• 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.

Status
Not open for further replies.

trunks2k

Contributor
Jan 26, 2004
11,369
3,520
42
✟277,741.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Oooo...you are not supposed to attack Darwin. Now, you're asking for it.

There's nothing wrong with attacking Darwin per-se. But attacks on Darwin are usually done as a way of trying to argue against evolution itself. What gets people annoyed is that such an attack is incredibly misguided and demonstrates a huge misunderstanding of the subject. If you want to argue against evolution, going after Darwin is a moot point.
 
Upvote 0

Baggins

Senior Veteran
Mar 8, 2006
4,789
474
At Sea
✟22,482.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Labour
Newton was "wrong" too but nobody picks on him

Yes in fact arguably Newton was more wrong, but he doesn't challenge a central pillar of some people's Christianity.

I don't think it is fair to say that either was wrong really, they just weren't completely correct.

Nearly everything both of them wrote was correct it just wasn't the whole story, how could it be, but very little they wrote was actively wrong.

That wasn't very elegantly written
 
Upvote 0

SiderealExalt

Well-Known Member
Feb 25, 2007
2,344
165
44
✟3,309.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Newton was "wrong" too but nobody picks on him

Creationists decided Newton's discoveries did not threaten their delusions about the nature of the universe. Darwin is no "sacred cow" of science. Nothing is. If anything it is the sacred cow of Creationism who feel that in attempting to discredit a man of science, they somehow discredit the science itself. The irony is that they highlight the importance of and strength of the scientific method in doing so. Further displaying both their ignorance and lack of substance for their own flawed viewpoint.
 
Upvote 0

SiderealExalt

Well-Known Member
Feb 25, 2007
2,344
165
44
✟3,309.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Here we have a classic example of absolutely no argument and a simple grasping of straws to have something smart sounding to say.
Either demonstrate with evidence why this is a "classic example of absolutely no argument." or understand you are engaging in nothing but ad hom.

Take that up with Merriam-Webster then if you have a problem with my definition.

Then you'd know scientific theories(not hypothesis, often Christians mistake one for the other) are not proven or disproven.
 
Upvote 0

The Princess Bride

Legend
Site Supporter
May 2, 2005
19,928
901
Georgia
✟92,326.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
I'm going to say this as nicely as possible....stop building straw men, it won't benefit you in the long run, and if you have a problem with my posts, feel free to use the ignore feature, won't break my heart.

It was never the responsibility of a general purpose dictionary to educate you on what a scientific theory is. Coy is as ill a fit on you as smugness is.
All this over a simple use of quotation marks. My, my....I'm sorry you were so distracted by them you were unable to comment on the differing perspectives of Darwin's vs. Lamarck's theories.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.