26. November 2009 03:04
When writing the descriptions for questions, and even when wording the questions themselves, I strive to maintain a neutral point of view. Importantly, this inhibits my bias towards logic seeping through. This is true for even the stupidest of questions:
Is the Earth 6000 years old?
There are meaningful religious questions that regardless of whether you are religious or atheist are valuable in that they really poke into how you rate being human, but this is not one of them. It's more of a gullibility filter that a church uses to screen its members: "congratulations! you passed the test ensuring that you're stupid enough for us to manipulate you however we want". Organizations such as those churches exist through the equilibrium between the lack of intelligence in its followers and the lack of honesty in its leaders. However, there's another strange type of people in such an organization - the tragically deluded intellectual island men who pump out psuedo-academic papers peer-reviewed in their parallel universe where three sides make a prangle.
For every scientific argument showing some crazy creationist claim can't be the case you'll find an even crazier creationist counterclaim. For example, scientists tells us starlight is billions of years old. Creationists argue that such starlight only seems to be billions of years old with the bizarre hypothesis that the speed of light has been slowing down.
At a certain point, there is no value even dignifying such turds of reason with a refutation. This is because these turds are pumped out of The Bottomless Well of Bullshit.
Religious metaphysics is of course the Saudi Arabia of bullshit, but we have great variety:
The foundation of all this bullshit is a mystery. Such is the nature of the Bottomless Well of Bullshit.