Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,840 Year: 4,097/9,624 Month: 968/974 Week: 295/286 Day: 16/40 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Humans walked with dinosaurs
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 53 of 108 (296566)
03-19-2006 8:18 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by randman
03-19-2006 1:11 AM


TalkOrigins/propaganda
but if you don't like indoctrination technigues such as using the term "evolution" in different ways, insisting because one definition is true that the other is as well, a logical fallacy
You attempted, and failed, to support this accusation of equivocation at Message 29. Every page you linked to was quite clear in differentiating between common ancestry and allele frequency change. I post this here because the thread is still open if either you or anglagard wish to discuss it further (since it is not about humans/dinosaurs it is heading off topic).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by randman, posted 03-19-2006 1:11 AM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by randman, posted 03-19-2006 2:17 PM Modulous has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 56 of 108 (296629)
03-19-2006 4:23 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by randman
03-19-2006 2:17 PM


Re: TalkOrigins/propaganda
No, I demonstrated it amply. No objective person that is educated in indoctrination and propaganda technigues could fail to see what I wrote is true. To hear someone like yourself say "you failed to support" means nothing. If you were taught the sky was orange, and I produced photos of it being blue, it wouldn't change your opinion. You'd still say the same thing. There are no facts, logic, etc,...that can affect you as you cling to what appears to me to be a religiously held beleif.
Keep your hair on. Naturally that was my opinion of the debate based on your lack of showing any section where the accused equivocation was employed. It wasn't like you responded to any of my refutations, so how would I know if you had addressed/refuted them? I didn't see any suitable refutation in any of your other posts. I'm not going to raise my objections again, but if you'd like a reminder check out the following posts of mine that you didn't respond to:
Message 31
Message 45
Message 52
Message 87
Message 89
Message 208
Message 223
Message 227
I would be more than happy if you want to show your evidence/refute my position/show me the sky is blue. I also remind you that this thread is about dinosaurs and humans allegedly walking with them. The thread we are now discussing was an offshoot of this one that was created in response to your claims here. I ask you nicely to not continue the off topicness of this discussion and if you want to discuss T.O propaganda, take it to the referenced and appropriate thread. Thanks, and take care.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by randman, posted 03-19-2006 2:17 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by randman, posted 03-20-2006 1:52 AM Modulous 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