Humor will not be tolerated!! -Portia

http://theboard.byu.edu/questions/62640/

I remember a question within the past few weeks where someone asked about reporting a professor (or someone) for a similar sentiment. (http://theboard.byu.edu/questions/62542/). Seriously, I think this guy is trolling and I just want validation that other people think it might be the same person.

Any takers?

Edit: I should note that the lack of spaces between words in his (only a guy would troll this obnoxiously) nym both times only reinforces my belief its the same person.

Well,theycertainlyhaveatendencytonotusespacesintheir'nyms...

Edit: hey! Did you edit that while I was talking to you?

Add http://theboard.byu.edu/questions/62642/ and http://theboard.byu.edu/questions/62641/ to the troll list.

Dead Cat wrote:Well,theycertainlyhaveatendencytonotusespacesintheir'nyms...

Edit: hey! Did you edit that while I was talking to you?

I prefer to think you were talking at me since I was busy editing and not paying attention to you.

Also they didn't put a space before any of their parentheses(so it seems like you're probably right, wired).

Seems feasible to me.

What exactly is it that you are concerned with? The young earth theories have a sizable following and I wouldn't be too surprised to find geology intstructors being faced with similar questions on a regular basis. Same with the skinwalkers, really. I know and respect some individuals (some Navajo, some not) who are sure that there is something preternatural there; is it not presumptuous to assume that we already have all answers and anyone asking such a question is doing so to mess with people?

Tao, as a fellow scientist I'm... disappointed to say the least. Young earth theories have absolutely zero substantiated scientific evidence to support their theories. None. The only location where the 6,000-year-old idea pops up is in a book which has been re-written by theologians, priests, and politicians (not scientists), more times than people can count by now. All evidence the young-earth theorists have shown has been molded to fit the theory.

Science is done by gathering evidence and forming theories based on evidence. Young-earth theorists start with their theory and then scramble to grasp on to any sliver of evidence which might validate their theory. NOT SCIENCE!

People who pretend to do science are either not-that-smart, intentionally obtuse, or trolling.

Most likely trolling.

Hypatia, I don't believe Tao agrees with the young earth theories, but rather is saying that this guy's theories aren't way off in left field. There are lots of people who believe them. He's just wondering why that concerns anyone.

I agree with Hypatia on this one. Young Earth creationism should not be treated as legitimate science. The fact that there are a lot of ignorant people out there who believe it does not make it any more legitimate.

I didn't say it was legit, either. I said there was no reason to get upset with Tao for wondering why people were concerned about this.

In fact, I'm a little curious, too. Why do we care enough about some guy's belief to start a thread? Do we think he'll read it and learn the error of his ways? Or do we just want to gripe? Is it because we think he's just doing it to be inflammatory? Is there something I'm missing?

Even though we know that people who believe this sort of thing exist, we still have trouble accepting that fact when we actually encounter one. So our first thought is that he doesn't actually believe these things, he is just a troll. I guess I had never considered the possibility that he actually believes these things.

I would say the point of the thread is not to get him to change his ways, but rather for us to discuss the proper way to deal with these characters.

Orson Scott Card (a pragmatic science-and-religion-don't-rule-each-other-out-but-we-might-not-have-the-whole-picture-on-both-sides-but-I-have-no-problem-with-evolution-or-the-Big-Bang kind of guy like me) wrote a really insightful article about this issue a few months ago for the Mormon Times.

http://www.mormontimes.com/article/1768 ... Lords-time

Here's a highlight:

Orson Scott Card wrote:If I find out eventually that the a-day-is-a-day people are right, or the 1,000-year-day people, or the natural-processes people, I'll rejoice at the new knowledge.

Meanwhile, I have my opinions, but I have no testimony of them. I'll keep them till I have better information, but I won't disdain anyone for having different ones.

Isn't there enough to worry about among the church's settled doctrines — the Atonement of Christ, living prophets, the Book of Mormon, the plan of happiness, and a long list of commandments that actually matter in our daily lives — that we can safely set aside purely academic issues?

If someone is coming to church, doing his callings, keeping the commandments as best he can, and yet he disagrees with me about a question that the First Presidency has specifically asked us not to argue about, I dare not climb up on a rameumptom to look down on him.

Also, the current edition of Sunstone magazine has a fantastic table showing how the biblical creation story and the scientific creation process actually line up with each other remarkably well. I'd link to it, but the library website is misbehaving tonight. Anyway, most people here wouldn't be able to log in and see it. But trust me, it's awesome.

edit: to include quote

wired wrote:Seriously, I think this guy is trolling and I just want validation that other people think it might be the same person.

That's the point of this thread. Wired wanted to know whether or not we thought it was the same person.

As to the question at large of why anyone cares, it is because each of us has a duty to try our best to understand the world around us given the best evidence at hand. That we may be wrong is true, and that's the risk any human takes when they say "I believe X and not Y." Nothing is to be gained from fear of trying to understand; ignorance is death. As Hypatia points out, we must always employ the method of taking the evidence and forming a theory, instead of forming a theory and then looking for corroborating evidence.

But when we have tried our best to understand, and have employed every shred of evidence, logic, and reason, and have come up with our best understanding given that, we need not fear the results.

I personally am in the billions-of-years-old camp as far as the issue is concerned, but I was just wondering if those of you vigorously against the person with an aversion to using the space bar would give him/her more latitude if he/she stopped trying to use science to back up his/her ideas about the earth's age and just said "this is what I believe," much as you may believe that there once was a person who walked on liquid water and whose dead body was reanimated after three days, among other things, of which we

...have absolutely zero substantiated scientific evidence to support...

I encountered enough young earthers when I was TAing physics at BYU that it would not surprise me if he were completely serious.

I do not care in the least whether someone actually believes that the Earth is 6,000 years old or if they believe that the lost tribes found a crack in the earth and live inside of it. (Neither of those I believe.) However, I do hate it when people use public forums, especially ones as good as the Board, to try to get a reaction on the basis of extreme beliefs when they don't hold such beliefs.

This kid is obviously trolling and my gut reaction is that he doesn't belief anything he is typing. Even if he does believe the earth's age is 6,000 years old, he is still trolling for reactions. Reporting professors to the Honor Code? His grandpa is an astronaut? (Must be Don Lind's grandson, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_L._Lind) The Book of Mormon says the earth is 6,000 years old? Seriously! This kid is picking out a ridiculous subject and trying to be so outrageous about it to try to rib reactions from the writers. "I will need at least a couple months to become rich."

I just wanted validation this kid is being ridiculous. I guess I am also throwing out a suggestion that the Board be willing to weed out trolling comments like these. My guess is that you guys already do and that you only weed them out when it's obvious they are people trying to get attention. Certainly I don't expect you guys to be perfect on detecting them either - but man, I just want this kid's questions in the incinerator.

http://theboard.byu.edu/questions/62712/

Troll strikes again.

wired wrote:http://theboard.byu.edu/questions/62712/

Troll strikes again.

You think that's the same person?