Gee, just what Jorge said ...

[Jorge]

You are not the only creationist on this site, Jorge. I am one too.

And I think you are a moron.

You do? Well slap my back and call me cousin, that is PRECISELY what I believe you are, a m-o-r-o-n.

But at least you got the Creationist part right - I'll grant you that one.
Perhaps that's due to a stopped clock being correct a few times a day.

Jorge

[Boxing Pythagoras]

You do? Well slap my back and call me cousin, that is PRECISELY what I believe you are, a m-o-r-o-n.

But at least you got the Creationist part right - I'll grant you that one.
Perhaps that's due to a stopped clock being correct a few times a day.

I'm not sure I understand why it is that you desire to post here, Jorge.

For example, I engage in conversation on TWeb, despite the fact that I know the majority of the members here will disagree with my position, because I am genuinely interested in irenic discussion, in learning about how other people view things, and in attempting to discover where my own reasoning may be flawed. Additionally, where my reasoning is not flawed, I do hope to convince others of its veracity.

In contrast, you don't seem to have any interest in congenial dialogue, you don't seem to have any desire to correct the flaws in your own reasoning, and you don't seem to care how anyone else understands the issues you raise. You also don't seem very interested in actually convincing anyone else of the veracity of your beliefs.

I know it's slightly off-topic, but I am quite curious.

[rogue06]

wow, I mean, WOW!!! The extent that specimens like you will travel to defend your religion makes my efforts to promote God's Kingdom pale in comparison. Check out my last post (quote by Cornelius Hunter) -- it is so apropos!

Jorge

Frankly, I don't recall seeing you ever promote God's Kingdom in over a decade of reading your posts. Perhaps you mean promoting YEC, which while you may equate the two, is not the same thing.

[Sparko]

I'm not sure I understand why it is that you desire to post here, Jorge.

For example, I engage in conversation on TWeb, despite the fact that I know the majority of the members here will disagree with my position, because I am genuinely interested in irenic discussion, in learning about how other people view things, and in attempting to discover where my own reasoning may be flawed. Additionally, where my reasoning is not flawed, I do hope to convince others of its veracity.

In contrast, you don't seem to have any interest in congenial dialogue, you don't seem to have any desire to correct the flaws in your own reasoning, and you don't seem to care how anyone else understands the issues you raise. You also don't seem very interested in actually convincing anyone else of the veracity of your beliefs.

I know it's slightly off-topic, but I am quite curious.

me too. all he does is troll. what's the point in that? I am sure he has better things to do with his time. Hopefully at least.

[rogue06]

I'm not sure I understand why it is that you desire to post here, Jorge.

For example, I engage in conversation on TWeb, despite the fact that I know the majority of the members here will disagree with my position, because I am genuinely interested in irenic discussion, in learning about how other people view things, and in attempting to discover where my own reasoning may be flawed. Additionally, where my reasoning is not flawed, I do hope to convince others of its veracity.

In contrast, you don't seem to have any interest in congenial dialogue, you don't seem to have any desire to correct the flaws in your own reasoning, and you don't seem to care how anyone else understands the issues you raise. You also don't seem very interested in actually convincing anyone else of the veracity of your beliefs.

I know it's slightly off-topic, but I am quite curious.

On multiple occasions Jorge has acknowledged that his primary reason for posting is to "rattle cages" or what everyone else would describes as trolling

I'm already there, I'm just not ready to post it here on TWeb. Soon enough ...

Believe it or not, this place is mostly for my entertainment. I get to rattle a few cages and then watch as the 'monkeys' screech.

Lastly - and I've stated this before - I regard this place mostly as amusement. I come here, rattle the cages, and then stand back to listen to the shrieking and howling. It's quite funny, actually.

Okay, you may now resume your howling.

It is best to keep that in mind when engaging with him.


Truth be told, I don't ignore them totally. Just like rattling a stick across the bars of the monkey cages to watch them go ape-wild, I cannot help myself from tormenting Santa and Tiggy every now and then. I will have to answer to the Almighty for that 'wicked' deed, I know.

Jorge

[rogue06]

I'm not convinced this is entirely true . I'm sure he and those of his ilk would be able to understand* plenty of the evidence. However, as you and others have posted before, only evidence that leads to a 6-12kyr timeframe can be accepted by YEC. Everything else must be wrong, it has to be wrong, it can only be wrong. Consilience be damned. They uphold the few erroneous data points as being sufficient to show that the rest of the data field can be dismissed with no further thought.

One can take his quote of Cornelius Hunter and apply it to YEC's version of the Genesis. Whatever needs to be done to account for any evidence that doesn't point towards 6-12kyr timeframe is notched up to yet another of God's undisclosed miracles or it's a problem to resolve at some point in the future. Nothing can overturn that view until they begin to honestly accept such a view is falsifiable and the data shows it to be false. IIRC that is what Glenn Morton went through.

The question is, what good can come from continually engaging people like Jorge in these forums? They demonstrate they'll never accept evidence of a particular type and often use invective responses, rarely if ever engaging with the actual data. So it becomes a game a chest beating and hollering and nothing is ever resolved.

(* to what degree they understand it will vary, but surely to a cursory level sufficient to know what the data represents and how the evidence is being presented to support gigayear timeframe, which is automatically wrong according to the AiG and others membership articles)

Morton's Demon

[Wally]

Morton's Demon

Nah, I think with Jorge it's full on Psychosis.

[Wally]

You are not the only creationist on this site, Jorge. I am one too. And I think you are a moron.

That's the thing, even if Jorge was absolutely right about everything, he'd still be an awful person.

[oxmixmudd]

That's the thing, even if Jorge was absolutely right about everything, he'd still be an awful person.

I think most people see it that way. But one needs to remember he is that way because he is that way, not because he is YEC.

Jim

[Wally]

I think most people see it that way. But one needs to remember he is that way because he is that way, not because he is YEC.

Jim

Absolutely!

I have fundamentalist, probably YEC relatives , and I love them and they are generally good folks.

YEC is just the tool he uses to intentionally alienate himself from us lesser heathens.

[Sparko]

Absolutely!

I have fundamentalist, probably YEC relatives , and I love them and they are generally good folks.

YEC is just the tool he uses to intentionally alienate himself from us lesser heathens.

It is his mocking smugness while being completely clueless. Dunning Kruger to the 10th power.

If he just said, "hey this is what I believe. I don't care what you believe. I just think you are wrong and I am right." and leave it at that, then all would be fine. That's my position. I am not going to argue with you all about fossils and all that. I am not a YEC anyway, but I am still a creationist. But Jorge can't leave it at that. And he can't even politely debate you on his differences. He has to poke you all with a stick while pretending to be superior, and not even realizing that he is the one that looks ignorant.

[TheLurch]

Yeah, if someone wants to say "my religious convictions demand that i believe the earth is 6,000 years old," i'm not going to argue with them - i don't view it as my place to try to change anyone's personal belief system. But once they start trying to say "and the science supports my belief" or (even worse) "i demand my beliefs be introduced into science classrooms", then i've got issues.

This is how my YEC relatives and I have gotten along despite my being in science for decades.

[Omega Red]

I guess the answer lies in your own comment "IIRC that is what Glenn Morton went through". One just never knows exactly what particular conversation or fact will poke into whatever areas of logic of intellectual honesty are accessable. So you just keep patiently trying. There is no way to know on the outside looking in how truly impenetrable a person is on an issue like this.


Jim

I would say, having seen the arrival of Jorge at TWeb 10(?) years back, he's as dogmatic as ever. Can you point to a single example of when he has indicated the potential to engage with these issues in a non 'impenetrable' manner? Do you expect he ever will? I doubt it would be anything that a person would be able to achieve in his case, it has to be an internal change. His raison d'etre is all too clear, so I ask what do you expect to achieve out of such an engagement? Correcting his mistakes for the benefit of other posters is understandable, getting him to own up to his mistakes equally so (and almost impossible - I should know), but in your post I felt there was a (continual) appeal to him to engage with the actual science in these issues, which he will not do, except under the YEC paradigm where the science against a 6-12kyr timeframe is automatically wrong.

[TheLurch]

I would say, having seen the arrival of Jorge at TWeb 10(?) years back, he's as dogmatic as ever. Can you point to a single example of when he has indicated the potential to engage with these issues in a non 'impenetrable' manner?

You're not hoping Jorge has a moment of clarity; you're hoping someone less fanatical than him comes along, reads the arguments, weighs their relative merits, and says "huh, the quality is all on one side."

It's happened in regard to climate change on another board i frequent. Over the years, maybe a half dozen people have said they were neutral or inclined for political reasons to not believe climate change was happening. But they saw all the arguments get recycled over the years, and noticed which side was always able to bring science, rather than speculation, to their side of the argument. They didn't engage in any of the arguments themselves; they just read and changed their minds.

[oxmixmudd]

You're not hoping Jorge has a moment of clarity; you're hoping someone less fanatical than him comes along, reads the arguments, weighs their relative merits, and says "huh, the quality is all on one side."

It's happened in regard to climate change on another board i frequent. Over the years, maybe a half dozen people have said they were neutral or inclined for political reasons to not believe climate change was happening. But they saw all the arguments get recycled over the years, and noticed which side was always able to bring science, rather than speculation, to their side of the argument. They didn't engage in any of the arguments themselves; they just read and changed their minds.

Yep - and there is one other element. Engaging Jorge is basically engaging the hardest nut you'll ever engage. So it's somewhat helpful to have such a fellow to spar with. It helps one realize that when you are dealing with the kind of ideologically based 'science' that he represents, real science, real facts don't matter so much. In fact, what Jorge consistently accuses others of being, he is the most clear example of. And he knows it, he just doesn't understand there are real poeple out there whose primary interest is not supporting some fixed ideology, but rather a genuine desire to know what in fact is true.

In the early stages of my dialogue with Jorge, I was interested in understanding if there were legitimate arguments for YEC. So I sought out the 'best of the best' so to speak in that area, hopeful they could deliver at least one cogent argument for YEC (you see, I am a former YEC). But they couldn't. And Jorge never has either.

Over the years Jorge in specific has become less and less engaging on actual data. I think that is telling - he knows the arguments he has don't don't have convincing power, and so he just plays the little games he plays. He may actually believe his arguments are valid (which would point to a fundamental misunderstanding of science itself) and that would explain how he can be absolutely convinced the only reason people arent convinvced by his arguments is ideological.

Nevertheless - any time he actually offers up something that might be legit - I check out what he puts forward. Nothing yet can stand any sort of rigorous examination of course, but that is to be expected of pseudo-science.


Jim