Wherein I catch a professional YEC in a lie

[Speedwell]

Secularist and humanist are God's responsibility.

Tell me that again next week after your man gets elected to the Senate.

 

[omega2xx]

Tell me that again next week after your man gets elected to the Senate.

I don't have a man in that race.

 

[tas8831]

Not true at all. Conservative Christians certainly have a political preference but it does not affect their theology.

So can a TRUE Christian vote for a person that tried to hook up with 14 year olds and committed adultery by courting his current wife (and apparently 'dating' her) while she was still married?

 

[AnotherAtheist]

I'll be waiting. Real evidence does not need reasoned arguments. Truth speaks loudly for itself.

In the meantime, here is genetic evidence for whale evolution. Note that this is an article, and there is a link to the scientific paper it summarises. There are plenty of references in the original paper. Genes Reveal How Whales Evolved For Ocean Life - Redorbit

 

[Bugeyedcreepy]

In the meantime, here is genetic evidence for whale evolution. Note that this is an article, and there is a link to the scientific paper it summarises. There are plenty of references in the original paper. Genes Reveal How Whales Evolved For Ocean Life - Redorbit

seriously, he's already been given this in spades, and then some. You're playing Pigeon Chess...

 

[AnotherAtheist]

seriously, he's already been given this in spades, and then some. You're playing Pigeon Chess...

I know, but there are different ways to debate, and different purposes of debate.

He's never going to change his mind no matter how much evidence or reason is sent his way. However, others may be reading this thread. If they see Creationists refusing to address the evidence, lying, dodging, refusing to debate seriously, then this makes Creationists look bad.

However, for this to work, it's necessary to always remain reasonable, and answer questions and challenges no matter how many times the same individual has asked the same question. Otherwise those reading the end of the thread but not the previous N pages will see a challenge that is not answered.

So, the reply is not for him. The reply is just to underline, for anyone reading, that he has been given the evidence. And therefore the continuing thread with him refusing to properly address the evidence (I expect him to just try to hand-wave it away) will discredit his position.

 

[Bugeyedcreepy]

I know, but there are different ways to debate, and different purposes of debate.

He's never going to change his mind no matter how much evidence or reason is sent his way. However, others may be reading this thread. If they see Creationists refusing to address the evidence, lying, dodging, refusing to debate seriously, then this makes Creationists look bad.

However, for this to work, it's necessary to always remain reasonable, and answer questions and challenges no matter how many times the same individual has asked the same question. Otherwise those reading the end of the thread but not the previous N pages will see a challenge that is not answered.

So, the reply is not for him. The reply is just to underline, for anyone reading, that he has been given the evidence. And therefore the continuing thread with him refusing to properly address the evidence (I expect him to just try to hand-wave it away) will discredit his position.

You're right - after all, that's exactly how I came to join the conversation.

 

[omega2xx]

In the meantime, here is genetic evidence for whale evolution. Note that this is an article, and there is a link to the scientific paper it summarises. There are plenty of references in the original paper. Genes Reveal How Whales Evolved For Ocean Life - Redorbit

Without reading it I will declare it has no verifiable scientific evidence. Cut and paste what they offer and prove me wrong.

 

[omega2xx]

So can a TRUE Christian vote for a person that tried to hook up with 14 year olds and committed adultery by courting his current wife (and apparently 'dating' her) while she was still married?

Of course not.

Can as true Christian vote for someone who lied to the parents over the casket of their dead son killed at Bengazi?

 

[PsychoSarah]

Without reading it I will declare it has no verifiable scientific evidence. Cut and paste what they offer and prove me wrong.

-_- why not just read it yourself rather than demand someone spoon feed it to you?

 

[omega2xx]

-_- why not just read it yourself rather than demand someone spoon feed it to you?

The NEVER contain any evidence. Prove me wrong.

 

[AnotherAtheist]

Without reading it I will declare it has no verifiable scientific evidence. Cut and paste what they offer and prove me wrong.

It's a summary of a paper in Nature. Minke whale genome and aquatic adaptation in cetaceans

The paper describes the sequencing of the minke whale genome, as well as bottlenose dolphin, a fin whale, and a finless dolphin. They looked into the development of genes for such things as anaerobic respiration (important for aquatic mammals), but also the contraction of genes for body hair etc.

Here's a Venn diagram of shared and unique gene families for some aquatic and terrestrial mammals. You'll need to read the paper to get the full explanation.

The link I linked to is a short and accessible summary of the content of the academic paper.

Hence I feel your dismissal without reading is misguided.

Have you ever heard the quote: There are none so blind as they who will not see?

 

[PsychoSarah]

The NEVER contain any evidence. Prove me wrong.

People's sources never contain any evidence? Then it should be very easy to skim through sources and point out their flaws. I do that all the time. It's especially common for people to misread their own sources and interpret information as supporting their position when in reality it contradicts their position.

One of the best ways to gain an upper hand in a debate is to use a person's own sources against them, when applicable.

 

[omega2xx]

It's a summary of a paper in Nature. Minke whale genome and aquatic adaptation in cetaceans

The paper describes the sequencing of the minke whale genome, as well as bottlenose dolphin, a fin whale, and a finless dolphin. They looked into the development of genes for such things as anaerobic respiration (important for aquatic mammals), but also the contraction of genes for body hair etc.

Here's a Venn diagram of shared and unique gene families for some aquatic and terrestrial mammals. You'll need to read the paper to get the full explanation.

The link I linked to is a short and accessible summary of the content of the academic paper.

Hence I feel your dismissal without reading is misguided.

Have you ever heard the quote: There are none so blind as they who will not see?

It is amusing and sad that some think pictures are evidence. Not one of them offered any science, let alone science that makes a leg become a fin possible.

My not reading your link is only misguided if you can cut and paste some evidence from it and you can't. While you were reading it you could have cut and pasted its evidence in less than a minute.

Your failure to do so and prove me wrong is an indication, they offered none, or you still think opinions are evidence.

If you or any other evo challenges something I say, I will respond in the very next post.

Have you ever heard the quote, they would if the could, but they can't?

Unless you will provide some verifiable evidence, don't look for any more responses from me.

 

[AnotherAtheist]

It is amusing and sad that some think pictures are evidence. Not one of them offered any science, let alone science that makes a leg become a fin possible.

My not reading your link is only misguided if you can cut and paste some evidence from it and you can't. While you were reading it you could have cut and pasted its evidence in less than a minute.

Your failure to do so and prove me wrong is an indication, they offered none, or you still think opinions are evidence.

If you or any other evo challenges something I say, I will respond in the very next post.

Have you ever heard the quote, they would if the could, but they can't?

Unless you will provide some verifiable evidence, don't look for any more responses from me.

I gave you a link to a paper that is overflowing with the results of scientific analysis of the genomes of a number of whales and (for comparative purposes) other mammals. Here it is again: Minke whale genome and aquatic adaptation in cetaceans

The 'picture' above is actually a Venn diagram showing the amount of overlap of genes for a number of animals, which is a summary of their results.

That you attempt to just arm-wave away well presented data reflects more on you than the data, and the paper behind it (link supplied).

The way that you would verify the evidence would be to ask the authors for a copy of their data and then repeat the analysis yourself to check if the original analysis was correct.

Have you ever heard the saying: There are none so blind as those who will not see. You've already been given the verifiable evidence you ask for. So, why do you just ask for it again?

 

[omega2xx]

I gave you a link to a paper that is overflowing with the results of scientific analysis of the genomes of a number of whales and (for comparative purposes) other mammals. Here it is again: Minke whale genome and aquatic adaptation in cetaceans

The 'picture' above is actually a Venn diagram showing the amount of overlap of genes for a number of animals, which is a summary of their results.

That you attempt to just arm-wave away well presented data reflects more on you than the data, and the paper behind it (link supplied).

I quit reading links year ago. The NEVER include and rel evidence. Cut and paste from yours and prove me wrong. Include the genome that cause a leg to become a fin.

You have not presented any provable data so my arms never get tired.

The way that you would verify the evidence would be to ask the authors for a copy of their data and then repeat the analysis yourself to check if the original analysis was correct.

Have you ever heard the saying: There are none so blind as those who will not see. You've already been given the verifiable evidence you ask for. So, why do you just ask for it again?

Have you heard the adage, I'M from Missouri?

 

[HitchSlap]

So can a TRUE Christian vote for a person that tried to hook up with 14 year olds and committed adultery by courting his current wife (and apparently 'dating' her) while she was still married?

 

[PsychoSarah]

Have you heard the adage, I'M from Missouri?

No, I haven't.

 

[omega2xx]

No, I haven't.

On the license plats of cars it has the state motto: The show me state.

When you have some science based evidence, SHOW ME.

Your poem is another of your biased opinions. When you can prove there is no God and no heaven, SHOW ME.

I never think of a forum as as win or lose contest, but and exchange of ideas. I am sure you will outlast me becaue I will no longer respond to post with no evidence.

Have a very + day.

 

[Jimmy D]

On the license plats of cars it has the state motto: The show me state.

When you have some science based evidence, SHOW ME.

Your poem is another of your biased opinions. When you can prove there is no God and no heaven, SHOW ME.

I never think of a forum as as win or lose contest, but and exchange of ideas. I am sure you will outlast me becaue I will no longer respond to post with no evidence.

Have a very + day.

Anything to avoid the addressing the evidence posted.

If you don't understand it just say so, I doubt anyone could think any less of you at this point.