Re: News: Seattle shows little love for Lucy fossil exhibit.

On Jan 30, 12:28 pm, "A.Carlson" <amca...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 11:57:54 -0800 (PST), Ray Martinez





<pyramid...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jan 30, 3:39 am, "A.Carlson" <amca...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 03:04:29 -0800 (PST), Wombat <tri...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

On 30 Jan, 11:53, "A.Carlson" <amca...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 18:38:22 -0800 (PST), Ray Martinez

<pyramid...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jan 29, 4:42 pm, NA Sides <nongo1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 16:12:14 -0800 (PST), Ray Martinez
<Clip>

Since Darwinism is ideology there isn't any evidence.

Can you say "non sequitur"?  There is plenty of empirical evidence in
support of the ToE, which I'm sure has been pointed out to you
countless times - which makes you a liar!

If he refuses to believe or accept your evidence, does that
automatically make him a liar?
Just nitpicking.

I would say yes simply because the claim that "there isn't any
evidence" is being directly juxtaposed with the equally false claim
that "Darwinism is ideology".   Even without getting into the issue it
is still clearly a non sequitur on its face.

I can accept the fact that there may indeed be differences of opinion
but one cannot honestly claim that a particular position is not
evidence based and is simply "ideology" in the presence of multiple
lines of evidence so commonly given and so widely accepted by people
with so many diverse backgrounds.

In light of this it is my position that  Ray Martinez must willfully
have his head buried deep into the sand (or well up his ass) to not
recognize the basic fact that, whether he agrees with the
interpretation of the evidence or not, there is indeed an abundance of
it that is regularly presented in support of the case for Evolution.

Since the interpretation is completely false there is no evidence
supporting mutability.

There is world of difference between the question of the existence of
evidence....

No one denied the existence of evidence. You misunderstood.

....and the interpretation of said evidence.  First you say that
it doesn't exist....

Show us the exact quote?

and now you seem to agree that the evidence is there
but that you somehow have a superior interpretation of it.  Make up
your mind, you can't have it both ways.


You misunderstood.

There is ONE set of scientific evidence and two major interpretations:
Creationism-ID and Darwinism. Since the former interpretation is
correct and since the latter is false there is no evidence supporting
Darwinism----none.


The Creationism-ID interpretation is correct
therefore the evidence supports Creationism-ID----exclusively. This is
our position.

Can you say tautology?  

A. Carlson: "Darwinism is the correct interpretation of evidence
therefore the evidence supports Darwinism----exclusively."

A. Carlson: "Can you say tautology?"

In addition it is certainly possible for
various pieces of evidence to support different, even conflicting,
ideas or theories so your crack about exclusivity is also a
non-sequitur.  How many logical fallacies can you fit into one
sentence anyway?


Are you saying there is evidence supporting Creationism?

Also, bald assertions aren't worth jack in the real world, especially
when they run counter to the evidence. There are good reasons why the
vast majority of scientifically educated people, even those who are
religious, accept the ToE as fact.  Not only is it true that the case
for the ToE is made on the merits of empirical evidence, it is also
true that there is plenty of evidence that shows that your own quaint
little religious fairytale about human origins  is clearly false.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

We already know Darwinists believe that there is evidence supporting
evolution, what's the point?

Ray

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Alien Genetic Manipulation of Man
    ... US evangelical literalist Creationism, claiming humility ... the available supporting evidence (including lack of refuting ... absolute lack of supporting evidence. ... other scientists simply by offering personal anecdotes of emotional ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Scant evolution evidence
    ... supporting your new theory. ... No need to since there is ample empirical evidence conveniently left ... Most of the data is extrapolated to fit the ToE. ... The fossil record is sorely lacking. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Alien Genetic Manipulation of Man
    ... the available supporting evidence (including lack of refuting ... absolute lack of supporting evidence. ... other scientists simply by offering personal anecdotes of emotional ... One thing on which we all agree - the truth never comes from you. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Alien Genetic Manipulation of Man
    ... the available supporting evidence (including lack of refuting ... absolute lack of supporting evidence. ... other scientists simply by offering personal anecdotes of emotional ... criteria to be the truth. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Twins and Noahs Ark
    ... The lack of physical findings supporting Wyatt's claims tends to be a more ... video puts forth subjective evidence until you've seen the video. ... I can,and I do say the video puts for 'subjective evidence', as the ... I suspect that your 'video' simply shows Wyatt and his merry crew ...
    (talk.origins)
Loading