Coffee House Musings on Creationist Topic Proposals

When your conclusion is nonsensical, either your premises are false or your reasoning is fallacious. Or both.And your conclusion is obviously nonsensical. Our science cures diseases and puts men on the moon. No sensible person would call it irrelevant.

They're only called Darwinists by idiots.

Someone who understands that the history of life on earth proceeded according to ToE is called a sensible person, an intelligent person, a science-minded person, a realist. We don't call ourselves Darwinists or Newtonists or Einsteinists. You should think but you don't. You have admitted your own lack of intelligence.

Non sequitur.Translation: It does not follow.You're confused about tenses. We may not have direct knowledge of exactly how a certain transition did happen historically (past tense). That does not prevent us from knowing how it does happen (present tense) when we see it happening.We have no reason to think it might have happened differently in the past.

Science is based on evidence and not on "proof". That's the opposite of religion.

Nor do we want to. "Proof" doesn't enter into it. You might as well say we can't make ice cream out of it. You have already admitted that you are unintelligent - i.e. that you are mindless. Why would you be the one who can distinguish fact from folklore?

That's not what you've been saying. Your claim is that we "can't know", not that we can't account for it.We can account for it to everybody's satisfaction but yours - and yours doesn't count because you're an admitted idiot.

You don't uderstand what knowlege is. It isn't about "proof". It's about what works.As long as you keep talking about proof, you're just making yourself look stupid.

Explain the joke. Why are you the only one laughing?

YOU don't know what knowledge means.You made a huge strategic error when you admitted how stupid you are. Now nothing you say can be taken seriously.

Then why can't you demonstrate it? Give us millions of examples.It IS a lie. And you have demonstrated that you're too stupid to tell a lie from the truth. You don't understand what knowledge is, so you're in no position to make that claim.

By your misunderstanding of knowledge, it would be impossible to know anything. Just because YOU know nothing, you idiot, it doesn't mean that nobody knows anything.

And yet you presume to tell other people what they know. We don't want to talk about proof because science doesn't deal in proof. Science doesn't prove anything, not evolution, not gravity, not the shape of the earth.YOU, on the other hand, want to talk about proof because you're too stupid to unerstand the first thing about science. What the hell would you know about minds?

And your argument is even worse than Bechly's.

For practical purposes, you are mindless. You have demonstrated repeatedly that you are incapable of using the few IQ poits that you do have. Give examples.