Originally posted by Proper KnobThose that are in science that disagree with your position. Either none of
Sorry, who are 'those'. You've lost me.
them are putting out peer review papers or they are. If none then it seems
bias, if they are then reminding me that there are peer review papers out
there that agree with you seems sort of like (duh). The thing I've worried
about with peer review papers are with this type of issue:
"A CONTROVERSIAL NEW FRACKING BAN in New York state was bolstered in part by research written and peer-reviewed by scientists with ties to the anti-fracking movement"
If you can hide your bias the review is just preaching to those that agree
with you which is actually what I believe happens more often than not. If
it were not true than those that don't agree with the herd wouldn't be so
personally attacked like they are here, people are people they behave that
way.
Originally posted by Proper KnobYou have a point, knowing someone believes and knowing why are not
I'm asking you, it was your claim you made on the previous page.
If scientists with a bias for evolution do so because they 'believe' as you put it. Does this view of yours extend to other scientists in other fields who's scientific findings contradict your view point?
the same thing!
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJaySo does this view of yours that scientists who have a 'bias' towards evolution because 'they believe' extend to the other scientists in scientific fields which contradict your position?
You have a point, knowing someone believes and knowing why are not
the same thing!
Originally posted by KellyJayStill not quite sure of your point to be honest Kelly. Do you know of any peer reviewed papers that 'disagree with my position', whichever position that maybe? Can you send me a link for any?
Those that are in science that disagree with your position. Either none of
them are putting out peer review papers or they are. If none then it seems
bias, if they are then reminding me that there are peer review papers out
there that agree with you seems sort of like (duh). The thing I've worried
about with peer review papers are with this type of issu ...[text shortened]... wouldn't be so
personally attacked like they are here, people are people they behave that
way.
Originally posted by Proper KnobI'd have little respect towards anyone who doesn't admit up front that they
So does this view of yours that scientists who have a 'bias' towards evolution because 'they believe' extend to the other scientist in scientific fields which contradict your position?
have bias! I believe we all have it, there is nothing wrong with that, I don't
think it is avoidable! We acquire bias as soon as we start to believe in
something anything is true you've picked up a bias. I would hope they have
a bias that they owe up too, if they refuse to admit it, I've no use for them
and if they are on my side of the debate I'd feel the same way towards
them.
2 edits
Originally posted by KellyJayWhy would someone have 'bias' with respect to evolution for example? Why would someone have 'bias' with regards to the age of the universe?
I'd have little respect towards anyone who doesn't admit up front that they
have bias! I believe we all have it, there is nothing wrong with that, I don't
think it is avoidable! We acquire bias as soon as we start to believe in
something anything is true you've picked up a bias. I would hope they have
a bias that they owe up too, if they refuse to admit ...[text shortened]... e no use for them
and if they are on my side of the debate I'd feel the same way towards
them.
I freely admit that I for instance will have a bias with regards to sports teams, friends, loved ones etc, but to claim that I have a bias towards the workings of the natural world is just bizarre.
Originally posted by Proper KnobDo you believe you know how old the universe is, do you believe that
Why would someone have 'bias' with respect to evolution for example? Why would someone have 'bias' with regards to the age of the universe?
I freely admit that I for instance will have a bias with regards to sports teams, friends, loved ones etc, but to claim that I have a bias towards the workings of the natural world is just bizarre.
evolution is true? As soon as you have an opinion you have a bias.
Originally posted by Proper KnobThe thing is I don't care if those on my side of any debate contradict my
So does this view of yours that scientists who have a 'bias' towards evolution because 'they believe' extend to the other scientists in scientific fields which contradict your position?
position on any topic, or that those on the other side of a debate contradict
my position. I don't hold my positions to be in the majority view on any
topic I try to settle on what I think is true. If your world is all about that
others agree with you on paper, please feel free! I don't care!
Originally posted by KellyJayAmongst all that shouting can I take your answer to be a yes?
The thing is I don't care if those on my side of any debate contradict my
position on any topic, or that those on the other side of a debate contradict
my position. I don't hold my positions to be in the majority view on any
topic I try to settle on what I think is true. If your world is all about that
others agree with you on paper, please feel free! I don't care!
Originally posted by KellyJayI disagree. You're using a non standard definition of the word 'bias'.
Do you believe you know how old the universe is, do you believe that
evolution is true? As soon as you have an opinion you have a bias.
'Bias is an inclination of temperament or outlook to present or hold a partial perspective, often accompanied by a refusal to consider the possible merits of alternative points of view. People may be biased toward or against an individual, a race, a religion, a social class, a political party, or a species.[1] Biased means one-sided, lacking a neutral viewpoint, not having an open mind. Bias can come in many forms and is often considered to be synonymous with prejudice or bigotry.[2]
Form the wiki for bias.
Originally posted by Proper KnobExactly how is what I said different than having an inclination or outlook
I disagree. You're using a non standard definition of the word 'bias'.
'Bias is an inclination of temperament or outlook to present or hold a partial perspective, often accompanied by a refusal to consider the possible merits of alternative points of view. People may be biased toward or against an individual, a race, a religion, a social class, a poli ...[text shortened]... nd is often considered to be synonymous with prejudice or bigotry.[2]
Form the wiki for bias.
to present or hold a partial perspective?
You want so bad to trap me in something and you are ending up proving
my point!
2 edits
Originally posted by KellyJay
Exactly how is what I said different than having an inclination or outlook
to present or hold a partial perspective?
You want so bad to trap me in something and you are ending up proving
my point!
Bias is an inclination of temperament or outlook to present or hold a partial perspective, often accompanied by a refusal to consider the possible merits of alternative points of view. People may be biased toward or against an individual, a race, a religion, a social class, a political party, or a species. Biased means one-sided, lacking a neutral viewpoint, not having an open mind. Bias can come in many forms and is often considered to be synonymous with prejudice or bigotry.
Note the text highlighted. I've frequently asked you to explain your position on various issues to me throughout this thread and others. Would you say that is a refusal on my part to consider the merits of alternative points of view?