A thread on evolution

[Subduction Zone]

He is since he wants everyone to know of his great knowledge of what evidence is. Someone should tell him that his changeable knowledge is false, no matter how many godless mortal men agree with him. God Bless you

Please don't make false claims about me.

I do not have "great knowledge of evidence" you and the other creationists here simply have no knowledge of evidence. Even a little bit of knowledge beats no knowledge at all.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Since you accused me of the same thing in order to show everyone your great knowledge of what "evidence:" is, you words ring hollow. Do you accuse all Christians of being dummies in need of your great knowledge? Of course you do. Be ashamed and remember that your deeds will surely find you out. God Bless you

No, only creationists as a rule do not understand the concept of evidence.

And the fact that you do not understand this does not make you "dummies". But what is truly amazing is that all creationists that I have met on this forum are afraid to learn.

If anyone you should be ashamed for your constant false attacks and running away from a simple idea that you know you will be able to understand.

Creationists seem to prefer not to learn what is and what is not evidence because then they can still repeat the false claim of "no evidence".

 

[Subduction Zone]

point 4 for my unanswered question. Yeah! Until you provide a peer review, I just keep racking up my points.

You really need to quit making false claims. You do not know what peer review is, how it is used, or how it has been supplied for you.

 

[createdtoworship]

More garbage claims from a garbage source.

The video that you linked debunked just this sort of "research". That is not a valid peer reviewed source.

you still haven't even defined what you mean by peer review, in your own words. I await your response

 

[createdtoworship]

Sorry, but you are going to have to wait on this one. Since it is going to be tied into the concept of evidence you need to learn what is and what is not evidence first.

please define evidence as well, since I don't think you understand it or peer review.

 

[createdtoworship]

Why the dishonesty? You have shown that you know and can use the term "quote mine" correctly so why lie about it?

wrong. If quote mines exist, then you can use it correctly, they don't. So I was simply wrong. No lies.

 

[createdtoworship]

You really need to quit making false claims. You do not know what peer review is, how it is used, or how it has been supplied for you.

you really need to answer my question about, what peer review is in your own terms. ? what are you scared we will find out you don't know?

 

[Subduction Zone]

you still haven't even defined what you mean by peer review, in your own words. I await your response

And I pointed out that you need to learn what is and what is not evidence a long long time ago.

You are not waiting for me, I am waiting for you.

 

[Subduction Zone]

you really need to answer my question about, what peer review is in your own terms. ? what are you scared we will find out you don't know?

No problem. As soon as you come through with what you are supposed to do first.

You are a long long way behind. Before you can expect an answer from your demands you need to do your homework.

 

[Subduction Zone]

wrong. If quote mines exist, then you can use it correctly, they don't. So I was simply wrong. No lies.

Quote mining is a form of lying.

How can lies ever be use "correctly"?

 

[Subduction Zone]

please define evidence as well, since I don't think you understand it or peer review.

That is what I am waiting for. I will not "define" it . You must learn what is and what is not evidence. I am ready to help you whenever you are ready. If I just lecture you you will simply deny it as you have denied every other time that you have been shown to be wrong.

 

[VirOptimus]

wrong. If quote mines exist, then you can use it correctly, they don't. So I was simply wrong. No lies.

The evidence is there for all to see so your lies only reflects on you.

You think the end justifies the means?

 

[Shemjaza]

Personally when I see the use of quotes out of context to dishonestly misrepresent their source (colloquially "a quote mine") used on this board, I like the phrase: bearing false witness against your neighbour.

 

[quatona]

In fact 90% of atheists questioned in the long video, recanted of their views and became theist by the end of the movie.

Source?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

2ndly, let me prove them false on a rational basis: 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?

No, that's not how a quote-mine works. I cannot quote-mine myself. To quote-mine someone, you have to take out something that has been said by someone that, by itself, means the opposite of what that person was saying.
xianghua gave a perfect example in post #582, and then there is also the brilliant example of quote-mining the Bible: "... there is no God."

 

[pitabread]

backing out of the debate so soon?

There hasn't been any debate here. Heck, there's barely been a discussion. You flat out refuse to engage anyone on any topic, even on things you post yourself.

Other than blatantly trolling, I can't figure out why you're even here.

 

[Skreeper]

backing out of the debate so soon? Well have a good vacation.

Who's debating here? All you have done in this thread so far is making claims that you don't back up.
You don't understand what the term "quote mining" means, you don't understand what "peer review" actually means and you also don't get what the word "evidence" entails.

Either you're the best troll I've seen in a long time or you're the worst debater I've ever came across.

 

[bhsmte]

And I pointed out that you need to learn what is and what is not evidence a long long time ago.

You are not waiting for me, I am waiting for you.

You will be waiting a long time. It will be entertaining though.

 

[LongLiveTheChrist]

Even if evolution is true, that doesn't mean that God is non-existent.

God simply would be the force guiding evolution.

And this also would mean that the book of Genesis is allegorical, which isn't a problem, because there are other books in the Bible, which are full of symbolism, such as Revelation.

Honestly, I find the idea of the universe being billions of years old to be more divine and awesome, than a young universe, only 7 thousands years old. Something about the universe being so old, so many countless, innumerable years - I find it to be very profound and sublime. It makes me realize just how beautiful and amazing God is - that throughout all that time, He has been there and even way before, for eternity.

 

[createdtoworship]

And I pointed out that you need to learn what is and what is not evidence a long long time ago.

You are not waiting for me, I am waiting for you.

then I asked for you to define "evidence" once again, and you did not. apparently from your posts you neither know what evidence is and what peer review is, you are a troll. You never state posts about your own beliefs and when asked you refuse to answer. That is the definition of trolling, and it's against the rules.