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.
Are female moths called myths?
...have ever read a science textbook? I'm curious.
(I don' t refer to "Darwin's Black Box" or Chick tracts, I am talking about books with titles like "An Introduction to Physics" or "General Biology". )
...have ever read a science textbook? I'm curious.
(I don' t refer to "Darwin's Black Box" or Chick tracts, I am talking about books with titles like "An Introduction to Physics" or "General Biology". )
Life 4th edition, the text book for my Biology 101 class. What is most interesting about the is that nothing in it has the slightest thing to do with what is discussed on these boards. Mostly because Darwinians are into shallow rhetoric and fallacious arguments of science, falsely so called.
Now I have read 'Darwin's Black Box', when I went to buy it at the bookstore I couldn't find it. It wasn't in Philosophy or Religion but the clerk looked it up and found it in the Biology section. I chuckled about that all the way home, of course it was in the Biology section.
"Everytime (sic) and (sic) chimp skull is found it is immediately celebrated as a human ancestor"
That's how the same evidence yields different conclusions.
"Darwinians" funny. Like there even is such a thing. No telling how they might act if there were any.
this is funnier: (regarding shallow, fallacious, and matters of falsely..)
Researchers have found the first reported chimpanzee fossils in Kenya's Rift Valley, providing the first physical evidence that chimpanzees coexisted with early human ancestors......
And your conclusion from all the data....
Key word: were. We're no more 'Darwinians' than we are 'Guthians' - we ascribe to the modern incarnations of Darwin's original idea, of Guth's original idea, etc.You really have no idea what your talking about do you? Darwinism was blended with the emerging science of genetics back in the early decades of the 20th century, it's also know as the Modern Synthesis. Richard Dawkins, Louis Leaky, Ernst Myer were Darwinians.
And yet, you were the one to childishly mock 'Darwinians' ("Mostly because Darwinians are into shallow rhetoric and fallacious arguments of science, falsely so called") - as if that ad homeniem has anything to do with the veracity of common descent. Frankly, I expected more from you.Childish mockery in the defense of science, that would be funny if it were not such an intellectually atrophy.
What's this, more childish mockery and belittlement? I'm sure Christ is simply loving your Christian attitude to your fellow man.Yea, I tell you that every time a chimpanzee skull is unearthed in Africa it's automatically one of our ancestors. You keep spamming this article about three maybe four teeth and no skull.
So have you ever read a Biology textbook? Do you read the peer reviewed scientific literature, books on creationism, evolution or biology, anything remotely scientific or substantive.
Better yet, do you read anything? Stephen King, Dr Seuss? Anything?
There are actually. Darwinians are those who subscribe to Darwin's theory of common descent through random mutation and natural selection."Darwinians" funny. Like there even is such a thing. No telling how they might act if there were any.
this is funnier: (regarding shallow, fallacious, and matters of falsely..)
Researchers have found the first reported chimpanzee fossils in Kenya's Rift Valley, providing the first physical evidence that chimpanzees coexisted with early human ancestors......
And your conclusion from all the data....
Key word: were. We're no more 'Darwinians' than we are 'Guthians' - we ascribe to the modern incarnations of Darwin's original idea, of Guth's original idea, etc.
And yet, you were the one to childishly mock 'Darwinians' ("Mostly because Darwinians are into shallow rhetoric and fallacious arguments of science, falsely so called") - as if that ad homeniem has anything to do with the veracity of common descent. Frankly, I expected more from you.
What's this, more childish mockery and belittlement? I'm sure Christ is simply loving your Christian attitude to your fellow man.
And yet, you were the one to childishly mock 'Darwinians' ("Mostly because Darwinians are into shallow rhetoric and fallacious arguments of science, falsely so called") - as if that ad homeniem has anything to do with the veracity of common descent. Frankly, I expected more from you.
Technically, it isnt belittlement. He doesnt have the capacity to successfully belittle me.
Crude and off point, it only says something about the person trying to do it.
Seriously?
does it need explaining?
No, I thought you explained YOURSELF quite well, but I don't think you realize that you did so.Of course, you'll have to go back and read your own posts. No offense, though. It's just funny that when we point at others we have three more fingers pointing right back at ourselves.
I'm a hopeless optimist at heartWell, maybe you were...
]No, I thought you explained YOURSELF quite well, but I don't think you realize that you did so.Of course, you'll have to go back and read your own posts. No offense, though. It's just funny that when we point at others we have three more fingers pointing right back at ourselves.
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?