Anecdotes & Trust in the Backroom

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Generally, how honest do you think us Orgahs are when it comes to anecdotes? Personally, I take most of the things said here on the .Org at face value when the poster isn't kidding.

[Strike For The South]

Mostly I beilive it.

[IrishArmenian]

I do not see why someone would lie. I would also like this time to say: how can people post this much? I have been sitting all day and I cannot see how one posts and posts. Cheers to all of you.

[Mithras]

I just assume that the 'unique' posters are simply lunatics or idiots of various sorts. The bloke who uses fundementlist to describe science and the liberal conspiracy guy springs to mind.

[Fragony]

Liberal conspiracy is simply true. I have reason to believe that they are campaigning (on television!) to get people to vote for liberals, with no other reason then getting a liberal president in the white house.

wake up neo.

[Hepcat]

Everyone here seems very open so I don't see why I shouldn't believe people.

[Andres]

Liberal conspiracy is simply true. I have reason to believe that they are campaigning (on television!) to get people to vote for liberals, with no other reason then getting a liberal president in the white house.

wake up neo.

It's all a conspiracy! From the Spinach-lobbyists! Bush and Verhofstad are the leaders.

God, I hate spinache!

[Rodion Romanovich]

I just assume that the 'unique' posters are simply lunatics or idiots of various sorts. The bloke who uses fundementlist to describe science and the liberal conspiracy guy springs to mind.

A praise of the herd mentality?

By the way if you refer to me as "the bloke who uses fundementalist to describe science" (I can't think of anyone else mentioning religious quotes in religion vs science discussions), first of all I'm not religious, I have never believed in God in my entire life, apart from acknowledging that with certain pantheistic forms of religion believing in God practically means nothing different than being an atheist, thus if such a pantheistic view is used I would have been religious all of my life, like everyone else, even the most stubborn atheist. Secondly I thought the point of using religious quotes in a science vs religion debate would be quite obvious to anyyone - 1. to show to the science side of the debate that the religion, when using the sources and not the interpretation made by over thousand years of oppressive rules from a not very religious or moralistic papacy, the religion says things that are a lot closer to the scientific claims than the interpretations made by the papacy and the religious tradition, which has changed over time. 2. to show to the religious side that the founders of the religions didn't agree with the anti-science version of the religion, created by tradition over time, and that the original version is closer to the scientific view, but more often than not the original version of the religion also refuses to give any opinion, and leaves that to the reader, in which case the reader can be a follower of the religion but still listen to the science, and 3. to show ways in which the religious faith can be combined with the claims made by science, contrary to what the papal tradition sometimes claims.

Now obviously, if it's me you are referring to, you've clearly misunderstood the purpose of the statements.