The changing shape of an active site of an enzyme is only ever going to produce a different shape, that's it. Tell me why it would produce anything else.

 

[buckshot24]

There ya go again, conflating religion and science, with a side of willful ignorance.

Bible thumpers use this tactic all the time to try and "prove" that science relies on the same tenets as they do. It's simply not true, and shows a willful misunderstanding of the scientific method.

I'm done here, as you don't have any interest other than confirming that your beliefs are just and true.

Then present the scientific evidence proving me wrong. You are the one who brought my beliefs into this, not me.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Make a reasonable extrapolation then. The changing shape of an active site of an enzyme is only ever going to produce a different shape, that's it. Tell me why it would produce anything else.

Nope, not happening, as any answer would get shit on by you for being 'not reasonable enough', so no. You get no participation from your smarter peers on this matter until you can definitively state what you would consider to be an acceptable response, what would meet your criteria.