Amazing Biological Nanotechnology

[bhsmte]

I haven't seen any of my evidence exposed in any way manner or form. Circumvented? Yes! Exposed? No!

what evidence?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I have repeatedly responded to that question and you folks claim that you can't see it.

There are 87 characters in that post.

Instead of dodge number-i-lost-count, you could have just typed "yes" 29 times or "no" 43.5 times and it would have taken the exact amount of energy. Less even, if you used copy-paste.

Just saying.

 

[Radrook]

what evidence?

The evidence you deny exists regardless of how compelling it is.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The evidence you deny exists regardless of how compelling it is.

That didn't answer his question. Unsurprisingly.

 

[Radrook]

That didn't answer his question. Unsurprisingly.

What question?

 

[Radrook]

There are 87 characters in that post.

Instead of dodge number-i-lost-count, you could have just typed "yes" 29 times or "no" 43.5 times and it would have taken the exact amount of energy. Less even, if you used copy-paste.

Just saying.

A yes or a no doesn't describe your modus operandi.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

What question?

You quoted it. "what evidence?"

He asked you to share this evidence. Instead, you just mentioned a juvenile reason on why you don't want to give it. As usual.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

A yes or a no doesn't describe your modus operandi.

But it would answer my question.

So, is it your position that the flagellum could not have evolved?

6th time I ask, and I'm not even counting the many times Loudmouth asked the same question. A simple yes or no, will do just fine.

 

[Radrook]

But it would answer my question.

So, is it your position that the flagellum could not have evolved?

6th time I ask, and I'm not even counting the many times Loudmouth asked the same question. A simple yes or no, will do just fine.

And I keep repeating that I am not arguing against theistic evolution but to no avail.
Now of course you will ask what I consider theistic evolution. Something that I previously explained several times before as well but to no avail.

 

[Jimmy D]

And I keep repeating that I am not arguing against theistic evolution but to no avail.
Now of course you will ask what I consider theistic evolution. Something that I previously explained several times before as well but to no avail.

Maybe you just aren't explaining yourself very well? I certainly don't know what you believe, we get the headline.... An intelligent designer is at work.... but the main body of the story is missing.

If you won't answer a simple question like "is it your position that the flagellum could not have evolved?" what conclusions can we draw from that?

A) You don't know - which would be fair enough, most of us aren't expert biologists.
B) You're reluctant to give an honest answer because it might expose flaws in your beliefs

 

[bhsmte]

The evidence you deny exists regardless of how compelling it is.

What evidence would that be?

 

[Radrook]

Maybe you just aren't explaining yourself very well? I certainly don't know what you believe, we get the headline.... An intelligent designer is at work.... but the main body of the story is missing.

If you won't answer a simple question like "is it your position that the flagellum could not have evolved?" what conclusions can we draw from that?

A) You don't know - which would be fair enough, most of us aren't expert biologists.
B) You're reluctant to give an honest answer because it might expose flaws in your beliefs

I already gave details to my answers, received criticisms and responded to them in detail, but I still keep getting demands for a repeat. I am not a machine. I did not post this thread to be constantly goaded and have to repeatedly explain myself!

 

[bhsmte]

I already gave details to my answers, received criticisms and responded to them in detail, but I still keep getting demands for a repeat. I am not a machine. I did not post this thread to be constantly goaded and have to repeatedly explain myself!

Could you provide a post number you responded to questions with specific details? If you dont provide, it will be telling.

 

[Loudmouth]

The evidence you deny exists regardless of how compelling it is.

You haven't presented any evidence that would require denying.

 

[Loudmouth]

I already gave details to my answers,

Post number?

 

[Loudmouth]

And I keep repeating that I am not arguing against theistic evolution but to no avail.

Then why do you have a link in your signature that argues against theistic evolution? Why do you cite an argument based on the premise that the bacterial flagellum can not come about through theistic evolution?

 

[Radrook]

Then why do you have a link in your signature that argues against theistic evolution? Why do you cite an argument based on the premise that the bacterial flagellum can not come about through theistic evolution?

I did not provide those links for the purpose that you are indicating.

 

[Loudmouth]

I did not provide those links for the purpose that you are indicating.

Then what are they there for?

 

[bhsmte]

I did not provide those links for the purpose that you are indicating.

Please respond to post 113.

 

[Radrook]

Then what are they there for?

You are wandering away from my direct links into other areas on those websites. My direct links are to pages that support what I believe and which were under discussion when I posted them.
Since it was suggested that I provide lnks I provided them. Now it's nitpicking with the links.