(September 8, 2008 at 5:55 am)Tiberius Wrote: So if we point out an error you make in Evolutionary theory you will simply ignore it?

I said that I will ignore any post which has the term "creationist" in it. If I make a mistake then I make a mistake and anyone is free to point that out to me. I welcome it in fact. But I do not welcome the comparison with creationists nor do I need/want to know that they made the same mistake. I will ignore such posts.

brick-top Wrote:There is no such thing as an 'evolutionist'

That is incorrect. The term evolutionist is a well defined term which can be found in any dictionary, e.g.
http://medical.merriam-webster.com/medical/evolutionist

Quote:evolutionist - a student of or adherent to a theory of evolution

Exactly what did you think they were called anyway??

Nothing personal folks but I think it may have been a mistake for me to come here.

(September 9, 2008 at 1:59 am)Pete Wrote: I said that I will ignore any post which has the term "creationist" in it. If I make a mistake then I make a mistake and anyone is free to point that out to me. I welcome it in fact. But I do not welcome the comparison with creationists nor do I need/want to know that they made the same mistake. I will ignore such posts.

I understand that, but I think when most of us say "common creationist mistake" or other such words we simply mean that it was a creationist who originally came up with it, and that it has somehow wandered into general thinking. The creationist term only refers to the origin of the mistake, not to the person making it.

(September 9, 2008 at 1:59 am)Pete Wrote: Nothing personal folks but I think it may have been a mistake for me to come here.

Why do you say that?

Do you recall they actually put the word "Doh" - as used by Homer Simpson - in the Oxford English Dictionary? Yes, dictionary definitions are limited and should not be used as the definitive endpoint for your semantics.

(September 9, 2008 at 1:59 am)Pete Wrote: [quote=brick-top]
There is no such thing as an 'evolutionist'

That is incorrect. The term evolutionist is a well defined term which can be found in any dictionary, e.g.
http://medical.merriam-webster.com/medical/evolutionist
[quote]

"The terms "evolutionism" and "evolutionist" are rarely used in the scientific community as self-descriptive terms"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionism

(September 10, 2008 at 8:45 am)Brick-top Wrote: "The terms "evolutionism" and "evolutionist" are rarely used in the scientific community as self-descriptive terms"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionism

You said that I made a mistake. I didn't. Just because people in the field don't use that term often it doesn't mean that people, such as a layman like myself, are making a mistake when we use it. Expecially when the field is being discussed and one is distinguishing between people with different views. Someday I might want to criticise those creationists folks and the term "evolutionist" is an appropriate term so that I can refer to someone who is an adherent to the theory of evolution. How else would I refer to such people? This is a pretty trivial topic and not worth discussing anyway. So let's leave it at that. Okay?

Ace Wrote:Why do you say that?

I came here to better understand how theists view things. I wanted to do my best to avoid getting into debates and it seems that I keep getting into them. I don't want to ruffle any feathers.

Perhaps I just need more practice in asking questions in such a way as to not imply that I'm criticizing anyones views. The reason I need to stay away from debates is not that I can't debate my viewpoint but that I have a problem where debates cause me to have chest pains and possibly anxiety attacks. Its probably a result of PTSD that I got from my fight with Leukemia. Its one of the reasons I'm disabled right now. Its nothing personal though. Please keep that in mind. Okey dokey?

Don't get too discouraged when it comes to debates on the interwebs Pete. No one here is "out for blood" - at least that I know of. And it can be hard to infer meaning from some posts - some may take something to heart when it may have been an innocent question - I'm guilty of that myself. It's like a fellow member on another board said "dude, it's just the internet". I suppose so of us may get a bit wrapped up emotionally in some debates. My problem is I have a want to impart as much knowledge as I can while simultaneously debunking myths, misunderstandings and so forth and sometimes I get a bit zealous with my information and can overload people but others eat it up and want more.

My advice is don't fret too much man, it's just the internet.

(September 7, 2008 at 9:43 pm)Brick-top Wrote:

(September 7, 2008 at 7:42 pm)Pete Wrote: I'm not an evolutionist. I don't claim to be one. I know the basics. Therefore I'm sure I'll make errors in the future. If the errors I make are the same as the errors that a creationists makes then I'm not interested in since an error is an error. For that reason I will no longer respond to any post which contains the word "creationist." Thanks.

You just made a mistake. It's the fourth word in that quote.

There is no such thing as an 'evolutionist'

You don't call someone an Atomic-ist or Gravitational-ist or a relativity-ist etc.

I'm nit picking but us Darwinists need to get rid of these moronic labels! lol hahahaha

Hi again Brick-Top

I've been really jazzed about learning more about evolution. Its one of my favorite areas of science. I just got back from the library and got several books on the subject. One of them is called What is Evolution by Ernst Mayr (2001). As you know Mayr is a big name in evolution circles. Mayr uses the term evolutionist in this book as well as the term evolutionism. I'm sure we all have better things to discuss than standard terminology. Feel free to correct me if I use a term that is not found in the dictionary. I'd be nice not to bother correcting spelling either since that goes against basic Internet ettique. Thanks.

Pete

(September 10, 2008 at 12:38 pm)Pete Wrote: How else would I refer to such people?

Sane.

This term is almost never used by people who accept evolution actually I've talked to several biologists and they say it's a idiotic term as well.

Like I said, you wouldn't call someone a gravitiationalist, atomicist or lable people just because they accept a theory.

(September 10, 2008 at 5:36 pm)solidsquid Wrote: Don't get too discouraged when it comes to debates on the interwebs Pete. No one here is "out for blood" - at least that I know of.

More importantly I want to make sure that I don't come off as being rude or condescending myself. I'm normally a very polite person and I never insult anyone who isn't obviously attacking me and going for my jugular.

Quote:And it can be hard to infer meaning from some posts - some may take something to heart when it may have been an innocent question - I'm guilty of that myself.

Exactly. In this case misunderstandings are easy to come by. In this case different people use the term creationist to mean different things. Some use it to refer to those people who argue that the Earth is less than 10,000 years old and that evolution is wrong. I am not one of those people. However it can also be taken to refer to those people who believe that the universe was created by design. I am one of those people, i.e. I believe that the universe was created by God. That's about as far as I go when it comes to others who refer to themselves as creationists. For that reason I don't want to be thought of as a creationist because the term is often taken to mean that such people don't believe in evolution.

Quote:I suppose so of us may get a bit wrapped up emotionally in some debates. My problem is I have a want to impart as much knowledge as I can while simultaneously debunking myths, misunderstandings and so forth and sometimes I get a bit zealous with my information and can overload people but others eat it up and want more.

I think it would be wise to get to know the intent of the person's comment since its easy to assume things that aren't true. I'm trying to make sure in my posts that people don't make some wrong assumptions about my views. Its easy to assume things about theists since many tend to have certain beliefs which I don't adhere to. I have many beliefs that go againts theists. A great deal many. I'm not what may be considered as your average theist by far.

Quote:My advice is don't fret too much man, it's just the internet.

Absoultely my good man. Thanks for your understanding.

Adrian - I want to make sure that you understand that I'm not upset about your responses by any means whatsoever. You seem like an intelligent man and I don't want to give you the impression that I think otherwise. Okay my good man?

Best wishes

Pete