The Official Perfection KOs Creationism Thread Part Four: The Genesis of Ire!

[brainpan]

I wouldn't characterize that as a stupid.

I would, because this is the debate you sought to win: 1. Evolution is a valid scientific claim. 2. Creationism is not a valid scientific claim. That's not tough to prove, and as I mentioned before, is akin to proving the Earth is flat.

But even with the deck so clearly stacked in your favor, you still lacked the courage to give the theists any wiggle room on #2! You really couldn't handle a debate on whether theistic creationism is scientifically valid?!

And this is what you brag about. Well, I'm not impressed. Nobody should be.

You're still ramblin' on about my offhand remark as if it's some central viewpoint I care deeply about or believe with 100% certainty!

Pretty much. While I can't read your mind, your behavior exactly mirrored that of a deep south fundie getting owned in a debate about religion. I found the example quite useful in making my point, which you seem unable to logically counter.

So you're saying that because I probably believe in some thing that I shouldn't or is based too much on emotional attachment or whatever I can't criticize other people's beliefs?

Of course not. I just decided to bring a little reality to the situation. And you weren't merely criticizing beliefs, far from it. You were taking pleasure from raking theists over the coals and bragging about winning a debate thats impossible to lose.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

This thread has never been about theism. Just read all the posts I, or Erik Mesoy, made. We are in agreement with Perf on the subject of the thread, which is the validity of the theory of evolution by natural selection. We left God out of it.

 

[warpus]

My point is simple: We all believe in things we don't know to be true.

We all also like different kinds of foods.

This doesn't add anything to the "debate".

 

[Smidlee]

We are in agreement with Perf on the subject of the thread, which is the validity of the theory of evolution by natural selection.

So far natural selection doesn't seem to have any more power than artificial selection. It's sound a lot like "free health care for everybody" kind of deals.

 

[brainpan]

Yeah, like if given enough time pigs can grow wings and fly as the big multi-ton dinosaur did. What some call science other call miracles.

I find myself, as usual, in the unenviable position of having to debate both sides.

With no disrespect, Smidlee, you should try to find some specific objection to evolutionary theory and then read the justification from the other side. All you're really presenting us with is your personal amazement, your inability to believe.

If you have a specific criticism of evolutionary theory, then lay it out. I can usually track down a good counter to these criticisms in minutes. Fair enough?

 

[Perfection]

I would, because this is the debate you sought to win: 1. Evolution is a valid scientific claim. 2. Creationism is not a valid scientific claim. That's not tough to prove, and as I mentioned before, is akin to proving the Earth is flat.

Proving evolution is akin to proving the Earth is flat?! What the hell?

But even with the deck so clearly stacked in your favor, you still lacked the courage to give the theists any wiggle room on #2! You really couldn't handle a debate on whether theistic creationism is scientifically valid?!

I certainly can! It's just that this thread isn't about it! Really though, theistic creationism can be pretty much harmonious with a scientific understanding of the universe, which is what I'm trying to champion here.

And this is what you brag about.

Not really, I brag about joke posts mostly.

Well, I'm not impressed. Nobody should be.
Pretty much. While I can't read your mind, your behavior exactly mirrored that of a deep south fundie getting owned in a debate about religion. I found the example quite useful in making my point, which you seem unable to logically counter.

Keep believin' it boy, and it might just come true!

 

[holy king]

So far natural selection doesn't seem to have any more power than artificial selection. It's sound a lot like "free health care for everybody" kind of deals.

ok... i have no f+++ing idea what you could be talking about....
power? health care? sanity?

 

[brainpan]

We all also like different kinds of foods.

This doesn't add anything to the "debate".

If you look more closely, you will see that I don't believe a valid debate can even happen on her terms. And my contribution was meant to support, well to prove, my case about Perfection.

 

[warpus]

If you look more closely, you will see that I don't believe a valid debate can even happen on her terms. And my contribution was meant to support, well to prove, my case about Perfection.

You admit that creationism isn't and can never be a valid scientific theory.

Debate over.

 

[Perfection]

So far natural selection doesn't seem to have any more power than artificial selection.

It doesn't need more power just more time. A few billion years is enough.

I find myself, as usual, in the unenviable position of having to debate both sides.

If you have a specific criticism of evolutionary theory, then lay it out. I can usually track down a good counter to these criticisms in minutes. Fair enough?

So basicly you're going to do the same thing as me (though I rely more on personal knowledge then internet searches) while insulting me for it?

You're a silly thing.

 

[holy king]

If you look more closely, you will see that I don't believe a valid debate can even happen on her terms. And my contribution was meant to support, well to prove, my case about Perfection.

could you please start a "perfection is unable to debate" thread?

 

[Smidlee]

It doesn't need more power just more time. A few billion years is enough.

This is a statement of faith since Father Time doesn't seem to be too friendly toward living things. In fact Father Time seem to eventually destroy everything. I guess if we give those politicians enough time they could gave "free health care for everybody" also.

 

[Perfection]

If you look more closely, you will see that I don't believe a valid debate can even happen on her terms.

This isn't meant to be debate between two sides with a comparable amount of justification on either side and it wasn't claimed to be. It was meant as a device to flesh out scientific misconceptions. If you don't have any scientific misconceptions or aren't willing to help flesh them out then all you're doing is feeding my ego by making my thread series larger and hence more sucessful.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

This is a statement of faith since Father Time doesn't seem to be too friend toward living things. In fact Father Time seem to eventually destroy everything.

What do you mean? Life has been around a long while, even if individual organisms haven't. I thought that was pretty self evident.

 

[holy king]

This is a statement of faith since Father Time doesn't seem to be too friend toward living things. In fact Father Time seem to eventually destroy everything.

yeah, and i heard swiss watches are quite outrageous during the summer months, but while carrying sleep bumblebees might freak out and this is about the sun and the moon only...

 

[Smidlee]

What do you mean? Life has been around a long while, even if individual organisms haven't. I thought that was pretty self evident.

Cars are still around also but still Father Time is not so friendly toward automobiles.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Cars are still around also but still Father Time is not so friendly toward automobiles.

Well, yes. What on earth does that have to do with anything? You seemed to imply that the fact that organisms die means that life itself can't exist very long, or else you just weren't making any sense.

 

[Perfection]

Cars are still around also but still Father Time is not so friendly toward automobiles.

Sure he is, while individual cars die, we keep getting more and better ones, just like evolution with organisms!

 

[holy king]

Cars are still around also but still Father Time is not so friendly toward automoblies.

but you have to agree that while on the one hand lions may drive cars during the shadows, there neither are gods nor freaks that run through the caves of italian food nor blood in the tubs of a thousand baths, but this is ok...

(hey smidley, wanna start a surreal discussion thread, so we dont pollute this discussion here?)

 

[Smidlee]

You seemed to imply that the fact that organisms die means that life itself can't exist very long, or else you just weren't making any sense.

We know life exists today yet the cause is the question. I'm just one of those who haven't seen the evidence that "natural selection" is the cause. Natural selection would still be be a factor if all of life is slowly dying/ degrading with time.