Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest Guest

David Paszkiewicz's idea of science

Recommended Posts

Guest Guest

According to "Guest," it isn't about Paszkiewicz at all.

You two hash it out, mmm-kay?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest

That MIGHT Matter if he taught Science..... But he does Not, so his personal beliefs on Science dont really matter now, do they???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest
That MIGHT Matter if he taught Science..... But he does Not, so his personal beliefs on Science dont really matter now, do they???

They matter as long as he's saying ignorant things to kids. If his beliefs on science don't matter, then he should keep his mouth shut. That would be the best solution but he's not doing that. He claims to know more about science than the science teachers AND all the world's scientists. So not only is he ignorant, he's arrogant. Yeah, that's a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest

This another typical example of censorship on the left. Of all the pictures you could have chosen regarding the Creation Museum, you chose the one which gives a fun photo op for children. These childish arguments are typical of the left, they don't involve thinking. The goal is to try to humiliate the opposition, not to engage their ideas. Concerning your link to the article "The Creation Museum - because our kids aren't stupid enough," I don't see how adding profane websites helps matters. In case you were not aware, there are other adjectives in the English language besides the F word.

In case you've run out of childish arguments, here's a few more for your repetoir:

1. Baby baby stick your head in gravy!

2. I know you are but what am I?

3. I'm rubber and your glue whatever you say bounces off of me and sticks to you!

4 or, if the above do not work, you might try this one: :wub:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's your defense of the Creationist Ignorance Emporium?

It's my attempt to get to clarity regarding our topic. Did you want to talk about the museum, Paszkiewicz, or both?

Get your story straight and we'll discuss it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest
They matter as long as he's saying ignorant things to kids. If his beliefs on science don't matter, then he should keep his mouth shut. That would be the best solution but he's not doing that. He claims to know more about science than the science teachers AND all the world's scientists. So not only is he ignorant, he's arrogant. Yeah, that's a problem.

Interesting. So by THAT logic i should be aple to have ANY teacher censured that speaks in class about somethign they aren't specifically there to teach??? I'll keep that in mind the next time my Children are forced to listen to some Liberal political nonsense that has nothing to do with the classwork at hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest
This another typical example of censorship on the left. Of all the pictures you could have chosen regarding the Creation Museum, you chose the one which gives a fun photo op for children. These childish arguments are typical of the left, they don't involve thinking. The goal is to try to humiliate the opposition, not to engage their ideas. Concerning your link to the article "The Creation Museum - because our kids aren't stupid enough," I don't see how adding profane websites helps matters. In case you were not aware, there are other adjectives in the English language besides the F word.

In case you've run out of childish arguments, here's a few more for your repetoir:

1. Baby baby stick your head in gravy!

2. I know you are but what am I?

3. I'm rubber and your glue whatever you say bounces off of me and sticks to you!

4 or, if the above do not work, you might try this one: :wub:

Not buying it. The kids could have just as much fun on a plastic horse. If you want fantasy, make it a plastic unicorn. The snake oil salesmen who designed the Creation Ignorance Emporium had a theme and an object. The theme is anti-scientific. The object is to convince kids that fantasies are as real as science. There's a reason for the saddled dinosaur, and you're right, it has to do with getting the kids to have fun - so they can be conditioned to ignore science in favor of a fantasy. That is as cynical and as insidious an attempt to undermine real learning as you could ever find: link ignorance to fun, and make sure you get them while they're young.

The linked rant is profane. It's also straight on the money and hilarious. Sometimes those of us who can think need a catharsis.

So you see, the argument does involve thinking. And I have engaged each of your ideas. Now you try the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest
It's my attempt to get to clarity regarding our topic. Did you want to talk about the museum, Paszkiewicz, or both?

Get your story straight and we'll discuss it.

I'm not telling a story. I wanted people to be aware of how ridiculous this theme park is. Paszkiewicz thinks it merits serious attention as science.

Several issues are presented here. If you were truly interested in discussing any of them, you could have directed the discussion in that fashion. I did what I wanted to do. If people check out the links, they can draw their own conclusions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest
Interesting. So by THAT logic i should be aple to have ANY teacher censured that speaks in class about somethign they aren't specifically there to teach??? I'll keep that in mind the next time my Children are forced to listen to some Liberal political nonsense that has nothing to do with the classwork at hand.

You do that. If any teacher, liberal or otherwise, tries telling the students that the United States was founded by Fred Flintstone in the second millennium B.C., I hope you'll call attention to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's my attempt to get to clarity regarding our topic. Did you want to talk about the museum, Paszkiewicz, or both?

You obviously understood that he was criticizing both, so exactly what "clarity" do you think is lacking?

Get your story straight and we'll discuss it.

His story is perfectly straight. Do you really want to discuss it, Bryan? I doubt that you would disagree that young-earth creationism is anti-scientific and rife with false claims, or that Paszkiewicz' advocacy of it is fair game for criticism. Are you siding against a critic out of a more general sense of philosophical kinship with Paszkiewicz and the YEC's, perhaps, rather than any objection to the specific criticism?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not telling a story. I wanted people to be aware of how ridiculous this theme park is. Paszkiewicz thinks it merits serious attention as science.

Several issues are presented here.

Let's not equivocate. There is a story behind which subject you wish to address.

If you were truly interested in discussing any of them, you could have directed the discussion in that fashion.

That's what I'm doing. I want to talk about the subject you want to talk about, and I'm asking you to identify it. So how about it?

I did what I wanted to do.

Wow. You're great.

:wub:

If people check out the links, they can draw their own conclusions.

Kids can ride a dinosaur at a common playground. That's wrong, isn't it?

http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/20029875.../Digital-Vision

http://www.flickr.com/photos/neatocoolville/86918043

http://www.meetup.com/nycfff/pt/about/

One can even find other anti-science museums that allow children to mix with dinosaurs:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fuk...aurMuseum04.JPG

Eeeeeeeevil!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Paul

The authors of posts 6 and 8 ignore the fact that the Creationist theme park promotes an anti-scientific world view. It's not just harmless fun. It's the mental conditioning of children who are too young to defend themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest
Interesting. So by THAT logic i should be aple to have ANY teacher censured that speaks in class about somethign they aren't specifically there to teach??? I'll keep that in mind the next time my Children are forced to listen to some Liberal political nonsense that has nothing to do with the classwork at hand.

No, the logic is that teachers shouldn't say ignorant things, or if they do, they shouldn't persist in it after it's pointed out. There's nothing wrong with a history teacher reinforcing the science and English teachers. In fact, that's a good thing. There's a lot wrong with a history teacher who knows nothing about science pretending that he knows more than the science teachers do, especially when he's doing it to promote a personal religious agenda.

You're going to have some liberal teachers and some conservative teachers. There's room for disagreement. That's all in bounds. "Dinosaurs on Noah's ark" is not in bounds. It's childish and anti-scientific. Anyone who says things like that should not be teaching at all, especially when he still has no idea why it's mis-education.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest 2smart4u
You do that. If any teacher, liberal or otherwise, tries telling the students that the United States was founded by Fred Flintstone in the second millennium B.C., I hope you'll call attention to it.

And ......If any teacher, liberal or otherwise, tries telling the students that all life on earth evolved by serendipity from a single one-cell organism in a puddle of soup, I hope you'll also call attention to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest
Kids can ride a dinosaur at a common playground. That's wrong, isn't it?

No. A common playground isn't a theme park designed to promote young earth creationism. You're missing the central point, which is that the Creationst Ignorance Emporium promotes a specific world view that is completely contrary to modern science.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The authors of posts 6 and 8 ignore the fact that the Creationist theme park promotes an anti-scientific world view. It's not just harmless fun. It's the mental conditioning of children who are too young to defend themselves.

Paul ignores the fact that the posts appropriately address attempted points from his followers.

I'm perfectly willing to debate the issue--whatever his side eventually decides that is--but honest debate would be nice from that side. No more stupid lawyer tricks in the rhetoric, please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest KEITH
And ......If any teacher, liberal or otherwise, tries telling the students that all life on earth evolved by serendipity from a single one-cell organism in a puddle of soup, I hope you'll also call attention to it.

Just because the rest of us have evolved and you haven't doesn't mean you have to get pissy about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest
One can even find other anti-science museums that allow children to mix with dinosaurs:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fuk...aurMuseum04.JPG

This attempted comparison is without merit. The Fukui museum is a genuinely scientific museum. The mere fact that one exhibit has a staircase leading onto the back of one of the dinosaur models doesn’t mean that the museum is promoting bad science.

Context is everything. Check out the links and judge for yourselves. The differences between the Fukui museum and the Kentucky amusement park (masquerading as a museum) are obvious.

http://www.dinosaur.pref.fukui.jp/archive/...ir/index_e.html

http://www.dinosaur.pref.fukui.jp/en/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukui_Prefect...Dinosaur_Museum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest
And ......If any teacher, liberal or otherwise, tries telling the students that all life on earth evolved by serendipity from a single one-cell organism in a puddle of soup, I hope you'll also call attention to it.

In all likelihood, no teacher has ever said that. What they do say, and should, is that scientists have made demonstrable progress toward uncovering the origins of life. It is a worthwhile pursuit because the further back we can trace life, the better we understand it, the more medical treatments we have and the longer and better we can expect to live. There was a time when science had not yet uncovered the secrets to space flight or computer technology or sound or visual recording. If your attitude had prevailed then, we would still be living in caves, or at best sitting in shacks with no electricity, communications devices or indoor plumbing.

Your issue is "God did it." Not once has that led to any discovery in science. By contrast, when scientists see the direction in which research is heading, they appropriately hypothesize things like uncovering the origins of life through completely naturalistic explanations. It's a reasonable hypothesis because so far every advance in science has been through naturalism, without any involvement from gods.

Try as you might, your childish misrepresentations of this important work do not diminish its contribution to the quality of human life. In no way is this excellent and dynamic science appropriately compared to the nonsense being spewed forth by David Paszkiewicz and others like him - or by you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Paul
This attempted comparison is without merit. The Fukui museum is a genuinely scientific museum. The mere fact that one exhibit has a staircase leading onto the back of one of the dinosaur models doesn’t mean that the museum is promoting bad science.

Context is everything. Check out the links and judge for yourselves. The differences between the Fukui museum and the Kentucky amusement park (masquerading as a museum) are obvious.

http://www.dinosaur.pref.fukui.jp/archive/...ir/index_e.html

http://www.dinosaur.pref.fukui.jp/en/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukui_Prefect...Dinosaur_Museum

The main point is what impression will each of these exhibitions have on young minds. The Fukui museum teaches children about science. The so-called "Creation Museum" misinforms them about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest 2smart4u
In all likelihood, no teacher has ever said that. What they do say, and should, is that scientists have made demonstrable progress toward uncovering the origins of life. It is a worthwhile pursuit because the further back we can trace life, the better we understand it, the more medical treatments we have and the longer and better we can expect to live. There was a time when science had not yet uncovered the secrets to space flight or computer technology or sound or visual recording. If your attitude had prevailed then, we would still be living in caves, or at best sitting in shacks with no electricity, communications devices or indoor plumbing.

Your issue is "God did it." Not once has that led to any discovery in science. By contrast, when scientists see the direction in which research is heading, they appropriately hypothesize things like uncovering the origins of life through completely naturalistic explanations. It's a reasonable hypothesis because so far every advance in science has been through naturalism, without any involvement from gods.

Try as you might, your childish misrepresentations of this important work do not diminish its contribution to the quality of human life. In no way is this excellent and dynamic science appropriately compared to the nonsense being spewed forth by David Paszkiewicz and others like him - or by you.

Thank you, Paul. Your usual diatribe again had nothing to do with the origin of life. I believe life is far too vast and complex to chalk it all up to serendipty, that Intelligent Design must be involved. When science proves me wrong, let me know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This attempted comparison is without merit. The Fukui museum is a genuinely scientific museum. The mere fact that one exhibit has a staircase leading onto the back of one of the dinosaur models doesn’t mean that the museum is promoting bad science.

I'm delighted to see you admit it.

Context is everything.

Indeed, in this case the dinosaur pic posted as evidence of an anti-science attitude should be dismissed as to that point. The case would rest entirely on other aspects of the museum, if such a case were to be made. In other words, posting that pic as evidence was misleading and inappropriate.

Check out the links and judge for yourselves. The differences between the Fukui museum and the Kentucky amusement park (masquerading as a museum) are obvious.

http://www.dinosaur.pref.fukui.jp/archive/...ir/index_e.html

http://www.dinosaur.pref.fukui.jp/en/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukui_Prefect...Dinosaur_Museum

Looks like you're admitting my point without admitting my point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The main point is what impression will each of these exhibitions have on young minds. The Fukui museum teaches children about science. The so-called "Creation Museum" misinforms them about it.

Does it? The linked photos indicate that the Creationist museum offers a comparison of the naturalistic account of creation side by side with the YEC account. If the naturalistic account is presented fairly, then shouldn't it be admitted even by antagonists that the museum teaches science?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×