Bad Research, Bad Arguments

[Kheldarson]

I just got done with the most rage-inducing tutoring session. Ranting here because of the subject matter of the paper.

This was an asynchronous session (we offer a live service where you can talk to someone in real time about your paper and the async where you don't have to talk to anybody, we just leave comments on your paper) so I had limited time (60 seconds) to judge if I was qualified to cover this paper. There's a pre-session document to give a summary of the assignment and where the student is on the paper along with other details. I usually just view this to make my decision because reading the paper itself tends to make me go over my acceptance period.

Paper topic: Creationism.

No problem. We can do that. Probably coming from one of the Christian universities and will be a generic breakdown of how it works.

Oh no. How I wish that was it.

This was a comparison of evolution and creationism. And their consequences.

Now, I'm Catholic. I believe that creation and evolution can work together in that God spoke, and nature happened. So I've got no problem with an argument for creation.

I have a problem when you're proving your point by deliberately misunderstanding the other side.

Some highlights:

The evolution of atheism started with Darwin’s Theory

It was designed to give humans free will to act without discipline from a higher power

The proof to knowing the difference between creationist and evolutionist is in Korea. North Korea teaches evolution and atheism, their people are imprisoned mentally and physically. South Korea teaches education and free willed existence under Gods law .

And their research for this impressive ball of fail? Two. Sites.

ARGH.

[Gravekeeper]

I got a headache just trying to parse the Korea one. >.>

[Kheldarson]

Yeah, that was my stopping point. I just couldn't take anymore.

[KabeRinnaul]

I got a headache just trying to parse the Korea one. >.>

She left off the parts where he said evolutionists would support an anarchist might-makes-right society where people kill each other to get what they want, because then we'd be eliminating the weak.

Or where he used Jesus quotes as an appeal to authority (with a questionable interpretation, on top of that).

And this:

Darwin's theory creates a bad influence for children because it teaches that there is neither good nor bad.

He seems to be conflating evolution, atheism, and moral nihilism.

He also, like many anti-evolution creationists, doesn't understand the independent confirmation of the theory of evolution from multiple fields and approaches, and brings up the standard "Evolution is faith, not science" misconception.

Honestly, the whole thing is so full of misconceptions, bad science, and religious bias that I kind of want to quote the entire thing, but then Kheldarson might get in trouble if it's found online.

Oh yeah. And by the fourth page, he was straight-up "let Jesus our Lord and Savior into your heart" preaching.

[Kheldarson]

Oh yeah. And by the fourth page, he was straight-up "let Jesus our Lord and Savior into your heart" preaching.

That last one's common from this college though. Their papers always include Scriptural references and preaching. For every topic.

[wolfie]

Ever get the urge to give these idiots the stereotypical slapstick cream 3 in the face? What's a cream 3, you ask? Simple - the scriptures have defined pi as being 3.

[Crazedclerkthe2nd]

Sounds like a great start for a future Fox News anchor.

[Talon]

I got a headache just trying to parse the Korea one. >.>

I'm surprised you got that far.
Soon as I saw the topic, my cognitive firewalls were up, sensing an incoming attack on my intellect.

Let's see how many of Aronra's Foundational Falsehoods of Creationism the paper used.

[Gravekeeper]

Yes, because if there's one thing Jesus was renowned for it was respecting authority.

*cough*

[mjr]

Ever get the urge to give these idiots the stereotypical slapstick cream 3 in the face? What's a cream 3, you ask? Simple - the scriptures have defined pi as being 3.

I read something very interesting about that, though. I think it's all in how the measurements were done, I believe.

In fact, here's an article on it from PurpleMath.com

http://www.purplemath.com/modules/bibleval.htm

[AccountingDrone]

That last one's common from this college though. Their papers always include Scriptural references and preaching. For every topic.

I can theoretically get a full ride scholarship from a very well known Baptist college here in the US [my father's side of the family were seriously huge financial supporters, to the tune of buildings and chairs named for us] and you have *no* idea how tempting it would be to go ... hell, they just fairly recently decided to let the students listen to music and dance! More or less every degree comes packaged with a minor in theology

It is just that I can not see agnostic iconoclastic sarcastic me actually attending and not cheesing off every professor and uberchristiany student there long enough to actually get a degree. I am afraid that if I did Biblical Archeology my thesis would probably be about how pretty much every claimed biblical site in Israel is false [especially since Flavia Julia Helena Augusta more or less went on pilgrimage and decided various sites were biblical locations ex cathedra her ass]

[Hyena Dandy]

I dunno, the professors might be pretty appy. I've heard from professors at bible colleges how much they hate what they have to talk about and do, they'd probably see you as a breath of fresh air.

The administrators, though...