createdtoworship
In the grip of grace
- Mar 13, 2004
- 18,941
- 1,758
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
actually it would be all three. genius.That's not really what Creationism means...that would be theistic evolution or intelligent design.
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.actually it would be all three. genius.
I know very very well the definitions of all the above. Creationism is the most attacked. Thus it's the one I hold.Arguably simply believing the universe had a creator wouldn't even necessitate theism. Even basic deist belief covers that.
creator? creationism. not that hard.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.
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.creator? creationism. not that hard.
and you are still not qualified to refute a peer review. no matter how you word it.
not peer review, just a summary of peer review. not good enough.Post 179
I guess you have a PhD in evolutionary biology?
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.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.
but I can prove that you don't use the scientific method in your view of evolution.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.
and you are still not qualified to refute a peer review. no matter how you word it.
A lot of hot air.but I can prove that you don't use the scientific method in your view of evolution.
says who?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.
but I can prove that you don't use the scientific method in your view of evolution.
Sorry, you fail again:
But we're not talking about evolution. We're talking about a crap article that fails to provide evidence for design. Focus, please.
so who is right, my site or yours?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."
I am juggling about five of you, without a sweat.He is in full retreat mode.
focus on your off topic discussion, or the fact that the op is about evolution?But we're not talking about evolution. We're talking about a crap article that fails to provide evidence for design. Focus, please.
My site, and if you read yours more carefully it actually agrees with me. It says:so who is right, my site or yours?
unqualified authority was a change later made. not originally by john locke did appeal to authority involve an unqualified 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."
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?