Creation/Evolution Non-Participant Commentary & InvitationsComment on existent debates, invite or challenge members to debates, and plan your debates here!
I find the most recent posts ironic, as it confirms what I see as a pattern. I will basically summarize what I see.
Creation/ID Proponent:
Originally Posted by razzelflabben
one could but personally, I refuse to, I maintain only what is claimed by that creator as testable and only the evidence of science as evidence of or against that same creator god/God/gods.
Post #157
Evolution Proponent:
Originally Posted by random325nicaea
then how about you back up that position by providing us a experiment? come on, lets be scientific here.
Post #158
Creation/ID Proponent:
Originally Posted by razzelflabben
I have many, many, many, many times over....how about if you deal with what has already been done before asking me to provide it again?
Post #159
(comment: lol)
Evolution Proponent:
Originally Posted by random325nicaea
no you have NOT. what you've provided constitutes as a vague "well somehting like this". there is a WHOLE lot more you can do to specify your proposed experiment. like name the species of organism your are planning to use, detail the procedures (methodology), give a list of the needed resources, hell i could go on. THIS is how you propose an experiment to test your hypothesis. NOT "we should test for design by testing for purpose", which says NOTHING when it comes to providing an experiment. either you show your scientific literacy or you should shut up about being capable of scientifically testing for god.
Post #160
[Note: Evolution proponent goes on to further challenge the lack of any citation by Razzel, quoting him in the quotation marks in his own post, I'll italicize Razzel's bit as well].
Evolution Proponent:
Originally Posted by random325nicaea
" So you are wrong in claiming it is personal testimony over hard evidence. The evidence to what I say is a matter of record."
then provide said record.
Post #161
[Note: This next reply is in response to Post #160]
Creation/ID Proponent:
Originally Posted by razzelflabben
When you figure out what we are testing for, we can move on...
Post #162
[Note: This next reply is in reponse to Post #161]
Creation/ID Proponent:
Originally Posted by razzelflabben
check the records for yourself, your the one who claims that I don't know anything about science....scientific method, etc. If I know nothing, I am definately to stupid to provide the evidence you want...
Post #163
(Comment: trying to shift burden of proof.)
[Note: This next is in reponse to Post #163 and contains in text quotation of Razzel in the post, which I will italicize for clarity]
Evolution Proponent:
Originally Posted by random325nicaea
"check the records for yourself, your the one who claims that I don't know anything about science....scientific method, etc. If I know nothing, I am definately to stupid to provide the evidence you want..."
WAY TO WALK AWAY FORM THE PROOF OF BURDEN!
really, YOU MAKE THE CLAIM. YOU PROVIDE THE EVIDENCE TO BACK IT UP.
this has NOTHING to do with science btw, this has to do with you simply sifting through news articles and linking the relevant article that detailed your accident.
NO HYPOTHESIS REQUIRED.
notice, you also have YET to provide us with an experiment to test for god.
Post #164
(Comment: Delightful. Random notices Razzel is trying to shift Burden of Proof, blasts her for it, notes the irrelevance of her point and further points out that Razzel is continuing to evade providing an experiment claimed existed in Post #157)
[Note: the following emphasis is mine. For hilarity]
Creation/ID Proponent:
Originally Posted by razzelflabben
look, I have run into people like you more than I care to, the hatred and venom force you to make unreasonable demands on people, their time, their evidence, etc. When you ask for evidence it is given, the evidence isn't enough for you...you want more evidence...that evidence is provided and for some reason you dismiss that, and round and round it goes...even went so far with one poster that when all the evidence was provided, his reason for not believing the evidence was that after the car stopped moving and I got out, a strange force (natural force don't forget) further compelled the car to collapse on itself. This natural force was like gravity, so the car stops moving, and further gravitational pull forces the metal to collapse in on itself in the footwell, so that it was more mangled by some magical gravitational force than it was by the force of the train, and this is suppose to be good science???!!!... so, I have come to the conclusion with people who are so blinded by hatred and bias that they can't accept evidence, to protect my privacy, therefore, I will give you enough information to look it up on public records, but not do the job for you, that way, you have to put down the venom long enough to consider what you find as real...when your ready to look it up, let me know, I'll give you all the info you need. In the meantime, don't claim to accept science when you aren't willing to look at and consider evidence.
(Comment: Hooray! "People like you" "venom" "hatred". She claims, once again to have shown evidence, but that its too much trouble to simply copy paste it back here again. Hmmm. Oh. And she can't re-post her evidence, because according to her, apparently that would violate her privacy.... Somehow . Oh yeah. And she hasn't realized that her attempt to shift the Burden of Proof has already been noted and rebuffed.)
And that is all we have so far. This does seem to be a recurring pattern. Creationist/ID claims there is science and proof, yet turns out to be oddly incapable of simple citation of the hypothetical proof.
Last edited by laconicstudent; 15th October 2009 at 06:37 PM.
Ha, I thought I was the only one following this exceedingly tedious thread! I even began to participate at one point, but the insults and accusations are hard to ignore and I thought Naraoia seemed to be getting through...
As for recurring pattern - see http://www.christianforums.com/t726062/ which dates back 5 years and features both lucaspa and jet black - it's well over a thousand posts long. You'll see many of the same arguments.
__________________ - Daisy
you're means you are
your means it belongs to you
yore means days long past
Ha, I thought I was the only one following this exceedingly tedious thread! I even began to participate at one point, but the insults and accusations are hard to ignore and I thought Naraoia seemed to be getting through...
As for recurring pattern - see http://www.christianforums.com/t726062/ which dates back 5 years and features both lucaspa and jet black - it's well over a thousand posts long. You'll see many of the same arguments.
Ohhh, thats a bit painful. The worst was the 25th post in which a claim was made for the existence of a lighter-then-air solid.....
I'm not sure how that could be. Hm. If you have take an equal volume , a single mole of air and the given solid, the air will be lighter. The only solid I could think of that could really be lighter then gaseous atmosphere would be metallic hydrogen. Maybe. hmmm
Of course, no one has managed to create solid hydrogen as of yet. Its considered the "Holy Grail" of low temperature physics, because its theorized that it would have some very unique and interesting properties.
Unfortunately we do not have the technology to cool and apply enough pressure to a given quantity of hydrogen to force it into a solid state as of yet. Ah well.
I think the poster was referring to aerogel which isn't actually lighter than air, but it's pretty cool.
Would it be possible to replace the liquid part of the gel with a very light gas such as helium? Then the density as a whole might be lighter than "air" at ground level. If not, why not?
__________________ - Daisy
you're means you are
your means it belongs to you
yore means days long past
I think the poster was referring to aerogel which isn't actually lighter than air, but it's pretty cool.
Oh yea, that stuff is really cool, I think I saw some in a high school science class once.
Originally Posted by aisy_Day
Would it be possible to replace the liquid part of the gel with a very light gas such as helium? Then the density as a whole might be lighter than "air" at ground level. If not, why not?
I don't think that is quite within the reach of our technology yet. *shrug* who knows
i though i was the only one reading and even posting there!
good to there are some actual lurkers who care
this is sooo satisfying to see other people notice razzles incessant beating around the bush and persecutor complex.
im really starting to give up hope that she has anything to provide whatsoever.
the frustration is starting to set in (hence all the CAPS)
oh and have you read the entire thread? including the parts where she directs to certain "scientific sources" that seem to support ID, or the vague claim in the bible.
(the "and yet we are still descendant of two people" remarks)
oh ya, am i really be to "venomous"?
__________________ My picture shows why creationists lose when they say T-Rex ate plants, not Adam.
oh and have you read the entire thread? including the parts where she directs to certain 'scientific sources' that seem to support ID, or the vague claim in the bible.
(the 'and yet we are still descendant of two people' remarks)
Ugh, no, not the entire thread. Some posters are extremely prolific and irritating. It is incredibly tedious to see the same dodges, accusations and non-answers repeated ad infinitum.
I think the key is to not get distracted, to ignore the snide accusations and irrelevant questions.
I would like to see how the 'scientific method' was used to test for a god - what the actual methodology was.
"There is an entire thread still going on all about that - 'Why Are People On This Forum So Venomous?' " which ironically is turning into a same kind of "see razzle dodge questions" showthread.... i wonder why....
__________________ My picture shows why creationists lose when they say T-Rex ate plants, not Adam.
"Its always a feat to get a Creationist to cough up citations."
well she DID in the beginning, but she completely failed to see that they didn't support ID.
i actually feel like ending it with none stinger and then quiting the topic, i rly can't be bothered anymore...my patience is reaching it's limit after 4 weeks.
__________________ My picture shows why creationists lose when they say T-Rex ate plants, not Adam.
. Oh yeah. And she hasn't realized that her attempt to shift the Burden of Proof has already been noted and rebuffed.)
Linear Mode
