A fascinating video on the vacuity of Macro Evolution for

[createdtoworship]

That's not really what Creationism means...that would be theistic evolution or intelligent design.

actually it would be all three. genius.

 

[Cearbhall]

actually it would be all three. genius.

The term "Creationism" is pretty meaningless if you expand it to such a degree. It's used to refer to the belief that species were created in their final form.

 

[createdtoworship]

Arguably simply believing the universe had a creator wouldn't even necessitate theism. Even basic deist belief covers that.

I know very very well the definitions of all the above. Creationism is the most attacked. Thus it's the one I hold.

 

[createdtoworship]

The term "Creationism" is pretty meaningless if you expand it to such a degree. It's used to refer to the belief that species were created in their final form.

creator? creationism. not that hard.

 

[Cearbhall]

creator? creationism. not that hard.

Well, you're free to do as you wish. Just realize that you are not communicating your meaning effectively, and you'll have to continue to explain your personal definition.

 

[pitabread]

and you are still not qualified to refute a peer review. no matter how you word it.

There's not really anything to refute, though, and that's the problem. I mean, if the author actually deemed to provide evidence for design, we could argue about its validity. But they don't even do that.

A crap article is a crap article, regardless of this purported (and arguably questionable) "peer review" you appear so proud of.

 

[createdtoworship]

Post 179

I guess you have a PhD in evolutionary biology?

not peer review, just a summary of peer review. not good enough.

 

[Subduction Zone]

a7

appeal to authority. you have people and scientists all going one way, then someone comes the opposite way and they prove them wrong. Likely not to get a lot of follows.

Sorry, but you do not know what an "appeal to authority" fallacy is. An appeal to authority fallacy is when one appeals to authorities that have nothing to do with the topic. For example appealing to what a medical doctor said when the topic was car repairs.

The people that you follow are cowards. They will not or cannot publish in real peer reviewed journals.

 

[createdtoworship]

There's not really anything to refute, though, and that's the problem. I mean, if the author actually deemed to provide evidence for design, we could argue about its validity. But they don't even do that.

A crap article is a crap article, regardless of this purported (and arguably questionable) "peer review" you appear so proud of.

but I can prove that you don't use the scientific method in your view of evolution.

 

[Subduction Zone]

and you are still not qualified to refute a peer review. no matter how you word it.

What makes you think that? All pitabread has to do is to find a serious error in the article.

You really don't understand how to debate at all.

 

[Subduction Zone]

but I can prove that you don't use the scientific method in your view of evolution.

A lot of hot air.

This is the second time you have made that claim.

 

[createdtoworship]

a7

Sorry, but you do not know what an "appeal to authority" fallacy is. An appeal to authority fallacy is when one appeals to authorities that have nothing to do with the topic. For example appealing to what a medical doctor said when the topic was car repairs.

The people that you follow are cowards. They will not or cannot publish in real peer reviewed journals.

says who?

Appeal to Authority


An expert asserts A is true. Therefore A is true.

The expert, of course, may not be expert, but they are a touchstone that people use to avoid having their own expertise challenged.

You can also assert your own expertise. If the other person cannot challenge your credentials, then they cannot challenge your argument.

 

[pitabread]

but I can prove that you don't use the scientific method in your view of evolution.

But we're not talking about evolution. We're talking about a crap article that fails to provide evidence for design. Focus, please.

 

[Subduction Zone]

says who?

Appeal to Authority

Sorry, you fail again:

Appeal to Authority

"Description: Using an authority as evidence in your argument when the authority is not really an authority on the facts relevant to the argument. As the audience, allowing an irrelevant authority to add credibility to the claim being made."

 

[Subduction Zone]

But we're not talking about evolution. We're talking about a crap article that fails to provide evidence for design. Focus, please.

He is in full retreat mode.

 

[createdtoworship]

Sorry, you fail again:

Appeal to Authority

"Description: Using an authority as evidence in your argument when the authority is not really an authority on the facts relevant to the argument. As the audience, allowing an irrelevant authority to add credibility to the claim being made."

so who is right, my site or yours?

 

[createdtoworship]

He is in full retreat mode.

I am juggling about five of you, without a sweat.

 

[createdtoworship]

But we're not talking about evolution. We're talking about a crap article that fails to provide evidence for design. Focus, please.

focus on your off topic discussion, or the fact that the op is about evolution?

 

[Subduction Zone]

so who is right, my site or yours?

My site, and if you read yours more carefully it actually agrees with me. It says:

"The expert, of course, may not be expert,"

The same thing that I said. The appeal to authority error occurs when the "expert" that you appeal to is not an expert in the field of study being discussed.

 

[createdtoworship]

Sorry, you fail again:

Appeal to Authority

"Description: Using an authority as evidence in your argument when the authority is not really an authority on the facts relevant to the argument. As the audience, allowing an irrelevant authority to add credibility to the claim being made."

unqualified authority was a change later made. not originally by john locke did appeal to authority involve an unqualified authority....

Argument from authority - Wikipedia