Comments on: Methodological naturalism, hobbit style http://designparadigm.blogsome.com/2006/06/13/methodological-naturalism-hobbit-style/ Weblog of the Intelligent Design Evolution Awareness Club at Cornell Sat, 05 Dec 2009 01:19:56 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1-alpha by: Admin http://designparadigm.blogsome.com/2006/06/13/methodological-naturalism-hobbit-style/#comment-791 Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:54:23 +0100 http://designparadigm.blogsome.com/2006/06/13/methodological-naturalism-hobbit-style/#comment-791 This comment thread is closed, and as soon as one of us has a few minutes we'll do some major moving to the geswæpabinn. Amy-- if you want to stay around here, you're going to have to change something about your manner of arguing. Imagine you were talking with these people face to face, perhaps? Dan-- you absolutely need to stick to the rules. Please. This isn't the place for name-calling. --- Update: per blog policy ( and on two counts-- degeneratively off-topic and in violation of the "rules of engagement"), the remainder of this thread has been moved to the <a href="http://designparadigm.blogsome.com/2001/01/20/47/">geswæpabinn</a>. This comment thread is closed, and as soon as one of us has a few minutes we’ll do some major moving to the geswæpabinn. Amy– if you want to stay around here, you’re going to have to change something about your manner of arguing. Imagine you were talking with these people face to face, perhaps?

Dan– you absolutely need to stick to the rules. Please. This isn’t the place for name-calling.

—
Update: per blog policy ( and on two counts– degeneratively off-topic and in violation of the “rules of engagement”), the remainder of this thread has been moved to the geswæpabinn.

]]> by: Jonathan Bartlett http://designparadigm.blogsome.com/2006/06/13/methodological-naturalism-hobbit-style/#comment-770 Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:12:47 +0100 http://designparadigm.blogsome.com/2006/06/13/methodological-naturalism-hobbit-style/#comment-770 I have not read the comments, I apologize. 81 was a bit too many to sort through. However, I thought based on the post itself, you all might find a posting I wrote before to be of interest: crevobits.blogspot.com/2006/02/history-creation-observables-and.html I have not read the comments, I apologize. 81 was a bit too many to sort through. However, I thought based on the post itself, you all might find a posting I wrote before to be of interest:

crevobits.blogspot.com/2006/02/history-creation-observables-and.html

]]> by: Dan http://designparadigm.blogsome.com/2006/06/13/methodological-naturalism-hobbit-style/#comment-662 Tue, 13 Jun 2006 19:51:04 +0100 http://designparadigm.blogsome.com/2006/06/13/methodological-naturalism-hobbit-style/#comment-662 While Don things that Wulfgar was referring to scientists, I think Hal in this story sounds a good bit more like IDers: Sam cited a reference (which, admittedly was not peer-reviewed, or scrutinized in any way like science is), and rather than discussing the claim, Hal dismissed it out of hand because of incredulity. Don - personally, I just use a feed reader (Mozilla Firefox's Sage extension, specifically), which gives me easy previewing of both posts and comments. While Don things that Wulfgar was referring to scientists, I think Hal in this story sounds a good bit more like IDers: Sam cited a reference (which, admittedly was not peer-reviewed, or scrutinized in any way like science is), and rather than discussing the claim, Hal dismissed it out of hand because of incredulity.

Don - personally, I just use a feed reader (Mozilla Firefox’s Sage extension, specifically), which gives me easy previewing of both posts and comments.

]]> by: Don Baccus http://designparadigm.blogsome.com/2006/06/13/methodological-naturalism-hobbit-style/#comment-660 Tue, 13 Jun 2006 19:44:17 +0100 http://designparadigm.blogsome.com/2006/06/13/methodological-naturalism-hobbit-style/#comment-660 <blockquote><i>Maybe Cornell should send Hal out to the swamp to look for the ivory-billed woodpecker.</i></blockquote> I did my best to pick a relevant example :)

Maybe Cornell should send Hal out to the swamp to look for the ivory-billed woodpecker.

I did my best to pick a relevant example :)

]]> by: Amy Lester http://designparadigm.blogsome.com/2006/06/13/methodological-naturalism-hobbit-style/#comment-659 Tue, 13 Jun 2006 19:40:52 +0100 http://designparadigm.blogsome.com/2006/06/13/methodological-naturalism-hobbit-style/#comment-659 Maybe Cornell should send Hal out to the swamp to look for the ivory-billed woodpecker. Maybe Cornell should send Hal out to the swamp to look for the ivory-billed woodpecker.

]]> by: Don Baccus http://designparadigm.blogsome.com/2006/06/13/methodological-naturalism-hobbit-style/#comment-658 Tue, 13 Jun 2006 19:40:46 +0100 http://designparadigm.blogsome.com/2006/06/13/methodological-naturalism-hobbit-style/#comment-658 This blog seriously needs a "preview" button, especially since the entry widget is only a few lines long ... This blog seriously needs a “preview” button, especially since the entry widget is only a few lines long …

]]> by: Don Baccus http://designparadigm.blogsome.com/2006/06/13/methodological-naturalism-hobbit-style/#comment-657 Tue, 13 Jun 2006 19:39:56 +0100 http://designparadigm.blogsome.com/2006/06/13/methodological-naturalism-hobbit-style/#comment-657 Well, yes, it's true that science, as a discipline, tends to be skeptical of claims that can have not been empirically verified. However, your hobbit snippet is not a good analogy for how scientists work. Scientists would spend the evening around the campfire planning an expedition to Northfarthing to investigate whether or not there were any walking trees there. When reputable birders reported hearing ivory-billed woodpeckers deep in a swampy forest in the south, did scientists sit around the campfire and poke fun at them? Sure, there was (and is) a lot of skepticism, but ornithologists responded by putting on a full-court press in an attempt to video and make sound recordings of the bird. This spring there was an organized professional effort to relocate the bird(s), and in addition ornithologists have enlisted the help of the amateur birding community. Real-world examples of how scientists respond to unexpected observations seem much more relevant than fictional accounts of fictional sentient creatures discussing fictional events. Well, yes, it’s true that science, as a discipline, tends to be skeptical of claims that can have not been empirically verified.

However, your hobbit snippet is not a good analogy for how scientists work. Scientists would spend the evening around the campfire planning an expedition to Northfarthing to investigate whether or not there were any walking trees there.

When reputable birders reported hearing ivory-billed woodpeckers deep in a swampy forest in the south, did scientists sit around the campfire and poke fun at them? Sure, there was (and is) a lot of skepticism, but ornithologists responded by putting on a full-court press in an attempt to video and make sound recordings of the bird. This spring there was an organized professional effort to relocate the bird(s), and in addition ornithologists have enlisted the help of the amateur birding community.

Real-world examples of how scientists respond to unexpected observations seem much more relevant than fictional accounts of fictional sentient creatures discussing fictional events.

]]>