Active Users:1120 Time:23/11/2024 12:11:23 AM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
Re: Well, maybe this has to do with your low opinion of the British press... random thoughts Send a noteboard - 15/09/2009 05:32:51 PM
Look I don't think it was a great article but he was hardly note worthy in it's mediocrity. We can pretend like the ridicule has solely about the quality of the article but why do pretend?

If this was meant to be an exhaustive debate on the issue then I agree it was poor. If on the other hand it was about the movie and the high points of the debate were mentioned then I think the only thing silly is the response to it.

But personally I do expect a journalist for a mainstream newspaper to do a better job describing the issue than your average 10-year old. Even if the main part of the article is about something else. If you're not capable or can't be bothered to do the effort to discuss the issue properly, it's rather wiser not to discuss it at all. And you still don't seem to get it: the ridicule IS solely about the quality of the article. I strongly doubt the author is actually a creationist. Entophile's post seemed to focus on the part about no evidence for evolution, yes, but my and Craig post were about how, as he put it, "both sides of the argument were represented so insultingly poorly".


I didn't see anyone refuting the claim that the writer was supporting creation.

And as for the 8000 lightyears argument, I have to disagree with Craig, I do think astronomy is relevant in the discussion. But the way that argument is presented is idiotic. If creationists actually believed that there were objects 8000 lightyears away whose light is reaching the earth only now, they wouldn't be creationists to begin with.


not exacatally right. I used to work with some hard core creationist and I have actaully studied some of thier beliefs. The ones I knew believed that light was created in path. One of them even put forth the theory that for stars far enough out there no actuall star just the light.

Why God would bother to create light from stars millions of lightyears away that could only be seen by a massive telescope in space didn't seem to be a question that had accured to him.

On the other side of the discussion, the stupidest part is the "allegory" argument, as the whole point of creationism is that those people *don't* think Genesis is an allegory. The allegory is not an argument for creationism, it's an argument to reconcile the Bible with evolution.


The writer did mix up theories there a bit and he could have done a better job explaining that the same people wouldn't believe all of these things but again it was a film review in the culture section.

So was the article noteworthy in its mediocrity, well, I don't often see journalism this shoddy in a serious newspaper, no. And since somebody linked to it, I gave my honest opinion about it, as did Craig.


I didn't comment on your oriignall post I was commenting on the first post and the claim that the wirter of the article was supporting creationism. I notice that neither you nor Craig challenged that but instead made comments that could be taken as support.
Reply to message
I can't even believe this. Entophile - 13/09/2009 07:40:02 PM 1042 Views
Take a deep breath, close your eyes and go to your happy place. Artsapat - 13/09/2009 07:43:15 PM 573 Views
Re: Take a deep breath, close your eyes and go to your happy place. Entophile - 13/09/2009 10:28:42 PM 670 Views
That is one amazingly stupid article... Legolas - 13/09/2009 08:04:47 PM 613 Views
ditto *NM* LadyLorraine - 13/09/2009 08:11:45 PM 304 Views
Re: ditto Cal Trask - 13/09/2009 10:01:54 PM 688 Views
wow why a witty and well thought out rebuttal. random thoughts - 14/09/2009 10:02:14 PM 591 Views
Ugh. Interesting subject, awful article. nossy - 13/09/2009 08:27:15 PM 639 Views
Re: I can't even believe this. Geniac - 13/09/2009 09:05:45 PM 593 Views
Re: I can't even believe this. Entophile - 13/09/2009 10:33:47 PM 528 Views
I'd agree with you, if... Wibble - 13/09/2009 10:36:07 PM 587 Views
*sigh* People bashing other people. Great Lord of Chaos - 13/09/2009 10:02:54 PM 660 Views
The author used the phrase "proven theories." Ergo, their argument is invalid. *NM* Craig - 14/09/2009 01:11:51 AM 316 Views
seriously. there's no such thing as a truly proven theory LadyLorraine - 14/09/2009 01:52:30 AM 582 Views
Re: definition of "theory" Geniac - 14/09/2009 04:49:13 AM 639 Views
Re: definition of "theory" Entophile - 14/09/2009 08:56:48 AM 734 Views
I can't really tell Craig - 14/09/2009 08:14:14 PM 621 Views
Re: I think I was agreeing with you, yes *NM* Geniac - 15/09/2009 12:37:00 AM 291 Views
Oh, good. I'll let you live. *NM* Craig - 15/09/2009 01:55:49 AM 344 Views
I think you are getting workedup over nothing random thoughts - 14/09/2009 09:57:22 PM 773 Views
That's... not exactly it. Craig - 14/09/2009 10:33:02 PM 534 Views
not that is exactly it random thoughts - 14/09/2009 11:10:52 PM 780 Views
No, Craig is quite right. Legolas - 14/09/2009 11:21:11 PM 584 Views
Heh. You were much more diplomatic about it than I was. *NM* Craig - 14/09/2009 11:24:41 PM 340 Views
No you just happen to wrong with him random thoughts - 15/09/2009 01:14:16 AM 573 Views
Well, maybe this has to do with your low opinion of the British press... Legolas - 15/09/2009 10:51:46 AM 778 Views
Re: Well, maybe this has to do with your low opinion of the British press... random thoughts - 15/09/2009 05:32:51 PM 728 Views
To butt in for a second... Craig - 15/09/2009 07:38:05 PM 601 Views
'Fraid not. Craig - 14/09/2009 11:24:00 PM 585 Views
It's not, it's supposed to be relatively decent - mainstream conservative newspaper. *NM* Legolas - 14/09/2009 11:28:44 PM 276 Views
Re: 'Fraid not. random thoughts - 15/09/2009 01:21:14 AM 579 Views
Re: 'Fraid not. random thoughts - 15/09/2009 01:22:59 AM 703 Views
Ithat was meant to be an eidt. oh well random thoughts - 15/09/2009 01:23:36 AM 645 Views
Craig - 15/09/2009 02:14:37 AM 673 Views
completely aside from this argument you guys have here... nossy - 15/09/2009 05:02:21 AM 618 Views
Interrupter! Craig - 15/09/2009 06:11:40 AM 561 Views
Re: Interrupter! nossy - 15/09/2009 06:54:56 AM 667 Views
One brain C4, coming up... jh - 15/09/2009 12:00:26 PM 614 Views
Nicely put Floffe - 15/09/2009 03:48:42 PM 547 Views
Yes, I know. jh - 15/09/2009 04:55:22 PM 690 Views
PFt nossy - 15/09/2009 04:56:19 PM 565 Views
Are you telling me I am getting predictable? jh - 15/09/2009 04:58:59 PM 651 Views
The age of the universe is an important point in the creationist argument random thoughts - 15/09/2009 05:53:41 PM 649 Views
Exactly. So it was in the wrong column. Craig - 15/09/2009 07:58:15 PM 599 Views
what I think has been lost in the debate is it looks like it will be a good movie random thoughts - 15/09/2009 08:14:04 PM 663 Views
That, I can agree with. *NM* Craig - 15/09/2009 08:22:44 PM 313 Views
Um. Rebekah - 14/09/2009 11:28:28 PM 722 Views
LOL Isaac - 15/09/2009 09:29:16 PM 653 Views
Really? Because this was a rather atypical debate, honestly. Legolas - 15/09/2009 09:43:13 PM 527 Views
Heh. Rebekah - 15/09/2009 09:54:00 PM 666 Views
Well, I can pretend if you want me to Isaac - 15/09/2009 10:07:59 PM 1097 Views
I happen to find it all extremely interesting nossy - 15/09/2009 10:23:19 PM 579 Views
Re: I happen to find it all extremely interesting Isaac - 15/09/2009 10:36:14 PM 594 Views
There are some places you can go that discuss the creationist ideas random thoughts - 15/09/2009 10:58:25 PM 739 Views
Having just been to the Creationist Museum last Monday nossy - 16/09/2009 12:00:12 AM 869 Views
All hail the Flying Spaghetti Monster! Craig - 16/09/2009 06:03:20 AM 575 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes