Kent Hovind

No, Dawn, this does not answer what is being asked.

quote:

---

Observation ...

---

What observations are leading you to this assertion. More description is called for. Take this opportunity to be verbose.

quote:

---

evaluation ...

---

This doesn't say anything. What "evaluation"? Walk us through this evaluation, step-by-step. Depending on the evidence you are evaluating this should take at least a couple paragraphs of details of your evaluation.

quote:

---

experimentation ...

---

What experimentation? What specific hypotheses was being tested? How was the experiment conducted? What were the controls, null-hypothesis, equipment, sensors, etc. What were the raw results and your conclusions? If you take just one such experiment and relay some of these details this may help us get a better feel for what you are going on about.

quote:

---

accidental discoveries ...

---

Which ones? How do they evidence your assertion?Remember in all this DrJones is referring specificaly to your statement:

quote:

---

Someone along time ago in a galaxay far far away observed the available evidence, law order an purpose, design etc and used this available evidence to form a valid, warrented premise. Not the other way around

---

in your Message 295 so no need to expand your explanations beyond what evidence you used to make these specific determinations are necessary unless you feel they would add understanding for us. Edited by AZPaul3, : spelin

Did you forget the assertion you made to DrJones?

quote:

---

Someone along time ago in a galaxay far far away observed the available evidence, law order an purpose, design etc and used this available evidence to form a valid, warrented premise.

---

When asked what evidence you had for making this statement you replied:

quote:

---

Observation, evaluation, experimentation and even accidental discoveries ...

---

I asked for you to break this down into finer details in support of your statement that someone along time ago in a galaxay far far away observed the available evidence, law order an purpose, design etc and used this available evidence to form a valid, warrented premise.I did not ask for generalizations of philosophy unattached from this specific statement.What observations did you make that led you to state that there was a "someone along time ago in a galaxay far far away?"What experiments or accidental discoveries are you referring to that led you to state that they "observed the available evidence, law order an purpose, design ..." and what observation, evaluation, experimentation and even accidental discoveries caused you to conclude that they "used this available evidence to form a valid, warrented premise." As this thread shows I did not make any such statement. You did. And I have no obligation to provide evidence for something you said, not me.Again, Dawn, referring to your ststement that "someone along time ago in a galaxay far far away observed the available evidence, law order an purpose, design etc and used this available evidence to form a valid, warrented premise," and your your response to DrJones that the evidence you used to arrive at this statement was borne of "Observation, evaluation, experimentation and even accidental discoveries" I am asking for specifics from you on exactly what observations, evaluation, experimentation and even accidental discoveries you used to arrive at your assertion that someone along time ago in a galaxay far far away observed the available evidence, law order an purpose, design etc and used this available evidence to form a valid, warrented premise.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

So what you're saying is that you do not have any evidence of a "someone along time ago in a galaxay far far away observed the available evidence ... " And having been caught in this failure you are attempting to obfuscate by bluster and misdirection. Bad form, Dawn. Oh, I generally don't do philosophies. I find that they are mostly self-serving to the various philosophers' disparate viewpoints, mainly without any grounding in this real world and inevitably just plain wrong. Like your friend you quoted.Philosophy is not science and so, like christianity, a philosophy can be interpreted and re-interpreted until it fits one's own likes and dislikes regardless of any reality. A total waste of time. Kinda like this discussion.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

He's not even reasonable. He's expensive as hell. He'll take every dollar you have ... and deposit them in the bank $4,999 at a time.