Fernandez is one of those "internet experts" on everything scientific. His background - which he uses to proclaim his superiority in making correct conclusions on all things scientific - includes a stint in the Air Force as a technician of some sort and supposedly working for DARPA, as well as supposedly being an adjunct statistics instructor at a community college in Florida (and we all know how much Florida values education). Plus, he claims to have a great 'analytical mind' and a personal library of over 1,000 books, so I mean, how could he possibly be wrong about anything?
Well, in addition to being one of the multitude of creationist "no new information" mongers who cannot provide a way in which to even define 'information' as per their argument, he also seems to be one of the many creationists with integrity/honesty problems.
Here, for example, we have documentation of a clear-cut exposure of Jorge Fernandez making diametrically opposed statements. Fernandez had claimed that an opponant was 'misreprenting' his views on whether or not Intelligent Design was a scientific alternative to evolution:
Originally posted by Jorge
You are misrepresenting my views, primarily on the grounds of ignorance. To say that I have suggested that "CSI/ID is a scientific alternative to evolution" is not only false, it's using inappropriate terms. What you've said sounded to me like the phrase "literature is an economic alternative to sea otters". [Yeah, I know, the phrase doesn't make any sense. Now you know how I felt after reading yours. Enjoy!]
A poster ('mentalist') juxtaposes the above quote with the following one, asking Fernandez if this guy is misrepresenting him, too:
Originally posted by Jorge
Among other things, the ID movement is designed to provide a scientifically-based alternative to that of evolution.
and
Originally posted by Jorge
The fact remains that ID is a genuinely viable alternative to evolution but is being kept out primarily because of ideological reasons.
Pretty clear cut, no? Two statements from the same person, stating the exact opposite sentiment. What is a person to do?
Let me re-ask the question - what would an honest person with integrity and dignity do?
I would hope that they would swallow their pride, apologize, and maybe slink away from the conversation to allow the embarrassment to subside.
So, what does a creationist do?
See for yourself:
Originally posted by Mentalist
How much would you say this guy was misrepresenting your views:
It's a shame neither of your personalities was blessed with intelligence or honesty.
Jorge:
You're p-r-o-j-e-c-t-i-n-g, Mentalist.
See, you never bothered to consider the fact that I was referring to the metaphysic of evolution, not the science of evolution. But then, you wouldn't know about such things, would you.
I'm blessed more than enough, thank you.
Jorge
Whaaa? 'Projecting'? Why would Mentalist - or anyone else - have considered it at all, much less as a "fact", that Fernandez was referring to the 'metaphysic' of evolution when he actually wrote explicitly about science? If he had meant the metaphysic of evolution, he should had written that. If he had meant that the "science" of ID should replace the metaphysic of evolution, he should have written as much.
Sadly, Fernandez is the most active creationist at that particular discussion board.
1 comment:
Jorge is a hoot, isn't he? Sadly, he is typical of the Internet Creationist know-it-all who actually doesn't appear to know anything. I have tried in vain to get him to address his arguments at Theology Web, but all he ever does is obfuscate and insult. It is almost as if his position is scientifically bankrupt, so he can't actually defend it scientifically.
Post a Comment