|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Coffee House Musings on Creationist Topic Proposals | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10085 Joined: Member Rating: 5.6
|
Dredge writes: Darwinist assume UCD is a fact, therefore the entire history of life on earth forms one huge nested hierarchy. You can't even stay consistent. The nested hierarchy is a fact, just like genetic similarities. The nested hierarchy is there whether anyone accepts UCD or not. Also, scientists concluded that all life shares a common ancestor because of the universal nested hierarchy. The observed fact led to the conclusion. Before this point, UCD was still a big question. It could have been that life had multiple origins, but that is not where the evidence led. In fact, Darwin himself did not assume UCD.
quote: All you are doing is beating up on strawmen.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5952 Joined: Member Rating: 5.7 |
Sorry, I don't follow. Why am I not surprised? All I did was to toss your own argument back at you. And, of course, you didn't understand it. Which is so sadly typical of creationists. Why am I not surprised?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 103 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Dredge writes:
Did you notice the pattern of SPECULATION evident in those quotes?Taq writes:
So you consider mere speculation about a hypothesis that has produced zero practical benefits be a "practical use" of UCD. Yes. It's called research. They are using common ancestry to come up with new hypotheses in biomedical research. That is a practical use. Wow, that's bizarre.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10085 Joined: Member Rating: 5.6
|
Dredge writes: So you consider mere speculation about a hypothesis that has produced zero practical benefits be a "practical use" of UCD. No. I never said any such thing. Perhaps you could address what I actually said?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 103 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Dredge writes:
So you consider mere speculation about a hypothesis that has produced zero practical benefits be a "practical use" of UCD.Taq writes:
In effect, it is what you said. No. I never said any such thing. Perhaps you could address what I actually said? In effect, you're saying a theoretical use of UCD is a practical use of UCD. Like I said, bizarre. Which treatment of which disease has resulted from"using common ancestry to come up with new hypotheses in biomedical research", as described in that paper? Message 1077
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10085 Joined: Member Rating: 5.6
|
Dredge writes: In effect, it is what you said. No, it isn't. You can keep swinging away at your strawmen, or you can actually address what people are saying.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
xongsmith Member Posts: 2587 From: massachusetts US Joined: Member Rating: 7.0
|
Dredgings:
mere speculation about a hypothesis that has produced zero practical benefits zero? where the fuck do you think any of us have said that?"I'm the Grim Reaper now, Mitch. Step aside." Death to #TzarVladimirtheCondemned! Enjoy every sandwich! - xongsmith, 5.7dawkins scale
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8564 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.1
|
You can keep swinging away at your strawmen, or you can actually address what people are saying. No, no he can’t. He has to continue to lie and obfuscate otherwise he is admitting that UCD and common descent are linchpin concepts in evidence of the reality of evolution. His gutter religion cannot accept the reality of evolution and he must fight against the obvious no matter how stupid and inane his arguments. He is a meat-cracker eating theist. Reality is anathema to him. Strawmen are his only arguments.Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 103 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
AZPaul3 writes:
Irrelevant to my argument.
He has to continue to lie and obfuscate otherwise he is admitting that UCD and common descent are linchpin concepts in evidence of the reality of evolution. His gutter religion cannot accept the reality of evolution and he must fight against the obvious no matter how stupid and inane his arguments.
Irrelevant to my argument. Reality is anathema to him.
Irrelevant to my argument.
Strawmen are his only arguments.
You've just presented four strawman arguments.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8564 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.1
|
Irrelevant to my argument. First, you have no argument. Only unevidenced assertions built into your own strawmen. Second, of course all are relevant. They form the very basis of your motivations to lie about evolution.Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9202 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4
|
Nice to see you learned a new word,
What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. -Christopher Hitchens Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness. If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 103 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Taq writes:
Wrong, Einstein. That is a theorectical use. It becomes a practical use when it results in an improvement in the treatment of a disease. They are using common ancestry to come up with new hypotheses in biomedical research. That is a practical use. So, which treatment of which disease has resulted from"using common ancestry to come up with new hypotheses in biomedical research", as described in that paper? Message 1077 If you can't tell me (and you can't), you don't have a practical use. Trying to pass off a theorectical use as a practical use demonstrates that you're a typical Darwinist ... ie, a bs-artist and a con-man.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10085 Joined: Member Rating: 5.6
|
Dredge writes: Wrong, Einstein. That is a theorectical use. It becomes a practical use when it results in an improvement in the treatment of a disease. Guiding research is a very practical use, whether you like it or not.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stile Member Posts: 4295 From: Ontario, Canada Joined: |
Taq writes: Guiding research is a very practical use, whether you like it or not. It is, quite possibly, the most practical use.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 103 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Taq writes:
More bs. Guiding research is a very practical use, whether you like it or not. Medical research that fails to produce an improvement in the treatment of disease is a useless failure ... not a practical use of anything. A research hypothesis that fails to produce an improvement in the treatment of disease is also a useless failure ... not a practical use of anything.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024