prophex and the poor

Do you have ANYTHING to back this up or was that just another brain-fart?This message has been edited by Creavolution, 01-13-2006 11:33 AM

I was probably mistaken. Thanks for spotting that. Nevertheless, the number of deaths over the last 100 years is likely a significant proportion of the total number of human deaths ever.This is mainly due to the world population being larger during the last 100 years than previously.Here is some information on current and historic world populations. To estimate total deaths, you would also need historic information on life expectancy. I'm not sure if that is readily available.

is this a young earth 'ever' or an old earth 'ever'?given that the further we look back in history the sketchier record like this become... I really don't believe there is any real basis for your point unless you can document lives saved by science versus population increase and equally document deaths in a 'pre-science' era..I'm not even sure there is such a thing as a pre-science era, given that the first time water was used to wash a wound, or a thorn was removed from a foot early humans were employing very basic scientific methods...This message has been edited by Creavolution, 01-13-2006 02:34 PM

I doubt that it makes a lot of difference.Sure, our knowledge of the past is quite uncertain. All indications are of far smaller human populations.

what? 6000 years of human existance versus millions of years of human existance... I'd say that would make a massive difference, even if the population gets progressively smaller as we go back.I agree indications are of smaller populations, but causes of death? methods of preventing death? not so clear really.trying to calculate how many lives 'science' has or has not saved is fruitless. when did 'science' begin?if a man puts a brick in front of a car to prevent it rolling over him, he has just used science to save his life. if a neanderthal wears an animal skin to keep warm, he has just used science to save his life. may not fully understanding all mechanisms involved, but science nonetheless.

Snopes says it ain't so:
Living Outnumber Dead | Snopes.com

I'm not sure where the millions of years comes from, unless you are including hominids as humans. Causes of death is a difficult problem. A high rate of infant death would make it harder to estimate the total number of deaths. I think you are interpreting "science" too broadly.

It's a consistent thing with you schraf, when you don't get the answer you want, you ignore, and repeat questions.This time, I'll do the ignoring, and you won't benefit any longer, or a have a chance at what I know.

---

I'm a Dboy
I have the blue shirt on.

what the heck is a D-boy?hit me up in chat....and why are you picking on Scraff??? is it fun?

Look, when you evade questions, everyone can see it.When you back away from arguments but refuse to admit your error, everyone can see it.When you run away, everyone can see it.I admit to doing all of these things at one time or another, but you have made it into an art form, because you do it so often.That's very poor form on a debate board, hon.

quote:

---

and why are you picking on Scraff??? is it fun?

---

Is that what he thinks he's doing?I just figured that his lame-ass arguments enjoy pain, so he put them in harm's way again.

Fact is, is that she thinks she has a hard life. She thinks she has sacrificed. She thinks that people of knowledge are not given this right out of wealthiness. She thinks she can tell me I am the one running. She thinks that my argument was lame.That's laughable. And, I'm still right.

---

porteus@gmail.com

quote:

---

Fact is, is that she thinks she has a hard life.

---

In some respects, I have.Tell me, prophex...How "hard" of a life does someone have to have led for you to consider them worthy of that honor?Is someone who has grown up in rural Alabama with no heat or running water, who sometimes went hungry, was molested and raped at a young age by male relatives, had very loving, wonderful grandparents, was a victim of institutionalized racism and sexism, went to substandard schools so they are illiterate, but who always got pretty good health and dental care considered by you to have had a "hard life"?What if they had heat and running water, went to good schools, but were still molested and raped and still were a victime of racism and sexism.What if they had running water but no heat, weren't raped or molested, but were illiterate because of poor schools, and were victims of sexism but not racism?Which ones qualify as having led a "hard" life and which ones don't, according to you?

quote:

---

She thinks she has sacrificed.

---

You seem to believe that the only "true" sacrifices are those made by the destitute.Does that mean, by extension, that no one who is not destitute can be described as deserving of anything they have earned? Or can anyone who is not destitute be described as having worked hard?You never did give a direct answer to these questions.Why don't you try doing that for once?

quote:

---

She thinks that people of knowledge are not given this right out of wealthiness.

---

What?Please work harder to express yourself more clearly and precisely.

quote:

---

She thinks she can tell me I am the one running.

---

Of course you are.Otherwise, you would answer my questions directly and clearly.

quote:

---

She thinks that my argument was lame.

---

Mostly, I think your argument is gobbledygook.Or, rather, I don't have a clear idea of what your argument is because you do not write clearly and precisely.Maybe the problem is that you do not think things through very well, but then attempt to write in a deep and dramatic way that is meant to be deep and inspiring.Sorry, it's not working.

quote:

---

That's laughable. And, I'm still right.

---

You know what is laughable?Look, when you evade questions, everyone can see it.
When you back away from arguments but refuse to admit your error, everyone can see it.When you run away, everyone can see it.I admit to doing all of these things at one time or another, but you have made it into an art form, because you do it so often.This message has been edited by schrafinator, 01-14-2006 10:44 PM

You missed it.

quote:

---

You seem to believe that the only "true" sacrifices are those made by the destitute.

---

Wrong, but I can see through artificial complaints from the wealthy.

quote:

---

Does that mean, by extension, that no one who is not destitute can be described as deserving of anything they have earned? Or can anyone who is not destitute be described as having worked hard?

---

No.

quote:

---

What?

​

Please work harder to express yourself more clearly and precisely.

---

You were given knowledge as a a product of being wealthy, and destiny. You seem to have had a disagreement with this statement.This message has been edited by prophex, 01-14-2006 11:57 PM

EvC Forum: Another Test for Intelligent Design Proponents

quote:

---

Show me statistics that show that the majority of scientists are not living well, and actually have to time to think about DNA extractions. I would bet you that the majority of scientists like what they do, and sacrifice nothing to earn a large income to study physis.

---

This was the original spark to start this whole issue.Let's restart this, what is your problem with this?This message has been edited by prophex, 01-14-2006 11:51 PM