PROOF against evolution

(sory should have been NosyNed)I've only been half following this. It would be helpful to back up and summarize where we are at.[This message has been edited by AdminNosy, 02-12-2004]

As noted this is not the dating forum.Also it is not good form to simple post a bunch of bare links. If you do that it is fair game to post a bare link in response.You need to pick out the parts that you are using in support of your argument and be prepared to both explain and defend them.Be warned: There are people around here who are very knowledgeable on some of these topics. You may find your defense more difficult that you think. You may also find that your sources don't know as much as you think they do.

Yes, let me explain more clearly how things work. These are two of the rules tha you agreed to:

quote:

---

2. Debate in good faith by addressing rebuttals through the introduction of additional evidence or by enlarging upon the argument. Do not merely keep repeating the same points without further elaboration.

​

4.Make your points by providing supporting evidence and/or argument. Avoid bare assertions. Because it is often not possible to tell which points will prove controversial, it is acceptable to wait until a point is challenged before supporting it.

---

Others do not have to do your research for you. You don't have any "methodology". There is nothing to correct. You have to show why you arrived at your conclusions. Then others can examine that reasoning and discuss it.This may be taken as an official warning. You may be restricted in your access to all or parts of the forum if you don't feel the need to follow the guidelines you agreed to.

Very well, I must have missed that support. Please re state your argument. You should also point to your assertions and the facts behind them.If you continue to be unable to do this you will not keep full posting priviledges.

Sorry jar, please take that to dates and dating.If you want to open a new topic that steps through it gradually as you are starting to do. Then I would quickly move it.It is a good idea that we haven't done yet that I know of.

Thanks.You might be right about this particular individual but the topic could be a good one. Unfortunately I think it would work best as a back and forth so you can't do it without someone working along with you.If you start I'll stay in admin mode and be very firm about it.

The "purpose" issue isn't connect to "Proof against Evolution" in any way I can see.

I think you are badly off topic here.However, you might have a very good opening post in a new topic. If you want to suggest that you might get some discussion on it.Where would it go? Faith and Belief? Misc. topics?

Ok, that is enough!Everyone take this to an appropriate thread about information, physic and/or abiogenesis.yxifix, you have NOT shown that this has any connection with the topic of the thread.If anyone continues they will get a break or the thread will be shut down as too far off topic.I'll be back in a couple of hours to check.This message has been edited by AdminNosy, 08-11-2004 01:25 PM

Mark, you too!

This is where you are others are talking past each other.As has been noted we don't have a complete explanation of how the intial genomic information happened. End of Story. That is not a concern of evolution.Meanwhile once there is information to use then RM and NS can add to it. It you wish to disprove that you will be on topic. If not find something in another topic in this forum.

yxifix, you are, in some cases, dealing with practicing scientists and mathematicians. What you are posting suggests you have little education in any of the areas you are discussing.Arrogance under such circumstances can be annoying to others. I suggest you back off a little and attempt to learn something.

Others are not doing a good job of showing you just what is wrong with your "proofs". I hope they will take a bit of time to try to help you with that.Your ideas are so very obviously and simply wrong that others haven't figured out how to explain the problems to you yet. We'll see if they can find a way to do so.

, yxifix is annoying of course. However, I don't think his "opponents" are doing a good job of pinning him down.I'd suggest that both yxifix and any others decided if they are arguing for and against the origin of life ideas or evolutionary theory. Even that step hasn't been accomplished and held to yet.yxifix's lack of understanding of logical thinking and arrogance makes him difficult but I think a better job could be done in holding him to a line of thought. I'm staying out of it but will step in as an admin if it is clear he isn't following guidelines. You've allowed him to wiggle enough that it isn't clear enough yet.

I agree with your assessment but I think it will have to be very, very simple for yxifix to "get it".I suggest you attempt, again, and more clearly, to separate what is being discussed the origin of life or evolution. It wouldn't hurt to ask that question directly.In fact, yxifix, you could take this opportunity to answer that. You should find that everyone agrees that life had to have some origin. However, evolution is a process which applies to living things (or things that are so close to living it gets difficult to distinguish clearly). Are you attempting to deal with the question of origins or of evolution?Mark, it is clear from the thread that a good deal of the time (but with a lot of jumping around) that yxifix is talking about the initiation of life and people are arguing back with him regarding evolution. That is part of the lack of clarity that makes it, in my mind premature to act. Draw the line before and then hold that line.This thread is, after all, in the Origin of Life forum but is named in an odd way for that.This message has been edited by AdminNosy, 08-18-2004 11:22 AM