Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


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


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Creationist Method
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 61 of 93 (413644)
07-31-2007 6:59 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by Cold Foreign Object
07-31-2007 5:48 PM


Book?
I'm intrigued. Will it contain a single new idea, or will it just be the same ol' creationist nonsense only more ungrammatical than usual?
And who on Earth do you suppose is going to publish someone who writes like you do?
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 07-31-2007 5:48 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by arachnophilia, posted 07-31-2007 8:57 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 62 of 93 (413664)
07-31-2007 8:57 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Dr Adequate
07-31-2007 6:59 PM


Re: Book?
hush hush dr a, we will have to wait and see.
as for the obvious question, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, right?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-31-2007 6:59 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by IamJoseph, posted 08-01-2007 12:13 AM arachnophilia has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 63 of 93 (413670)
07-31-2007 9:20 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by Cold Foreign Object
07-31-2007 5:48 PM


Re: Creationism is NOT a Scientific Premise.
After reading it you will be enraged and I am looking forward to it.
i am quite looking forward to it myself, ray. will you post it online somewhere, or are you actually publishing?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 07-31-2007 5:48 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3668 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 64 of 93 (413703)
08-01-2007 12:07 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by Vacate
07-31-2007 10:40 AM


Re: Creationism is NOT a Scientific Premise.
quote:
Are you willing to be the one who affirms this by examination? A logical first step, since you claim this so often, would be to define "seed". A good second step would be to define "kind".
'Seed' is absolutely appropriate, anticipating all future generations. Depending on the life form, all transmissions for an offspring are via the seed. The same applies to 'kind' - humans are NOT different by virtue of their bone structure nor the size of their brains. Genesis correctly distinquishes humans by 'speech'. Its deniers will eventually come around - as with all their other failed denials.
That a seed shall follow its own kind, needs no evidencing. It is perhaps the most widely manifest fact in the universe. Its not a theory!
quote:
If you are to continue saying that science must accept this as a valid premise, don't you think that its about time you put forward what the heck you are saying? How many threads are going to be derailed by your kinds and seeds before we are allowed to understand your use of the language?
The issue is the reverse: its denial is the grotesque which needs to be addressed. That evolution does not consider the seed relevent to an offspring is abject denial of the first recording of a scientific equation. It means you have to evidence it as wrong - prove evolution without any translission via the seed. The latter is where science, math and history enters the picture - not before. Both science and medicine has a source point!
Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Vacate, posted 07-31-2007 10:40 AM Vacate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by arachnophilia, posted 08-01-2007 12:16 AM IamJoseph has not replied

  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3668 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 65 of 93 (413704)
08-01-2007 12:13 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by arachnophilia
07-31-2007 8:57 PM


Re: Book?
Will contain the role of the seed, and that Genesis contains the first scientific equation?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by arachnophilia, posted 07-31-2007 8:57 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by arachnophilia, posted 08-01-2007 12:18 AM IamJoseph has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 66 of 93 (413705)
08-01-2007 12:16 AM
Reply to: Message 64 by IamJoseph
08-01-2007 12:07 AM



all transmissions for an offspring are via the seed.
"seed" can have two (closely related) meanings:
  1. offspring
  2. a euphemism for "sperm."
as such:
That evolution does not consider the seed relevent to an offspring is abject denial of the first recording of a scientific equation.
this statement is utter nonsense. first you have (again) used a word as if it is somehow independent (or opposite) from its definition. how would eevolution possibly fail to consider offspring relevant to offspring? that's anti-tautological. and of course evolution realizes that sperm is an integral part of making offspring.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by IamJoseph, posted 08-01-2007 12:07 AM IamJoseph has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 67 of 93 (413706)
08-01-2007 12:18 AM
Reply to: Message 65 by IamJoseph
08-01-2007 12:13 AM


Re: Book?
Will contain the role of the seed, and that Genesis contains the first scientific equation?
i am unaware of what the contents of ray's book will be. perhaps mr. martinez can illuminate the matter for us? but i suspect we will have to wait and see when (if) it is published.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by IamJoseph, posted 08-01-2007 12:13 AM IamJoseph has not replied

  
Adminastasia
Inactive Member


Message 68 of 93 (413707)
08-01-2007 12:20 AM


Are you guys serious?
Seeds? Books?
The thread is about CHARTS!
Stop it, or I am going to learn how to do suspensions.

Please use one of the following links to ask questions or comment on admin messages:
  • General discussion of moderation procedures
  • Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum
  • Thread Reopen Requests
  • Great Debate Proposals
    Helpful links for New Members:
    Forum Guidelines, [thread=-19,-112], [thread=-17,-45], and Practice Makes Perfect

  • Replies to this message:
     Message 70 by IamJoseph, posted 08-01-2007 12:29 AM Adminastasia has not replied

      
    IamJoseph
    Member (Idle past 3668 days)
    Posts: 2822
    Joined: 06-30-2007


    Message 69 of 93 (413708)
    08-01-2007 12:27 AM
    Reply to: Message 58 by Dr Adequate
    07-31-2007 5:31 PM


    Re: Lobsters
    quote:
    Except laws against pedophilia, slavery, genocide, torture, arson, blackmail ...
    Yes, carnal knowledge and arson are listed as crimes. Slavery was confronted nowhere else than by the OT laws. Lets hope your science is any better.
    quote:
    But it does have a rule against lending money at interest, which I'm sure we'd all follow if it wasn't the economic basis of modern civilisation.
    Yes, modern banking resulted because Europe's medevial churches accidently left out money lending from its list of decrees bariing jews and other non-christians from every vocation one can imagine.
    quote:
    Oh, and a stern prohibition against eating lobsters.
    True. Half the world is at risk today from consuming shell fish, which are scavengers that consume toxics, and its proper cleansing is not observed. This is a correct advocation, when science was not yet developed. Consumption of shell fish poses a greater risk factor than any other foods - if not properly cleansed, which is very difficult: it can kill or damage for life. Medicine, including the first advocation of washing of hands to eliminate 90% of contact transferred bacteria, was introduced in the OT.
    One cannot describe creationism if their knowledge of the OT is so insignificant and distorted. All world accepted laws come from the OT - exclusively. Not a single law accepted by the world's institutions come from any other source. Feel free to name us one!

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 58 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-31-2007 5:31 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

      
    IamJoseph
    Member (Idle past 3668 days)
    Posts: 2822
    Joined: 06-30-2007


    Message 70 of 93 (413709)
    08-01-2007 12:29 AM
    Reply to: Message 68 by Adminastasia
    08-01-2007 12:20 AM


    Re: Are you guys serious?
    Fire away. Or change the name of this thread.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 68 by Adminastasia, posted 08-01-2007 12:20 AM Adminastasia has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 71 by arachnophilia, posted 08-01-2007 12:32 AM IamJoseph has replied

      
    arachnophilia
    Member (Idle past 1344 days)
    Posts: 9069
    From: god's waiting room
    Joined: 05-21-2004


    Message 71 of 93 (413710)
    08-01-2007 12:32 AM
    Reply to: Message 70 by IamJoseph
    08-01-2007 12:29 AM


    Re: Are you guys serious?
    joe, one forum member to another, don't tempt the mods. you've been having a run of suspensions recently, and it certainly is no credit to creationists and fundamentalists that they can't seem follow the rules of civilized debate.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 70 by IamJoseph, posted 08-01-2007 12:29 AM IamJoseph has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 72 by IamJoseph, posted 08-01-2007 12:40 AM arachnophilia has replied

      
    IamJoseph
    Member (Idle past 3668 days)
    Posts: 2822
    Joined: 06-30-2007


    Message 72 of 93 (413711)
    08-01-2007 12:40 AM
    Reply to: Message 71 by arachnophilia
    08-01-2007 12:32 AM


    Re: Are you guys serious?
    Explain the name of this thread - the only thing not addressed.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 71 by arachnophilia, posted 08-01-2007 12:32 AM arachnophilia has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 73 by arachnophilia, posted 08-01-2007 12:46 AM IamJoseph has replied

      
    arachnophilia
    Member (Idle past 1344 days)
    Posts: 9069
    From: god's waiting room
    Joined: 05-21-2004


    Message 73 of 93 (413712)
    08-01-2007 12:46 AM
    Reply to: Message 72 by IamJoseph
    08-01-2007 12:40 AM


    topic
    read the op.
    describe and discuss what the method creationists use for research -- if indeed creationists do research -- and how it is similar to or differs from the scientific method.
    as a creationist, you should probably be adding information about the procedures used by yourself or prominent creationists for arriving at "the truth."


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 72 by IamJoseph, posted 08-01-2007 12:40 AM IamJoseph has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 74 by IamJoseph, posted 08-01-2007 12:57 AM arachnophilia has replied

      
    IamJoseph
    Member (Idle past 3668 days)
    Posts: 2822
    Joined: 06-30-2007


    Message 74 of 93 (413713)
    08-01-2007 12:57 AM
    Reply to: Message 73 by arachnophilia
    08-01-2007 12:46 AM


    Re: topic
    That's where you get evidence of the 'seed', representing transmissions of life forms - ignored by atheists; that 'kind' represents an evidential proof what separates humans from all other life forms - ignored by atheists. I call it selective atheism, and slight of hand science. I'm not fooled.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 73 by arachnophilia, posted 08-01-2007 12:46 AM arachnophilia has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 75 by arachnophilia, posted 08-01-2007 1:28 AM IamJoseph has replied

      
    arachnophilia
    Member (Idle past 1344 days)
    Posts: 9069
    From: god's waiting room
    Joined: 05-21-2004


    Message 75 of 93 (413715)
    08-01-2007 1:28 AM
    Reply to: Message 74 by IamJoseph
    08-01-2007 12:57 AM


    Re: topic
    That's where
    what's where? your statement lacks a specified subject -- there's a pronoun but no antecedant.
    you get evidence of the 'seed', representing transmissions of life forms - ignored by atheists;
    please explain what this has to do with the topic, what exaclty you mean by "seed," and how the creationist method (whatever it is) does not ignore this (whatever it is) and how the "atheist" scientific method does.
    that 'kind' represents an evidential proof what separates humans from all other life forms
    this statement lacks a preposition somewhere. should that be "of what separates... " possibly? please explain how you are using the term "kind" in quotes, and how such a word represents a difference, in regards to the bible (where it is applied to many different, uh, kinds of things including humans AND animals AND plants), or science, or the creationist method.
    I call it selective atheism,
    call what "selective atheism?" when are atheists being selective about believing in god? do they believe in god at some times, but not others? or for some reasons, but not others? how is atheism particularly relevent to the scientific method?
    and slight of hand science. I'm not fooled.
    what is slight of hand? what do you feel is being "palmed" away?
    please don't feel the grammar-nitpicks are quibbles designed to distract from any point you might. i honestly cannot figure out what you are trying to say. it seems to you have become somewhat accustomed to posting pure unadulterated nonsense. not in terms of content or points being argued, but in terms of simply stringing together gibberish and failing to elaborate on the specifics of yoru argument. please elaborate.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 74 by IamJoseph, posted 08-01-2007 12:57 AM IamJoseph has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 76 by IamJoseph, posted 08-01-2007 2:22 AM arachnophilia has replied

      
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.2
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024