Wow, Calminian chasing trolls! That's basically like Oprah Winfrey saying women should be seen and not heard, except with ten times the irony.
Smug??
The OP made a statement that Evolution was great for christianity. Ted said no it wasn't, and to pray about it. Mallon concludes Ted is smug.
Sheesh! Why to TE's get so trollish over this subject. If you guys are so sure you're right, why do you revert to ad hominems the moment someone disagrees. That would seem to be proof that this is an emotional, rather than a logical belief system you have.
Look, let's get this "ad hominem" thing sorted out once and for all. Calminian seems to think that Mallon calling ted "smug" was an
ad hominem attack. Really? I suppose calling us "trollish" should count as an
ad hominem too, shouldn't it?
But it doesn't, because an
ad hominem attack is an attack on a speaker's character for the purpose of weakening his argument. A mere insult is not an
ad hominem attack. When I simply call my younger brother a noob, I am not implying that any particular argument he makes is invalid. I am just saying he is, hmm, incompetent in certain electronic activities. It would be a mean thing to say, no doubt, but it wouldn't actually be a logical folly - especially if I could demonstrate his inferiority by, say, beating him a few times at Starcraft II 1v1.
And indeed
ad hominem attacks can be valid, because speakers' characters do often weigh in on their arguments. For example, in a trial, if it is demonstrated that the key witness for the defense has often lied to protect the defendant, then his witness becomes less credible in proportion to the strength with which his or her lying character is proven. Is this an attack on the speaker's character - namely to prove that he or she is a habitual liar? Yes. Does it successfully impeach the argument being made? Yes, because a liar should be trusted less than a truth-teller.
If you are so worried about
ad hominem attacks in particular or negative comments on character in general, then perhaps you might get a bit nervous reading the New Testament. After all, Jesus said:
But woe to you Pharisees! For you tithe mint and rue and every herb, and neglect justice and the love of God. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others. Woe to you Pharisees! For you love the best seat in the synagogues and greetings in the marketplaces. Woe to you! For you are like unmarked graves, and people walk over them without knowing it. (Luke 11:42-44, ESV)
Wow! I'm not sure if I've ever called any YEC an unmarked grave. Was Jesus a bigger troll than I was?
At the end of the day, mallon felt that ted was being smug based on his response to the OP, and he said so, and he had every right to say so without being called emotional or a troll. I personally think mallon voiced his opinion in a suitably understated way; he did not pile on any insults beyond the bare statement of fact, as some creationists are wont to do on this very thread. I'm quite curious about how you said:
And yours was of the milder responses. I don't know what it is about TEs. They're ready for jihad at any sign of descent.
I'm sure you'll be able to show us exactly where on this thread the "harsher responses" were. And I'm sure none of them will be your own posts, oh no.
