|
Author
|
Topic: Creationists think Evolutionists think like Creationists.
|
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 303 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: 07-20-2006
|
|
Message 19 of 485 (568496)
07-06-2010 10:35 AM
|
Reply to: Message 16 by Big_Al35
07-06-2010 9:31 AM
|
|
Evolutionary thinking however is very pessimistic. They believe in survival of the fittest, kill or be killed, anything goes. Success is measured in terms of still being around to see the death of all those around you. You can see that evolution paints a horrific picture even if it is factually correct. (I am not saying that it is mind) It needs to work on its salesmanship. One obvious difference between "selling" evolution and selling a commercial product such as soap and automobiles is that in the world of business it is not considered permissible for the competition to tell lies about one's product. If creationist propagandists could ever attain to the standard of morality and decency set by Madison Avenue hucksters, then evolutionists would have no difficulties in appealing to a wider market. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 16 by Big_Al35, posted 07-06-2010 9:31 AM | | Big_Al35 has not replied |
|
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 303 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: 07-20-2006
|
|
|
Message 26 of 485 (568511)
07-06-2010 11:24 AM
|
Reply to: Message 20 by Big_Al35
07-06-2010 10:56 AM
|
|
Re: The case may rest
If every thought I had about evolutionists confirms that I think that they think like creationists then where will the contributions to this debate come from. Do you only want evolutionists to post? You're free to post rubbish, and we're free to mock you for doing so.
After all a creationist can't think correctly right? Apparently not. But you'll never know unless you try.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 20 by Big_Al35, posted 07-06-2010 10:56 AM | | Big_Al35 has not replied |
|
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 303 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: 07-20-2006
|
|
|
Message 28 of 485 (568514)
07-06-2010 11:25 AM
|
Reply to: Message 25 by Big_Al35
07-06-2010 11:23 AM
|
|
Re: The case may rest
Good grief...I think I touched a nerve! That's the usual consequence of telling unpleasant lies about people, yes. Why the air of surprise? Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 25 by Big_Al35, posted 07-06-2010 11:23 AM | | Big_Al35 has not replied |
|
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 303 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: 07-20-2006
|
|
|
Message 69 of 485 (568793)
07-17-2010 8:52 PM
|
Reply to: Message 46 by Big_Al35
07-07-2010 5:38 AM
|
|
If there is nothing wrong with these questions then I guess you wont mind me asking for a source for the following quote. You're welcome.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 46 by Big_Al35, posted 07-07-2010 5:38 AM | | Big_Al35 has not replied |
|
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 303 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: 07-20-2006
|
|
|
Message 71 of 485 (568796)
07-17-2010 9:27 PM
|
Reply to: Message 44 by Big_Al35
07-07-2010 5:04 AM
|
|
I don't mean to be rude but you are typical of how evolutionists think. "let's see some documentation". Other typical quotes from evolutionists include "where's the evidence", "prove it", "show me one person who" etc etc.... Paying people unsolicited compliments is certainly the best way to avoid being rude.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 44 by Big_Al35, posted 07-07-2010 5:04 AM | | Big_Al35 has not replied |
|
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 303 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: 07-20-2006
|
|
|
Message 72 of 485 (568798)
07-17-2010 9:31 PM
|
Reply to: Message 57 by Big_Al35
07-07-2010 9:25 AM
|
|
OH and you are ok with people stating things and having nothing to back themselves up. I'm fine with that. Ah, yes, creationism.
You seem to think that creationists should think like evolutionists. And that people who think they're Napoleon should think like people who don't.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 57 by Big_Al35, posted 07-07-2010 9:25 AM | | Big_Al35 has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 115 by Big_Al35, posted 07-21-2010 7:04 AM | | Dr Adequate has replied |
|
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 303 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: 07-20-2006
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 78 of 485 (568812)
07-17-2010 10:13 PM
|
Reply to: Message 73 by GDR
07-17-2010 9:40 PM
|
|
Re: Evolution is agnostic
It just seems to me that if our science is correct then it should have something to tell us about a creator should one exist. "He has a inordinate fondness for beetles."
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 73 by GDR, posted 07-17-2010 9:40 PM | | GDR has replied |
|
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 303 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: 07-20-2006
|
Re: Evolution is agnostic
Please do not presume what I do or do not believe. I don't believe or disbelieve this. I have no knowledge of abiogenesis. I think he's talking about embryology.
|
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 303 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: 07-20-2006
|
|
|
Message 116 of 485 (569252)
07-21-2010 8:01 AM
|
Reply to: Message 115 by Big_Al35
07-21-2010 7:04 AM
|
|
If you know anyone who thinks they are the actual famous/historical Napoleon have you suggested psychiatric treatment to them? No, but I would if I did. Why do you ask? I suppose I could just give them a history book, a postcard of Napoleon's tomb, a portrait of Napoleon, and a mirror. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 115 by Big_Al35, posted 07-21-2010 7:04 AM | | Big_Al35 has not replied |
|
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 303 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: 07-20-2006
|
Re: How evolutionists think...
That would be fine, if the scientific community allowed a scientist to conclude that a non-material explanation is the most likely for a said phenomenon. But that is not what the scientific community allows. Instead they specifically say that such a conclusion is absolutely unacceptable, even if that's where the evidence points. So they do not truly believe in following the evidence where it leads. OK, let's add methodological naturalism to the list of things you don't understand.
|
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 303 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: 07-20-2006
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
Re: How evolutionists think...
Sure it can be wrong which is why the Phlogiston theory was thrown out, and replaced with Oxidation-Reduction or why the sun centered solar system replaced the earth centered system. When a scientific theory is found wrong it is corrected which is not the case with creationism. That's exactly what happened to creationism: it was thrown out and replaced with evolution --- by scientists. Not by all non-scientists, but then one could say the same of geocentrism; and I feel sure that if the Bible had mentioned phlogiston then creationists would be going around denouncing the "atheist myth of oxygen" and demanding that schools should "teach both theories". Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 193 by bluescat48, posted 07-27-2010 11:24 AM | | bluescat48 has not replied |
|
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 303 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: 07-20-2006
|
Re: WOW!!
Are you as intellectually as dishonest as Granny, or is this just another example of xenophobic behavior, where all evolutionists try to support the others no matter how bizarrely incorrect they are. Explain to me exactly how I was talking out of MY ass? He didn't discuss this just like I said he did? She didn't flat out refuse to accept that he discussed this in any way shape or form, even saying "he didn't say this or anything like it. He never discussed silicon or flecks of sand. You completely made that up". And she didn't try every cop out lie in the book to try to deny it after she arrogantly mistook that he DID in fact discuss this, both in lectures and in his best selling book? How full of shit are you? If you're trying to lie about your bullshit on this thread, then I'm not surprised you didn't link to it.
|
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 303 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: 07-20-2006
|
Re: suspending for giving opinion?
Well, this is a very interesting view you bring to the table subbie. That I should actually be SUSPENDED for my opinions about the topic of how creationists think evolutionists think. Its a most interesting and revealing point I must say. That was not his point. Whom do you hope to deceive by pretending that it was?
|
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 303 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: 07-20-2006
|
Re: suspending for giving opinion?
Please substantiate your opinion. Certainly. We all know that that was not his point because we can all see that that was not what he said. I didn't think even you would need this explaining to you.
I believe that was his point. And yet it was not what he said. I've noticed that a lot of your beliefs are at right-angles to the evidence. Have you noticed that? It is really most striking.
Also please avoid breaking the rules any further. Rule #4 Points should be supported with evidence and/or reasoned argumentation. Address rebuttals through the introduction of additional evidence or by enlarging upon the argument. Do not repeat previous points without further elaboration. Avoid bare assertions. Hypocrisy is definitely among the more amusing of your vices. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 426 by articulett, posted 08-02-2010 5:51 AM | | Dr Adequate has not replied |
|
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 303 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: 07-20-2006
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 439 of 485 (571909)
08-02-2010 11:12 PM
|
Reply to: Message 432 by marc9000
08-02-2010 8:51 PM
|
|
Thomas Sowell
As Thomas Sowell put into words very concisely; People who are very aware that they have more knowledge than the average person are often very unaware that they do not have one-tenth of the knowledge of all the average persons put together. Well, that depends on the subject, doesn't it? If you put together the knowledge of a million people with an average knowledge of quantum mechanics, you wouldn't get Schrodinger's equation, would you? Or if you put together the knowledge of a million people with an average knowledge of how to read Babylonian cuneiform (modal average: no knowledge whatsoever) it wouldn't add up to the knowledge of someone who'd actually studied cuneiform. There are cases when Sowell's point applies: see, for example, James Surowiecki's The Wisdom Of Crowds. But it often breaks down when it comes to technical subjects such as the sciences.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 432 by marc9000, posted 08-02-2010 8:51 PM | | marc9000 has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2