|
Author
|
Topic: Cdesign proponentist troll recruiting center
|
NoNukes
Inactive Member
|
|
Message 76 of 107 (589480)
11-02-2010 7:56 PM
|
Reply to: Message 51 by Nij
11-02-2010 12:17 AM
|
|
Re: Final exam questions
Nij writes: If that wasn't enough, yes, it is a valid thing to question why religious apologetics is required in what is supposedly a science class. The class is not a science class at all. It somewhat akin to the 'physics for poets' classes that liberal arts students take. Sorta... Page not found - SWBTS
quote:
NAS 3303 Intelligent Design or Unintelligent Evolution
This course provides an overview of the broad cultural, intellectual, and scientific movement known as intelligent design as well as of its chief antagonist, the view that cosmological and biological origins are best explained as the result of an accidental evolutionary process. Prerequisite IDE 1103 and 1203.
The pre-reqs for this class are history classes. Why would I need to take 1203 Church and Empires Seminar before taking a science course? The ID course is apologetics. No samples get into beakers in the ID class. The lab is on the Internet, and to my mind that's highly appropriate given the subject matter.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 51 by Nij, posted 11-02-2010 12:17 AM | | Nij has not replied |
|
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 105 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: 11-23-2007
|
|
|
Message 77 of 107 (589481)
11-02-2010 7:57 PM
|
Reply to: Message 68 by Taq
11-02-2010 5:39 PM
|
|
Re: What, judges cant be idiots like yourselves?
Keep going until you get to the part that contains authors, name of journal, title of paper, volume, number, pages. Well, clearly you are not able to defend your position on your own, you need these writers and authors to help you, so ill follow you down your bunny trail. tell me out of the authors, journals, papers, volumes, etc, what i am missing, what types of tests and experimentation do i need to conduct, that is NOT already described in the research, by Id i desribed in that other post IOWs could you explain why the DETAILS of thier research, establish any better the general principles of evidence concerning evolution verses design Dawn Bertot
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 68 by Taq, posted 11-02-2010 5:39 PM | | Taq has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 89 by Taq, posted 11-03-2010 11:20 AM | | Dawn Bertot has not replied |
|
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 105 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: 11-23-2007
|
|
|
Message 78 of 107 (589483)
11-02-2010 8:11 PM
|
Reply to: Message 75 by Nij
11-02-2010 7:45 PM
|
|
When presented with the evidence you request so often, instead of applying rationality to it, you dive off into another tirade of "No True Scotsman", begging the question and circular logic fallacies. once again instead of presenting evidence, you claim it has been presented. I cant respond to something that is NOT there. ill give you this simple challenge. provide one piece of "evidence" you say i have not responded to and we will see if what you are saying is true, that is if i have avoided it or that you simply disagree with it
It's a little difficult to tell whether you know you're wrong and are deliberately trolling, or whether you're just another moronic creotard with its own spin on science, reality, logic and the definitions thereof. Either way, I'm not dealing with you any more. It's not worth the effort. Its hard for you understand (tell) because you have not been presented with the information in this manner before. This is recognizable by your frustration Is it worth the effort to present one point that i have not responded to Dawn Bertot Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 75 by Nij, posted 11-02-2010 7:45 PM | | Nij has not replied |
|
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 105 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: 11-23-2007
|
Re: What, judges cant be idiots like yourselves?
The cdesign proponentists need to actually do some "observation, investigation, experimentation, conclusions, predictions" rather than you reciting it like a mantra. That would be kinda the missing step --- the step between saying stuff and doing it. Please tell me specifically what "doing it" is, that we have not already done, that does not follow your pattern of the S and M, Do you have any specifics? Dawn Bertot Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
|
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 105 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: 11-23-2007
|
|
|
Message 80 of 107 (589485)
11-02-2010 8:20 PM
|
Reply to: Message 75 by Nij
11-02-2010 7:45 PM
|
|
You refuse to consider something not derived from your idiosyncratic point-of-view and completely ignore any explanation of others. Rather than address the points raised, you get defensive and complain about "tyranny" and playing ad hominem games. trust me it is not my intention to be evasive, so could you please present the POINTS RASIED, i have falied to address This shouldnt be to hard, eh Dawn Bertot
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 75 by Nij, posted 11-02-2010 7:45 PM | | Nij has not replied |
|
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 105 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: 11-23-2007
|
|
|
Message 81 of 107 (589488)
11-02-2010 8:25 PM
|
Reply to: Message 74 by Dirk
11-02-2010 6:52 PM
|
|
Re: Final exam questions
Anyway, in order to stay on topic, you are saying that we are not allowed to comment on the courses that are given in those institutions? I mean, we even gave some suggestions for improvement. Surely that must be appreciated. And even if it's not, I'm sure that all comments were still made in the utmost sincerety, and that no one here was trying to set them up. Would you like for me to go back and quote the "sincerety" passages, disguised as insult, disgust and contempt?.. I can do that if you wish. Sincerety my arse. You cant even be honest about sincerety Geeees Dawn Bertot
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 74 by Dirk, posted 11-02-2010 6:52 PM | | Dirk has not replied |
|
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 307 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: 07-20-2006
|
Suggestion
Please tell me specifically what "doing it" is, that we have not already done, that does not follow your pattern of the S and M, Do you have any specifics? Yes. I suggest that they produce a hypothesis having predictive power, so that it is in principle testable and so amenable to the scientific method. Any further specifics will have to depend on what that hypothesis is. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 105 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: 11-23-2007
|
Re: Suggestion
Yes. I suggest that they produce a hypothesis having predictive power, so that it is in principle testable and so amenable to the scientific method. Any further specifics will have to depend on what that hypothesis is. Two people from two different backgrounds may not understand the way in which a term is being used, such as "predictive." How are you using this term and specifically what do you mean by it. Can you give me an example in your methodology of why this will produce an event that cannot be demonstrated by ID? What exacally does the totality of evolution predict? Dawn Bertot Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
|
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 307 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: 07-20-2006
|
Re: Suggestion
Two people from two different backgrounds may not understand the way in which a term is being used, such as "predictive." How are you using this term and specifically what do you mean by it. The predictions of a hypothesis are the necessary consequences of it being true.
Can you give me an example in your methodology of why this will produce an event that cannot be demonstrated by ID? If that sentence has a meaning, it is known only to you and to God --- and I'm not sure about him.
What exacally does the totality of evolution predict? It makes predictions in a number of fields such as morphology, embryology, paleontology, genetics, behavioral ecology and biogeography. However we have strayed far enough from the topic of this thread without me giving you a crash course in Evolution For Absolute Beginners.
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
Re: Final exam questions
your so intent on proving ID wrong That is not the case. ID has never, anywhere established any evidence that supports the notion that life was designed by a supernatural designer i.e. Yaweh.
evidence of a thing, the same way evolution is not counter religious, but it does imply the eternality of matter I agree that ToE has no nearing on anybodies beliefs in the supernatural but how on Earth does the fequency of allele change over time mean that matter is eternal? The two do not logically follow unless one posits a creator. ToE does not do that so matter does not have to be eternal. Matter being eternal is dependent on assuming design.
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
Re: Final exam questions
Who designed the designer? Self created. Yay! 100%
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 62 by Species8472, posted 11-02-2010 4:50 PM | | Species8472 has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 87 by frako, posted 11-03-2010 8:23 AM | | Larni has not replied |
|
frako
Member (Idle past 328 days) Posts: 2932 From: slovenija Joined: 09-04-2010
|
|
|
Message 87 of 107 (589529)
11-03-2010 8:23 AM
|
Reply to: Message 86 by Larni
11-03-2010 4:47 AM
|
|
Re: Final exam questions
Who designed the designer? Self created. Yay! 100% hehe i realy dont get the idst and the creationist there is order and things are so complex that there hasto be a desighner well who then made this infinatly more complex desighner? oh um he made him self or he is eternal .... so why could evrything be eternal and we skip the desighner? cant you see everything is desighned by him the one who does not need desighning. go figure
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 86 by Larni, posted 11-03-2010 4:47 AM | | Larni has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 88 by dwise1, posted 11-03-2010 10:09 AM | | frako has not replied |
|
dwise1
Member Posts: 5949 Joined: 05-02-2006 Member Rating: 5.5
|
|
|
Message 88 of 107 (589541)
11-03-2010 10:09 AM
|
Reply to: Message 87 by frako
11-03-2010 8:23 AM
|
|
Re: Final exam questions
But you forget that they do not need any kind of internal consistency. They feel free to believe many different and mutually contradictory things. Just so long as it's not what science says!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 87 by frako, posted 11-03-2010 8:23 AM | | frako has not replied |
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10045 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.3
(1)
| |
| |
| |
Re: What, judges cant be idiots like yourselves?
Well, clearly you are not able to defend your position on your own, you need these writers and authors to help you, so ill follow you down your bunny trail. My position is that no scientist is using ID to do scientific research. If there were scientists using ID then you would be able to point me to ID based research papers in peer reviewed journals. Since there is no ID science there is nothing scientific to debate. It really is that simple.
tell me out of the authors, journals, papers, volumes, etc, what i am missing, what types of tests and experimentation do i need to conduct, that is NOT already described in the research, by Id i desribed in that other post It is your job to describe the research programs needed to test ID and then present that research to the scientific community. That is how science works. It doesn't work by challenging scientists to debate theology.
IOWs could you explain why the DETAILS of thier research, establish any better the general principles of evidence concerning evolution verses design Because that is how science works. Go to http://www.pubmed.com . Search for phylogenomics. Pick a paper. Read it. That is the kind of detail I am asking for, the kind of detail a real scientific theory would be able to produce.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 77 by Dawn Bertot, posted 11-02-2010 7:57 PM | | Dawn Bertot has not replied |
|
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 105 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: 11-23-2007
|
Re: Suggestion
The predictions of a hypothesis are the necessary consequences of it being true. Really, thank you. Your impressive. Bertot writes: Can you give me an example in your methodology of why this will produce an event that cannot be demonstrated by ID? Ill try this again and see if you try avoiding it again. Answer the question What exacally does the totality of evolution predict that is different than IDs methodology
It makes predictions in a number of fields such as morphology, embryology, paleontology, genetics, behavioral ecology and biogeography. However we have strayed far enough from the topic of this thread without me giving you a crash course in Evolution For Absolute Beginners. Instead if repeading what I asked you, perhaps you could give me an example that is different than IDs methods. Since the scientific method is superior. So what predictions does evo make and how are its basic scientific methods different than IDs, to make it more acceptable Examples this time, not repetitions of my questions, reworded This should be fun to watch Dawn Bertot
|
™ Version 4.2