The following describes another example of how some YECs use
pseudoskepticism for financial gain:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytMAYACpIRQ>

Erika aka Gutsick Gibbon makes an interesting observation: **************************************************
28:49
Their focus is not on convincing anybody, we've known that for a long
time. Their focus is on keeping the flock that they have. And part of
that is after-school programs like the one we just saw in Genesis
Apologetics, um to keep people around, and sowing that mistrust in
science is going to be the only way like that they can that they can
keep folks from venturing out and getting curious. ***************************************************

--
You're entitled to your own opinions.
You're not entitled to your own facts.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

jillery wrote:

The following describes another example of how some YECs use
pseudoskepticism for financial gain:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytMAYACpIRQ>

Erika aka Gutsick Gibbon makes an interesting observation: **************************************************
28:49
Their focus is not on convincing anybody, we've known that for a long
time. Their focus is on keeping the flock that they have. And part of
that is after-school programs like the one we just saw in Genesis Apologetics, um to keep people around, and sowing that mistrust in
science is going to be the only way like that they can that they can
keep folks from venturing out and getting curious. ***************************************************

Intelligent design is _not_ about Genesis, but rather interpretation
the same scientific evidence, as evidence for purposeful design as
opposed as evidence for evolution. And I suspect each interpretation
is in accordance with ones paradigm.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Ron Dean wrote:

Intelligent design is _not_ about Genesis, but rather interpretation
the same scientific evidence, as evidence for purposeful design as
opposed as evidence for evolution.

I don't know what planet you're on but, here on Earth we also have
something called "Intelligent Design," and it was without any
question what-so-ever invented by the religious faithful.

it's not secular. It may have attracted secular people over time, but
it was not created by or for any secular reasons.





-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/727701377221083136

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 4 Oct 2023 10:54:07 -0400, Ron Dean
<rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:

jillery wrote:

The following describes another example of how some YECs use
pseudoskepticism for financial gain:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytMAYACpIRQ>

Erika aka Gutsick Gibbon makes an interesting observation:
**************************************************
28:49
Their focus is not on convincing anybody, we've known that for a long
time. Their focus is on keeping the flock that they have. And part of
that is after-school programs like the one we just saw in Genesis
Apologetics, um to keep people around, and sowing that mistrust in
science is going to be the only way like that they can that they can
keep folks from venturing out and getting curious.
***************************************************

Intelligent design is _not_ about Genesis,

The cited video isn't about Genesis either, but about Genesis
Apologetics specifically, and other groups generally which produce religious-based anti-evolution, anti-science, after-school programs
and materials. You would know this if you had bothered to watch the
video.

but rather interpretation
the same scientific evidence, as evidence for purposeful design as
opposed as evidence for evolution. And I suspect each interpretation
is in accordance with ones paradigm.

I accept that you need to believe your paradigm is logically
equivalent to those who disagree with you.

--
To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 4 Oct 2023 10:54:07 -0400, Ron Dean
<rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:

jillery wrote:

The following describes another example of how some YECs use
pseudoskepticism for financial gain:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytMAYACpIRQ>

Erika aka Gutsick Gibbon makes an interesting observation:
**************************************************
28:49
Their focus is not on convincing anybody, we've known that for a long
time. Their focus is on keeping the flock that they have. And part of
that is after-school programs like the one we just saw in Genesis
Apologetics, um to keep people around, and sowing that mistrust in
science is going to be the only way like that they can that they can
keep folks from venturing out and getting curious.
***************************************************

Intelligent design is _not_ about Genesis, but rather interpretation
the same scientific evidence, as evidence for purposeful design as
opposed as evidence for evolution. And I suspect each interpretation
is in accordance with ones paradigm.

The leading proponents of Intelligent Design have all said their
designer is God - and not just any God but the Christian one. Do you
accept that you are an outlier in claiming that ID is not religious?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 10/4/23 7:54 AM, Ron Dean wrote:

jillery wrote:

The following describes another example of how some YECs use
pseudoskepticism for financial gain:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytMAYACpIRQ>

Erika aka Gutsick Gibbon makes an interesting observation:
**************************************************
28:49
Their focus is not on convincing anybody, we've known that for a long
time. Their focus is on keeping the flock that they have. And part of
that is after-school programs like the one we just saw in Genesis
Apologetics, um to keep people around, and sowing that mistrust in
science is going to be the only way like that they can that they can
keep folks from venturing out and getting curious.
***************************************************

Intelligent design is _not_ about Genesis, but rather interpretation
the same scientific evidence, as evidence for purposeful design as
opposed as evidence for evolution. And I suspect each interpretation
is in accordance with ones paradigm.

You are repeating the lie that the ID promoters created to try to get
religious creation ideas taught in public schools. It was decisively
disproved in court, and much additional evidence, including statements
of ID supporters, also show it to be false.

Your statement promotes bad science. Nobody has found any objective
evidence of purposeful design in biology. ID rests entirely on
subjective interpretations, and subjectivity is a lousy basis for science.

ID is also horrible theology. Besides being founded to promote a lie, it hamstrings God by saying that He cannot work in certain ways, and it
implies qualities to God that few if any would agree with.

--
Mark Isaak
"Wisdom begins when you discover the difference between 'That
doesn't make sense' and 'I don't understand.'" - Mary Doria Russell

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 5:55:05 AM UTC-7, jillery wrote:

The following describes another example of how some YECs use pseudoskepticism for financial gain:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytMAYACpIRQ>

Erika aka Gutsick Gibbon makes an interesting observation: **************************************************
28:49
Their focus is not on convincing anybody, we've known that for a long
time. Their focus is on keeping the flock that they have. And part of
that is after-school programs like the one we just saw in Genesis Apologetics, um to keep people around, and sowing that mistrust in
science is going to be the only way like that they can that they can
keep folks from venturing out and getting curious. ***************************************************

I'm wondering whether you have a higher IQ than "Erika"...is that "interesting"?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wednesday, October 4, 2023 at 7:55:57 AM UTC-7, Ron Dean wrote:

jillery wrote:

The following describes another example of how some YECs use pseudoskepticism for financial gain:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytMAYACpIRQ>

Erika aka Gutsick Gibbon makes an interesting observation: **************************************************
28:49
Their focus is not on convincing anybody, we've known that for a long time. Their focus is on keeping the flock that they have. And part of
that is after-school programs like the one we just saw in Genesis Apologetics, um to keep people around, and sowing that mistrust in
science is going to be the only way like that they can that they can
keep folks from venturing out and getting curious. ***************************************************

Intelligent design is _not_ about Genesis, but rather interpretation
the same scientific evidence, as evidence for purposeful design as
opposed as evidence for evolution. And I suspect each interpretation
is in accordance with ones paradigm.

The statement above from "Erika" is not an "observation", and never could be an observation. jillery is a brain dead robot.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 5 Oct 2023 13:50:48 -0700 (PDT), Glenn <GlennSheldon@msn.com>
trolled:

On Wednesday, October 4, 2023 at 7:55:57?AM UTC-7, Ron Dean wrote:

jillery wrote:

The following describes another example of how some YECs use
pseudoskepticism for financial gain:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytMAYACpIRQ>

Erika aka Gutsick Gibbon makes an interesting observation:
**************************************************
28:49
Their focus is not on convincing anybody, we've known that for a long
time. Their focus is on keeping the flock that they have. And part of
that is after-school programs like the one we just saw in Genesis
Apologetics, um to keep people around, and sowing that mistrust in
science is going to be the only way like that they can that they can
keep folks from venturing out and getting curious.
***************************************************

Intelligent design is _not_ about Genesis, but rather interpretation
the same scientific evidence, as evidence for purposeful design as
opposed as evidence for evolution. And I suspect each interpretation
is in accordance with ones paradigm.

The statement above from "Erika" is not an "observation", and never could be an observation.

However you choose to describe Erika's statement, doesn't inform its
veracity.

jillery is a brain dead robot.

Yeah, I get that a lot from willfully stupid trolls.

--
To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)