Evolution and the myth of "scientific consensus"

justlookinla · Jun 30, 2015

HitchSlap said:
Did you miss where I answered your question?

Yes.

Loudmouth · Jun 30, 2015

Oncedeceived said:
Exactly. It is so typical. And if that doesn't work you watch, this all will take to ad hominem attacks that will lead to shutting down the thread so that they are free from having to present evidence for their claims.

Notice that you are also shifting the focus away from the complexity, functionality, and purpose of naturally occurring systems that were produced by natural mechanisms.

HitchSlap · Jun 30, 2015

Oncedeceived said:
You haven't provided any evidence for the design we see in the complexity, functionality, and purpose of natural systems being produced by natural processes.

Which is why Dawkins states that you are gullible for accepting the appearance of design.

HitchSlap · Jun 30, 2015

justlookinla said:
Yes.

Well, take a look. I did.

Loudmouth · Jun 30, 2015

Oncedeceived said:
You haven't provided any evidence for the design we see in the complexity, functionality, and purpose of natural systems being produced by natural processes.

I supplied as much evidence as you did for biological systems.

Oncedeceived · Jun 30, 2015

HitchSlap said:
Did you miss where I answered your question?

Oncedeceived said: ↑
Exactly. It is so typical. And if that doesn't work you watch, this all will take to ad hominem attacks that will lead to shutting down the thread so that they are free from having to present evidence for their claims.

I claim there is no evidence for your acce

Did you forget to write the whole sentence?

Davian · Jun 30, 2015

Oncedeceived said:
I'm pretending to not see the face just like others pretend that seeing a face in a cliff or a tree is equivalent to the function and form in systems within systems.

Either way, is that an actual face that is seen in that cliff, or an illusion?

HitchSlap · Jun 30, 2015

Oncedeceived said:
Oncedeceived said: ↑
Exactly. It is so typical. And if that doesn't work you watch, this all will take to ad hominem attacks that will lead to shutting down the thread so that they are free from having to present evidence for their claims.

I claim there is no evidence for your acce

Did you forget to write the whole sentence?

Yep, I ended up erasing it. Didn't think it was worth responding to.

crjmurray · Jun 30, 2015

Oncedeceived said:
You haven't provided any evidence for the design we see in the complexity, functionality, and purpose of natural systems being produced by natural processes.

Do you realize that sexual reproduction refutes that argument?

Loudmouth · Jun 30, 2015

justlookinla said:
Yeppers. And they think they're winning by evasion.

I answered your question, and you won't even address it.

I am also pointing to the complexity, functionality, and purpose of river drainage systems which you refuse to address.

justlookinla · Jun 30, 2015

HitchSlap said:
Well, take a look. I did.

Post number?

justlookinla · Jun 30, 2015

Loudmouth said:
I answered your question, and you won't even address it.

Post number?

Oncedeceived · Jun 30, 2015

Davian said:
Either way, is that an actual face that is seen in that cliff, or an illusion?

Oh Davian, aren't you so clever.
Patterns are not the equivalent to what we are discussing here and you are trying so hard to make it that simple. Sorry, not in anyway equivalent.Sorry that sounded snarky and it wasn't meant to be.

Oncedeceived · Jun 30, 2015

HitchSlap said:
Yep, I ended up erasing it. Didn't think it was worth responding to.

What???

HitchSlap · Jun 30, 2015

justlookinla said:
Post number?

1654

Oncedeceived · Jun 30, 2015

crjmurray said:
Do you realize that sexual reproduction refutes that argument?

No, I didn't realize that. Perhaps you could explain?

crjmurray · Jun 30, 2015

Oncedeceived said:
No, I didn't realize that. Perhaps you could explain?

Sexual reproduction is a natural process, yes?

Loudmouth · Jun 30, 2015

justlookinla said:
Post number?

"I would say that it is necessary. When you identify design, you are identifying a designer. It is the act of designing that leaves the evidence, such as the use of tools or methodologies."--post 1674

Smidlee · Jun 30, 2015

Oncedeceived said:
What evidence? That is what I am waiting for here. He did a great job speculating but no evidence is given for any of it.

Give me the evidence that Dawkins gave for the evolution for the eye for instance.

All Dawkins deals with is the eyeball.

Loudmouth · Jun 30, 2015

Oncedeceived said:
Oh Davian, aren't you so clever.
Patterns are not the equivalent to what we are discussing here and you are trying so hard to make it that simple. Sorry, not in anyway equivalent.Sorry that sounded snarky and it wasn't meant to be.

Since you are comparing the helicopter rotor to the bac flag, perhaps you could point to the turbine engine that is running on kerosene within the bac flag.

Evolution and the myth of "scientific consensus"

Regular Member

Contributor

PROUDLY PRIMATE

PROUDLY PRIMATE

Contributor

Senior Veteran

fallible

PROUDLY PRIMATE

The Bear. Not The Bull.

Contributor

Regular Member

Regular Member

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

PROUDLY PRIMATE

Senior Veteran

The Bear. Not The Bull.

Contributor

Veteran

Contributor

Similar threads