Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A general discussion of debate (goals)
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 31 of 57 (364534)
11-18-2006 10:14 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by Percy
11-18-2006 7:11 AM


Re: How is this a disagreement?
Having read your posts on this thread, I genuinely can't work out if you're satirizing YEC or agreeing with it.
If you are agreeing with it, then I would reply, with Einstein, that "Raefiniert ist der Herr Gott, aber boeschaft ist Er nicht". God is subtle, but He is not malicious.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Percy, posted 11-18-2006 7:11 AM Percy has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 32 of 57 (364535)
11-18-2006 10:23 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Buzsaw
11-17-2006 7:21 PM


Re: Group Think
I don't know that there's a table of stats on this, but many scientists go Biblical from being avid evolutionists due to the evidence they find as to the problems of evolution and due to the evidence they discover as to the credibility of the Biblical record as per things like fullfilled prophecy, personal experiences, statistics of social benefits, et al.
That was very, very strange.
First you say that you don't know whether anyone's tried to count these people, and then in the next breath you say that there are "many" of them.
This is like saying "I don't know whether anyone's seen the far side of the Moon, but it's pink".
If you don't even know whether anyone's tried to find out the facts, then how the heck do you know what the facts are?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Buzsaw, posted 11-17-2006 7:21 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 33 of 57 (364536)
11-18-2006 10:38 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by purpledawn
11-18-2006 7:52 AM


Re: Short OT

Contents hidden.
I'm not familiar with the history, but if you'd like to politely invite further discussion in the appropriate thread that would be fine.
--Admin
Oh for Pete's sake.
Maybe you're a creationist.
OK, so you're a creationist, you hate biology. But will you just go back to the bit where you believe in the magic tree and the talking snake, and leave aside the stupid **** where you turn your child into a plague pit?
I mean, if you're a creationist, your crazy stupid cult requires you to deny evolution, but do you have to kill children? That's not in a literalist interpretation of the Bible, it's not part of your religion, it's just your stupidity and arrogance killing children. No part of your religion says that you have to deny the facts in order to kill children. Neither your own children, nor other people's children. No part of your dogma says that you have to murder children. Please do not kill children.
If you are a creationist, your beliefs requires you to deny the theory of evolution, but what part of your stupid dogma requires you to reject the germ theory of disease?
Please. Do not kill children.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
Edited by Admin, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by purpledawn, posted 11-18-2006 7:52 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by nwr, posted 11-18-2006 10:48 AM Dr Adequate has replied
 Message 38 by purpledawn, posted 11-18-2006 11:26 AM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 35 of 57 (364540)
11-18-2006 10:51 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by nwr
11-18-2006 10:48 AM


Possibly. But whereas the creationists are just wrong, and I can debate them, any form of the anti-vaccination gibberish ... kills children.
Well, you've read my response.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by nwr, posted 11-18-2006 10:48 AM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by nwr, posted 11-18-2006 10:55 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 40 of 57 (364552)
11-18-2006 12:08 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by purpledawn
11-18-2006 11:26 AM


Re: The Debate
PurpleDawn's a creationist.
PurpleDawn hates biology.
Thanks Doc, that was the best laugh I've had all day.
Well, so it appeared.
If you could make yourself clearer, I could give a more precise response.
It seemed that you were an anti-vaccer: if not, I apologize sincerely, and will add (which, in that case, is obvious) that I've made a fool of myself.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by purpledawn, posted 11-18-2006 11:26 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by purpledawn, posted 11-18-2006 12:29 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 43 of 57 (364561)
11-18-2006 12:40 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by purpledawn
11-18-2006 12:29 PM


Re: The Debate
If you are, in fact, an anti-vaccinator, but not a creationist, then I would repeat my previous remarks only more strongly. There is nothing, not even a crackpot religion, which requires you to be so stupid and so arrogant and so lethal to other people.
Are you an anti-vaccinator? You have not said. You've just danced around the issue.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by purpledawn, posted 11-18-2006 12:29 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Chiroptera, posted 11-18-2006 12:44 PM Dr Adequate has not replied
 Message 45 by Silent H, posted 11-18-2006 1:20 PM Dr Adequate has replied
 Message 46 by AdminNWR, posted 11-18-2006 1:24 PM Dr Adequate has not replied
 Message 48 by purpledawn, posted 11-18-2006 3:12 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 47 of 57 (364569)
11-18-2006 2:15 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by Silent H
11-18-2006 1:20 PM


Re: The Debate
Why is choosing to allow a person (presumably onesself or one's child) to be exposed to disease as they naturally would stupid, arrogant, or lethal? It is a risk to be sure, but then offset by some emotional gain that is valid for them, regardless of whether you feel it.
I would question whether the "emotional gain" offsets rendering one victim dead, another crippled, another sterile ...
As to whether it is "stupid, arrogant, or lethal" to decide that an innocent child should run this risk for the sake of someone else's "emotional gain", then yes. Duh. Not to mention selfish to the point of psychopathic.
Perhaps in the vein of this thread, are you open to changing your mind on this subject, and if not is continued debate worthy?
We are off topic, but if you want to start a new thread, I am perfectly prepared to defend the position that it is better for people not to die of preventable diseases.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Silent H, posted 11-18-2006 1:20 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Silent H, posted 11-18-2006 5:24 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024