It seems most here are very good at insults, ...
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone eh?
John, msg 256 writes:
I think some of you should step back and really consider the wisdom of your arguments, such as, ... (quotes me)
The arrogant condescension of this remark, the insinuation that I don't consider the implications of what I post, and the bare assumption that you know better and that
you can presume to correct me -- when you have
demonstrated no such ability in any of your several so-called responses.
And as I said before, I don't care tiddly-boo what your education and profession is.
I do have a BS degree in Engineering Physics, ... etc. ... My engineering abilities and understanding of scientific principles have served me very well for 41 years, and continue to do so.
Because this is really just
another appeal to authority logical fallacy, with the added egotistical twist that
you are claiming to be the expert (while demonstrating inability at basic math probability skills). What your claim here is that your argument is correct just because you have a degree and worked. How is that valid John?
The point is that your
argument is just plain wrong, wrong on many levels, even uncontestedly wrong (as in the errors have been noted and you have not {contested\bothered} to answer).
You could be Einstein, and if you made the same specious and vapid claims and then failed to correct or to substantiate your position when challenged I would be making the same challenges, the same remarks, the same conclusions, about the failures of your arguments.
Who makes the argument has no bearing on the validity of the argument.
What the argument
says is the
only thing that has bearing on the validity of the argument. If the argument is challenged then you need to provide evidence to substantiate it or withdraw the argument -- you need to provide more
what to the argument.
The
only thing I expect from someone claiming these credentials is the ability, the willingness and the courtesy of substantiating their positions when challenged or recanting them when they can't do so. I expect this basic honesty from people with high school diplomas (or less), and I certainly should expect no less from someone with 1.5 college degrees and 41 years of work.
So stop beating your chest, John, and stop whining about being {insulted\persecuted\ganged} and start demonstrating that ability you claim by making some substantiated and mathematically valid arguments.
Stop insulting yourself with what you post.
Many scientific principles are provable to a very high degree of certainly, ...
{sigh} ... repeating once more for the peanut gallery:
As pointed out science doesn't "prove" any theory, the best that you get is substantiating evidence that doesn't contradict the theory. So far evolution has substantiating evidence. Where some theories ran into contracting evidence, those theories were invalidated (Lamarckism, etc) and replaced by new theories. This is how science operates.
... but abiogenesis is not one of these.
Sorry, I missed any kind of substantiation for this assertion, any evidence, any display of logical thinking, any reason to think it is anything more than just another blind faith argument from incredulity.
And in point of fact abiogenesis has substantiating evidence with more accumulating every day. Since it's inception as a science (essentially with the Miller Urey experiments) it has grown to be rather exciting, imh(ysa)o, field standing on it's own legs.
Denial of evidence has remarkably little effect on the existence of the evidence.
I’m sure this post will generate more insults and questionings of my credentials, but that’s your problem, not mine.
Bare the chest, get out the willow switches, rend your clothes and cover yourself with ashes ...
Yeah, you're just another poor old persecuted christian that gets dumped on by all the unholy anti-christs ... instead of just somebody that {can't\won't} actually answer the criticism of their arguments or provide any substantiation other than making assertions about how great they are.
Clothes make the man, eh? And on sites like this your clothes are your arguments. I suggest you start dressing your arguments with substance.
Now you have two choices: you can take this as an insult, or you can take it as valid criticism and change your ways for the better.
According to your calculations you have a 50:50 chance of getting it right ...
Enjoy.
Join the effort to unravel {AIDS\HIV} with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
™ Version 4.2