Talk:Essay: PZ Myers finally admits: "...I was naive and stupid"

From Conservapedia
This is the current revision of Talk:Essay: PZ Myers finally admits: "...I was naive and stupid" as edited by Conservative (Talk | contribs) at 19:43, 28 January 2019. This URL is a permanent link to this version of this page.

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

From Myers essay, it says,

what happened is that the credibility of science was stolen to bolster rationalizing prior bigotries. People were drawn into the Church of the New Atheism by Islamophobia, but rather than being enlightened about the unity of humanity, they instead learned that bastardized evolutionary theories could be weaponized to justify all kinds of abuses

Perhaps something could be excised from this for the War on Science? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 12:24, 28 January 2019 (EST)

Scientific fraud is so rampant that a doctor told me that he no longer trusts medical journals and prefers to see medical procedures prove their effectiveness over a number of years. And he is probably one of the best doctors in his field for the city in which he resides.Conservative (talk) 13:10, 28 January 2019 (EST)
Can you put together a few paragraphs? Say one, two, or three using PZ Myers's essay? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 13:47, 28 January 2019 (EST)
For example, here he says "the intellectual foundation of atheism," which presumably is science, then he claims "science was stolen to bolster rationalizing prior bigotries." The rest of the article (when he's not quoting someone else), is a treasure trove of the main thesis of War on Science, "the Leftist expropriation of natural science to promote crackpot social science theories." RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 13:55, 28 January 2019 (EST)

RobS, please check your talk page, I will soon post something for you on it.

Second, atheism has no foundation. That is why the question, "What proof and evidence do you have that atheism is true?" is so effective.

The atheist Francois Tremblay wrote in his essay Herding Cats: Why atheism will lose:

Atheism, as commonly defined by atheists, expresses a lack of belief, or disbelief, in deities. It is not a positive belief in anything, but a negative concept. That is why atheists, inasmuch as they are atheists, are nothing like a coherent or concerted group. Organizations like American Atheists serve a role of broadcasting information more than anything else, because there cannot be concerted action when nobody agrees on what to do (except of course on direct concerns like the rights of atheists or separation of church and state). Most atheists disagree strongly on whenever atheism should be propagated, or promoted, and on the matter of doing so.

Another problem of atheism qua atheism is that it does not contain its own basis. What I mean by this is that atheism is a punctual, ontological belief, which is itself the implicit or explicit result of metaphysical and epistemological deductions. Any reply to an attack on this basis cannot come directly from atheism. Concentrating oneself only on being an atheist is like trying to build a house from the second floor up. It may look less costly on paper, and for people who only build houses in their imagination this may be a good way of seeing it, but it's not good enough for a serious endeavour. And most importantly, it's too fragile. I see too many religionists attacking atheism from the bottom and atheists being unable to adequately reply to the arguments. If the atheist cannot answer to his most fundamental beliefs on the nature of reality and cognition, then his atheism is worthless in terms of validation. It is nothing more than a big paper tiger, made from the finest cardboard.[1]

In January of 2017, PZ Myers said about Donald Trump's presidential victory:

This span of time representing the agonizing death of American idealism, decline of liberalism, and collapse into corruption has played out as the background of my life.

That’s depressing. History is not going to remember me, but I managed to live through a terrible period that will be remembered, unpleasantly. It would be nice to go out on a note of optimism, but that’s probably not going to happen.[2]

Given the rise of right-wing populism in Europe/USA (and other places), I have a feeling that Myers will die a bitter old man.Conservative (talk) 14:39, 28 January 2019 (EST)

Think of the audience you are writing for. Begin with something like this : "According to PZ Myers, the intellectual roots of atheism is science. Myers complains that science was stolen to bolster rationalizing prior bigotries." Then fill in the rest with cuts n pastes of his nonsensical arguments. But focus on his criticism of leftist colleagues, and not Republicans or the right. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 15:02, 28 January 2019 (EST)
RobS, Myers is a liberal/leftist and he was attacking people to the right of him. So I don't think this essay of Myers is going to be very useful for the purpose you requested of me. I did the best I could do though and put something I your talk page.Conservative (talk) 15:06, 28 January 2019 (EST)
It's Myers we're talking about. It doesn't have to be rational, scientific, or make sense. Use his own words and own arguments. Thus we draw the link between atheism and the War on Science. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 15:16, 28 January 2019 (EST)
I did the best I can do on your talk page. To be frank, I am not feeling well today. Regardless, I am not going to be of much help to you. I will just leave it at what I left on your talk page.Conservative (talk) 15:21, 28 January 2019 (EST)
Take your time. If you start with the paragragh I suggested above, then cut n paste his criticism of Hitchens and whoever, you can load it up with links to your pages. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 15:32, 28 January 2019 (EST)
I'll start it for you. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 15:38, 28 January 2019 (EST)

Do you see what we were able to do? by using the Frankfurt School of imminent critique, we were able to take PZ Myers own words, "evidence-based reasoning," and have PZ Myers make the case against evolutionary racism: "rather than being enlightened about the unity of humanity, they instead learned that bastardized evolutionary theories could be weaponized to justify all kinds of abuses."

This is a classic example of using their own techniques to defeat them. See Far-left#Immanent_critique_and_political_correctness. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 18:20, 28 January 2019 (EST)

As an aside, I think Myers is going to be more and more irrelevant given the bigger and bigger declines of secular leftism in the world. And Myers is pretty obscure already. Maybe the Democrats will surprise me and beat Trump, but I think the odds still favor Trump. It might all come down to whether Trump's administration can successfully broker a deal with China.Conservative (talk) 20:41, 28 January 2019 (EST)


  1. Herding Cats: Why atheism will lose by Francois Tremblay
  2. [Stop tolerating the intolerable] by PZ Myers, January 2017