|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Exposing the evolution theory. Part 2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10084 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
sensei writes: Sure, in your puny little mind.
I'm not the one who has to stoop to insults.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10084 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
sensei writes: It's an observation that fits the model of a simpelton mind. Again, all you have is insults. Why can't you address the science?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10084 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1
|
sensei writes:
and you keep responding with poor logic and fallacies.
If I am understanding you correctly, you are saying that it is poor logic if someone says that the observations which match a theory's predictions is evidence for the theory. Am I getting that right?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10084 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
sensei writes: Evidence is not proof, but you argue with logic as if it is. Where? If you can't even admit that something is evidence, what reason is there to argue about proof?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10084 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1
|
sensei writes: You evolutionists here claim that evolution is fact, because the data you chose, fits the model you made up.​ Now you are confusing theory and fact. There are facts of evolution. There is also the theory of evolution. The facts of evolution are the empirical observations such as the nested hierarchy. The theory of evolution explains those facts. The match between the facts and the theory is what supports the theory. This is how all of science is done. You also seem to be accusing us of cherry picking the data. Can you even start to back this up?
You don't know what facts are. Facts are verifiable, objective observations. One example is the nested hierarchy. This observation was first described by Linnaeus in the 1700's. Linnaeus was actually a creationist, so it isn't as if the nested hierarchy is something evolutionists have dreamt up.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10084 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
sensei writes: Facts are things that are true with absolute certainty. No, they aren't. Now you are the one making false claims about absolute certainty. Go figure.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10084 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
sensei writes: I told you, you did not know what facts were. You don't know what facts are. Facts are never viewed as being absolutely true. Facts are measurements, and they can be wrong.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10084 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
sensei writes: It's possible to change solid ice water to liquid form, by adding heat / energy for example. Your model is that heat causes phase changes. Your evidence is the observation that there are phase changes when heat is added. Is it bad logic to say that heat is responsible for phase changes?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10084 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
sensei writes: I don't need a model for that. Yes, you do.
It would be bad logic to claim that everything that can be liquified, is water, just because we have such an abundance of water as evidence to support this claim. We could use experiments to disprove those predictions, such as melting lead. But of course, you would reject such demonstrations as bad logic.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10084 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
sensei writes: Same, we have data that falls outside of common ancestor prediction. Like what?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10084 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1
|
sensei writes: The heat was an example. Fact remains that ice can melt. Theories explain why we observe ice melting in certain situations, and those theories are supported by the same types of evidence and logic that is used in the theory of evolution. The theory of evolution is no different than any other scientific theory.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10084 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1
|
sensei writes: More usseless and inaccurate claims. Your inability to substantively address the evidence is noted.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10084 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
sensei writes: No, you are making the dumbest claims. The kind of evidence for ice melting is very much different than the evidence for evolution. Sorry, your stupidity does not work on me.
Is this all you have? Insults?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10084 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
sensei writes: You are insulting with your lame claims. Argue with facts or zip it, as I have no use for your opinions and vague assertions. The nested hierarchy is a fact, not an opinion or an assertion. If you think common ancestry and evolution would not produce a nested hierarchy, then explain why.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10084 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
sensei writes: Many things produce nested hierarchies. Two of those things is common ancestry and evolution.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024