Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,828 Year: 4,085/9,624 Month: 956/974 Week: 283/286 Day: 4/40 Hour: 0/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 10.0
Someone who cares
Member (Idle past 5778 days)
Posts: 192
Joined: 06-06-2006


Message 246 of 305 (405167)
06-11-2007 6:24 PM
Reply to: Message 241 by RAZD
06-10-2007 6:25 PM


Re: great debates 2 against 1? S1WC?
I would like to say that I am not interested in debating the argument of "What a real debate is or is not," so I do not wish to debate this matter (or others like defining certain terms) with you.
However, since you have brought up the Lucy matter, (and I apologize if this isn't the most appropriate place for this)I would like to say that I have revised my essay concerning this matter just recently. I have deleted the old statement, which I have learned is not proper, but in its place I have put in the truth about the knee joint and so my argument that Lucy is not a transitional from apes to man is just as strong, if not stronger! You can read what I have revised in my essay here: Page Not Found - Webs
Note: Your sudden attacks at my argument and use of negative comments and bandwagoning that so many other Creationists have declined from using the argument were not what prompted me to realize my mistake. I learned of my mistake when reading 'Ape-Men - Fact or Fallacy?' by Malcolm Bowden, where he explained the whole situation in the proper argument, which is what I have in my essay now. So I would like you to know that if you want to approach me and point out my mistakes, I would accept it much better if it were softer and more understanding (this is one of the main reasons I like debating with Anglagard- we actually get somewhere and I have realized the errors in my essay as we debated and fixed them).
I do recall that you have said you would not debate with me until I remove my false Lucy argument, and now I have removed it. But I would still appreciate debating with someone who presents more arguments for "proof" than for only defining terms and saying we cannot debate until we define all the terms. I realize this is your specialty, but I like debating proof, not definitions.
I will probably not reply to any replies made to this post, and it is true that I find little time and determination to debate here, but hopefully Anglagard and I can tackle another debate- the one about "proofs" against the Flood.
Peace my friends. Once again, I apologize for posting this here, but as RAZD has noticed, I do not normally post anywhere except in the Great Debate topics.

"If you’re living like there is no God you’d better be right!" - Unknown

This message is a reply to:
 Message 241 by RAZD, posted 06-10-2007 6:25 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 247 by RAZD, posted 06-11-2007 7:59 PM Someone who cares 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