Post Reply
Page 1 of 6  •  1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Switch to Forum Live View How to be a denialist
3 years ago  ::  May 17, 2010 - 5:59PM #1
Karma_yeshe_dorje
Karma_yeshe_dorje
Posts: 10,402

«1. Allege that there's a conspiracy. Claim that scientific consensus has arisen through collusion rather than the accumulation of evidence.

  • 2. Use fake experts to support your story. "Denial always starts with a cadre of pseudo-experts with some credentials that create a facade of credibility," says Seth Kalichman of the University of Connecticut.
  • 3. Cherry-pick the evidence: trumpet whatever appears to support your case and ignore or rubbish the rest. Carry on trotting out supportive evidence even after it has been discredited.
  • 4. Create impossible standards for your opponents. Claim that the existing evidence is not good enough and demand more. If your opponent comes up with evidence you have demanded, move the goalposts.
  • 5. Use logical fallacies. Hitler opposed smoking, so anti-smoking measures are Nazi. Deliberately misrepresent the scientific consensus and then knock down your straw man.
  • 6. Manufacture doubt. Falsely portray scientists as so divided that basing policy on their advice would be premature. Insist "both sides" must be heard and cry censorship when "dissenting" arguments or experts are rejected.»

www.newscientist.com/article/mg20627606....
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  May 17, 2010 - 9:28PM #2
Blü
Blü
Posts: 21,533

KYD


Whoever wrote that list has been conversing with creationists here.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  May 18, 2010 - 6:57AM #3
Kwinters
Kwinters
Posts: 17,683

May 17, 2010 -- 9:28PM, Blü wrote:


KYD


Whoever wrote that list has been conversing with creationists here.






And climate change deniers....

Jesus had two dads, and he turned out alright.~ Andy Gussert

“Feminism has fought no wars. It has killed no opponents. It has set up no concentration camps, starved no enemies, practiced no cruelties. Its battles have been for education, for the vote, for better working conditions…for safety on the streets…for child care, for social welfare…for rape crisis centers, women’s refuges, reforms in the law.

If someone says, “Oh, I’m not a feminist,” I ask, “Why, what’s your problem?”

Dale Spender
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  May 18, 2010 - 11:52AM #4
teilhard
teilhard
Posts: 43,018

May 17, 2010 -- 5:59PM, Karma_yeshe_dorje wrote:


4. Create impossible standards for your opponents. Claim that the existing evidence is not good enough and demand more. If your opponent comes up with evidence you have demanded, move the goalposts.


www.newscientist.com/article/mg20627606....




I've noticed that The Materialist-Atheist Devotees do this "kind" of Thing re: "God" ...
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  May 18, 2010 - 8:56PM #5
Blü
Blü
Posts: 21,533

teilhard


I've noticed that The Materialist-Atheist Devotees do this "kind" of Thing re: "God" ...


Create impossible standards?  Don't be silly.

All you've been asked to do is show that the supernatural beings you speak of have any other kind of existence than as things imagined in your brain.

If they have any other kind of existence, just demonstrate it to us.  If you can't, the conclusion stands.

Nothing impossible at all, just reasoning from evidence.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jun 26, 2010 - 9:17PM #6
Myownpath
Myownpath
Posts: 944

Thanks Tellhard, you reminded me...


 


 


 


7. Confuse  subjective, indescript, personal beliefs with factual, detailed, concrete, objective evidence.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jun 28, 2010 - 1:48PM #7
teilhard
teilhard
Posts: 43,018

Well, I wouldn't use exactly those Words to describe the un-Reasonable Demands of The Materialist-Skeptic-Atheist Siblings ... but ... (IMHO) it IS "kind" of like that, yes ...


 


Jun 26, 2010 -- 9:17PM, Myownpath wrote:


 


Thanks Tellhard, you reminded me...


 


7. Confuse  subjective, indescript, personal beliefs with factual, detailed, concrete, objective evidence.


 
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jun 29, 2010 - 3:33AM #8
Vardu
Vardu
Posts: 786

Jun 28, 2010 -- 1:34PM, teilhard wrote:

Hello ... ???


I'm STILL  WAITING  for SOMEONE  to BRING  The Super-Huge Electro-Baloney Ring  TO  ME ... so that I may "Believe" in It ...


May 19, 2010 -- 8:02PM, Blü wrote:


teilhard


See my Thread on The Large Hadron Collider ...


Your posts on the LHC thread are nonsense from start to finish.


And completely irrelevant - you don't show in them that the supernatural beings you speak of have any other kind of existence than as things imagined in your brain.

Your talk of impossible standards is just more dishonesty from you - more practising your teilhard-the-martyr poses in front of the mirror.



Is there not sufficient rational evidence to convince you that the Large Hadron Collider exists?


 


 

Moderated by Jcarlinbn on Jun 30, 2010 - 11:11PM
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jun 29, 2010 - 3:36AM #9
Vardu
Vardu
Posts: 786

Jun 28, 2010 -- 1:48PM, teilhard wrote:


Well, I wouldn't use exactly those Words to describe the un-Reasonable Demands of The Materialist-Skeptic-Atheist Siblings ... but ... (IMHO) it IS "kind" of like that, yes ...


 


 


 


Jun 26, 2010 -- 9:17PM, Myownpath wrote:


 


 


 


Thanks Tellhard, you reminded me...


 


 


 


7. Confuse  subjective, indescript, personal beliefs with factual, detailed, concrete, objective evidence.


 


 


 









 


What is there unreasonable about an atheist, a skeptic, or a materialist questioning beliefs for which there is apparently little or no evidence?
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jun 29, 2010 - 6:48AM #10
Myownpath
Myownpath
Posts: 944

tellhard,


Please keep these sections separate. I am no longer participating in your other topic. I already offered you concrete proof which you will not further look into so I have moved on.
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 6  •  1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Post Reply
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook