Welcome to WeAreSMRT.com. Click here to register

Jason Lisle: Another sociopath?

A place to talk about specific theists and our interactions with 'em. Should we engage or dismiss? Are there effective strategies?

Re: Jason Lisle: Another sociopath?

Postby E-lad » Wed Mar 11, 2015 9:57 pm

Yeah.....absurd beyond description. And this God wrote one book of which everything in those indescribably vast spaces must adhere to. It is mind boggling how that meme has survived.
Life is a comedy for those who think, and a tragedy for those who feel.- Horace Walpole
User avatar
E-lad
 
Posts: 14741
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 12:48 pm
Location: Northwestern Pennsylvania

Re: Jason Lisle: Another sociopath?

Postby zilch » Thu Mar 12, 2015 7:53 am

G.E., I don't think we really differ on Jason Lisle, except perhaps that I'm more (probably foolishly) optimistic that he might wise up someday. I just define my terms a bit differently than you.

For instance, I agree that Lisle's arguments are full of holes and logical errors. But at least they're out there, in grammatical English, for all to see- unlike the works of many fundies, which are so incoherent you can't really figure out what they're trying to say.

That, combined with his obvious ability to ratiocinate about, say, sunspots, makes him a more interesting debator than, say, Ray or Kirk.
You were born. And so you're free. So happy birthday.
- Laurie Anderson
User avatar
zilch
 
Posts: 14873
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 2:12 pm
Location: Vienna, Austria

Re: Jason Lisle: Another sociopath?

Postby the_ignored » Mon Mar 23, 2015 4:16 am

I made a comment on this video of Jason Lisle's.

Image
the_ignored
 
Posts: 2381
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 5:02 pm

Re: Jason Lisle: Another sociopath?

Postby zilch » Mon Mar 23, 2015 8:59 am

Nice, reynold. But by admitting that there was a "reason" for Adam to appear mature when freshly created you're putting one foot on the slippery slide to galaxies created colliding. It's Phillip Henry Gosse's Omphalos argument: God had to create the world, including Adam's navel, tree rings, and pretend fossils, and I would bet Gosse would have also included the colliding galaxies, because you have to start somewhere in the middle of all kinds of living and cosmological cycles. Gosse was generous enough to say that it was still profitable to study fossils, say, even though they were "prochronic" and not "diachronic": that is, only existing in God's story for a time that never happened. Fossils, although fake, showed us a glimpse into the mind of God before there was time.

Of course, you know all that stuff, but I wonder if Lisle knows about Gosse- I can't remember if he's been mentioned by one of us at Lisle's place. By the way, I just read a fascinating autobiography by Gosse's son Edmund about being raised fundamentalist. It can be downloaded free from Gutenberg.
You were born. And so you're free. So happy birthday.
- Laurie Anderson
User avatar
zilch
 
Posts: 14873
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 2:12 pm
Location: Vienna, Austria

Re: Jason Lisle: Another sociopath?

Postby the_ignored » Mon Mar 23, 2015 10:38 pm

Lisle had already used the "appearance of age" argument as you can see from the screenshot I posted. So I figured I'd cut him off.

That got brought up once when Chris Sharpe confronted Lisle.

More for the benefit of the other people standing around, many of whom were probably creationists, rather than for Jason Lisle himself, I asked him about various orbital resonances in the Solar System, and in particular the Kirkwood gaps18 in the asteroid belt, showing irrefutably that the Solar System is much more than 6000 years old. The Kirkwood gaps can be directly tested by placing test particles in a computational model of the Solar System, and just calculating the equations of motions, there are no assumptions other than the orbit of Jupiter has not changed, and the law of gravity has not changed. I pointed out to him that after a few hundred thousand or million years of simulated time on a computer, asteroids in certain orbits are ejected, which confirms the Kirkwood gaps, to which he replied that God created the Solar System to appear that way. This is the common creationist cop-out argument, when all else fails invoke the appearance-of-age argument as an explanation.

A common defense for the creationist appearance-of-age argument is that Adam was created mature in the Garden of Eden in order to be fully functional. There are two problems with this, quite apart from whether Adam existed or not as a real individual: (1) his remains are not around today (or have not been identified), whereas starlight, rocks and asteroid orbits can be directly observed today, and (2) one could argue that if Adam existed, he had to be mature to be fully functional, but, say, the Kirkwood gaps or the craters on the Moon perform no function other than to deceive us into believing in a false and non-existent past history of a 6000 year old Solar System. I argued with him that he was following a God of deception rather than a God of truth. Another problem with the appearance-of-age argument is that it is not science because it is not falsifiable even in principle, i.e. the argument by implication is that God being omnipotent could fool us in such a way that humans could never test this argument out to see if it is true or false even in principle. This type of argument is junk science and trailer trash theology.

My coup de grace was to produce some papers he published and reviewed when he was a research student in Colorado. At http://www.boulder.swri.edu/~joel/seminar98.html under the entries for February 18 and April 22, he reviewed a couple of papers on luminous blue variables, where timescales of millions of years are mentioned. I asked him how he could square that with his belief in a 6000 year old universe. He looked rather surprised when I produced these papers, and could only say that he had to keep his beliefs under wraps when he was studying for his Ph.D. A colleague of mine at work had contacted his old thesis advisor in Colorado, and his advisor was most surprised to hear of Jason Lisle’s beliefs, because he was a good student. Note that it is a matter with his creationist beliefs that is an issue, not his Christian beliefs.
the_ignored
 
Posts: 2381
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 5:02 pm

Re: Jason Lisle: Another sociopath?

Postby the_ignored » Mon Mar 23, 2015 10:46 pm

Image
the_ignored
 
Posts: 2381
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 5:02 pm

Re: Jason Lisle: Another sociopath?

Postby zilch » Tue Mar 24, 2015 8:34 am

Gosse, who was a very perceptive naturalist and very charismatic, was roundly laughed at in his own time for his Omphalos theory, for exactly the reasons we have. He was surprised and bitterly disappointed. Had he but lived today, he would have been encouraged by this new crop of believers.
You were born. And so you're free. So happy birthday.
- Laurie Anderson
User avatar
zilch
 
Posts: 14873
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 2:12 pm
Location: Vienna, Austria

Re: Jason Lisle: Another sociopath?

Postby the_ignored » Sun Mar 29, 2015 6:23 am

Lisle caught spreading already refuted bullshit.

Here is the article that I link to in my comment on Lisle's page.
Image

Image
the_ignored
 
Posts: 2381
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 5:02 pm

Re: Jason Lisle: Another sociopath?

Postby zilch » Sun Mar 29, 2015 6:23 pm

Again, I'm surprised that Lisle can maintain his heroic cognitive dissonance. He must know at some level that this is bull. But at least he hasn't removed your comment yet.
You were born. And so you're free. So happy birthday.
- Laurie Anderson
User avatar
zilch
 
Posts: 14873
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 2:12 pm
Location: Vienna, Austria

Re: Jason Lisle: Another sociopath?

Postby Chris » Mon Mar 30, 2015 5:03 am

zilch wrote:Again, I'm surprised that Lisle can maintain his heroic cognitive dissonance. He must know at some level that this is bull. But at least he hasn't removed your comment yet.


Lisle may indeed know it's bull but it pays the bills. I suspect his attitude is 'I'll believe anything you like as long as there's a pay cheque in it'. It needs to be added that many [not all] apologists seem to have a problem with the truth. Are they inveterate liars or merely greedy? I'll let the rest of you decide.
If perchance I have offended, think but this, and all is mended, that you have but slumbered here, while a vision did appear. A Midsummer Night's Dream
User avatar
Chris
 
Posts: 1581
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 6:02 am
Location: Victoria, Australia

PreviousNext

Return to Care and Feeding of Recalcitrant, Incorrigible Fundies

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest