|
Understanding through Discussion |
|
|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
| Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
| Author | Topic: Arrogance of Elitism | |||||||||||||||||||
|
cavediver Member (Idle past 3674 days)  Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
Small but important correction:
"So be good little fool, as your arguments have been blown apart since the beginning of time, for we once knew as little as you know now, and once thought as you now think." Regarding elitism, I refer you to DrJones*  *Not a real doctor
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
cavediver Member (Idle past 3674 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
cashmir effect Is this anything to do with the alternative guitar tuning, or the counterpoint-style time signatures? Great song, either way (though with K, not a C) (or perhaps you meant i instead of h...  )
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
cavediver Member (Idle past 3674 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
1. Uniformitarianism. 2. Our planet being old, because the universe seemingly is. (X is Z therefore X). 3. The present being the key to the past. (Not logically sound, initiated by Lyell's philosophy). 4. The abiogenesis MEGA-Assumption, despite it not ever having shown any evidence apart from the circular argument that states that because we are here it must have happened. (I could state the same about the book of Genesis). 5. Assuming size and shape of fossils/remains, and then putting them in the assumed pattern through cladistical fantasy. 6. Assuming designs in the fossils prove macro-design when it doesn't. I could go on and on and on. I am not logically obliged to presuppose these things when there are example AGAINST such presuppositions, in teh FACTS. Such as fast fast fossilization and coalification. (ten years). The moon, reversing into the earth if the "present is the key to the past", not credible! The fact that no new added information happens in DNA in the form of a mutation, within modern animals, producing, are prtially producing the beggining of a new system/design. (Always less or more limbs, but never new limbs, and always disease and deformity).
 Geez Mike - fine, you have gone more creationist in your "thinking", but did you have to leave your brain at home? You've gone bat-shit creationist-crazy here. Information? Limbs? Uniformitarianism? Who would have thought you would end up as another AIG clone? There is no rule that says a creationist cannot use his brain. You're going to be supporting Kent Hovind next... very, very sad and a complete waste 
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
cavediver Member (Idle past 3674 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
it is a heck of a big claim that matter would arrange itself to become something more than matter. Stars have incredibly complex life cycles, are made up of complex processes from the core to the outer corona, and give birth to new stars from their own ashes. I'm not wholly convinced that they are not alive themselves in some sense. Do stars form naturally from clouds of matter, or do they require supernatural intervention???
Rrhain writes: Are you saying god is incapable of making life that evolves? Ah, the crux of the matter 
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024
