Login

RoadRunner79 · (This post was last modified: August 4, 2017 at 11:09 am by RoadRunner79.)

**The Grand Nudger** · (This post was last modified: August 4, 2017 at 11:40 am by The Grand Nudger.)

Whereas the human machine sacrifices both accuracy -and- consistency, and yet, some of us are comfortable with lynching. You know, the two might be related.

Astonished · August 4, 2017 at 3:48 pm

Exactly. You don't get it, Beep-Beep, you're just defeating yourself more and more with every post, why don't you just admit defeat and give this charade up?

Pat Mustard · August 4, 2017 at 5:13 pm

Two questions:

1) Was it originally me that Rev'd Road Runner did in with the candle stick in the dining room? Once I caught the thrust of his OP I stopped reading it.

2) Why is this thread still in Life Sciences? It is clearly christian apologetics and has nothing to do with any science.

**Ravenshire** · August 4, 2017 at 8:14 pm

(August 4, 2017 at 8:04 am)RoadRunner79 Wrote: I understand where you are coming from. And with DNA, the false convictions, was mostly the result of human error and contamination. I do think that there are other issues, that we are just starting to come up concerning DNA, but they are more false negatives, which is what is preferred in a criminal case. Although my understanding of the process of DNA testing, is that it is not quite as objective as is sometimes thought. See Here

Your argument here is a bit disingenuous since you're linking to a page regarding the difficulties of determining guilt based on DNA mixtures, yet you're applying the arguments from the link to all DNA testing. Yes, there will always be trouble determining guilt when the DNA of three or four (or more, a DNA mixture) people are taken in a swab, but a clean sample compared to a clean specimen is going to be far more accurate than you're trying to depict.

Astonished · August 4, 2017 at 8:54 pm

(August 4, 2017 at 5:13 pm)Tazzycorn Wrote: Two questions:

1) Was it originally me that Rev'd Road Runner did in with the candle stick in the dining room? Once I caught the thrust of his OP I stopped reading it.

2) Why is this thread still in Life Sciences? It is clearly christian apologetics and has nothing to do with any science.

1) Not sure what you mean by that but it was Tizerhuk that was being strawmanned as Beep-Beep's punching bag in the OP.

2) You honestly expect Beep-Beep to think critically about anything? He has no idea what the fuck he's talking about and has such a complete misunderstanding of fundamental definitions of terms and applications of them, why would anyone expect him to figure out the right forum to put any kind of discussion?

RoadRunner79 · August 4, 2017 at 9:20 pm

(August 4, 2017 at 8:54 pm)Astonished Wrote: You honestly expect Beep-Beep to think critically about anything? He has no idea what the fuck he's talking about and has such a complete misunderstanding of fundamental definitions of terms and applications of them, why would anyone expect him to figure out the right forum to put any kind of discussion?

I still have an open invitation to anyone, who would like to discuss/debate The topic in more detail.
Now by this I mean actual discussion, not just insults, declaring your opinion as fact, and more insults. You will need to demonstrate this critical thinking you keep talking about.

All you need to do is show enough interest to start a thread.

Now do you want to keep sniping and straw manning me Astonished

Amarok · August 4, 2017 at 9:29 pm

(August 4, 2017 at 8:14 pm)The Gentleman Bastard Wrote:
(August 4, 2017 at 8:04 am)RoadRunner79 Wrote: I understand where you are coming from. And with DNA, the false convictions, was mostly the result of human error and contamination. I do think that there are other issues, that we are just starting to come up concerning DNA, but they are more false negatives, which is what is preferred in a criminal case. Although my understanding of the process of DNA testing, is that it is not quite as objective as is sometimes thought. See Here

Your argument here is a bit disingenuous since you're linking to a page regarding the difficulties of determining guilt based on DNA mixtures, yet you're applying the arguments from the link to all DNA testing. Yes, there will always be trouble determining guilt when the DNA of three or four (or more, a DNA mixture) people are taken in a swab, but a clean sample compared to a clean specimen is going to be far more accurate than you're trying to depict.

Indeed you can't compare mixed dna to a regular clean sample . Just another attempt by Road to try and undermine real standards and methods . And try and elevate hersay and the babbling of religious cultist . And pretend there on the same level . But that's all apologists do.

**LadyForCamus** · (This post was last modified: August 4, 2017 at 9:35 pm by LadyForCamus.)

Just my humble opinion, and not that I'm perfect or anything, but the verbal abuse has gotten a little heavy around these parts lately. I don't think it casts us in the best light is all I'm saying.

Astonished · August 4, 2017 at 9:33 pm

(August 4, 2017 at 9:20 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote:
(August 4, 2017 at 8:54 pm)Astonished Wrote: You honestly expect Beep-Beep to think critically about anything? He has no idea what the fuck he's talking about and has such a complete misunderstanding of fundamental definitions of terms and applications of them, why would anyone expect him to figure out the right forum to put any kind of discussion?

I still have an open invitation to anyone, who would like to discuss/debate The topic in more detail.
Now by this I mean actual discussion, not just insults, declaring your opinion as fact, and more insults. You will need to demonstrate this critical thinking you keep talking about.

All you need to do is show enough interest to start a thread.

Now do you want to keep sniping and straw manning me Astonished

There's no need to straw man you, there are 16 pages of you proving my point in here. So what exact value would there be in creating a thread to discuss this when you've proven you're incapable of making any productive contribution to it?

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me

Poll: Is there Evidence to Convict You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
Yes: the testimony is Evidence	33.33%	3	33.33%
No: the testimony is not evidence	66.67%	6	66.67%
Total		9 vote(s)	100%

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread		Author	Replies	Views	Last Post
	Is‏ ‏there 50 evidence of evolution?‎	king krish	74	23853	January 14, 2015 at 1:50 am Last Post: bennyboy
	Precision in Nature: Evidence of God or Accidents?	Alter2Ego	20	12956	August 13, 2013 at 9:48 am Last Post: Something completely different
	Researchers Find More Evidence That Dolphins Use Names	pocaracas	6	3363	July 25, 2013 at 11:02 am Last Post: Doubting Thomas
	Evidence of life on Europa and Enceladus?	popeyespappy	7	4544	July 8, 2013 at 3:36 pm Last Post: Anomalocaris
	Best Evidence For Evolution	RonaldReagansGhost666	35	21801	February 12, 2013 at 7:06 am Last Post: Zone
	An Apologist's Reference for Evidence of Evolution	Erinome	28	13324	December 29, 2011 at 4:38 pm Last Post: Cyberman
	Neanderthals are us– More evidence	Justtristo	0	1886	August 29, 2011 at 10:34 am Last Post: Justtristo
	Evidence For Evolution	HeyItsZeus	5	4634	August 27, 2010 at 1:32 am Last Post: Entropist