+- Drunkard's Walk Forums (http://www.accessdenied-rms.net/forums)
+-- Forum: General (http://www.accessdenied-rms.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Politics and Other Fun (http://www.accessdenied-rms.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=17)
+--- Thread: Creationist Puts His Money Where His Mouth Is (/showthread.php?tid=3916)
Creationist Puts His Money Where His Mouth Is - ECSNorway - 03-28-2013
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/cr ... 18499.html
California Creationist Joseph Mastropaolo has put up a $10,000 bond as the prize for anyone willing to take him on and argue, before a judge, that the Book of Genesis is not literal truth. If they can prove it to the judge's satisfaction they'll walk home with the money.
RevDark, California is Calling You.
--
Sucrose Octanitrate.
Proof positive that with sufficient motivation, you can make anything explode.
- khagler - 03-28-2013
Quote:ECSNorway wrote:It's California. After taxes, there won't be enough left for cab fare to the airport.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/cr ... 18499.html
California Creationist Joseph Mastropaolo has put up a $10,000 bond as the prize for anyone willing to take him on and argue, before a judge, that the Book of Genesis is not literal truth. If they can prove it to the judge's satisfaction they'll walk home with the money.
RevDark, California is Calling You.
- Morganite - 03-28-2013
He's also demanding that anyone who wants to argue with him put their own 10k on the table.
There's something about that arrangement that feels more than a little off to me...
-Morgan.
- Jinx999 - 03-28-2013
And Creationists tend to be creative about what they'd consider a logical argument.
My view is that you can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into.
No... - Rev Dark - 03-28-2013
A court of law is not the venue - especially not when laughing boy is demanding a stacked deck; his rules for evidence are listed as "scientific, objective, valid, reliable and calibrated" which are pretty much meaningless in the context. The words mean whatever he sets his kangaroo court says they are; not in the context of actual research.
Quote:“Are you willing to participate in a contest to prove your point thatYou get to go home with $10,000 or your money and $10,000 of his money. (If you believe this I know several Nigerian princes eager to smuggle filthy oil lucre out of their country.
the Bible is wrong and that we evolved? You could go home with $20,000
if you win!”
Proving the Bible wrong (or rather incorrect) is one matter (and an easy one.); proving evolution is going to be entirely dependent on what he defines 'proof' as.
"Well Suh, I do want to challenge the witness. Were you or were your family ever dinosaurs?""Cluck?""The defendant is too chicken to speak to the point.""Objection - the defendant is a chicken."
They [evolutionists] are not stupid people; they are bright, but they
are bright enough to know there is no scientific evidence they can give
in a minitrial," Mastropaolo said.
Maybe he could prove the bible is correct and that we are specially created in a legitimate peer reviewed journal like Nature?
- Morganite - 03-28-2013
Well, the part about jointly agreeing on a judge might keep it from being *too* kangaroo, or something.
Still, I ultimately get the feeling that this is less about wanting a real debate than it is setting up a scenario where he can claim victory because nobody showed up to play. (Due to having rules nobody is willing to put up with.)
-Morgan. Somehow, the idea that God could have created evolution never seems to come up in these debates...
- DHBirr - 03-29-2013
Quote:"Well Suh, I do want to challenge the witness. Were you or were your family ever dinosaurs?"Dinosaurs? Those parvenus? I don't like to boast (well, yes, I do, really), but my family counts trilobites among our ancestors! Dinosaurs, good grief....
That's about as much respect as this guy's proposition deserves.
-----
Big Brother is watching you. And damn, you are so bloody BORING.
- LynnInDenver - 03-29-2013
Quote:Morganni wrote:I suspect this is in part because God being responsible for evolution would imply even "The Almighty" is actually imperfect. (Note that if you read various religious texts, if you're thinking She's an infallible being afterwards, then you've got your head firmly up your a**.)
Somehow, the idea that God could have created evolution never seems to come up in these debates...
--
"You know how parents tell you everything's going to fine, but you know they're lying to make you feel better? Everything's going to be fine." - The Doctor
- Morganite - 03-29-2013
Wouldn't it just imply that you don't have enough information to properly judge it?
Personally I don't find the idea of a singular deity all that compelling anyway. I just can't help but look at things like star-nosed moles, and think "If this was designed, it was designed by a committee."
-Morgan.
- Logan Darklighter - 03-29-2013
I remember a bit back from a classic Robin Williams routine ("Live at the Met" I believe it was. Back in the ancient days when, you know, Robin was actually FUNNY...) where he basically said -
"You think God gets stoned? I do. Look at the Platapus!"
*mines taking a toke* Okay - lets take... a beaver... and give him a ducks bill *giggles* and... he's a mammal, but he lays eggs! Here ya go! HEY DARWIN, YO!!! *middle finger*"
"Or, just look at the Giraffe! This is NOT the work of a serious artist!"