- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,851,410
- 51,545
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
You dog wasn't Baptised then .. 'Original Sin' and all of that ..
Ouch!
Upvote
0
You dog wasn't Baptised then .. 'Original Sin' and all of that ..
Perhaps you are unaware that Charles Darwin did not make a deathbed conversion.
Now that you are aware of this, please do not post demonstrably false information.
I debated this in-depth here years ago.
I'll be more than happy to debate it again.
Darwin's own family can take a hike.
Unless they were with Mr. Darwin 24/7, they can say what they want and I don't have to accept it.
Others didn't ... mind if I don't, either?
Your posting style makes it impossible to debate with you. I could present the clear evidence that you are mistaken and you would simply double down on your original error. It was behaviour like that, from you and others, which led me to abandon this forum for almost six months because of the impact it was having on my mental wellbeing. So, no AV, I do not wish to debate with you on a done deal.I debated this in-depth here years ago.
I'll be more than happy to debate it again.
If that's what you call "demonstrably false," you can start calling me Genghis Khan.
If you'd like to debate Charles Darwin's deathbed (or near deathbed) conversion start a thread and let's get to it.
Your posting style makes it impossible to debate with you. I could present the clear evidence that you are mistaken and you would simply double down on your original error. It was behaviour like that, from you and others, which led me to abandon this forum for almost six months because of the impact it was having on my mental wellbeing. So, no AV, I do not wish to debate with you on a done deal.
We understand that you are adverse to unwelcome facts.Fair enough.
I'll take Post 143 with a grain of salt then.
We understand that you are adverse to unwelcome facts.
As noted by others above, the fact that Darwin did not "recant" on his death bed had been discussed with you before (I seem to recall at least one such occurrence) and it was to no avail. As also noted above there is no point "debating" with you.I'm willing to discuss your "unwelcome facts."
Anytime, anywhere.
Which is not "anywhere".As long as it's on this site.
As noted by others above, the fact that Darwin did not "recant" on his death bed had been discussed with you before (I seem to recall at least one such occurrence) and it was to no avail. As also noted above there is no point "debating" with you.
Reluctance noted.
There is nothing to be gained by "debating" you about established facts.
Ya ... those "established facts" might change before we're done, mightn't they?
The evidence from Darwin's deathbed isn't going to change. Time machines don't exist.
See post #143 and your reference to it.Oh, sorry.
I forgot we were talking about Darwin's deathbed.
I was thinking about the Creation.
There is nothing to be gained by "debating" you about established facts.
I've seen your "established facts."
Telling me his kids say he didn't convert, doesn't cut it.
They weren't there in the room with him.
Elizabeth Cotton was.
And I'll point this out again.
The same thing happened with my father, where my sister -- (who hated him) -- claimed he didn't convert.
Yet his pastor claimed he did convert.
And I spoke with my dad and yes ... he did convert.
In circumstances like these AV likely feels that by getting "us" to refuse to debate with him he can argue that we are afraid to debate, because we know we have a weak case. I imagine this would be effective with those members and lurkers who believe Darwin did convert on his deathbed.what part of not going to debate facts with you do you not understand?
I recall at NYU- maybe because I am Asian-In circumstances like these AV likely feels that by getting "us" to refuse to debate with him he can argue that we are afraid to debate, because we know we have a weak case. I imagine this would be effective with those members and lurkers who believe Darwin did convert on his deathbed.
Then we have the peculiar attitude of the subset of humanity who believe this. Somehow this alleged last minute acceptance of Christ invalidates his lifes work on evolution. It doesn't! The evidence and chain of reasoning he collected and constructed stands apart any personal actions he took. He could have been a wife beater, a bank robber, or a harsh landlord and none of those would have relevance to his evolutionary findings.
Instead we have the precocious young student, engaged as much in hunting and collecting beatles as his studies; the brilliant young scientist collecting a world of experience and observation aboard the Beagle; the cautious researcher patiently exploring the evidence for and the character of the evolutionary process; the startled middle age man who learned he was in danger of losing priority for his findings to Wallace; and the ageing scientist who continued to develop his ideas, despite painful physical conditions and tragic family events. That give us a different, and I think attracitve, view of the man, yet that too does not alter in the slightest the facts of evolution.