Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Arguments 'evolutionists' should NOT use
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 3993 days)
Posts: 1512
From: brisbane,australia
Joined: 06-08-2004


Message 26 of 74 (400072)
05-10-2007 2:05 AM


Arguing backward
Sounds like Doddy hit the nail on the head about poor defence.
Creo: Where`s your 'proof'?
Evo: Well, it`s not really 'proof'
Creo: The TOE is just a 'theory'
Evo: Well, we understand 'theory' in a different sense
Creo: Evolution can`t explain life`s origins
Evo: Well, the TOE really isn`t about abiogenesis
Etc.
Counter-punching only works against a 'real' opponent. As long as we try to hit strawmen by altering the questions posed, we will look like we are retreating, or covering up our inadequacies. Far better to dictate the terms by giving concrete replies built around overkill.
Creo: Where`s your 'proof'?
Evo: Millions of confirming experiments by millions of scientists worldwide
Creo: The TOE is just a 'theory'
Evo: Really? Then explain why millions of experiments, etc. confirm
Creo: Evolution has failed to explain life`s origins
Evo: Want to buy a 2-y-o car with 500 miles on the clock for $100.00? Irrelevant? So is your linking evolution with abiogenesis. Two totally different subjects. Next question?
Focussing on hard facts that the creo must dispute will weaken his argument (and resolve?), rather than us being forced to defend what can be nebulous proposals. Works for me.

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Taz, posted 05-10-2007 2:21 AM Nighttrain has replied
 Message 30 by nator, posted 05-10-2007 8:46 AM Nighttrain has not replied

  
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 3993 days)
Posts: 1512
From: brisbane,australia
Joined: 06-08-2004


Message 29 of 74 (400085)
05-10-2007 8:14 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Taz
05-10-2007 2:21 AM


Re: Arguing backward
Evo: What`s the difference between bullshit and pizza?
Creo: ????
That`s the idea,Taz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Taz, posted 05-10-2007 2:21 AM Taz has not replied

  
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 3993 days)
Posts: 1512
From: brisbane,australia
Joined: 06-08-2004


Message 39 of 74 (400200)
05-11-2007 4:22 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by ringo
05-10-2007 3:41 PM


POV
A large part of science's PR failure is the refusal to see things from the lay point of view
I guess we can be challenged by a spectrum of believers, from the layman, through people with a passing knowledge of science, to someone with qualifications in a field (engineers? :-p). So the answers should be tailored to fit. The bulk we get at EvC seem to come loaded like a parrot, and rattle off the standard declaimers. These, I suggest, should be overwhelmed by hard facts to establish some sort (oops, nearly said kind) of authority on the part of the defender. Perhaps once they respect your knowledge, you might continue to such levels until the questioner`s eyes start to glaze over, when you know it`s time to drop down a strata or two.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by ringo, posted 05-10-2007 3:41 PM ringo 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