Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 53 (9179 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Anig
Upcoming Birthdays: Theodoric
Post Volume: Total: 918,057 Year: 5,314/9,624 Month: 339/323 Week: 183/160 Day: 0/19 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evidence for the Biblical Record
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8610
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 332 of 348 (585561)
10-08-2010 6:33 PM
Reply to: Message 328 by BarackZero
10-08-2010 5:25 PM


So YOUR definition of "plausible" is when "we know how it works." Otherwise it's not "plausible."
This is not what Ringo said.
What she said was:
quote:
Photosynthesis is more than plausible because we know how it works.
Knowing how something works is one vector to plausibility.
Ringo did not explore, let alone negate, any other vectors to plausibility.
This situation came about because of two items:
1. Your poor reading comprehension skills
2. Your poor critical thinking skills
If you could improve on these areas then please go back and re-read the OP and the rest of the thread. Then maybe you could answer jar's question above.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 328 by BarackZero, posted 10-08-2010 5:25 PM BarackZero has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 333 by BarackZero, posted 10-09-2010 9:44 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8610
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 343 of 348 (586142)
10-11-2010 1:21 PM
Reply to: Message 333 by BarackZero
10-09-2010 9:44 PM


You responded in typical leftist fashion, by attacking my ability to read and think.
Ad hominem attacks are the sine qua non of leftists everywhere.
Ad hominem is not fallacious nor inappropriate when:
quote:
questions of personal conduct, character, motives, etc., are legitimate and relevant to the issue.
See Wiki
And since you have shown obvious deficits in both reading comprehension and critical thinking during this discussion then your questionable personal conduct, character and motives are not just fair game but legitimate points of discussion.
Leftists always, always pretend to be enlightened, intellectual, smart, scientific, and all things moral, good, and brilliant.
First, I am not a leftist except in your mind. But then everyone who doesn't agree with your fantacies you label as a "leftist" as if this is a bad thing. This goes, again, to your lack of critical thinking skills.
Second, this cannot be said to be pretense when, compared to you ultra right-wing nutjobs, it is, in fact, true. I especially identify with the "brilliant" part.
This is the definition of "plausible" at http://www.dictionary.com:
having an appearance of truth or reason; seemingly worthy of approval or acceptance; credible; believable: a plausible excuse; a plausible plot.
Nowhere does the word "proof" appear.
Plausibility is clearly a matter of perspective, a matter of how the subject "appears" to the observer in question.
Precisely.
From what we know, there is no reason, no credibility, to believe some sky rock could turn water into blood. It is not plausible.
And since we know how photosynthesis works, there is sufficient reason, credibility, in the natural fabrication of a hard, solid material, from a gas and a liquid. This is more than just plausible, it is fact.
This is what Ringo was attempting to convey to your deficient intellect.
That you have neither the knowledge nor the intellectual capacity to understand the differences between photosynthesis and sky rocks is a legitimate observation to be made in context of this discussion.
That you and so many of your pals here must engage relentlessly in jejune ad hominem attacks speaks volumes about your true scientific and intellectual acumen.
They are not jejune when the deficiencies cited are legitimately displayed, and are integral, to the poor conduct of your discussion.
It is not a positive message either.
Quite negative to be sure, and well deserved.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 333 by BarackZero, posted 10-09-2010 9:44 PM BarackZero 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