Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Racial Evolution 101
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 106 of 109 (104611)
05-01-2004 6:52 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by redwolf
05-01-2004 6:42 PM


This is the basic method of argument made infamous on talk.origins. Evo(s) claim to have refuted the other guy's arguments in a previous thread and, therefore, if the other guy uses them again in another context (i.e. he doesn't believe the evos claim to have refuted the argument in their own minds), he is a liar.
Liar or not, it's against the forum guidelines here:
quote:
Debate in good faith by addressing rebuttals through the introduction of additional evidence or by enlarging upon the argument. Do not merely keep repeating the same points without further elaboration.
You can't repeat claims without addressing rebuttals. Ignoring them doesn't count. Maybe you don't like it, but those are the rules, and you agreed to them when you registered.
Get used to addressing rebuttals to your arguments around here. Dismissing them as unsubstantial doesn't cut it.
I don't see anything dishonest or pernicious about expecting a participant to follow rules they agreed to.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by redwolf, posted 05-01-2004 6:42 PM redwolf has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 107 of 109 (104612)
05-01-2004 6:53 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by redwolf
05-01-2004 6:42 PM


Re: OFF TOPIC switcheroo tactics
still no answer to the point made = no answer to the points made.
bluff and bluster, you are still off topic on this thread.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by redwolf, posted 05-01-2004 6:42 PM redwolf has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 108 of 109 (104687)
05-02-2004 1:22 AM
Reply to: Message 105 by redwolf
05-01-2004 6:42 PM


Re: OFF TOPIC ... once more, with feeling
claim to have refuted the other guy's arguments in a previous thread
Actually, I showed that it could not be what you claimed ... and you never answered those posts (still haven't). Qualifies as refuted in my book.
ignoring the explanation of retouching which is sufficiently real
Except that I did address this with the evidence that the retouching would not leave blank stone where the head and neck should be, thus invalidating that claim. Plus you have not cited any sources that talk to any such touchups (which would interfere with the patina over the stone and the dating of the petroglyphs which would open up a whole new can of worms). What you have is a baseless comment that doesn't fit the evidence.
ignoring the description of mishipishu having a "great spiked tail" which it used as a weapon in oral traditions
As noted in earlier posts it is entirely possible for early natives to have found fossils of dinosaurs and to have constructed fantastic creatures from them. This would result in a mix of real and imaginary characteristics, such as spiked tails on land based herbivors mixed with horned heads of feline water beasts. The mixture of fact and fantasy is the proof that there was no contemporary experience of stegosaures by early native humans -- they would not have made those mistakes. Thus, far from ignoring actual elements, they become additional proof that the claim for coexistence is a fantasy.
This is on top of claiming to have debunked the ica stones
I did not claim to debunk those stones, what I said was that they were discussed on another thread. That makes that thread the place to discuss them, not here.
This is on top of the dishonest claim that the Paluxy tracks are some sort of a "known forgery".
This is wrong. My actual phrase was:
the paluxy footprints are a well known creatortionista hoax
The use of different words in quotes as if they were mine is blatantly dishonest. There is a difference between hoax and forgery. The hoax is that actual dinosaur footprints are portrayed as human when they are not. A forgery would be creating fake human footprints. The reality behind the footprints is discussed at length on talk.origins - paluxy. The upshot is that the human looking footprints are those of other dinosaurs. Notice that AiG's List of "Arguments we think creationists should NOT use" includes this bit:
‘Paluxy tracks prove that humans and dinosaurs co-existed.’ Some prominent creationist promoters of these tracks have long since withdrawn their support. Some of the allegedly human tracks may be artefacts of erosion of dinosaur tracks obscuring the claw marks. There is a need for properly documented research on the tracks before we would use them to argue the coexistence of humans and dinosaurs. However there is much evidence that dinosaurs and humans co-existed
I take that as negative support for the tracks being human. A known hoax is also continuing to claim something that has been shown to be false.
Mishipishu having a "catlike" face somehow amounts to their claiming him to be a member of the cat family.
Actually it is the native legend that so describes it.
The basic truth, RAZD, is that I don't really view you as capable of adding anything meaningful to any sort of a debate or discussion on origins topics. You appear to be basically just throwing stuff at the wall hoping any of it will stick, and looking for some way to have me booted from the forum on some sort of a technicality.
Your opinion is relatively meaningless to me. Getting you booted off the forum would mean I would have less fun with your arguments. The one who seems to be throwing stuff out without corroborating evidence appears to be you.
Your ignoring of my arguments just means that you have no more answers. I can get used to that.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by redwolf, posted 05-01-2004 6:42 PM redwolf has not replied

  
Lithodid-Man
Member (Idle past 2930 days)
Posts: 504
From: Juneau, Alaska, USA
Joined: 03-22-2004


Message 109 of 109 (109838)
05-22-2004 5:50 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by Riley
03-30-2004 9:14 PM


Louisiana
This post is a late one (I am replying to an old post in this thread) but thought it worth mentioning. I did my MS work in Lafayette LA and my oldest son attended public school there. He started the first year that Lafayette parish desegregated (2000!!). One informed "good Christian" we talked to argued that it was unfair because "you can't expect us to change overnight". This in point, I would not in any context believe that the state of Louisiana (maybe unfairly based upon the region I lived in) would have a problem with evolution based on its supposed rascist implications. There was a KKK public access TV station in Lafayette for crying in a bucket! Must have been sponsered by evolutionists....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Riley, posted 03-30-2004 9:14 PM Riley has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024