Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 62 (9094 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: d3r31nz1g3
Post Volume: Total: 901,806 Year: 12,918/6,534 Month: 201/2,210 Week: 142/390 Day: 51/47 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Coffee House Musings on Creationist Topic Proposals
Stile
Member
Posts: 4184
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


(1)
Message 82 of 1218 (892820)
03-15-2022 8:42 AM
Reply to: Message 77 by Admin
03-13-2022 10:50 AM


EVOLUTION IS FALSIFIED!!!!!!!
Admin writes:
...etc., etc., etc., yet otherwise be completely dysfunctional?
As your other examples show (job, using a computer...) he's only completely dysfunctional in this very specific topic - evolution.
Which is a big deal, if you're working in biology.
But, for most average people... how much do we actually talk about biology in our day-to-day lives? Me? Not a bit.
I'm sure he's extremely scientific, practical and focused on reality when crossing the street... I bet he looks both ways first, just like everyone else.
But in a topic that's not a part of most people's every day life? It's pretty easy to be completely dysfunctional and not affect anything else.
As for the promotion of his topic:
  • If we're a science journal - then it's absolute craziness to promote such jibberish.
  • If we're an entertainment site - then it's a travesty to delay promotion a second longer. (Admin is having all the fun!)
  • If we're somewhere in the middle - well, then I understand your dilemma. Good luck.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Admin, posted 03-13-2022 10:50 AM Admin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Admin, posted 03-15-2022 2:45 PM Stile has seen this message but not replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4184
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 126 of 1218 (894859)
05-31-2022 10:18 AM
Reply to: Message 96 by Dredge
05-26-2022 10:18 PM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Dredge writes:
...but until someone actually produces a eukaryote from a prokaryote, they can't claim to know how that evolution happened.
Why not?
I know how climbing mountains happens.
But I've never been atop Everest.
I know how lawn mowers work.
But I've never built a small engine.
I know how heavier-than-air flight happens.
But I've never designed an airplane.
These hills your choosing to die on... seems awfully easy to flatten.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Dredge, posted 05-26-2022 10:18 PM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 214 by Dredge, posted 06-22-2022 12:14 PM Stile has replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4184
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


(3)
Message 211 of 1218 (895322)
06-22-2022 8:42 AM
Reply to: Message 204 by Dredge
06-21-2022 4:55 PM


Re: Dredge Doesn't Think
Dredge writes:
Can you describe the step-by-step process involved in the (alleged) evolution of a whale's blowhole or tail?
I don't know the step-by-step process involved in climbing Mt. Everest (or any specific, individual mountain, really...)
But I know how people climb mountains.
I don't know the step-by-step process involved in getting a 747 jet to take-off.
But I know how airplanes fly.
I don't know the step-by-step process involved in most of my colleagues' drive to work.
But I know how people drive from point A to point B.
Your argument is... let's say... immature.
It's meaningless and useless to pursue or attempt to correct.
If you can't see how silly your own argument is... you aren't going to understand why you're so wrong.
You're lost in your own panic.
Like an adult desperately flailing their arms in 2 feet of water crying out that you can't swim... everyone around you is just so confused and thinking... why don't you just stand up?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 204 by Dredge, posted 06-21-2022 4:55 PM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 285 by Dredge, posted 07-10-2022 12:51 AM Stile has seen this message but not replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4184
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


(1)
Message 216 of 1218 (895331)
06-22-2022 1:03 PM
Reply to: Message 214 by Dredge
06-22-2022 12:14 PM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Dredge writes:
Bcoz the (alleged) evolution of eurkaryotes from prokaryotes is
unobservable and unrepeatable. Therefore the only way to know how eurkaryotes evolved from prokaryotes is to literally produce eurkaryotes from prokaryotes.
Why do you think this true?
It's absurd.
I had a friend who died.
Before he died he would get up in the morning and drive to work.
He's dead now - unavailable to us.
His morning routine and drive to work is unobservable and unrepeatable. There are no recordings of it occurring.
But I know he did it.
And I know how he did it.
And I know how to drive from point A to point B.
When you have a lot of personal knowledge about driving form point A to point B - you can then see how someone else would drive between another point C to another point D, without having all the knowledge about it.
I drive from home to work all the time.
I've never observed anyone driving from Canada to Mexico before.
But I know it's happened.
And I know how it happened - even if I can't describe every turn and every blade of grass that's visible out the side window.
We've studied a lot about evolution, and we know how it happens for many, many things.
We may never observe a prokaryote evolving into a eukaryote.
But we know it happened.
And we know how it happened - even if we can't describe every minute detail.
All the examples you offer are readily observable and repeatable ... unlike the (alleged) evolution of eurkaryotes from prokaryotes.
They are not readily observable and repeatable.
Sometimes the person involved is dead.
Sometimes roads have construction and are changed.
Regardless... it doesn't matter if someone could.
I'm talking from the stance of someone who hasn't and won't even if they could - effectively the same thing as can't.
I will never, ever bother to look up how someone will actually drive all the way from Canada to Mexico.
I will never look up every turn.
I will never look up every blade of grass that's visible out the side window.
Because, with my knowledge of driving, it's irrelevant.
And, it's still perfectly reasonable and valid for me to confidently say that I know how to drive from Canada to Mexico.
We may never be able to look up how a prokaryote evolved into a eukaryote.
We may never be able to look up every detailed step.
We may never be able to look up each specific option and each specific pathway chosen along the way.
We also don't need to, because with our knowledge of evolution, it's irrelevant.
It's still perfectly reasonable and valid for us to look at the knowledge we have and apply that to the gaps in our knowledge and see if it still makes sense - this allows us to devise multiple possible pathways for a prokaryote evolving into a eukaryote and how it may have happened. Each and every one backed by evidence... not wishful thinking. As the information and evidence grows, we might develop new pathways, or alter the ones we already have, or accept ones already existing as "more confident answers."
And all along... it's still perfectly reasonable and valid for us to confidently say that we know how evolution works.
You're just making yourself look silly.
If you don't think so - explain why it's unreasonable or unscientific for me to say I know how to drive from Canada to Mexico even though I'm never, ever going to willingly observe a route.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 214 by Dredge, posted 06-22-2022 12:14 PM Dredge has not replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4184
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


(4)
Message 660 of 1218 (896616)
08-15-2022 10:58 AM
Reply to: Message 650 by Dredge
08-14-2022 6:03 PM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Dredge writes:
So if a scientist says "I know how such-and-such works...", he actually means "I know a theory for how such-and-such works?"
No. If a scientist says "I know how such-and-such works..." he actually means "know" to a much, much higher degree than you and I use it every day.
Think of anything you "know" about the world:
1. Undisturbed water will settle to being level.
You know this, and I know this.
It's why we put that little water bubble in all levels - it's how "being level" works.
-but the ocean goes around the earth... if you had a long enough level, it wouldn't bend with the ocean and it would eventually say that the ocean "isn't level"
-because this isn't how "level" actually works. Scientists know it's because of gravity and being pulled to the center of the earth and this simply doesn't matter on the kind of scale we normally need to measure "level" things
-but you can put a dish of water in a spinning system, and if you spin it smoothly enough, you can have it rotate all over the place and the water will settle wherever it is without being "level."
-because this isn't how "level" actually works. Scientists know it's because of the force exerted on the water due to the spinning system and this sort of thing doesn't need to be considered for how we normally measure "level" things
-but there are aspects of gravity that we don't fully understand
-but there are aspects of forces-caused-by-spinning that we don't fully understand
And yet - we understand them enough to understand how "being level" works
-and if we learn more, we'll add it to our knowledge on "being level."
There are also issues we can think of that could cause problems:
-what if the level we're using isn't actually using water, but something that looks like it but doesn't act like it accurately?
-then the level won't work... and we won't know it
-what if the level we're using is old and defective and the water inside it doesn't sit in a smooth cavity anymore and the bubble doesn't rest where it's normally supposed to rest?
-then the level won't work... and we won't know it
-what if the level has had a sophisticated, undetectable cover placed over it that displays something that "looks like the level bubble" but actually isn't... and this fake cover displays an incorrect position for the water bubble?
-then the level won't work... and we won't know it
How can we prevent any of these things?
-by testing the level and verifying it against other aspects of reality... which is simply describing "doing science" on it
-what if something we haven't thought of yet and don't have sufficient technology to detect yet is affecting the level?
-this sort of issue is something that is present with all knowledge. It's unescapable, for everyone, about everything... simply because no one knows everything.
-science has been our best (and only) tool to date in going into this realm, making progress, and growing our knowledge while shrinking this "unknown" area.
That's how "know" works in science.
-it's the best way we have to "know" things. Better than any other method ever used by anyone else in any portion of history we've ever been aware of.
-Science uses this way to "know" things
-Most other people think the word "know" means "I can't think of a way it could be wrong."
-but this is always wrong... because there can be many things you can't think of that could make it wrong and you're simply unaware of them
-Science accepts this, and builds a system to attack this problem... no other system does this, and is usually left "being wrong" at some point instead of learning/adapting on how to be right.
If you think "truth" and "certainty" actually exist in the realm of "human knowledge"
-then it's you who is using the inferior form of "know" and you are unable to identify the problems with your own thinking
When a Scientist uses the word "know" they are fundamentally higher than any other form of knowledge - because it's aware of the possible issues and is always working on correcting them instead of ignoring them and ending up being more and more wrong as time goes on.
When a Scientist moves onto the word "theory"... they are even moving up higher than the word "know." As a theory, in Science, requires much more reliance on evidence and confidence than any other single aspect a scientist may say that they "know."
Once you understand this... you can begin to understand the simple errors you've been making in all your claims against evolution.
To anyone who actually understands how human knowledge works - your objections to evolution are just... immature misunderstandings.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 650 by Dredge, posted 08-14-2022 6:03 PM Dredge has not replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4184
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


(3)
Message 661 of 1218 (896617)
08-15-2022 11:05 AM
Reply to: Message 655 by Dredge
08-15-2022 5:33 AM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Dredge writes:
It's a serious question. How can a scientist claim to "know how evolution works" if science doesn't prove anything?
Same way most people can claim to "know how to drive from Canada to Mexico" without needing to prove they've done it before in the past.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 655 by Dredge, posted 08-15-2022 5:33 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4184
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


(3)
Message 739 of 1218 (896868)
08-24-2022 3:38 PM
Reply to: Message 738 by Tanypteryx
08-24-2022 1:44 PM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Tanypteryx writes:
YOU may not need it, but WE have that knowledge and find it quite useful. And we just keep learning more and more.
That's basically the main point on why this is such a silly argument to put forward.
No one NEEDS a hammer to drive in a nail.
But it certainly does make it a lot easier to USE the proper tool for the job.
UCD is the nail-gun of evolution - the best tool for the job that's ever been invented.
Spend your time ruining your pliers and screwdrivers trying to hammer nails all you want.
We'll use the nail-gun and complete 100 projects to your 1.
Not to mention there's no slow down to inventing/learning better and better tools for the way Science works either... ongoing improvement, ongoing self-correction, ongoing results in 'best progress.' Forever and ever.
Ramen.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 738 by Tanypteryx, posted 08-24-2022 1:44 PM Tanypteryx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 746 by Dredge, posted 08-24-2022 10:32 PM Stile has replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4184
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


(2)
Message 751 of 1218 (896884)
08-25-2022 8:17 AM
Reply to: Message 746 by Dredge
08-24-2022 10:32 PM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Dredge writes:
Which "job" in the field of medicine has been made "a lot easier" by the theory of UCD?
Pretty much all of them.
But coming up with new vaccines and medicines, as already listed a few times for you, is a good one.
Evolution is defined as a change in allele frequency within a population.

So please explain how "UCD is the nail-gun of evolution".
UCD is the best tool we have for explaining the change in allele frequency within a population.
Sure ... if by "projects" you mean useless bed-time stories from Darwinist folklore about what might have happened millions of years ago.

But if by "projects" you mean medical applications, it appears UCD has accomplished zilch.
UCD: Hundreds, quite possibly thousands of new medicines.
Creationists: 0 new medicines.
That's way better than 100:1

This message is a reply to:
 Message 746 by Dredge, posted 08-24-2022 10:32 PM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 788 by Dredge, posted 08-31-2022 1:55 AM Stile has replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4184
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


(1)
Message 792 of 1218 (897208)
08-31-2022 8:33 AM
Reply to: Message 788 by Dredge
08-31-2022 1:55 AM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Dredge writes:
Please explain how the theory that all life on earth descended from a common ancestor (UCD) has contibuted to the development of a vaccines and medicines.
Understanding how viruses evolve and how they affect humans and other species (due to UCD) leads to knowledge that guides us into efficiently creating vaccines and medicines.
A change in allele frequency within a population is explained by mechanisms such as natural, artificial and sexual selection, mutations, genetic drift, recombination.
Exactly: UCD.
The theory that that all life on earth descended from a common ancestor (UCD) is not necessary to explain change in allele frequency within a population.
Of course it is. Without UCD, changed in allele frequencies would not happen. Why would they change if they didn't mutate from their ancestors during reproduction?
When everyone changes from their ancestors... and it all follows back... it all comes down to UCD. It's all part of the same theory.
Please explain how UCD is necessary to explain the evolution of different beaks in Galapagos fiches, for example.
Different beaks in Galapagos finches wouldn't exist if it weren't for UCD... the fact that living creatures evolve from their ancestors and that we're all related (some more so than others.)
What other theory describes such evolution? Only UCD.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 788 by Dredge, posted 08-31-2022 1:55 AM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 864 by Dredge, posted 10-10-2022 12:54 AM Stile has replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4184
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


(1)
Message 926 of 1218 (900251)
10-25-2022 1:56 PM
Reply to: Message 864 by Dredge
10-10-2022 12:54 AM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Dredge writes:
No one needs the theory of UCD to understand how viruses evolve and how they affect humans and other species.
Without UCD no one understands how viruses evolve.
What crap. No scientific publication would describe the mechanisms of evolution as UCD, or vise-versa.
Of course not.
But, UCD is a major part of all mechanisms - which would all fall apart if it wasn't for UCD.
No user manual describes a vehicle as being nuts and bolts.
But the nuts and bolts are a part of the vehicle - which would all fall apart if it wasn't for the nuts and bolts.
quote:
And the theory of UCD can be defined without even mentioning the mechanisms of evolution.
Sure can.
The vehicle can be defined without even mentioning the nuts and bolts.
But the nuts and bolts are a major connecting system of the vehicle.
And UCD is a major connecting system of the mechanisms of evolution.
The mechanisms of evolution are independent from the theory of UCD... the former exist regardless of the latter.
Sort of and not really at the same time.
In a theoretical fantasy universe - you're right... but there would still be a "UCD-ish-like" theory on each variant path.
However, in our real universe - we don't find anything that doesn't align with the UCD theory on earth.
If UCD didn't exist the way it does - the mechanisms of evolution we have today would not exist the way they do either.
You don't need the theory of UCD to understand and utilize the mechanisms of evolution.
This is true, but silly.
Just like you don't need nuts and bolts to understand and utilize a vehicle (you can have a 3D printed car now, even.)
BUT - all vehicles are based on theories and ideas that come from assemblies using nuts and bolts. And if you understand what the nuts and bolts are doing - you'll have a MUCH better understanding of vehicles (even 3D printed ones without nuts and bolts) than those who don't understand the nuts and bolts.
Equivalent to:
All mechanisms of evolution are based on theories and ideas that come from UCD. And if you understand what UCD is doing - you'll have a MUCH better understanding of the mechanisms of evolution than those who don't understand UCD.
Medicine utilizes facts such the mechanisms of evolution, but medicine has no use for the theory of UCA.
No.
Medicine utilizes facts such as the mechanisms of evolution as understood being based on UCA and medicine as we know it today wouldn't exist without UCA.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 864 by Dredge, posted 10-10-2022 12:54 AM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 928 by Dredge, posted 10-26-2022 2:55 AM Stile has replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4184
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


(1)
Message 929 of 1218 (900270)
10-26-2022 8:29 AM
Reply to: Message 928 by Dredge
10-26-2022 2:55 AM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Dredge writes:
Stile writes:
Without UCD no one understands how viruses evolve.
Why not?
Because it's such a fundamental aspect.
Just like no one understands how vehicles are built without nuts and bolts.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 928 by Dredge, posted 10-26-2022 2:55 AM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 930 by Dredge, posted 10-26-2022 9:01 AM Stile has replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4184
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


(1)
Message 931 of 1218 (900273)
10-26-2022 9:16 AM
Reply to: Message 930 by Dredge
10-26-2022 9:01 AM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Dredge writes:
That doesn't tell me anything.
Why is the theory of UCD "fundamental" to understanding how viruses evolve?
The same way nuts and bolts are fundamental to understanding how vehicles are built.
It's part of the basic structure.
The overview is basic logic:
Living things do, in fact, evolve.
And they all evolve from their ancestors.
Looking at all things, we all (eventually) have common ancestors.
UCD
The details require years of biology study.
If things were different... then UCD may not be applicable. Let's say, for example, we found that things did, in fact, evolve - but they did not evolve from their ancestors; or if we looked at groups of things and they didn't eventually have common ancestors... then the mechanisms of evolution would be different from what they are today. And the lessons we learn would be different. And all of biology would be different. And all of medicine would be different.
UCD is a fundamental aspect to how the mechanisms of evolution function due to the facts we see.
The vast increases in technology and knowledge in biology and medicine are due to the knowledge of the fundamental UCD ideas and applying them to further concepts/trials/experiments. Without that... we would still be moving slowly in biology and medicine - as we were before the UCD ideas were being applied and understood.
Like nuts and bolts in vehicles.
Can you build a vehicle without knowledge of nuts and bolts? Sure - but it will be a long learning process.
If you have knowledge of nuts and bolts - can you build vehicles faster and find faster ways to build better vehicles? Absolutely.
This is the fundamental understanding that UCD provides.
If you want extreme details beyond simple analogies - you'll have to go to libraries and universities and look up the millions of papers and years of study everyone else does in order to have those extreme details.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 930 by Dredge, posted 10-26-2022 9:01 AM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 932 by Dredge, posted 10-26-2022 10:27 AM Stile has replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4184
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


(2)
Message 933 of 1218 (900291)
10-26-2022 12:28 PM
Reply to: Message 932 by Dredge
10-26-2022 10:27 AM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Dredge writes:
Medical science doesn't care if all life descended from a common ancestor or what the ancestors of viruses were doing millions of years ago, bcoz it has no practical use for such stories.
Ha ha...
That's like saying "Mechanics don't care if vehicles use nuts and bolts because they have no practical use for such connections."
Medical science is only interested in what viruses have been doing in recent history ... bcoz that's all that relevant and useful.
That's not true either.
Medical science relies on UCD in order to make all the crazy good advancements they've been doing in the last 50 years. Because it leads them in the right direction for their next experiment or trial they want to be successful with. Using UCD as a guide is what's made the crazy good/fast advancements possible - because now they understand how it works.
Mechanisms of evolution are known ... and knowing how they work and how to make practical use of them in medicine and biology doesn't require knowing anything about what happened or didn't happen millions of years ago. Therefore UCD is irrelevant to understanding the mechanisms of evolution. So stop talking crap.
This is like saying "Vehicles are known to work... and knowing how to drive them on the road doesn't require knowing anything about nuts and bolts. Therefore nuts and bolts are irrelevant to understanding how vehicles work. So stop talking crap."
I don't think I'm the one talking crap... You're funny
You could cut through all your stupid Darwinist bullshit by simply providing an example of how UCD has provided a practical use in biology or medicine ... but you can't, bcoz no such use for the theory of UCD exists.
Examples were provided to you immediately. From Message 751:
quote:
But coming up with new vaccines and medicines, as already listed a few times for you, is a good one.
New vaccines and medicines are developed based on an understanding of UCD to understand the mechanisms of evolution.
Using UCD understanding has allowed the crazy/fast creation of new medicines and vaccines we see and use today.
Without it - medicine would still be in the 1950's and human population would still be 2-3 billion instead of the 8-ish billion we have now.
The theory of UCD exists.
It permeates all of biology and medicine.
All advancements depend on it.
You're talking sillyness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 932 by Dredge, posted 10-26-2022 10:27 AM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 935 by xongsmith, posted 10-26-2022 9:22 PM Stile has seen this message but not replied
 Message 936 by Dredge, posted 10-27-2022 7:51 AM Stile has replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4184
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


(2)
Message 938 of 1218 (900378)
10-27-2022 8:44 AM
Reply to: Message 936 by Dredge
10-27-2022 7:51 AM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Dredge writes:
Cite one example of a vaccine or medicine that required the acceptance of that theory that all life on earth evolved from a common ancestor.
"Cite one example of a vehicle that requires acceptance of nuts and bolts."
-can't do it, because it's silly
Nuts and bolts in vehicles work regardless of whether or not you accept them.
Vaccines or medicines relying on UCD work regardless of whether or not you accept them.
Vehicles will fall apart without nuts and bolts.
Modern vaccines and medicines wouldn't have been discoverable without guidance from the ideas of UCD.
Explain why an understanding of UCD is necessary to understand the mechanisms of evolution.
You're repeating yourself. I provided your answer in Message 926:
quote:
All mechanisms of evolution are based on theories and ideas that come from UCD. And if you understand what UCD is doing - you'll have a MUCH better understanding of the mechanisms of evolution than those who don't understand UCD.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 936 by Dredge, posted 10-27-2022 7:51 AM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 939 by Dredge, posted 10-27-2022 10:15 AM Stile has replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4184
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


(1)
Message 940 of 1218 (900407)
10-27-2022 10:42 AM
Reply to: Message 939 by Dredge
10-27-2022 10:15 AM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Dredge writes:
All you're doing is making assertions with no evidence to back them up. Any fool can do that.
I've backed them up with facts and analogies.
You've got nothing.
I've got reality.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 939 by Dredge, posted 10-27-2022 10:15 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2022 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022