Sad what creationism can do to a mind, part 2

The point why I brought it up is in the original post, and a next post. You should read before making an infantile reply.regards,
Mohammad Nor Syamsu

quote:

---

Originally posted by Syamsu:
To argue with a moral risk means that you concede the possiblity that your position may be liarous, or expressing your own corruption.

​

I didnt' accuse you of being a Nazi, I was just pointing out that the human-animal distinction has much significance in Holocaust studies. Your response as well as the responses of some others are completely infantile.

​

regards,
Mohammad Nor Syamsu

---

M: Perhaps my responses are infantile but at least they are not evasive. The burden of proof is on you. Show your supporting evidence that humans are not animals before you accuse me of some bizarre form of corruption. That you are now resorting solely to name calling rather than supporting your position starts to make me think you have no case

Hey, here is a clever way to publish ..maybe there is some business here for Ten-sai?Nature 420, 597 (2002)
Ousted creationist sues over website
GEOFF BRUMFIEL
[WASHINGTON]A Tennessee creationist is suing the operators of a popular physics website that refused to publish his alternative Big Bang hypothesis.Robert Gentry, a lifelong Seventh-Day Adventist, filed the suit in the district court at Knoxville, Tennessee, against the operators of the arXiv preprint server, claiming that they refused a series of ten of his papers because of their religious content. Counsel representing the chief defendant, Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, says the claims have no merit and that the university has the right to choose what appears on the site.

quote:

---

Originally posted by sonnikke:

​

if humans = animals
then mathematically, animals = humans.

---

Is it safe to conclude that you have never taken a math class either?Really, this is just getting plain stupid.

No. Or rather, some animals are humans...

quote:

---

Originally posted by SLPx:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sonnikke:

​

if humans = animals
then mathematically, animals = humans.

---

​

Is it safe to conclude that you have never taken a math class either?

​

Really, this is just getting plain stupid.

---

No kidding.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by SLPx:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sonnikke:

​

if humans = animals
then mathematically, animals = humans.

---

​

Is it safe to conclude that you have never taken a math class either?

​

Really, this is just getting plain stupid.

---

*******************Well, to be fair, he did say he wanted a description of evolution a 6 year old could understand. So it stands to reason he would use a "mathematical" proof a 6 year old might produce I guess next we will be asked to explain why there are no fossil relatives of Barney or the Teletubbies.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Syamsu:
The point why I brought it up is in the original post, and a next post. You should read before making an infantile reply

---

Is this your idea of a substantive post? If you can't address issues, we will understand.Besides, I see nothing about the holocaust or Nazis in the original post on this thread.

Having a rough idea of the background of the person you're discussing with helps a lot. Some kids come in here and say, "Hey, I'm a kid." Other kids try to pretend they're adults, and how are we to know? Was Sonnikke trying to make some subtle point that we haven't detected yet, or was he being serious when he asked if we believed animals are humans? If he was serious, does he deserve explanations or ridicule? And is this the level of dialogue most people are hoping for?One idea I've been entertaining is to have two levels of forums. The novice forums would be for everyone. The expert forums would be only for those who have demonstrated a capacity for informed discussion through their participation in the novice forums. This is just an idea at this point, but I think it has some potential.--Percy

quote:

---

Originally posted by Percipient:
Having a rough idea of the background of the person you're discussing with helps a lot. Some kids come in here and say, "Hey, I'm a kid." Other kids try to pretend they're adults, and how are we to know? Was Sonnikke trying to make some subtle point that we haven't detected yet, or was he being serious when he asked if we believed animals are humans? If he was serious, does he deserve explanations or ridicule? And is this the level of dialogue most people are hoping for?

​

One idea I've been entertaining is to have two levels of forums. The novice forums would be for everyone. The expert forums would be only for those who have demonstrated a capacity for informed discussion through their participation in the novice forums. This is just an idea at this point, but I think it has some potential.

​

--Percy

---

Once again, Percy has proven that some people do have class...and MORE do NOT, and I thank him again.My "simple" math equation was obviously a "stab" to say that humans are NOT animals...whether a real math equation can actually be derived to prove the distinction of man; that possibility is not unreasonable.Jude 1:18 How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.

Sonnike:All nouns are words. Not all words are nouns.Humans may be animals but it does not follow that animals may be human.

quote:

---

Originally posted by gene90:
Sonnike:

​

All nouns are words. Not all words are nouns.

​

Humans may be animals but it does not follow that animals may be human.

---

How true.And yes, some people have class, some do not.Some people have COMMONS SENSE, and many more do not.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Percipient:
Having a rough idea of the background of the person you're discussing with helps a lot. Some kids come in here and say, "Hey, I'm a kid." Other kids try to pretend they're adults, and how are we to know? Was Sonnikke trying to make some subtle point that we haven't detected yet, or was he being serious when he asked if we believed animals are humans? If he was serious, does he deserve explanations or ridicule? And is this the level of dialogue most people are hoping for?M: Hi Percy. I think it is obvious that the level of dialogue is not at the level most of us (Quetzal, mark24, SLPx, etc.) want. Things were much better when (hate to admit it) Peter Borger was around. Not because I think anything Peter proposed had particular merit, but though things got heated rather frequently, almost all posts were laced with scientific references. Also most of Peter's challenges were based on some aspect of evolution as opposed to the current crop of arguments like "if humans are animals are all animals humans". The benefit for me from the past arguments was that I often had to read references outside my direct expertise and often got references from others that were very interesting i.e. the entire W. nobilis thread. I think the drop in the activity in the Evolution forum is indicative that the debate is not at a level anyone really appreciates.
P:
One idea I've been entertaining is to have two levels of forums. The novice forums would be for everyone. The expert forums would be only for those who have demonstrated a capacity for informed discussion through their participation in the novice forums. This is just an idea at this point, but I think it has some potential.M: If you do proceed with this, how would you implement it? Someone could be an expert on evolution but be a novice in the the subjects covered in the Big Bang thread. Would it be expert/novice by forum?Cheers,
M

quote:

---

One idea I've been entertaining is to have two levels of forums. The novice forums would be for everyone. The expert forums would be only for those who have demonstrated a capacity for informed discussion through their participation in the novice forums. This is just an idea at this point, but I think it has some potential.

​

M: If you do proceed with this, how would you implement it? Someone could be an expert on evolution but be a novice in the the subjects covered in the Big Bang thread. Would it be expert/novice by forum?

---

I also see problems with the implementation of this idea. I enjoy reading threads that I don't know enough to ultimately participate in, but I do enjoy being able to interject questions into the discussion. Even though I do not have a mastery of the subject.I can understand the frustration with some of the ignorant creationist/theist posts that are made on this board. Though I think you guys have proved, just through your dealings with me that you have some class. I enjoy this forum quite alot, it has been an excellent source of information, and inspiration.------------------
Saved by an incredible Grace.[This message has been edited by funkmasterfreaky, 12-16-2002]

F:
I also see problems with the implementation of this idea. I enjoy reading threads that I don't know enough to ultimately participate in, but I do enjoy being able to interject questions into the discussion. Even though I do not have a mastery of the subject.I can understand the frustration with some of the ignorant creationist/theist posts that are made on this board. Though I think you guys have proved, just through your dealings with me that you have some class. I enjoy this forum quite alot, it has been an excellent source of information, and inspiration.M:Hi funkmasterfreaky
I have to agree. Segregating the forum based on expertise would probably be more discouraging of participation than encouraging. Though some threads do degenerate now and then, overall I think the discussion are interesting. And people have a right to their own opinions even if others will disagree...which is partly why we come here to argue. The threads already mostly segregate themselves i.e. Evolution usually contains more technical debates with fewer people posting but a fairly regular crowd. My guess is those with less expertise are lurkers or those who occassionally post on a specific topic. Forums like Faith and Belief tend to have a wider number and variety of people posting. I don't see a problem even if a particular thread may now and then break down....like this one for example cheers,
M