Rather than argue what I said, you managed to prove what I said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rufusboi
Not all scientists can agree if global warming is happening. Not all scientists can agree that if it is happening whether it is caused by human actions or is a natural occurence.
|
"Not all scientists can agree" is an argument of the uninformed or ignorant. Understanding preponderance of evidence and overwhelming consensus in science are pretty basic skills.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rufusboi
The evolution debate is also linked to religion. Just because someone has religious beliefs that don't coincide with another person's belief in evolution does not mean they are uninformed or uneducated, it just means they have different beliefs.
|
People's religious beliefs don't have coincide, that's not the point. The point is that evolution, as Aj put it, is a matter of scientific evidence. Confusing religion with science is an argument of the uniformed or ignorant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rufusboi
I'm not a fan of Palin, but some people think it is wonky thinking to take Obama seriously or Clinton seriously.
|
Yes, some unformed or ignorant people do think that Palin is the bomb and think that it is wonky to take those two men seriously. Obama is one of the smartest people in this country, and Clinton's right up there. Palin, on the other hand, has a clear and consistent track record of being not terribly bright. So, yeah, when someone thinks Obama's a joke and Palin's not, that person's not "tuned in" or "aware".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rufusboi
The points you are making above have to do with opinion not how informed someone is on issues or how willing they are to learn about issues. Otherwise you are saying that anyone that does not agree with you is uninformed. Surely you are not saying that?
|
Sorry, no. Global warming, evolution, and how smart Obama is next to Palin aren't opinions. I don't have a problem with someone disagreeing with me on facts. I have a huge problem with someone disagreeing with me because of their lack of facts and refusal to look at the facts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rufusboi
Perhaps someone's belief that Saddam was involved in 9/11 is due to being influenced by media stories and hype. Part of the issue is that most of us don't know what to believe because most of what we read is biased and skewed, lacking facts, or poorly written. So perhaps if the President did say take out your map, here are the facts, maybe many of us would. We spend our days sorting through so much misinformation that most of us no longer know which side is up.
|
This conversation started because you said "I think more Americans are tuned in, aware, and concerned than you could imagine." Now you're saying that most of you don't know how to sort out the facts from the crap. Which is it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rufusboi
My larger point is not to point fingers at the masses or people who disagree with you, but to point out the problems with sources of information.
|
Again, all those tuned in, aware, and concerned Americans should be able to weight information against it's sources.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rufusboi
I would also add that I think most of the problem is not to do with lack of knowledge of facts and info bites, but lack of critical thinking and analysis. Teaching people how to think is more important than teaching them what to think.
|
Again, gotta disagree. Teaching people how to think is vitally important, agreed. But, teaching them what to think is also important. All the critical thinking skills in the world mean nothing if they're taught to believe that the earth is 6,000 years old. No amount of critical thinking skills are going to help those school kids in Texas who are having American history replaced by Conservative indoctrination. You can't critically think your way out of a paper bag if you don't have facts.