GodsAreUs
Seasoned Citizen
If you fail to question anything, you may be had by everything.
Posts: 215
|
Post by GodsAreUs on Jan 7, 2007 10:29:42 GMT -5
You rock Squid. Good work.
|
|
|
|
Post by solidsquid on Jan 7, 2007 19:55:17 GMT -5
|
|
dan
Seasoned Citizen
Posts: 116
|
Post by dan on Jan 9, 2007 19:04:29 GMT -5
Simply producing links that disagree with young-earth creationism does not itself disprove young-earth creationism. Similarly, the fact that I provided links in favor of young-earth creationism does not prove that young-earth creationism is true; the reader is encouraged to be the judge of that after he reads the sources himself.
|
|
|
|
Post by solidsquid on Jan 9, 2007 20:18:56 GMT -5
Similarly, the fact that I provided links in favor of young-earth creationism does not prove that young-earth creationism is true. Which is why I posted those my links. Call it "equal time". However, I'd really encourage anyone to take a look at the open access, peer reviewed journals I linked to - current research in many fields. |
|
dan
Seasoned Citizen
Posts: 116
|
Post by dan on Jan 10, 2007 23:11:34 GMT -5
However, I'd really encourage anyone to take a look at the open access, peer reviewed journals I linked to - current research in many fields. That's all fine, but I assumed that your list of links was intended to be a reply to my last post. In reality, you didn't really address the content of my post or the points I brough up. |
|
|
|
Post by solidsquid on Jan 11, 2007 8:19:14 GMT -5
However, I'd really encourage anyone to take a look at the open access, peer reviewed journals I linked to - current research in many fields. That's all fine, but I assumed that your list of links was intended to be a reply to my last post. In reality, you didn't really address the content of my post or the points I brough up. Your post was the equivalent of saying, "Nah uh, we have scientists on our side too!". It doesn't do anything to invalidate evolutionary theory or validate intelligent design or YE/OE creationism (whichever flavor you prefer). Unless you're wanting me to visit your links and take on the task of refuting every single article at AiG. Sorry, but I have better things to do with my time than write rebuttals to an entire website or ID articles. |
|
|
|
Post by Dragon*of*Heaven on Jan 12, 2007 10:31:59 GMT -5
Dan you may have posted a few links to a few websites that are pro creationist, however that as you said is not proof. On the side of actual Science there must be evidence, to quote a few good men "It doesn't matter what I believe it only matters if I can prove it." On this site we have posted much information to many different questions most with scientifically sound evidence to back our claims. So far I have seen none from you and the other creationists on this site. So before you launch into a tirade give us something tangible to back you claim or at least some form of proof so you don't look like a fool.
|
|
dan
Seasoned Citizen
Posts: 116
|
Post by dan on Jan 12, 2007 16:55:38 GMT -5
Your post was the equivalent of saying, "Nah uh, we have scientists on our side too!". No, I was simply responding to the remarks of Mistwalker, who wrote: "There is no controversy among SCIENTISTS. The only `controversy' is among those who disregard science in favor of their religion." I never said it did. I was only trying to show that the idea that "no credible scientist rejects evolution" is false. |
|
dan
Seasoned Citizen
Posts: 116
|
Post by dan on Jan 12, 2007 17:10:40 GMT -5
On the side of actual Science there must be evidence, to quote a few good men "It doesn't matter what I believe it only matters if I can prove it." Agreed! I can only be held responsible for the discussions on this board that I've actually been a part of. For instance, you can't blame me for not providing any fossil evidence for creation, when that hasn't been the topic of any of the discussions I've been in to this point! Anytime I've entered a particular discussion, I have tried to present the necessary evidence for my case. |
|
|
|
Post by solidsquid on Jan 12, 2007 18:26:44 GMT -5
Your post was the equivalent of saying, "Nah uh, we have scientists on our side too!". No, I was simply responding to the remarks of Mistwalker, who wrote: "There is no controversy among SCIENTISTS. The only `controversy' is among those who disregard science in favor of their religion." I never said it did. I was only trying to show that the idea that "no credible scientist rejects evolution" is false. Okie dokie. 'twas my bad then. |
|
|
|
Post by Dragon*of*Heaven on Jan 12, 2007 23:44:44 GMT -5
Agreed, you cant be held responcible for every one else. However what evidence you have given us is from a book that cannot be used as a historical book. It dosent quallify in the relm of proveing any thing. Since this is the only proof I have seen you present I must say you are not provieding good basis for your argument.
|
|
dan
Seasoned Citizen
Posts: 116
|
Post by dan on Jan 13, 2007 16:50:31 GMT -5
However what evidence you have given us is from a book that cannot be used as a historical book. It dosent quallify in the relm of proveing any thing. Since this is the only proof I have seen you present I must say you are not provieding good basis for your argument. If you're talking about the Bible, I haven't once used the Bible or even mentioned the Bible in this thread, so I'm not sure what post of mine you're referring to! |
|
|
|
Post by Dragon*of*Heaven on Jan 16, 2007 9:13:37 GMT -5
Im not speeking of this particular thread Dan I am speeking of the board in generality. Yes I am speeking of the bible.
|
|
dan
Seasoned Citizen
Posts: 116
|
Post by dan on Jan 17, 2007 22:28:23 GMT -5
Im not speeking of this particular thread Dan I am speeking of the board in generality. Yes I am speeking of the bible. Okay, but you were saying that the only evidence I ever provide is from the Bible, whereas in this thread as well as others I have used totally different sources and arguments. In addition, I mostly defend the Bible in my posts, not use it as evidence. |
|
