On 10/21/2010 4:10 PM, Darren New wrote:
> Patrick Elliott wrote:
>> On 10/20/2010 11:04 PM, Darren New wrote:
>>> Patrick Elliott wrote:
>>>> On 10/20/2010 8:58 AM, Darren New wrote:
>>>>>> Sadly, this is not uncommon. However, many, including myself, have
>>>>>> argued that you cannot have such a drastic error in thinking, and not
>>>>>> have it spill over into your own discipline,
>>>>>
>>>>> Huh. Odd. Some of the smartest people I know doing computers are
>>>>> devoutly religious. I can't imagine why you'd think that belief that
>>>>> Jesus sacrificed himself to save you would interfere with your ability
>>>>> to design computer software, for example.
>>>>>
>>>> Right.. Because there isn't, for example, a very weird association
>>>> between either engineers *or* computer science, and the tendency of
>>>> both to think ID makes more sense than Evolution. Its invariably one
>>>> or the other, which ends up being the discipline someone belongs to,
>>>> when they claim to advocate ID.
>>>
>>> You know, I don't know where you grew up or anything, but I have the
>>> hardest time in the world understanding WTF you're going on about. That
>>> entire sentence makes no sense. It's like a written version of the G-Man
>>> speaking.
>>>
>>
>> Its not about where I grew up.
>
> What you've experienced isn't what I'm talking about. I'm saying that
> you're the only person on here that posts entire posts that are utterly
> incomprehensible to me. It's like you took a handful of clauses from
> some books and strung them together with no commas. It doesn't matter
> what you're talking about. Half the time you just don't make any sense,
> regardless of whether I'd agree or disagree were I able to understand.
>
> It may be me. I'm not saying it's you. I'm just saying half your posts
> sound like disconnected babble to me, referring to things in your own
> head that you haven't actually written in the post or something.
>
> My wife used to do that. She'd be telling me something that happened at
> work between her and Steve, and by the end of the story she's talking
> about six other people, all of whom I think are Steve, because she never
> mentioned someone came in. And wouldn't finish half her sentences before
> starting the next sentence.
>
>> That is the point I am making.
>
> I agree entirely. But that's not what you said. You said "being deluded
> about creationism damages your ability to do anything else." That's what
> I'm disagreeing with.
>
>> In my experience, even being *very good* at your discipline,
>> seemingly, doesn't mean that your belief in certain religious concepts
>> won't "bleed over" into that discipline, and undermine your ability to
>> do you job.
>
> I think you have to decide whether he's *very good* at his job, or
> whether his beliefs damage his ability to do his job. I don't think you
> can have it both ways.
>
>> At best, the only argument that *is* valid, with regard to the idea
>> that it may not have an effect, would be, "Depending on whether or not
>> the goofy shit you believe directly addresses some subject you are
>> studying, you may escape having your thinking muddled *in* your studies."
>
> Well, yes. That's why I said creationism doesn't really affect computer
> programming much, but certainly affects biology.
>
>> question then becomes, "How sure are you that what ever those goofy
>> things are, you will *never* run across something that contradicts it,
>> in your field?"
>
> I'm pretty sure believing that Jesus saves your soul or that John Smith
> had magic golden plates isn't going to affect your ability to calculate
> someone's federal income tax or implement the bittorrent protocol.
>
Which, if that is all they do, isn't a problem. I am sure the goofballs 
at the Disco Institute have some top programmers trying to prove flood 
geology via simulation (or had, since I never heard anything since.. 
wonder why? lol), but being able to code something that simulates 
gibberish, and do it **really really well** is only considered a 
non-liability when applied to *video games*, usually. Though, I might be 
wrong, some of the gibberish that no doubt went into the financial 
accounting software everyone was using could call into question whether 
those people are really that brilliant at it either..

>> That is what I see happening with some of these people.
>
> Sure. But you implied it happens with all of these people. That's the
> assertion to which I'm objecting.
>
> I think overgeneralization damages truth. Pointing out that fixing a
> Mac's web cam requires taking the whole computer back to the store I
> think is much more effective than screaming "All Mac users are fags!"
>
Ok. I overgeneralized. I admit it.

-- 
void main () {
   If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
     if version = "Vista" {
       call slow_by_half();
       call DRM_everything();
     }
     call functional_code();
   }
   else
     call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models, 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message