Are there any "problems" with the ToE that are generally not addressed?

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

Happy, that didn't answer Robert's point. He says that the species (and I guess even the genus isn't important). So the fact that this is of the same family makes it the "same" in his eyes. I think you might want to ask him some more questions about what the heck he does mean.You might also want to point out what other things are as close as this and the extinct coelacanth.added by edit for ChiropteraHe defines "the same" as being of the same family I think. You might want him to get clear just what he does mean.This message has been edited by AdminNosy, 09-08-2004 01:40 PMThis message has been edited by AdminNosy, 09-08-2004 01:40 PM

Yupe. Since he is moving goalposts all over the place you have to tie him down before answering. Get clear what he means first.Then you either point out that he is being silly or answer the question he is actually asking.By now we understand that Robert doesn't actually know what he is asking. Since he makes up things as he goes along he can't be expected to remain consistent for even a few posts.

I think you had enough time to learn that simply repeating assertions and ignoring what is posted to you isn't good debate etiquete. If it continues you will have a day or two to read what others have posted.This is a last warning.

I very strongly suggest that you don't try such fun things. Someone who has demonstrated that they certainly understand how ignorant the slugs comment is can get away with it.You, however, have made a large number of comments that demonstrate just as much ignorance of the topics under discussion. Therefore when you make a little "joke" you are taken seriously.In fact: could easily be taken as you trying to disown a comment that you, at the time, did mean seriously. It is hard to be sure.

Is this the list? It is what I could find in post 50.Now please acknowledge the discussion that you have been given, at length, on both of these points.It is also not clear in post 50 why this is an embarassment I don't recall you doing more than asserting that it was.I think you have now earned your suspension. But since you may not have time to have absorbed various suggestions I will wait for one more post. Given your track record I'm sure it will tip you over the edge. Enjoy the free for all forum while you have priviledges there.

Robert, it seems you're quality of posting is not improving after rather a large number of weeks.This is to put you on notice that unless you start taking some of the rather patient advice you have been getting you will have to be restricted to the new Bootcamp where you can get more attention in pointing out the flaws in the way you approach the discussion.Specifically, you will have to support assertions that you make. This needs to be with some actual data and a demonstartion of the logical steps required to reach the conclusions you assert.Of course, it is understood that the data will be mostly from links to web references. The logic needs to be your own or explainable by you when asked. As the discussion proceeds you will have to support yourself with, perhaps, very detailed logical steps indeed.Good luck.

I'm not clear in this post Robert exactly what timescale you have a problem with or what the problem is.In any discussion about timescale you must first learn a little about how they have been shown to be correct.Please read over at least the beginning of
Age Correlations and an Old Earth.Then you may post your answer there to the issues raised. If you avoid dealing with that and argue against the currently accepted dating methodologies again without evidence then you will be given an opportunity to learn better debating skills in the boot camp.Think very carefully about your next few posts. Further unsupported assertions will restrict your privileges.This message has been edited by AdminNosy, 10-13-2004 03:43 PM

I'll wait for Percy to clarify about time scales here. I'm not actually sure about the direct relavance that dating methods have so you are off the hook in this thread for now.However, the claim HAS been backed up. There are a number of threads in Dates and Dating. If you bring up that as an issue anywhere else you have to deal with the back up that has been supplied. There are several threads because there is a LOT of backup.Now you have to back up your assertions. In fact, you have to back up ANY assertion you make. If you continue to make assertions without back up in the form of evidence or logical reasoning you will be restricted to bootcamp to allow you to get the help you need with your debating skills.This message has been edited by AdminNosy, 10-13-2004 04:09 PM

Loud, WT, please reveiw the topic of this thread.And stick to it! Thanks.

Welcome aboard. Give it a few hours and you'll have several answers to your question.Enjoy the stay, Please ask any questions in the Questions and Suggestions thread.

---

Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:

​

Change in Moderation? (General discussion of moderation procedures)
or
Thread Reopen Requests
or
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum
or
Introducing the new "Boot Camp" forum