Is a skeptic missing the compassionate part of their being, while only focusing on logic?

[VirOptimus]

I disagree with your opinion on this matter.

You can disagree all you want, doesnt change the fact that you are in error.

 

[createdtoworship]

You can disagree all you want, doesnt change the fact that you are in error.

I disagree with your opinion that I am wrong. (again we can do this all day), you know....you saying I am wrong, and me saying I disagree. It ultimately comes down to evidence.

 

[VirOptimus]

I disagree with your opinion that I am wrong. (again we can do this all day), you know....you saying I am wrong, and me saying I disagree. It ultimately comes down to evidence.

Indeed, and all the data and evidence agree with the ToE (i.e. my point).

 

[createdtoworship]

Indeed, and all the data and evidence agree with the ToE (i.e. my point).

Yes but I am currently in three debates, I don't have the time to watch every video posted, or every site posted, so if you wish to further debate this you will have to ACTUALLY POST YOUR EVIDENCE, not provide links. Again I get links all the time, but for one, who is to say they are not from biased sources as well? So you can use your sources just don't post links, post just the facts of the matter with scientific references, that is how I do it.

 

[VirOptimus]

Yes but I am currently in three debates, I don't have the time to watch every video posted, or every site posted, so if you wish to further debate this you will have to ACTUALLY POST YOUR EVIDENCE, not provide links. Again I get links all the time, but for one, who is to say they are not from biased sources as well? So you can use your sources just don't post links, post just the facts of the matter with scientific references, that is how I do it.

Evidence for the ToE? Are you serious?

The ToE is the foundation of modern biology, accepted in all biology courses and even a cursory googling will give you the basics.

No, the controversial standpoint is to deny the ToE and if you do you have to write articles for peer-review, if you cant your views dont matter.

 

[KCfromNC]

So this is a logical fallacy called poisoning the well. It is also an ad hominem. Let me explain how the first fallacy applies. It assumes because there was one scientific or medical error that all science or medical practice was in error in the 18th century. That is obviously wrong.

It isn't what I asked. It is also not an example of poisoning the well. Nor is it ad hominem.

Things aren't going well at all for this post.

Secondly let me explain how an ad hominem works. Typically when a logical premise is valid a skeptic will attack the presenter of said factual information, as sort of a character assasination.

TIL that asking if posters actually believe their own arguments is "character assasination[sp]"

If one however didn't want to use fallacy in responding, they merely would address the facts of the matter....that the founder of taxonomy (which is used to this date universally in science and is modern practice) the founder...said there was a barrier to evolutionary change at the genus level.

Sure, that's easy to address - he was wrong. It happens. We learn new things about reality, bad ideas get weeded out and replaced with better ones. It is one of the many strengths of science.

 

[KCfromNC]

Yes but I am currently in three debates, I don't have the time to watch every video posted, or every site posted, so if you wish to further debate this you will have to ACTUALLY POST YOUR EVIDENCE, not provide links.

Any time I see a post making up a bunch of rules for how evidence must be presented or it will be outright rejected, I start to get suspicious...

 

[loveofourlord]

It isn't what I asked. It is also not an example of poisoning the well. Nor is it ad hominem.

Things aren't going well at all for this post.



TIL that asking if posters actually believe their own arguments is "character assasination[sp]"


Sure, that's easy to address - he was wrong. It happens. We learn new things about reality, bad ideas get weeded out and replaced with better ones. It is one of the many strengths of science.

I love how the guy complaining about poisoning the well and ad-hominem spent ages doing the same with racism and daranwism.

 

[Amittai]

Yes but I am currently in three debates, I don't have the time to watch every video posted, or every site posted, so if you wish to further debate this you will have to ACTUALLY POST YOUR EVIDENCE, not provide links. Again I get links all the time, but for one, who is to say they are not from biased sources as well? So you can use your sources just don't post links, post just the facts of the matter with scientific references, that is how I do it.

You don't have to be in three debates. Two of them are in this thread which we have troubled with.

Can you address the points in posts added please?

 

[createdtoworship]

Evidence for the ToE? Are you serious?

The ToE is the foundation of modern biology, accepted in all biology courses and even a cursory googling will give you the basics.

No, the controversial standpoint is to deny the ToE and if you do you have to write articles for peer-review, if you cant your views dont matter.

biology was around way before evolution you can trace certain biological aspects back to ancient asseria and babylonia.

So again after darwin biology which is a hard science (not evolutionary), split off to a soft science called evolutinary biology, which assumes the conclusion, that evolution is true. That is why they split from a hard to soft science, mainly because there is no hard evidence of monkey to man evolution.

 

[createdtoworship]

It isn't what I asked. It is also not an example of poisoning the well. Nor is it ad hominem.

Things aren't going well at all for this post.



TIL that asking if posters actually believe their own arguments is "character assasination[sp]"


Sure, that's easy to address - he was wrong. It happens. We learn new things about reality, bad ideas get weeded out and replaced with better ones. It is one of the many strengths of science.

I didn't see any facts to adress here so I will go to your other post. thanks

 

[createdtoworship]

You don't have to be in three debates. Two of them are in this thread which we have troubled with.

Can you address the points in posts added please?

I should not have to do your homework for you, if you provide articles, then quote from them the points you wish to make out of the article on this thread for the other readers or we simply won't see it or validate it and it simply won't be able to be used as evidence on your end.

 

[VirOptimus]

biology was around way before evolution you can trace certain biological aspects back to ancient asseria and babylonia.

So again after darwin biology which is a hard science (not evolutionary), split off to a soft science called evolutinary biology, which assumes the conclusion, that evolution is true. That is why they split from a hard to soft science, mainly because there is no hard evidence of monkey to man evolution.

This is all wrong.

Humans are apes btw.

 

[createdtoworship]

This is all wrong.

Humans are apes btw.

thanks for the reply, but I disagree.

 

[VirOptimus]

thanks for the reply, but I disagree.

Your disagreement means nothing. Humans are apes by definition.

 

[createdtoworship]

Your disagreement means nothing. Humans are apes by definition.

ok lets talk about this for a bit. Neanderthal is human like, lucy species (Australopithecus) is ape like. So far no transitional forms.
But lets talk about lucy she is probably the most popular.

Most will use pictures of her hip bone that are graphically altered and not actual photos from a museum for instance of the actual bones.




here is LUCY


Australopithecus afarensis: AL 288-1 | eFossils Resources


even here:


http://www.efossils.org/page/bonevie...sis/AL 288-1


note how Lucy is forward facing on the lobes of the hip


and note below how a human like hip wraps around for 360 degree balance for walking upright (not knuckle dragging)


News/Media Center


do you see the same bone configuration of the ilium (specifically) in actual photos of fossils, or 3D CT scans?

 

[VirOptimus]

ok lets talk about this for a bit. Neanderthal is human like, lucy species (Australopithecus) is ape like. So far no transitional forms.
But lets talk about lucy she is probably the most popular.

Most will use pictures of her hip bone that are graphically altered and not actual photos from a museum for instance of the actual bones.




here is LUCY


Australopithecus afarensis: AL 288-1 | eFossils Resources


even here:


http://www.efossils.org/page/bonevie...sis/AL 288-1


note how Lucy is forward facing on the lobes of the hip


and note below how a human like hip wraps around for 360 degree balance for walking upright (not knuckle dragging)


News/Media Center


do you see the same bone configuration of the ilium (specifically) in actual photos of fossils, or 3D CT scans?

Humans are apes by definition. Your post is irrelevant.

 

[Amittai]

I should not have to do your homework for you, if you provide articles, then quote from them the points you wish to make out of the article on this thread for the other readers or we simply won't see it or validate it and it simply won't be able to be used as evidence on your end.

The point higlighted is good.

I meant our questions about evangelising, emotion and church.

 

[createdtoworship]

Humans are apes by definition. Your post is irrelevant.

we are both hominids, but humans are of the genus "homo" , there are three other hominids, Pan, Ponga, and Gorilla. All four homids are different animal sub groups, because they have different genus's and cannot inter-mate. So they would fall under different animal kinds by a taxonomical genus barrier.

 

[createdtoworship]

The point higlighted is good.

I meant our questions about evangelising, emotion and church.

what post is that?