Gun range is a great place to hear Creationist bullshit.

[Deep13]

I was chatting with the owner and another customer at the gun range Saturday night. They were complaining about how bad TV programming is. One of them mentioned the History channel and that he wasn't impressed with How the Earth Was Made (or something like that.) Since I have been unimpressed by the scholarship on HC anyway and found that particular show to be unnecessarily dramatic and sensationalist, I was preparing to agree. Then he dropped the Creationist bomb. He says the scientists weren't there. He says he doesn't know if we believe in the Bible, but a whale skeleton in a desert is what one would expect from the flood.

How does one respond to such a mountain of bullshit served in one steaming mass? I said fossils were not made during human history.

The owner then said he doubted science because weather forcasts were sometimes inaccurate (he said about half the time which is an overstatement.) I pointed out that predicting what a dynamic system was going to do at a specific time and place exactly is hard because it is so narrow. Not just clouds or sun, but clouds or actual precipitation and whether that precipitation is snow, sleet or rain and exactly how much for this specific zip code. That's a tall order. Geologists deal with vast events happening over millions of years.

I feel like I really should have stood up for science. The problem was that I tend to be litteral-minded and was thinking of responses on his specific point--that show on HC not being very good and the whale skeleton--and not on his general idea about the bible as a source of information. Frankly, suddenly being in the middle of that conversation caused a bit of anxiety on my part too.

What I should have said was, "Well I will accept the conclusions of those who actually study the evidence--and it is extensive--over the guesses of a late bronze age society who thought the Middle East was the whole world."

[gizmonic]

1. You have more restraint than I do.

I would have punched him in the throat, called him a cock-juggling thunder c***, and gone on my merry little way

But that's me... :evilgrin:

Seriously, I don't know how to do battle w/ignorance like that...it just makes me sad.

[Deep13]

2. Wow, you actually found a way to work that expression into a conversation!

I knew you said you wanted to.

One of the characters in Blade III said it and Sweetie found it hilarious.

[EvolveOrConvolve]

9. LOL - you are an evil, evil skeptic!

Seriously, I almost shit myself when I read your post.

:rofl:

[gizmonic]

16. Thank you!

I try to do my part :7

I think Ms. Eartha Kitt says it best:

"I wanna be evil, little evil me
Just as mean and evil as I can be"

:evilgrin:

[ChadwickHenryWard]

3. A man did a study in Terre Haute, IN

and found that his local forecasters were right 85% of the time, when predicting precipitation. However, since it only rains 13.3% of days in Indiana, that's not very impressive. They actually would have been more accurate if they had predicted no rain every single day. That said, they were accurate way more than 50% of the time.

Also, I tend not to disagree with men who are holding guns. My father often gets into arguments at Walmart's ammo counter with the redneck troglodytes that hang around there. Not a single piece of gun legislation has been passed in the year since Obama took office, but these guys are still going nuts over him.

[Deep13]

4. Well, I was holding a gun too.

:evilgrin:

You know, I don't want to be an elitist and look down on uneducated people, but sometimes they make it really hard not to. Maybe I should have said, "Well, keep in mind that story was written by a guy who thought every animal in the world lives within walking distance of Noah's house."

[salvorhardin]

5. He's right!

11.3% accuracy if they just predicted "no rain" every single day vs. their actual accuracy of 11.05%.

You wouldn't happen to have a link for that, or otherwise reference would you? That's an awesome example in demonstrating statistical abuse.

[PVnRT]

6. Especially since you rarely see a forecaster say

"It's definitely going to rain tomorrow."

A more intelligent study would be to study how accurate they are predicting temperature and do something with chance of precipitation.

[ChadwickHenryWard]

7. It's from a great article about bullshit professions.

It mostly makes you reconsider how we think about statistics.

Here you go:
http://www.cracked.com/article_18380_the-6-most-statistically-full-shit-professions.html

[salvorhardin]

8. Ah, Cracked

America's finest skeptical website.

I say that only half-jokingly. Cracked in the past couple of years has been a great force for critical thinking.

[ChadwickHenryWard]

10. Yeah, strangely.

A lot of their articles have a really good skeptical bent. They just have a really good way of thinking about the world and looking at what's funny about it. I have to wonder whose influence it is.

[lazarus]

11. I know it's a daily stop for me

I recently spent a few days just reading articles from Cracked.

[realisticphish]

12. yeah

even seanbaby's stuff... I remember him from when he had his own website, and his comic strip photoshops are absolutely hilarious, if you like juvenile bizarre humor

[Deep13]

13. "if you like juvenile bizarre humor"

What other kinds of humor are there?
:shrug:

[realisticphish]

14. Jay Leno

juvenile, but not humor ;)

[Deep13]

15. Right, the kind of humor that actually hurts to hear. nt