Active Users:390 Time:13/12/2025 11:55:07 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 1170 Views
Take a deep breath, close your eyes and go to your happy place. Artsapat - 13/09/2009 07:43:15 PM 702 Views
Re: Take a deep breath, close your eyes and go to your happy place. Entophile - 13/09/2009 10:28:42 PM 787 Views
That is one amazingly stupid article... Legolas - 13/09/2009 08:04:47 PM 738 Views
ditto *NM* LadyLorraine - 13/09/2009 08:11:45 PM 356 Views
Re: ditto Cal Trask - 13/09/2009 10:01:54 PM 832 Views
wow why a witty and well thought out rebuttal. random thoughts - 14/09/2009 10:02:14 PM 716 Views
Ugh. Interesting subject, awful article. nossy - 13/09/2009 08:27:15 PM 761 Views
Re: I can't even believe this. Geniac - 13/09/2009 09:05:45 PM 718 Views
Re: I can't even believe this. Entophile - 13/09/2009 10:33:47 PM 640 Views
I'd agree with you, if... Wibble - 13/09/2009 10:36:07 PM 716 Views
*sigh* People bashing other people. Great Lord of Chaos - 13/09/2009 10:02:54 PM 777 Views
The author used the phrase "proven theories." Ergo, their argument is invalid. *NM* Craig - 14/09/2009 01:11:51 AM 386 Views
seriously. there's no such thing as a truly proven theory LadyLorraine - 14/09/2009 01:52:30 AM 695 Views
Re: definition of "theory" Geniac - 14/09/2009 04:49:13 AM 777 Views
Re: definition of "theory" Entophile - 14/09/2009 08:56:48 AM 857 Views
I can't really tell Craig - 14/09/2009 08:14:14 PM 743 Views
Re: I think I was agreeing with you, yes *NM* Geniac - 15/09/2009 12:37:00 AM 347 Views
Oh, good. I'll let you live. *NM* Craig - 15/09/2009 01:55:49 AM 395 Views
I think you are getting workedup over nothing random thoughts - 14/09/2009 09:57:22 PM 893 Views
That's... not exactly it. Craig - 14/09/2009 10:33:02 PM 654 Views
not that is exactly it random thoughts - 14/09/2009 11:10:52 PM 908 Views
No, Craig is quite right. Legolas - 14/09/2009 11:21:11 PM 704 Views
Heh. You were much more diplomatic about it than I was. *NM* Craig - 14/09/2009 11:24:41 PM 394 Views
No you just happen to wrong with him random thoughts - 15/09/2009 01:14:16 AM 711 Views
Well, maybe this has to do with your low opinion of the British press... Legolas - 15/09/2009 10:51:46 AM 897 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 868 Views
To butt in for a second... Craig - 15/09/2009 07:38:05 PM 721 Views
'Fraid not. Craig - 14/09/2009 11:24:00 PM 713 Views
It's not, it's supposed to be relatively decent - mainstream conservative newspaper. *NM* Legolas - 14/09/2009 11:28:44 PM 331 Views
Re: 'Fraid not. random thoughts - 15/09/2009 01:21:14 AM 697 Views
Re: 'Fraid not. random thoughts - 15/09/2009 01:22:59 AM 845 Views
Ithat was meant to be an eidt. oh well random thoughts - 15/09/2009 01:23:36 AM 773 Views
Craig - 15/09/2009 02:14:37 AM 791 Views
completely aside from this argument you guys have here... nossy - 15/09/2009 05:02:21 AM 761 Views
Interrupter! Craig - 15/09/2009 06:11:40 AM 690 Views
Re: Interrupter! nossy - 15/09/2009 06:54:56 AM 793 Views
One brain C4, coming up... jh - 15/09/2009 12:00:26 PM 764 Views
Nicely put Floffe - 15/09/2009 03:48:42 PM 675 Views
Yes, I know. jh - 15/09/2009 04:55:22 PM 811 Views
PFt nossy - 15/09/2009 04:56:19 PM 684 Views
Are you telling me I am getting predictable? jh - 15/09/2009 04:58:59 PM 774 Views
The age of the universe is an important point in the creationist argument random thoughts - 15/09/2009 05:53:41 PM 768 Views
Exactly. So it was in the wrong column. Craig - 15/09/2009 07:58:15 PM 727 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 789 Views
That, I can agree with. *NM* Craig - 15/09/2009 08:22:44 PM 366 Views
Um. Rebekah - 14/09/2009 11:28:28 PM 841 Views
LOL Isaac - 15/09/2009 09:29:16 PM 775 Views
Really? Because this was a rather atypical debate, honestly. Legolas - 15/09/2009 09:43:13 PM 692 Views
Heh. Rebekah - 15/09/2009 09:54:00 PM 784 Views
Well, I can pretend if you want me to Isaac - 15/09/2009 10:07:59 PM 1227 Views
I happen to find it all extremely interesting nossy - 15/09/2009 10:23:19 PM 714 Views
Re: I happen to find it all extremely interesting Isaac - 15/09/2009 10:36:14 PM 781 Views
There are some places you can go that discuss the creationist ideas random thoughts - 15/09/2009 10:58:25 PM 860 Views
Having just been to the Creationist Museum last Monday nossy - 16/09/2009 12:00:12 AM 1007 Views
All hail the Flying Spaghetti Monster! Craig - 16/09/2009 06:03:20 AM 693 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes