"Theory": All pigs have wings. Evidence: Lots of wingless pigs.
Evidence is in the eye of the beholder.
Perhaps when you wrote that you thought it meant something.
You have to make a convincing argument that your "evidence" can only support your favorite view to the exclusion of all other views.
No, not really. No-one, for example, is required to exclude Last Thursdayism when accounting for the existence of last Wednesday's newspaper.
You people have fucked the word "evidence" all to bloody hell. You have rigged things so that "evidence" only means anything that supports the consensus view and anything that doesn't get peer review support is by definition "not evidence".
Actually, that's not the reason why those of your beliefs which are wrong have no supporting evidence. It's 'cos of them being wrong.
There are certain things you should learn. 1) Definition of evidence. 2) Understanding what it means when I put the word theories in quote marks. 3) How the peer review process works and what and means and just as importantly what it doesn't mean. 4) Telling an atheist to go to hell is not an insult. Just shows you have no argument and you should take you ball, go home and cry.
Since you are sticking up for Buzzy how about you show how his theories are valid, how they do not defy scientific evidence. Go on try. I need a good laugh.
If this is as good as you have in a battle of wits I think you might be unarmed.
Evidence is in the eye of the beholder.
Bullshit. All that is is a creo cop out for distorting evidence.
Edited by AdminPhat, : fixed spelling
Edited by Theodoric, : Fixed Phats meddling
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
How in the hell can a theory defy evidence? Evidence is in the eye of the beholder.
If a guy called Kosie Petoorsie, who doesn't even exist, is accused (and then found guilty) of the murder of Pres. Barak Obama on the 1st of April 2012, it is crap. It's not in the eye of the beholder. It's just crap.
Kosie Petoorsie doesn't exist and Pres. Obama wasn't killed on the first of April, 2012. To accuse a non-existing person of a murder that didn't happen certainly is not "in the eye of the beholder". It's just crap.
Buz, the only butt you've managed to kick is your own. By continually blowing your own trumpet you look like a fool. Everyone here knows that what you are saying just isn't true - you're fooling no-one but yourself.
I think you've just managed t demonstrate that you are one of a kind and don't fit into any of the categories already mentioned. You have a category all to yourself - the "Heart in the right place, but crazy as a loon" category.
We're ignoring one category of creationist. Some creationists *are* very knowledgeable. Some that come to mind are TrueCreation, Tranquility Base and Peter Berger, but old timers know they haven't been here in quite some time.
In terms of science knowledge there is no one like them here today. Creationists familiar with science are not common, but they do exist, and it seems strange that we almost never see that breed anymore.
The last three post comments were nothing but strawman personal attacks.
My comment pertained to Adminnemooseus's right on statement implying that I should have not been moderated by Percy, essentially mandating in this garbage pail Freeforall forum that Buzsaw cease and desist making his claims relative to ideology, etc.
All member Percy posted was personal attacks, all the while ignoring my valid points as to why I posted what I did, He attempted to silence me, applying his member account, violating his own forum guidlines. Obviously that strategy was in lieu of refuting, which no one has yet done, including you three thread off topic trolls.
ABE: The last tree comments pertained to messages 398, 399 and 400.
Edited by Buzsaw, : No reason given.
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
Someone wisely said something ;ike, "Before fooling with a fool, make sure the fool is a fool." :)