tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post7532245718361862747..comments2023-09-24T07:53:50.826-05:00Comments on The Atheist Experience™: Why I don't argue with YouTube, reduxUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-35166629333170593302010-06-01T04:16:58.004-05:002010-06-01T04:16:58.004-05:00A You-tuber took pity on my gay heathen soul and I...A You-tuber took pity on my gay heathen soul and I turned our exchange into a blog post:<br /><br />http://giaklamata.blogspot.com/2010/05/jesu-joy-of-mans-desiring.html<br /><br />(Sorry, I don't know how to create hyperlinks here)Ipmilathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11370120491927658242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-14822996553349750582010-05-31T04:08:35.228-05:002010-05-31T04:08:35.228-05:00I find the message in this post compelling, but I ...I find the message in this post compelling, but I do not agree with the conclusion. The power in YouTube, as with Wikipedia and other such sites, is that others have already done the work for you. So on a forum where I don't wish to spend a few hours writing a detailed rebuttal, I might be lazy and post a YouTube link.<br /><br />Of course in a one-on-one debate you should in general not say "You are wrong, see this YouTube clip". However, people tend to find it easier to listen and watch rather than read. So for general educational purposes, YouTube can really help. Especially in a creationist/'Darwinian' debate, they can tackle a lot of commonly found misconceptions about evolution in a simple, graphical, and easy to understand way.<br /><br />Nevertheless, I think I will at least try to use them less. ;_; *sigh* Not like I have actual work to do or something, more suited to my legal education...WriterBen01https://www.blogger.com/profile/09761407698941801260noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-71897882861731985342010-05-30T23:24:27.146-05:002010-05-30T23:24:27.146-05:00Cool awesome stereotypes of atheists
-they'r...Cool awesome stereotypes of atheists <br /><br />-they're nerds<br />-they eat babies<br />-they obsess<br /><br />its all true nuff said.Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06404279723285205037noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-62998844182071052032010-05-30T12:05:03.002-05:002010-05-30T12:05:03.002-05:00Duke, you're coming across as kind of nutty.Duke, you're coming across as kind of nutty.MethodSkeptichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05844566230083531269noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-4205427093714402562010-05-30T10:40:31.158-05:002010-05-30T10:40:31.158-05:00@David
It can only be construed as irony if reduc...@David<br /><br />It can only be construed as irony if reduced to such vague terms and then conflated. It seems to me that what you are really trying to do is to discredit the post and article by claiming hypocrisy, as opposed to irony. So, if Russell "points" to something for further clarification, under the umbrella of complaining about people who "point" to bad evidence, he is a hypocrite? Really? If that's the case...so what? Does that mean 9/11 conspiracies are more valid?<br /> <br />The point is that these YouTube videos are presented as "evidence", but do not have to meet any standards whatsoever, and therefore, debunking them is a waste of time. The burden of proof is on them, and a YouTube video is not proof. <br /><br /><br />A conspiracy theorist is like someone who is putting together a jigsaw puzzle from a bunch of random pieces, with only a vague idea of what the completed picture should look like. They cut away mismatched edges with scissors, and repaint pieces to match others. The puzzle is completed when the rectangular space no longer has any holes, and they feel a sense of great accomplishment. <br /><br />The puzzle pieces are bits of information, like YouTube clips, and the internet allows faster access to more of these pieces, with easy to use computer tools to alter this information. The completed puzzle becomes an unassailable fact.Thomas Dukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00804326045764733280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-9432912363168181052010-05-30T10:39:08.345-05:002010-05-30T10:39:08.345-05:00slightly. On the other hand, practice what you pr...slightly. On the other hand, practice what you preach--"Please sum up the points in that video that you found compelling, because I'm not going to watch." <br /><br />Which he did.MethodSkeptichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05844566230083531269noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-31269174270750806482010-05-30T08:42:23.547-05:002010-05-30T08:42:23.547-05:00Don't you find it quite ironic that an article...Don't you find it quite ironic that an article that chastises you-tubers for pointing to someone else and saying "what he said" does so by pointing to another web site and saying "what he said"? I love what you guys do, but isn't this article doing exactly what it tells people not to do by pointing to another article that explains it better?David Buckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14309364915707457568noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-10048498962632733152010-05-29T18:32:34.179-05:002010-05-29T18:32:34.179-05:00Now now, Russell, you know I'll never consider...Now now, Russell, you know I'll never consider you an authority on <i>anything</i> until you become a proper Conservative...George From NYhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06158111795024631345noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-20204436934573584762010-05-29T14:59:06.475-05:002010-05-29T14:59:06.475-05:00When requesting that somebody sum up the contents ...When requesting that somebody sum up the contents of the video they are trying to get you to watch, I would think that the most frequent answer would be, "Well, it's a nattily dressed fellow dancing about while telling the listener that he's never going to give them up and never going to let them down."Nick Joneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08849197571884207591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-79529099749497954642010-05-29T08:17:43.860-05:002010-05-29T08:17:43.860-05:00I think there may be something similar going on wi...I think there may be something similar going on with ordinary, non-conspiracy-theorist people as well: you've probably noticed how a lot of religious apologists on Internet fora often copy and paste articles without attribution. And I think we all know people who forward alerts that could've been debunked in two minutes at Snopes.<br /><br />I suspect what's going on in their heads is that they don't differentiate between good and bad sources, or at least not as well as they should. That is, if they found an argument convincing solely because it was written by a Ph.D., they may not realize this fact, and forward it because they mistakenly think it's convincing on its own merits.<br /><br /><i>Something I prefer not to see is using a clip from TAE as an authority.</i><br /><br />I think the Star Trek Rule cuts both ways: if I want to argue my point by saying that "Tracie says X...", then it behooves me to make sure it would be equally convincing as "Jim Kirk says X...".arensbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15251547886605570242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-59154398886301950572010-05-29T05:51:52.234-05:002010-05-29T05:51:52.234-05:00@Kargonath
Oh, good god, the comments are a waste...@Kargonath<br /><br />Oh, good god, the comments are a waste of freaking electrons. A bunch of shrieking dimwits.MethodSkeptichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05844566230083531269noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-18359494357822244072010-05-29T05:50:07.190-05:002010-05-29T05:50:07.190-05:00The second excerpt reminds me of the reasoning pro...The second excerpt reminds me of the reasoning process of the "somebody's got to stand up to these experts" creationists.<br /><br />A couple of months back at my blog (*coughshamelessplugcough*) I did a little bit mostly to advertise my favorite podcasts/videos called "How to Deconvert with iTunes and YouTube." Put simply, I think there's a time and a place for such things, if something you agree with is stated particularly well or entertainingly.<br /><br />But you're exactly right, I can't fathom citing a YouTube video as a source, even if it were something from ProfMTH, AronRa or Thunderf00t. At best I would email one of those gentlemen and ask what resources they could point me towards. I get leery even using information I get off of wikipedia.MethodSkeptichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05844566230083531269noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-48863172302872222512010-05-29T02:01:00.259-05:002010-05-29T02:01:00.259-05:00This is why I love the Iron Chariots wiki; I can e...This is why I love the Iron Chariots wiki; I can expand my knowledge of a given subject to get a basic understanding of what is meant by a term, which then acts as a starting point for further research (a similar effect to Wikipedia).<br /><br />Worse than video arguments are arguments in the comments sections. Not only is there a character limit, but related posts are not always contiguous which makes reading them very difficult.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00754868350469328271noreply@blogger.com