When you go to the doctor and he or she tells you that you have an affliction or need to take some medicine, do you accept what they say on the basis of their expertise? Or do you question it, look into the matter yourself? Do you do your own experiments to do you simply read up on experiments done by others? Does it make you dogmatic just because you take the medical advice of experts and if not, what is different about medicine than any other area of science?<br>
<br>Look, you are not being fair and are using cheap shots and insults. There are MANY areas of your life where you depend on the expertise of others, especially in cases of massive consensus. Medicine is just one obvious example. Doing so does not make you dogmatic. NO ONE has the time to look into EVERY issue with the detail of an expert. Testimony is an indispensable source of human knowledge. Without, we would each know very little.<br>
<br>Then we come down to the issue of what I or anyone else should do when given the choice of (a) believing what the majority of experts say on ANY topic or (b) believing what you say, given that you have no formal training, education, or expertise. The wise decision is (a). Even you will agree in most cases that this general way of thinking is correct. <br>
<br>Joe<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 10:48 AM, Paul Rumelhart <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com" target="_blank">godshatter@yahoo.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><div class="im">
<div>On 01/01/2013 03:13 AM, Joe Campbell
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>I'm dogmatic because I think that a non-scientist has no
place making comments that are rejected by the VAST majority of
scientists? Holy crap!</div>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
You are choosing to believe the authorities based not on reasoning
but on belief in their abilities. That sounds dogmatic to me.<div class="im"><br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Sorry but global warming is a serious issue and it appears
that you do not know what you are talking about wrt it. So yes,
in a public forum, I will point that out every day of the week.
I don't care about your ego; I care about the future of our
planet.</div>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
You can assume I don't know what I'm talking about, or you can look
into my arguments and set aside, for the moment, the idea that
consensus means anything at all in science. When I do this, I see a
science in its infancy that has a long way to go before we can rely
upon the many predictions of death and disaster that have not (yet?)
come true.<div class="im"><br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>You are a Christian. Do you believe what the bible says, at
least in some cases? On what basis? Testimony. <br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
I am not a Christian. The Bible to me is an interesting historical
document.<div class="im"><br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>That is all I'm appealing to wrt issues about global warming.
Non-scientists should generally defer to scientists when it
comes to matters of science. Some issues of science are
unsettled and are matters of debate. Global warming is not one
of them. There is a solid consensus on this issue.</div>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
I'm of the opinion that people should look into things for
themselves. That way, they might be able to find out if the wool is
being pulled over their eyes or if the Emperor is wearing clothes.<div class="im"><br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I work at a university. I talk to scientists all the time. I
have never met a single scientist who is also a skeptic about
climate change. Not one. Believe me I meet and ask scientists
all the time.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Change the topic to football. Suppose you posted on the V
that Mark Sanchez was a better quarterback than Tom Brady. That
alone would tell me that you don't know jack about football and
I'd have no problem telling you that.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The other thing that is so irritating about you is that your
arguments are ALWAYS structurally similar to general skeptical
arguments. Were they sound you could use them to undermine ALL
knowledge claims. There is nothing special about climate change,
given the structure of your arguments. <br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
The models have not been very good at predicting global surface
temperature. That is one argument. I can see how that can be
applied to any field of knowledge where the models have not been
good at predicting something, but I don't see how it undermines ALL
knowledge claims.<div class="im"><br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I've told you this before. I'd tell you that I'm an expert
when it comes to the topic of skepticism but since you don't
even listen to scientists about matters of science, what's the
use?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Also slippery slope arguments are classic FALLACIES, that is,
they are bad, invalid arguments. It is the favored fallacy of
the NRA.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
I just read up on this, and you are right. That doesn't stop the
problem that a ban on a weapon sets a precedence that can be used
later to ban other weapons, but I can't claim that it will
definitely do so time after time. I just fear that the momentum
from such a ban in an anti-gun climate could leave us effectively
unarmed, which is a problem that the Second Amendment was designed
to counter.<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
Paul</font></span><div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><br>
On Dec 31, 2012, at 4:49 PM, Paul Rumelhart <<a href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com" target="_blank">godshatter@yahoo.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div>Some comments below.<br>
<br>
On 12/31/2012 01:53 PM, Joe Campbell wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">Scott,<br>
<br>
Can you give some specific examples? Or is it just enough to
say "This is happening"? <br>
<br>
Wilson says "But they would rather not talk at all, and so
they resort quite quickly to the instruments of harassment
and coercion" to which Scott responds "This is happening." <br>
<br>
Please support your claim. If "they" -- meaning
progressives, liberals, or Intoleristas -- "resort quickly
to the instruments of harassment and coercion" you must have
plenty of cases to back up your claim, enough to support the
claim that "they" are doing, as opposed to a select few.
Please give those examples and make sure you have enough of
them to support this very general, over-the-top claim.<br>
<br>
Or maybe Paul could provide evidence backing up this claim:
"I would like to point out that it's the liberals on this
list (or 'Intoleristas', if you prefer) that come across as
the most dogmatic of the two main groups on this list
(Intoleristas/liberals vs. conservatives/Christ Church
members)." Come across as dogmatic to whom? And how many
liberals come across as dogmatic? Why not name 10 since
there are enough, on your view to make such a general claim.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Are there even 10 regular posters on this list any more? But,
in answer to your questions, they come across as dogmatic to
me, personally. Tom seems to take the cake here, since he
constantly posts cartoons from various outlets that
(presumably) match his take on things, and often posts snide
one-liners that refer back to some of his standard concerns
(i.e. something that Doug did, something that Dale did, etc).
If I never see that picture of Doug Wilson smoking a cigarette
again with some pithy slogan attached to it, I'll have moved
on to bigger and better things. So, that's one. You count as
a second one, because of the whole argument we had about
whether or not I should be posting sceptical comments about
climate change without letting everyone know that I am not a
credentialed climate scientist. Ted would count as a third,
because he almost always simply posts articles from what he
thinks of as unbiased science-only climate change
publications. He will, occasionally, post something of his
opinion on the matter, but those posts are rare. You could
probably also throw Nick in there, though his posts are very
professorial and he doesn't engage in mud-slinging. <br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
Paul also writes: "It was the Intoleristas that spent a lot
of time and effort trying to convince me that boycotting
businesses run by Christ Church members wasn't somehow
intolerant of another religion." Please be sure to name the
Intoleristas that "spent a lot of time and effort trying to
convince" you to boycott Christ Church businesses? Be
specific. Name enough of them to justify this slander of a
whole group of people who happen to disagree with your
views.<br>
<br>
And of course "No conservative has ever told [you, Paul]
that [you] shouldn't make posts of a certain type." Why
should they? You are there mouthpiece.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Believe it or not, but I have almost nothing in common with
your average Christ Church member, or your average staunch
conservative. I am not a Christian, so you can point to that
as the major difference between myself and Christ Church
members that is a bar that pretty much completely separates
us. I don't fight against gay marriage, I don't care what
goes on in the bedroom, I don't care much about abortion, etc.
I end up taking their side, though, when I think the
Intoleristas are unfairly persecuting them for their beliefs
or because they just don't like them.<br>
<br>
As for who it was that tried to convince me to boycott Christ
Church businesses, I'd have to go through the archives and
look. I don't particularly care enough to do that at the
moment, so feel free. I remember a lot of discussion about
how Christ Church was (for lack of a better term) "invading"
Moscow and how any money spent at a Christ Church-owned
business just gets tithed back to the church, so we shouldn't
spend our money there or it would just end up in Doug's
pockets. I remember also being inundated by a list of acts
that Christ Church members have pulled in the past, which I
guess was supposed to show just how evil they were and how we
should boycott them because of that. My arguments about "what
if they were Muslims, would we treat them the same way?" and
"why harm individuals that you all seem to think are being
brainwashed?" going exactly nowhere. But it's all out there
in the archives, if anyone cares enough to look for it.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
The two posts are ironic because I've posted a slew of
questions about gun control over the last few weeks, asking
some straightforward questions and trying to engage in
thoughtful discussion. None of the questions received any
serious answers. There were some sarcastic posts by Paul but
no serious attempt to engage in discussion. <br>
<br>
I've refuted several arguments given by conservatives on
this these issues but guess what? Conservatives keep using
those bad arguments anyway, without attempting to respond to
them. I can't count the times that Paul or Gary or others,
for instance, have jumped from "let's talk about gun
control" to "let's ban all firearms."<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
As Scott mentioned, that's your classic "slippery slope"
argument. If it's OK to ban AR-15s because of this one
incident, then when is it not OK to ban pellet guns because
of some other one?<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
I'm ready to talk and I can talk without insulting anyone.
Can either of you? Is it even possible for Scott, Paul, or
Gary to have a conversation without insulting someone, or
making the kinds of unsupported general claims in these two
posts? This is not an insult, it is a challenge.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I can, occasionally, refrain from resorting to insults, you
wart-hogged faced baboon (<-- Princess Bride reference).<br>
<br>
Paul<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
Joe<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 1:00 PM,
Scott Dredge <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:scooterd408@hotmail.com" target="_blank">scooterd408@hotmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<div dir="ltr"> It's got some substance Dr. Gier, you
just need to cut through a lot of Doug's crap to see
some of it:<br>
<br>
<Everything goes great in this world of
monochrome diversity until someone actually
disagrees with them in their town><br>
This happened.<br>
<br>
<They cannot handle disagreement and debate, and
so to the extent that they have to talk at all they
resort immediately to shrill invective.><br>
This is still happening and you can see it in the
threads about 'gun control & the NRA' and
'global warming'.<br>
<br>
<But they would rather not talk at all, and so
they resort quite quickly to the instruments of
harassment and coercion.><br>
This is happening.<br>
<br>
<This is what has happened in every place in the
world where they have had their way.><br>
This is true. Might makes right. We're lucky to
live in a country where individual rights are
protected against mob rule.<br>
<br>
<These people we are up against are as intolerant
as it gets. While I grant they are not as dangerous
as they used to be, they are certainly as noisy as
they used to be.><br>
Intolerance cuts both ways. Atheists can be just as
intolerant and Fundy religious types. Again, we're
lucky to live in a country where individual rights
are protected against mob rule.<br>
<br>
As for your comment that <font style="font-size:10pt"><[Doug's] is a very
narrow world indeed</font>>, I agree with this
as it's quite obvious. Even so, Doug and his
gullible flock deserve the exact same Constitutional
rights and protections as everyone else even though
they doesn't believe in the Constitution and do not
believe in an egalitarian society.<br>
<br>
<<font style="font-size:10pt">Happy New Year to
all beings> I <font style="font-size:10pt">couldn't
agree more. :)</font></font><br>
<br>
-Scott<br>
<br>
<div>
<hr>Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2012 10:45:59 -0800<br>
From: <a href="mailto:ngier@uidaho.edu" target="_blank">ngier@uidaho.edu</a><br>
To: <a href="mailto:moscowcares@moscow.com" target="_blank">moscowcares@moscow.com</a><br>
CC: <a href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com" target="_blank">vision2020@moscow.com</a>
<div> <br>
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] [link added] We,
Intoleristas . . .<br>
<br>
<font>Hi Tom,<br>
<br>
Thanks for posting this. I had not read it
either before now. It is vintage Wilson--all
rhetoric and sarcasm with little substance.
Much like his papers for my philosophy
classes.<br>
<br>
Some time ago a Kirker accused me of being a
"Hindu-Lover," or something like that. I had
to inform him that I have supported four
Indians for their studies: one Christian who
is now practicing psychotherapy in Australia,
one Hindu for his art career, and a man and
wife team (both devout Christians). My Hindu
friends may have good reason to charge that
I'm a "Christian-lover."<br>
<br>
The husband just finished his Ph.D. at the
University of Denver on the psychology of
being a Christian untouchable. (I thought that
they did not exist.) It was a brilliant
analysis that gained him a dissertation prize
of $2,000. The wife just graduated summa cum
laude from the School of Nursing and the
University of Houston. <br>
<br>
I had a great weekend celebrating with them
(Indian food at every meal) and a wonderful
church service for Telegu-speaking
Christians. What a change when they switched
from the stodgy English hymns to the ones in
Telegu. The tamborines and tabla came out,
and I was able sing along because an IT guy
projected the phonetic equivalents on a
screen. A weekend of total immersion in
Indian culture that will never be forgotten.<br>
<br>
Wilson praises that fact that many, but not as
many as he implies, Latin Americans have
converted to Pentecostal Christianity. (The
highest percentage of them in coffee producing
countries is 20 percent in Gautemala.) As he
does with his right hand, he calls American
Pentecostals less than Christian on the left.
(I can play the right and left hand game as
well as he can.) There is absolutely no
healing, speaking in tongues, prophesying, and
holy rolling at Christ Church.<br>
<br>
The only foreign travel Doug Wilson did was on
U.S. subs. He doesn't have a clue what
multiculturalism is or what seasoned travelers
experience and learn in foreign lands. His is
a very narrow world indeed.<br>
<br>
Happy New Year to all beings,<br>
<br>
Nick<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
A society grows great when old men plant the
seeds of trees whose shade they know they
shall never sit in.<br>
<br>
-Greek proverb<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: <a href="mailto:vision2020-bounces@moscow.com" target="_blank">vision2020-bounces@moscow.com</a>
on behalf of Moscow Cares<br>
Sent: Sun 12/30/2012 5:40 PM<br>
To: Joe Campbell<br>
Cc: viz<br>
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] [link added] We,
Intoleristas . . .<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
---------------------------------------<br>
<br>
Seeya round town, Moscow, because . . .<br>
<br>
"Moscow Cares"<br>
<a href="http://www.MoscowCares.com" target="_blank">http://www.MoscowCares.com</a><br>
<br>
Tom Hansen<br>
Moscow, Idaho<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</font> <br>
<br>
</div>
<div>=======================================================
List services made available by First Step
Internet, serving the communities of the Palouse
since 1994. <a href="http://www.fsr.net" target="_blank">http://www.fsr.net</a>
mailto:<a href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com" target="_blank">Vision2020@moscow.com</a>
=======================================================</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
=======================================================<br>
List services made available by First Step Internet,<br>
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.<br>
<a href="http://www.fsr.net" target="_blank">http://www.fsr.net</a><br>
mailto:<a href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com" target="_blank">Vision2020@moscow.com</a><br>
=======================================================<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<br>
<pre>=======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet,
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
<a href="http://www.fsr.net" target="_blank">http://www.fsr.net</a>
<a href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com" target="_blank">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</a>
=======================================================</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br>