(May 11, 2018 at 2:40 am)Tizheruk Wrote:

Quote:What counter-argument?  You mean the childish name calling on here and strawman arguments?

All the ones that have refuted your bullshit . And all you brought is propaganda , fallacies , Stupid ID talking points . Name calling . And general ignorance . And just spewing talking points as a refutation . 

---

Quote:Prove it.

You first .

I brought scientific facts, I didn't call anyone names, and I supported my claims.

I already have proved it.

(May 11, 2018 at 2:44 am)CDF47 Wrote: I brought scientific facts, I didn't call anyone names, and I supported my claims.

I already have proved it.

Did you, though?  Be honest with yourself.

Quote:I brought scientific facts, I didn't call anyone names, and I supported my claims.

You brought propaganda , Fallacies and yes you name called . And no you supported nothing .

Quote:I already have proved it.

Not even close 

---

(May 11, 2018 at 2:46 am)Kit Wrote:

(May 11, 2018 at 2:44 am)CDF47 Wrote: I brought scientific facts, I didn't call anyone names, and I supported my claims.

I already have proved it.

Did you, though?  Be honest with yourself.

You ask for miracles my friend

(May 11, 2018 at 2:46 am)Kit Wrote:

(May 11, 2018 at 2:44 am)CDF47 Wrote: I brought scientific facts, I didn't call anyone names, and I supported my claims.

I already have proved it.

Did you, though?  Be honest with yourself.

Yes, I have.

---

(May 11, 2018 at 2:46 am)Tizheruk Wrote:

Quote:I brought scientific facts, I didn't call anyone names, and I supported my claims.

You brought propaganda , Fallacies and yes you name called . And no you supported nothing .

Quote:I already have proved it.

Not even close 

---

(May 11, 2018 at 2:46 am)Kit Wrote: Did you, though?  Be honest with yourself.

You ask for miracles my friend

Where is the propaganda?  Who did I call a name (which post)?

Yes, I did.

No, he doesn't.

(May 11, 2018 at 2:49 am)CDF47 Wrote:

(May 11, 2018 at 2:46 am)Kit Wrote: Did you, though?  Be honest with yourself.

Yes, I have.

If you honestly believe that, the fault lies with you that you are incapable of seeing how erroneous your thought processes are.  Have you provided a peer reviewed scientific article in relation to DNA being so complex that it undeniably proves the existence of a designer?

(May 11, 2018 at 2:53 am)Kit Wrote:

(May 11, 2018 at 2:49 am)CDF47 Wrote: Yes, I have.

If you honestly believe that, the fault lies with you that you are incapable of seeing how erroneous your thought processes are.  Have you provided a peer reviewed scientific article in relation to DNA being so complex that it undeniably proves the existence of a designer?

ID Peer Reviewed Articles:

https://www.discovery.org/id/peer-review/

(May 11, 2018 at 2:54 am)CDF47 Wrote:

(May 11, 2018 at 2:53 am)Kit Wrote: If you honestly believe that, the fault lies with you that you are incapable of seeing how erroneous your thought processes are.  Have you provided a peer reviewed scientific article in relation to DNA being so complex that it undeniably proves the existence of a designer?

ID Peer Reviewed Articles:

https://www.discovery.org/id/peer-review/

Quote:The [b]Discovery Institute[/b] ([b]DI[/b]) is a politically conservative[4][5][6] non-profit think tank based in Seattle, Washington, that advocates the pseudoscientific principle[7][8][9] of intelligent design (ID). Its "Teach the Controversy" campaign aims to permit teaching of anti-evolution, intelligent-design beliefs in United States public high school science courses in place of accepted scientific theories, positing that a scientific controversy exists over these subjects.[10][11][12][13][14][15][16]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_Institute

I'm not impressed, you'll have to try much harder.

(May 11, 2018 at 2:58 am)Kit Wrote:

(May 11, 2018 at 2:54 am)CDF47 Wrote: ID Peer Reviewed Articles:

https://www.discovery.org/id/peer-review/

Quote:The [b]Discovery Institute[/b] ([b]DI[/b]) is a politically conservative[4][5][6] non-profit think tank based in Seattle, Washington, that advocates the pseudoscientific principle[7][8][9] of intelligent design (ID). Its "Teach the Controversy" campaign aims to permit teaching of anti-evolution, intelligent-design beliefs in United States public high school science courses in place of accepted scientific theories, positing that a scientific controversy exists over these subjects.[10][11][12][13][14][15][16]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_Institute

I'm not impressed, you'll have to try much harder.

That specific Wikipedia article, which cannot be edited, is complete bias BS.

(May 11, 2018 at 3:05 am)CDF47 Wrote:

(May 11, 2018 at 2:58 am)Kit Wrote: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_Institute

I'm not impressed, you'll have to try much harder.

That specific Wikipedia article, which cannot be edited, is complete bias BS.

Sure~

(May 11, 2018 at 3:05 am)Kit Wrote:

(May 11, 2018 at 3:05 am)CDF47 Wrote: That specific Wikipedia article, which cannot be edited, is complete bias BS.

Sure~

Glad you're in agreement.