A thread on evolution

[pitabread]

so you can't find an official dictionary that has it in it, I rest my case.

s'funny, it was only a handful of posts ago where someone pointed out this exact behavior and the pointlessness of debates. When one is shown to be demonstrably wrong, people don't tend to say, "oops, you're right, my mistake". Instead, they further entrench their position rather than admit they might be incorrect.

Fascinating to watch.

 

[HitchSlap]

so you can't find it in any official dictionary (I rest my case)

No what else you won't find in any official dictionary? The word "gullible."

 

[bhsmte]

s'funny, it was only a handful of posts ago where someone pointed out this exact behavior and the pointlessness of debates. When one is shown to be demonstrably wrong, people don't tend to say, "oops, you're right, my mistake". Instead, they further entrench their position rather than admit they might be incorrect.

Fascinating to watch.

Highly entertaining indeed.

 

[PsychoSarah]

quote mines don't exist, except in the mind of the evolutionist. Do you hear a Judge in a court room say , violation of quote mining" no because quoting out of context, or misquoting is the norm. Again quote mining doesn't exist..

-_- quote mining isn't an official legal term. Furthermore, a person has to have the original source material a quote is taken from in order to tell that it is a quote mine. The practice is far from exclusive to evolution vs creationism debates, however. Ever seen those advertisements for movies that have a bunch of quotes from reviewers saying that the film is "The best film of the year..." and then you go to see the movie, and it's trash? Film advertisers utilize quote mines a lot. That's why, in advertisements for the worst movies, you see a lot of the "..." at the ends and sometimes in the middle of the "supportive praise" from critics. Those signal that the quote is incomplete

here is an example of the folly of quote mining theories:


I was talking about oranges for 10 minutes, but one minute I was

talking about bananas.


Now, If you quote the banana part, then you have quote mined because it was not in context of the oranges.

Oh, I can do more than that with quote mining. Like making those sentences "I was... one banana." I could make it seem like you said all sorts of funny things. You cannot deny that you have revealed yourself to be a singular banana... unless you can admit quote mines can entirely change the narrative of what a person said without adding any new words.

But who is to say HE just didn't change opinions or doubt his orange

opinion in the few minutes he debated bananas?

"...who is to say... he debated bannanas?"

See, quote mining doesn't exist.

It's all a lie of evolutionists.

"See... mining doesn't exist. It's all a lie..."

quote mining doesn't exist as I have just proven.

"...mining doesn't exist as I have just proven."

Misquotes exist. Quoting out of context exist. But not quote mining.

On a serious note, I wasn't quote mining you to demonstrate quote mining exists or even that it can be a big problem. More for fun. Personally, I don't care if you don't think quote mines exist as long as you don't use them.

it was made up by evolutionists to debate creationists.

Uh, what? What a quote mine is: taking a quote out of context such that it supports one's position, even though the original material does not. Quote mining is so prevalent in evolution vs creationism debates that several people that are the victims of it have spoken out about it. You could consider quote mining to be a form of "misquote" done intentionally.

"it was made up by... creationists."
Sorry, couldn't help myself, had to do one more.

 

[PsychoSarah]

How pathetic. Quote mines both exist, and PsychoSarah has just recorded a whole list of them.

I didn't even record a list of them, really. I just found an apologetics site that listed a bunch of them, and proceeded to show how these quotes were taken out of context to fit the narrative of said site. Not even kidding, check the site, all those quotes are listed along with more than a dozen more.

 

[createdtoworship]

s'funny, it was only a handful of posts ago where someone pointed out this exact behavior and the pointlessness of debates. When one is shown to be demonstrably wrong, people don't tend to say, "oops, you're right, my mistake". Instead, they further entrench their position rather than admit they might be incorrect.

Fascinating to watch.

I enjoy it too, glad we are having fun

 

[createdtoworship]

-_- quote mining isn't an official legal term. Furthermore, a person has to have the original source material a quote is taken from in order to tell that it is a quote mine. The practice is far from exclusive to evolution vs creationism debates, however. Ever seen those advertisements for movies that have a bunch of quotes from reviewers saying that the film is "The best film of the year..." and then you go to see the movie, and it's trash? Film advertisers utilize quote mines a lot. That's why, in advertisements for the worst movies, you see a lot of the "..." at the ends and sometimes in the middle of the "supportive praise" from critics. Those signal that the quote is incomplete



Oh, I can do more than that with quote mining. Like making those sentences "I was... one banana." I could make it seem like you said all sorts of funny things. You cannot deny that you have revealed yourself to be a singular banana... unless you can admit quote mines can entirely change the narrative of what a person said without adding any new words.



"...who is to say... he debated bannanas?"



"See... mining doesn't exist. It's all a lie..."



"...mining doesn't exist as I have just proven."



On a serious note, I wasn't quote mining you to demonstrate quote mining exists or even that it can be a big problem. More for fun. Personally, I don't care if you don't think quote mines exist as long as you don't use them.



Uh, what? What a quote mine is: taking a quote out of context such that it supports one's position, even though the original material does not. Quote mining is so prevalent in evolution vs creationism debates that several people that are the victims of it have spoken out about it. You could consider quote mining to be a form of "misquote" done intentionally.

"it was made up by... creationists."
Sorry, couldn't help myself, had to do one more.

Well if you are talking about goats for 9 minutes but in the middle you talk about sheep for 1 minute. if you quote the sheep section you are quote mining by your own admission, even if the quote was correct. it was just not in context of the whole, get it now?

 

[createdtoworship]

Highly entertaining indeed.

Again, I really am enjoying myself. glad you are having fun too. that's always good. now I do recommend you watch the long video in the op to the end.

 

[pitabread]

now I do recommend you watch the long video in the op to the end.

Out of curiosity, were you ever going to address you claim in the OP about "90%" of those atheists converting? Because having watched the beginning and end of that video, that sure didn't seem the case.

 

[Obliquinaut]

Well if you are talking about goats for 9 minutes but in the middle you talk about sheep for 1 minute. if you quote the sheep section you are quote mining by your own admission, even if the quote was correct. it was just not in context of the whole, get it now?

You need to get off this whole goats and sheep or oranges and apples thing.

You earlier claimed you worked at a newspaper around journalists. I am really confused why this is causing you so much confusion. I would think that unless you were the janitor at the newspaper you would understand what this whole concept is about in relation to quotes.

Even the janitor at the newspaper can understand this point. Are you trolling now? Have you given up honest discussion? Can't find a Ray Comfort Video to put in place of any actual original thought?

 

[Obliquinaut]

Again, I really am enjoying myself. glad you are having fun too. that's always good. now I do recommend you watch the long video in the op to the end.

Why would ANYONE in their right mind watch the videos you demand they watch? I watched one of them and you could barely be brought to discuss anything in them! And in fact you completely misinterpretted one of my posts and now you seem to be feigning obtuseness about simple, simple concepts.

I mean, think of your Bible for a minute! Have you read Luke 6:31?

C'mon, man if you want people to treat your requests with respect perhaps you should treat others points with respect.

 

[createdtoworship]

I wonder what happened to Gradyll's question he hadn't seen answered in ten years? Did it really exist?

you don't want to know. Well I guess I can give it to you, since you are so adamant. A little backround first. you have species, and then you have genus level taxonomy. Evolution happens at a species level and I can show you papers that define this level evolution as micro evolution. Macro level evolution is where you have two animals or types of animals evolving into a whole other genus of animal. For example a dog like creature into a whale or a dinosaur into a bird. The obvious conclusion is that there would be many transitions of monkey to man, and dinosaur to bird, and dog to whale creatures roaming the earth. Hence the search for the missing link. My question is can you provide a missing link between two separate genus of animal? Lucy for example is ape like, while neanderthal is human like. So those would not qualify, you must show one that has both. This is the necessary ingredient to prove macro evolution is possible since macro evolution is at a taxa higher than species, or at the genus level at a minimum. But could be also higher, like a transition between two family of creature.

 

[createdtoworship]

You need to get off this whole goats and sheep or oranges and apples thing.

You earlier claimed you worked at a newspaper around journalists. I am really confused why this is causing you so much confusion. I would think that unless you were the janitor at the newspaper you would understand what this whole concept is about in relation to quotes.

Even the janitor at the newspaper can understand this point. Are you trolling now? Have you given up honest discussion? Can't find a Ray Comfort Video to put in place of any actual original thought?

you are just using ad hominems to strengthen your argument where you have no facts to rebute my solid logic. And working with journalists is the one reason I like conservative news now.

 

[createdtoworship]

Why would ANYONE in their right mind watch the videos you demand they watch? I watched one of them and you could barely be brought to discuss anything in them! And in fact you completely misinterpretted one of my posts and now you seem to be feigning obtuseness about simple, simple concepts.

I mean, think of your Bible for a minute! Have you read Luke 6:31?

C'mon, man if you want people to treat your requests with respect perhaps you should treat others points with respect.

I have not seen anything trustworthy here. Just misinformation. But I did pose an important question for you. in another post.

 

[Obliquinaut]

But I did pose an important question for you. in another post.

Then remind me what it was. At least point to the post. I'll be glad to answer your question.

 

[Obliquinaut]

you are just using ad hominems to strengthen your argument where you have no facts to rebute my solid logic.

Solid logic? Sorry, I haven't seen any of that. Perhaps you could point it out again.

And working with journalists is the one reason I like conservative news now.

And based on your expert use of reasoning with regards to how dictionaries work I can definitely understand! It must have been so hard working around so many people who use words for a living.

 

[createdtoworship]

Then remind me what it was. At least point to the post. I'll be glad to answer your question.

A thread on evolution

 

[createdtoworship]

Solid logic? Sorry, I haven't seen any of that. Perhaps you could point it out again.



And based on your expert use of reasoning with regards to how dictionaries work I can definitely understand! It must have been so hard working around so many people who use words for a living.

I have several times but I will again. Say you are talking about dogs for 9 minutes or 90% of the lecture, then for one minute talk about cats. If your quote contains cats at all, it would be considered a quote mine. It does not matter if the cats are bad, or good or non existent, it's still a quote mine under your own definition. I use this to point out that it is extremely hard to prove a quote out of context, and takes considerable energy, yet these questionable allegations fly out of your guys mouth like a dime a dozen.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I have several times but I will again. Say you are talking about dogs for 9 minutes or 90% of the lecture, then for one minute talk about cats. If your quote contains cats at all, it would be considered a quote mine. It does not matter if the cats are bad, or good or non existent, it's still a quote mine under your own definition. I use this to point out that it is extremely hard to prove a quote out of context, and takes considerable energy, yet these questionable allegations fly out of your guys mouth like a dime a dozen.

Wrong. Try again.

 

[Shemjaza]

My question is can you provide a missing link between two separate genus of animal?

I refuse to believe no one has told you about Homo erectus and Homo habilis.