Scientific and logical objections to evolution...

[Techne]

There is always a need to get personal with you. You are a relentless troll with a one-track mind and you have a tendency to cock up perfectly decent threads with your own version of clap-trappery...

Sheesh dude, keep your personal issues to yourself. Move along :erm:.

 

[Techne]

Lol , i knew you were reading into it too much. Anyway i think the clip is fine you don't, lets just leave it at that and let the mods decide.

Of course you do. It is however plain to see that it is a double standard to allow that claptrap while denying IDers to post ID stuff here in this section. Keep both in PD if we are to be consistent.

 

[Ekstasis]

How is it possible that people cannot logically deduct Intelligent design from what they see in nature and the universe?

 

[DrJohnZoidberg]

How is it possible that people cannot logically deduct Intelligent design from what they see in nature and the universe?

Because its not at all logical.

 

[Unhappy438]

Of course you do. It is however plain to see that it is a double standard to allow that claptrap while denying IDers to post ID stuff here in this section. Keep both in PD if we are to be consistent.

Are the IDers presenting their arguments with Scientific facts? If they are i dont see a problem, but as i said lets just leave it to the mods to decide.

 

[Ekstasis]

Because its not at all logical.

You're generalizing. What is logical for some is not logical for others.

 

[DJ...]

Are the IDers presenting their arguments with Scientific facts? If they are i dont see a problem, but as i said lets just leave it to the mods to decide.

The reason why Techne gets targeted so often is because he tries to turn every single thread he involves himself in, into a PD debate and 100 pages of definition posting. The mods got sick of it, which explains the numerous previous bannings. He now expects everyone to be subjected to the limitations he finds himself under. Not gonna happen...

 

[Unhappy438]

You're generalizing. What is logical for some is not logical for others.

I lol'd ... You just counter argued yourself

The reason why Techne gets targeted so often is because he tries to turn every single thread he involves himself in, into a PD debate and 100 pages of definition posting. The mods got sick of it, which explains the numerous previous bannings. He now expects everyone to be subjected to the limitations he finds himself under. Not gonna happen...

To be fair he seems to have improved, what do i know though haven't been here for that long.

 

[Ekstasis]

I lol'd ... You just counter argued yourself

Glad I could entertain you
I'm just saying that logic is subjective in many cases

 

[DrJohnZoidberg]

You're generalizing. What is logical for some is not logical for others.

While I agree that a logical path may take different paths based on a the available information, bad information will lead to illogical arguments.

 

[Techne]

The reason why Techne gets targeted so often is because he tries to turn every single thread he involves himself in, into a PD debate and 100 pages of definition posting. The mods got sick of it, which explains the numerous previous bannings. He now expects everyone to be subjected to the limitations he finds himself under. Not gonna happen...

Wow, so many falsehoods and misrepresentations. Go get a few pork dumplings and drop the personal issues.

 

[Ekstasis]

While I agree that a logical path may take different paths based on a the available information, bad information will lead to illogical arguments.

The extrapolated version of the "fact of evolution" is in totality a fairytale in itself. Gradualism has been a very convenient escape route for the ignorant.

 

[DJ...]

To be fair he seems to have improved, what do i know though haven't been here for that long.

Because he's banned from PD so has no choice, after warnings, but to stick to science-related threads only...

 

[CoolBug]

Because he's banned from PD so has no choice, after warnings, but to stick to science-related threads only...

How does someone get banned in PD? Maybe it should be pointed out so that others don't do the same thing?

 

[DrJohnZoidberg]

Okay, quick questions.

If you believe that the diversity of life is not governed by the processes of Evolution, how far off do you think the current information is from what you think the actual facts may be?

Even if you think that some aspects of evolutionary theory have it wrong, do you really think the truth would be that far away from the information we already have?

 

[Ekstasis]

Okay, quick questions.

If you believe that the diversity of life is not governed by the processes of Evolution, how far off do you think the current information is from what you think the actual facts may be?

Even if you think that some aspects of evolutionary theory have it wrong, do you really think the truth would be that far away from the information we already have?

From a scientific point of view ToE is the best explanation of what is observed. My personal belief is that "new evidence" are molded to fit the theory and not the other way around. Gradualism is a barrier we cannot get past - meaning ANYTHING is possible over time if you understand where I'm going with this.

There's other counter arguments ito age of earth etc that immediately nullifies gradualism...which creates a problem for ToE. Inconsistencies in dating methods...numerous. Lastly, logic - look at an earthworm when you have the chance and let the thought of "we have a common ancestor" run through your head. Then honestly tell me logic brought you back on the path of evolution.

Lastly, if scientists had to come up with undeniable proof that ToE is hogwash, do you think it will be published? Never in a million years




This is what I believe.

 

[DJ...]

"new evidence" are molded to fit the theory and not the other way around.

Which would require there to be a huge conspiracy amongst every single scientists involved in biology, around the world. So, how do they get this right, and then still manage to convince us all that it is correct? Or is it possible that your "belief" is simply a factor of your own naivety on the subject?

Also, please provide examples of where this has taken place...

 

[DJ...]

There's other counter arguments ito age of earth etc that immediately nullifies gradualism...which creates a problem for ToE.

Please show me where the age of the earth, in an accepted, scientific study, causes problems for the ToE. Note, we are now talking about the ToE, not evolution itself, which has been explained to you on numerous previous occasions. So clearly you have an impeccable scientific background to be able to dig holes in the actual theory of the explanation itself.

Then please point out the earth dating issues created for evolution itself. I'm all ears...

 

[Swa]

So. Not a single sound logical and or scientific objection to evolution.

Open your eyes and read.

I agree, but I think this specific thread was asking for this from the get go and would have been better to place such a question in the PD section.

What everyone is missing here is that science can't function without philosophy. Philosophy is not religion. Those that object to philosophy here only object when it doesn't with their preconceived philosophical assumptions.

Too bad PD is not a thread we all can post in huh.

instead of moaning why dont you post something interesting?

You are welcome to add your voice to the dissent as well.
http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php/402319-New-rights-permissions-on-MyBroadband-forums
http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php/441873-Who-s-moving-stuff

Some fair points, but as much as creationists love calling ID a science, it really is not remotely science as has been shown many times over.

Care to add elaborate on why you think it isn't science?

The facts Neil Tyson presents are Scientific? Yes or no?

If you admit that you have to admit ID is science. This is perfect example of the double standard. I don't care if philosophy is discussed as it's pertinent but Porch apparently does so better report it.

 

[Ekstasis]

Please show me where the age of the earth, in an accepted, scientific study, causes problems for the ToE. Note, we are now talking about the ToE, not evolution itself, which has been explained to you on numerous previous occasions. So clearly you have an impeccable scientific background to be able to dig holes in the actual theory of the explanation itself.

Then please point out the earth dating issues created for evolution itself. I'm all ears...

This was expected..Mr DJ, ToE has already been accepted by the scientific world. Do you think they will publish any counter findings?? Don't be naive. It has been so well received that there is NO contest. "Off the record" scientists do have counter arguments. They might be in the minority, but they're there