|
Post by lowtacks86 on Jun 19, 2017 18:50:56 GMT
Nope. If they have a point of view that involves deliberately lying to the public, they should lose their jobs. They aren't lying just because they're wrong and that's assuming you aren't talking about the religious in general since that would be idiotic.
People that go there or work there are perfectly fine with whatever it is they are offering so it's silly to hope people lose their jobs.
There's just no reason to care about people losing their jobs to normal market issues.
"They aren't lying just because they're wrong"
Not necessarily, while many Biblical Literalists are simpy ignorant of things like evolution, geology, and meteorology, professional hucksters like Ken Ham have to do at least some research on the topics to "debunk" evolution and "prove" the Biblical flood to keep the lie going and make money. So yes, at least on some level these people are lying.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Jun 19, 2017 19:27:44 GMT
They aren't lying just because they're wrong and that's assuming you aren't talking about the religious in general since that would be idiotic.
People that go there or work there are perfectly fine with whatever it is they are offering so it's silly to hope people lose their jobs.
There's just no reason to care about people losing their jobs to normal market issues.
"They aren't lying just because they're wrong"
Not necessarily, while many Biblical Literalists are simpy ignorant of things like evolution, geology, and meteorology, professional hucksters like Ken Ham have to do at least some research on the topics to "debunk" evolution and "prove" the Biblical flood to keep the lie going and make money. So yes, at least on some level these people are lying.
I have no reason to make the assumption that Ken Hamm is willingly ignoring some aspects of evolutionary theory in order to dishonestly create his vision of the Noah account. He's not even obligated to accept evolutionary theory in the first place.
I'm saying that his vision of the Noah account was not started nor will it end with him and it's largely based on whatever his beliefs are.
It's odd to call him a liar regarding this when so many atheists are under the impression that Christians overall hate all things science anyway which doesn;t necessarily make them liars although I assume, as in Hamm's case, it makes them wrong.
|
|
PanLeo
Sophomore
@saoradh
Posts: 919
Likes: 53
|
Post by PanLeo on Jun 19, 2017 19:37:59 GMT
So you keep saying. Are you really that mentally handicapped that you don't see a difference between a false belief and a lie? He might as well have committed genocide. You are still taking about that almost a year later?
|
|
PanLeo
Sophomore
@saoradh
Posts: 919
Likes: 53
|
Post by PanLeo on Jun 19, 2017 19:39:51 GMT
So if people have a point of view you don't like they should lose their jobs? How's the scarecrow business going? Demand high? Just assuming you work in the scarecrow business, since you're so good at building strawmen. What strawman?
|
|
PanLeo
Sophomore
@saoradh
Posts: 919
Likes: 53
|
Post by PanLeo on Jun 19, 2017 19:41:14 GMT
So if people have a point of view you don't like they should lose their jobs? If a museum that was dedicated to denying the Holocuast closed down, would you be upset about people losing their jobs? It isn't just about a "belief", they were promoting a flat out lie (Biblical flood) Oh for fuck sake. Are you really comparing this to a holocaust museum?
|
|
PanLeo
Sophomore
@saoradh
Posts: 919
Likes: 53
|
Post by PanLeo on Jun 19, 2017 19:44:41 GMT
So you keep saying. Are you really that mentally handicapped that you don't see a difference between a false belief and a lie? Are you? How is Ham a liar?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2017 20:08:50 GMT
|
|
PanLeo
Sophomore
@saoradh
Posts: 919
Likes: 53
|
Post by PanLeo on Jun 19, 2017 20:14:16 GMT
Ok first of all the writer seems to think that Ken Ham lied about the quote instead of just misinterpreting it because as we know he is a fucking moron. Second of all his lie about dinosaurs (assuming the author is describing what Ham wrote and what he said correct) has nothing to do with the museum or its employees.
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Jun 19, 2017 20:21:15 GMT
|
|
PanLeo
Sophomore
@saoradh
Posts: 919
Likes: 53
|
Post by PanLeo on Jun 19, 2017 20:39:00 GMT
How is that a strawman? The moron can't tell when someone has a genuine belief of when they are lieing.
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Jun 19, 2017 20:47:49 GMT
If a museum that was dedicated to denying the Holocuast closed down, would you be upset about people losing their jobs? It isn't just about a "belief", they were promoting a flat out lie (Biblical flood) Oh for fuck sake. Are you really comparing this to a holocaust museum? I'm not comparing them on the basis that they're both equally wrong, I'm comparing them on the basis that they're both clearing lying, so yes.
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Jun 19, 2017 21:01:34 GMT
"They aren't lying just because they're wrong"
Not necessarily, while many Biblical Literalists are simpy ignorant of things like evolution, geology, and meteorology, professional hucksters like Ken Ham have to do at least some research on the topics to "debunk" evolution and "prove" the Biblical flood to keep the lie going and make money. So yes, at least on some level these people are lying.
I have no reason to make the assumption that Ken Hamm is willingly ignoring some aspects of evolutionary theory in order to dishonestly create his vision of the Noah account. He's not even obligated to accept evolutionary theory in the first place.
I'm saying that his vision of the Noah account was not started nor will it end with him and it's largely based on whatever his beliefs are.
It's odd to call him a liar regarding this when so many atheists are under the impression that Christians overall hate all things science anyway which doesn;t necessarily make them liars although I assume, as in Hamm's case, it makes them wrong.
"I have no reason to make the assumption that Ken Hamm is willingly ignoring some aspects of evolutionary theory in order to dishonestly create his vision of the Noah account."
Then you clearly don't know much about him. As far as I know he denies the fossil record, denies DNA evidence, denies dating methods, and denies probably a bunch of other science. Many consider him a creationist "expert" which basically means he has done at least some research on evolution, which means he is purposely dishonest in his position. You need further proof he's a habitual liar, watch the evolutionary "debate" between him and Bill Nye, he distorts truths and lies quite a bit.
|
|
PanLeo
Sophomore
@saoradh
Posts: 919
Likes: 53
|
Post by PanLeo on Jun 19, 2017 21:07:26 GMT
Oh for fuck sake. Are you really comparing this to a holocaust museum? I'm not comparing them on the basis that they're both equally wrong, I'm comparing them on the basis that they're both clearing lying, so yes. How are YECs lying?
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Jun 19, 2017 21:11:58 GMT
I'm not comparing them on the basis that they're both equally wrong, I'm comparing them on the basis that they're both clearing lying, so yes. How are YECs lying? I should clarify, not all YECs are necessarily lying, many are simply ignorant, typically from childhood indoctrination and perhaps a lousy school system. Once presented with the scietific evidence, they must choose between either being honest or remaining Creationist. Profesional hucksters like Ham, Hovind, and Comfort who make their living from duping people tend to fall under the latter category. These types have typically done some at least some science research, which mean they must lie and distort facts to "disprove" evolution.
|
|
PanLeo
Sophomore
@saoradh
Posts: 919
Likes: 53
|
Post by PanLeo on Jun 19, 2017 21:19:41 GMT
I should clarify, not all YECs are necessarily lying, many are simply ignorant, typically from childhood indoctrination and perhaps a lousy school system. Once presented with the scietific evidence, they must choose between either being honest or remaining Creationist. Profesional hucksters like Ham, Hovind, and Comfort who make their living from duping people tend to fall under the latter category. These types have typically done some at least some science research, which mean they must lie and distort facts to "disprove" evolution. Why doesn't it mean they just dismiss the scientific evidence?
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Jun 19, 2017 21:24:02 GMT
I should clarify, not all YECs are necessarily lying, many are simply ignorant, typically from childhood indoctrination and perhaps a lousy school system. Once presented with the scietific evidence, they must choose between either being honest or remaining Creationist. Profesional hucksters like Ham, Hovind, and Comfort who make their living from duping people tend to fall under the latter category. These types have typically done some at least some science research, which mean they must lie and distort facts to "disprove" evolution. Why doesn't it mean they just dismiss the scientific evidence? That is essentially lying. Saying something like "there are no transitional species in the fossil record", "humans and dinosaurs lived together according to the fossil record", or "evolution has never been observed" would be flat out lies. I'm not sure what you're getting at.
|
|
PanLeo
Sophomore
@saoradh
Posts: 919
Likes: 53
|
Post by PanLeo on Jun 19, 2017 21:54:07 GMT
Why doesn't it mean they just dismiss the scientific evidence? That is essentially lying. Saying something like "there are no transitional species in the fossil record", "humans and dinosaurs lived together according to the fossil record", or "evolution has never been observed" would be flat out lies. I'm not sure what you're getting at. Having retarded and ignorant opinions is now lying?
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Jun 19, 2017 22:02:44 GMT
That is essentially lying. Saying something like "there are no transitional species in the fossil record", "humans and dinosaurs lived together according to the fossil record", or "evolution has never been observed" would be flat out lies. I'm not sure what you're getting at. Having retarded and ignorant opinions is now lying? Doing at least some research on evolution and then turning around and saying "there are no transitional species in the fossil record" isn't an opinion, that's a flat out lie. That's like using a DNA test to find out who your father is and then simply dismissing the results "Well that doesn't prove anything". That's simply factually incorrect.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2017 22:33:22 GMT
Ken Ham and his ilk aren't wrong. They are professional liars. So you keep saying. Are you really that mentally handicapped that you don't see a difference between a false belief and a lie? Yes, I do see the difference. And I see that Ken Ham is engaged in the latter, and not the former.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2017 22:54:56 GMT
Then you clearly don't know much about him. As far as I know he denies the fossil record, denies DNA evidence, denies dating methods, and denies probably a bunch of other science. Many consider him a creationist "expert" which basically means he has done at least some research on evolution, which means he is purposely dishonest in his position. You need further proof he's a habitual liar, watch the evolutionary "debate" between him and Bill Nye, he distorts truths and lies quite a bit.
|
|