Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The lack of empirical evidence for the theory of evolution, according to Faith.
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 61 of 138 (197716)
04-08-2005 5:08 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by Faith
04-08-2005 4:33 PM


Re: The faults are?
Faith,
This is a patient reminder from one Christian to another that there is only one person in this thread who has decended into name calling.
If you intent is to be banned then why not just quit? Or take a break? There is no need to sacrafice your integrity over this.
You seem frustrated and the only product of that frustration is a presentation of a negative image. For yourself, your witness, and everyone else here who would like to see you stick around and be part of some good discussion, just take a breather.
These discussions can be blood boiling at times and we forget that it is our responsibility to be let these things roll off of us like water over a stone. We must be the example. I just want to encourage you to think about these things.
Thanks,

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Faith, posted 04-08-2005 4:33 PM Faith has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 62 of 138 (197728)
04-08-2005 5:55 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by Faith
04-08-2005 4:20 PM


nothing but a chiding of me for failing to grasp your point or something like that.
No, not failing to grasp the point, but rather to ignore the actual point in order tto simply preach about the effectiveness of Xian home schooling. I'd have had no problem with that, except it was entirely besides the point.
I'd grasped it just fine, but you like everybody else here will make up a fault if you can't find one.
I take this as an admission you will refuse to address actual points of arguments made to you and continually seek out bare sentences you have the ability to attack in an ad hominem fashion.
I see you are now actually seeking getting banned too. Its too bad a person with evident ability to write, is so insistent on avoiding communication.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by Faith, posted 04-08-2005 4:20 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by Faith, posted 04-08-2005 6:03 PM Silent H has not replied
 Message 65 by Faith, posted 04-08-2005 6:04 PM Silent H has replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 63 of 138 (197731)
04-08-2005 6:03 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by Faith
04-08-2005 4:29 PM


Liar liar pants on fire
That's the kind of idiocy creationists have to deal with here. Nobody can or will judge a well reasoned post on its merits. The rule on the evo side seems to be Make An Objection, doesn't matter what it is, make it up if you have to, but be sure to make an objection to anything a creationist says.
Right, I only wrote at least two posts praising you without any criticism at all within the first thread I encountered you, and seconded a POTM nomination for you (as well as defending that seconding).
I am beginning to see a rule however. You claim to be set upon by evos, and then repeat that charge at all times and at all costs, including your own credibility when it can be pointed out that you have not only not been attacked, but at times have been praised.
Perhaps you should learn to recognize and accept praise, as well as understand and accept criticism.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Faith, posted 04-08-2005 4:29 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 64 of 138 (197732)
04-08-2005 6:03 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by Silent H
04-08-2005 5:55 PM


No, not failing to grasp the point, but rather to ignore the actual point in order tto simply preach about the effectiveness of Xian home schooling. I'd have had no problem with that, except it was entirely besides the point.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Silent H, posted 04-08-2005 5:55 PM Silent H has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 65 of 138 (197734)
04-08-2005 6:04 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by Silent H
04-08-2005 5:55 PM


No, not failing to grasp the point, but rather to ignore the actual point in order tto simply preach about the effectiveness of Xian home schooling. I'd have had no problem with that, except it was entirely besides the point.
----
I was making the point that Christians will give the best possible schooling to answer your feverish worry that it would all lead to deterioration of standards. It was an answer to your charge. Your attributing other motives to me is typical of the partisan blindness at this place.
This message has been edited by Faith, 04-08-2005 05:07 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Silent H, posted 04-08-2005 5:55 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by Silent H, posted 04-08-2005 6:09 PM Faith has replied
 Message 69 by Admin, posted 04-08-2005 6:12 PM Faith has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 66 of 138 (197735)
04-08-2005 6:05 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by Faith
04-08-2005 9:15 AM


quote:
Good, I knew I agreed with him on something important.
However, you CAN'T read as you arrogantly lectured me on the supposed errors of my perfectly reasonable answers to your idiotic hysterical worries about educational "splintering." Why should I listen to a jerk like you for another minute?
Whatever respect I MIGHT possibly have had for "science" when I entered this loony bin has long since left thanks to the irresponsible attitudes of the majority gang of thugs here.
As for the rest of your stupid self-serving post (do you guys know how to do anything else?):
Blah blah blah blah blah.
You know, faith, I'm starting to believe that you just enjoy behaving like a hotheaded, abusive jerk with no social skills.
Why you think that slinging around the personal attacks is acceptable adult behavior anywhere is beyond me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Faith, posted 04-08-2005 9:15 AM Faith has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 67 of 138 (197736)
04-08-2005 6:09 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by Faith
04-08-2005 6:04 PM


I was making the point that Christians will give the best possible schooling to answer your feverish worry that it would all lead to deterioration of standards.
My charge was neither that Xians cannot give good schooling, nor that having Xian schooling would lead to deterioration of standards.
It was an answer to your charge.
No it wasn't. I was concerned that if curricula in fields could be changed based on beliefs, then the result would become a splintering of standards within education.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by Faith, posted 04-08-2005 6:04 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by Faith, posted 04-08-2005 6:15 PM Silent H has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 68 of 138 (197737)
04-08-2005 6:11 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by Faith
04-08-2005 9:25 AM


Re: Give it up creationists
quote:
If you make a terrific point about one thing they will ignore it and point out something utterly irrelevant and beat you to a pulp for supposedly overlooking it. You can be sure that NOTHING you say will get a MOMENT's serious consideration. Oh you might get a pat on the back for trying if you get upset enough, but attention to your actual argument, forget it.
You know, the funny thing is, I've had this same experience on Creationist run boards, except that I don't get the "pat on the back".
I usually get banned from those places for asking too many questions, or roviding too much evidence.
...can't help but notice that you have been encouraged to stay, even though you have begged to become a martyr for the cause.
I get banned from Creationist boards for asking questions and providing evidence, yet you get to hurl rather vicious personal insults at people such as "idiotic" and "stupid" just about every third post or so, yet you are allowed to stay.
Don't you find that interesting, the difference between the approaches of the two camps?
This message has been edited by schrafinator, 04-08-2005 05:16 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Faith, posted 04-08-2005 9:25 AM Faith has not replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 69 of 138 (197738)
04-08-2005 6:12 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by Faith
04-08-2005 6:04 PM


Hi Faith,
How can I help make this a better experience for you?

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by Faith, posted 04-08-2005 6:04 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by Faith, posted 04-08-2005 6:46 PM Admin has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 70 of 138 (197739)
04-08-2005 6:15 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by Silent H
04-08-2005 6:09 PM


It was an answer to your charge.
------------
No it wasn't. I was concerned that if curricula in fields could be changed based on beliefs, then the result would become a splintering of standards within education.
------
Implying that Christian BELIEF, or creationist BELIEF, would change standards and in fact be the cause of this splintering, since you were answering MY statement that Christians should abandon the public schools altogether. That led to this worry of yours and I WAS answering that by saying the standards would be the highest. That was the whole point but you jumped to some other conclusion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Silent H, posted 04-08-2005 6:09 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by Silent H, posted 04-08-2005 6:26 PM Faith has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 71 of 138 (197741)
04-08-2005 6:23 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by Faith
04-08-2005 4:33 PM


Re: The faults are?
Mr. Snot Face?
Come on, how old are you Faith? Is this how a grown woman actually behaves?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Faith, posted 04-08-2005 4:33 PM Faith has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 72 of 138 (197742)
04-08-2005 6:26 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by Faith
04-08-2005 6:15 PM


Implying that Christian BELIEF, or creationist BELIEF, would change standards and in fact be the cause of this splintering, since you were answering MY statement that Christians should abandon the public schools altogether.
I was not implying, nor intending to imply that it was Xian or Creo belief in and of itelf that would cause a lowering of standards. There are plenty of other beliefs that someone could argue from that would be just as problematic for standards (if they used the rule you were arguing for).
That led to this worry of yours and I WAS answering that by saying the standards would be the highest.
Whether they taught subjects at a "high standard" is irrelevant for my point. You are equivocating. I am stating that standards of curricula would be undercut, which means that there would no longer be accurate understandings of what knowledge of any particular field required in its background.
For example, geographers and geologists generally expect instruction in round earth models, but if we are allowed to remove that standard because flat earthers do not believe the "theory" of a round earth, then we have broken a central standard. Indeed flat earthers could teach at extremely high standards, including within geography and geology which do not in and of themselves require "round earth" models. They just wouldn't teach, or teach as counterfactual the main model, one of the standards for those fields.
There are more examples of course, but we could stick with that one for argument.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Faith, posted 04-08-2005 6:15 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by Faith, posted 04-08-2005 6:33 PM Silent H has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 73 of 138 (197743)
04-08-2005 6:26 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by pink sasquatch
04-08-2005 5:01 PM


Re: Faith: lying and science don't mix
This is NOT a nitpick - if the source/evidence on which commike bases his intelligent and reasonable points is wrong, then his points are no longer valid.
-------------
It wasn't WRONG, it was merely deemed INFERIOR.
{EDIT: And maybe I didn't get this right but it seemed to me it was NOT a matter of EVIDENCE but of ANALYSIS, and that's to be judged on its merits. The evidence-hound focus here disqualifies reasonable points it has no jurisdiction over at all.
This message has been edited by Faith, 04-08-2005 05:53 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by pink sasquatch, posted 04-08-2005 5:01 PM pink sasquatch has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by pink sasquatch, posted 04-08-2005 7:30 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 74 of 138 (197745)
04-08-2005 6:33 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by Silent H
04-08-2005 6:26 PM


That led to this worry of yours and I WAS answering that by saying the standards would be the highest.
-----
Whether they taught subjects at a "high standard" is irrelevant for my point. You are equivocating. I am stating that standards of curricula would be undercut, which means that there would no longer be accurate understandings of what knowledge of any particular field required in its background.
----------------
I AM NOT "EQUIVOCATING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" You are simply missing the point over and over.
WHAT YOU ARE WORRIED ABOUT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN and I argued why not in more than one place. There are about, what, TWO flat-earthers left on the planet? What are you worried about? I answered you over and over on that thread. High standards means STANDARDS, the ones accepted by ALL. I made it clear that Christians expect to meet the national standards and in fact exceed them and since it was my saying Christians should abandon the public schools that got you off on your worry about standards, my reassurance that Christian schools will ace those very standards ought to have done it for you, but no, somehow I'm just spamming for Christian schools, or what?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Silent H, posted 04-08-2005 6:26 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by Silent H, posted 04-09-2005 5:49 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 75 of 138 (197753)
04-08-2005 6:46 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Admin
04-08-2005 6:12 PM


How can I help make this a better experience for you?
---
It can't happen, Percy. I realize I'm being indulged to some extent and I don't want to be ungrateful, but I don't see any solution to this. It's completely a matter of biased mental sets that can't be fixed, but thanks for trying.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Admin, posted 04-08-2005 6:12 PM Admin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by Admin, posted 04-08-2005 7:59 PM Faith has replied
 Message 78 by Nighttrain, posted 04-08-2005 8:06 PM Faith has replied
 Message 80 by edge, posted 04-09-2005 12:12 AM Faith has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024