Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The evidence for design and a designer - AS OF 10/27, SUMMARY MESSAGES ONLY
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 562 of 648 (588414)
10-25-2010 12:44 PM


Just Checking
Has Dawn done anything on this thread except state the Argument From Design ... appallingly badly ... over and over again?

Replies to this message:
 Message 568 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-25-2010 7:26 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 595 of 648 (588580)
10-26-2010 5:02 PM
Reply to: Message 594 by Dawn Bertot
10-26-2010 4:52 PM


only someone that understands nothing or very little of sound reasoning would make such a silly comment. the principle of design is sound in both logic and reality. It has eluded you because you understand only a contrived method of evaluation called the scientific method, which closes its eyes to reason and its own limitations concerning evidence.
You understand nothing and your lame approvals and reqiriments are not necessary for it to be valid
A rant is not a rebuttal.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 594 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-26-2010 4:52 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 597 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-26-2010 5:11 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 601 of 648 (588589)
10-26-2010 5:32 PM
Reply to: Message 600 by Dawn Bertot
10-26-2010 5:29 PM


The eye is ordered, its puropse is to allow sight to manuver. its intent by its creator was so that its creation would not bump into things or fall off clifts, step on snakes, or grab the wrong wife
Since people do in fact do all these things, may we conclude that the creator was a failure?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 600 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-26-2010 5:29 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 603 by Parasomnium, posted 10-26-2010 5:41 PM Dr Adequate has not replied
 Message 607 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-26-2010 11:10 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(2)
Message 604 of 648 (588593)
10-26-2010 5:44 PM
Reply to: Message 597 by Dawn Bertot
10-26-2010 5:11 PM


A rant is all that is required to respond to a rant, correct?
And what you were replying to was not a rant.
It made a point. It was a request for a methodology.
This point is strengthened by the passage in your rant where you rave that: "you understand only a contrived method of evaluation called the scientific method, which closes its eyes to reason and its own limitations concerning evidence.".
OK. You think that the scientific method is bad. You say this in reply to Dwise1's reply that you should supply some methodology of your own.
But you do not supply a methodology of your own. You just shout at other people that they're "silly" and "understand nothing".
I too would like to see your methodology. Let us see some single coherent method that would allow us to find out all the facts about the world that you do not object to, and yet would allow you to be a creationist. It can't be the scientific method, because we've heard your opinions of that. It must be something new. And I for one should like to hear it.
Possibly you could offer something of value
Actually, the purpose of this thread is for you to do that. It's called "The evidence for design and a designer", remember? And you made the OP, remember?
All I have to do here is to assess whether you have offered anything of value.
You have not.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 597 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-26-2010 5:11 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 617 of 648 (588649)
10-27-2010 1:51 AM
Reply to: Message 614 by Dawn Bertot
10-26-2010 11:34 PM


You fellas really cant go any deeper that your own methodology can you.
Not until you show us another one that works better.
Once we have established that Bertotism leaves science far behind, then we'll all become Bertotists.
Both are allowable in the available evidence both use the same methodology for its conclusions ...
And yet you disparage the scientific method and decry our methodology, which suggests that this is not the case.
Would you and you like to fight this one out between the two of you, while we just watch?
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 614 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-26-2010 11:34 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 618 of 648 (588650)
10-27-2010 2:05 AM
Reply to: Message 607 by Dawn Bertot
10-26-2010 11:10 PM


As i suspected you really have nothing to offer in respose to the ppoint being made. Do these people have the same ability to not do these things because of that purposeful item?
Come on Dr In adequate something useful please
Dawn Bertot
I note that you did not answer my question, which was perfectly straightforward and required only a yes or no answer.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 607 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-26-2010 11:10 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 642 of 648 (588756)
10-28-2010 1:47 AM


Summary
Dawn Bertot has certainly added something to the trivial fallacy known as the Argument From Design.
Unfortunately, that "something" is incoherence.

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 647 of 648 (588878)
10-28-2010 8:08 PM
Reply to: Message 646 by Dawn Bertot
10-28-2010 7:58 PM


Re: One last summation
Oh, we're allowed to have more than one summation?
In that case:
Dawn explains everywhere and in every place why order evidences design.
This is, of course, not true --- Dawn has never explained this, which is why Dawn's pitiful attempts at creationist apologetics are such a complete and pathetic failure.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 646 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-28-2010 7:58 PM Dawn Bertot 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