(January 22, 2019 at 11:58 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote:

(January 22, 2019 at 11:32 pm)CDF47 Wrote: What's the problem now??  There are some absolute truths and laws of this universe you do realize?

Your first sentence caused my eyebrows to shoot up to the top of my head by implying that, inspite of your behavior thus far, there might actually exist an infinitesimal possibility that you can be taught.

Then the second sentence set me right again.

How's that?

(January 23, 2019 at 12:03 am)CDF47 Wrote:

(January 22, 2019 at 11:58 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote:


Your first sentence caused my eyebrows to shoot up to the top of my head by implying that, inspite of your behavior thus far, there might actually exist an infinitesimal possibility that you can be taught.

Then the second sentence set me right again.

How's that?

The second sentence makes it clear that you continue to think that a Jesus freak like you know anything real at all.

(January 22, 2019 at 11:37 pm)CDF47 Wrote:

(January 22, 2019 at 9:31 pm)Peebo-Thuhlu Wrote:  Uhm... no.

My post was a question. To which, if you notice, you (CDF47) reply with exactly the words I posted and in the affirmative.

---

Which thence kind of shows where CDF47's mind is at in regards to thier even cursory understanding of anything scince related.

Sadly, this open and acknowledging comment leaves no room for doubt as to CDF47 complete lack of understanding on the conversation and the topic at hand.

Pretty sure the thread's main purpose is over now. CDF47 doesn't even understand the very basic tennent of which they're actually trying to make a point for.

All the very best CDF47.

I did not use your exact words.  What are you talking about.  I had to re-phrase the entire thing to make it accurate.  

And, yes, I do understand the conversation and topic at hand.

---

(January 22, 2019 at 10:12 pm)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote: I think maybe you're both confusing each other.  He's suggesting something partially, but your conclusions are kinda "out there" too.

I don't want to speak for him, but looking at it based on what I know so far is him trying to say that the way DNA works as a code couldn't have happened without intelligent input.    In other words, the design of the code proves a Designer.

Yes, no where in there do I mention the Intelligent Design movement.  My point is on DNA.

---

(January 22, 2019 at 10:33 pm)Peebo-Thuhlu Wrote:

---

---

(January 22, 2019 at 10:12 pm)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote: I think maybe you're both confusing each other.  He's suggesting something partially, but your conclusions are kinda "out there" too.

I don't want to speak for him, but looking at it based on what I know so far is him trying to say that the way DNA works as a code couldn't have happened without intelligent input.    In other words, the design of the code proves a Designer.

 

It's the "Nothing can falsify it" bit where CDF47 jumps the shark, M4X.
Though bravo for padding up and stepping onto the crease for CDF47.
Rather sad that he's already swung his bat back through the stumps.
Still... we'll see how long the thread continues to run.

I say in the OP that it is proven so this nothing new where I state nothing can falsify it.
[/quote]

 You are now REPEATING that the concept of I.D. cannot be falsified.

I am not misquoting you.

Perhaps trying to say your thoughts using different words?

Are you not now wording better-er?

(January 23, 2019 at 12:05 am)Anomalocaris Wrote:

(January 23, 2019 at 12:03 am)CDF47 Wrote: How's that?

The second sentence makes it clear that you continue to think that a Jesus freak like you know anything real at all.

Can you argue the facts rather than try to throw sand in the eyes.  It's a manipulative debate tactic that gets no where quick.

---

(January 23, 2019 at 12:07 am)Peebo-Thuhlu Wrote:

(January 22, 2019 at 11:37 pm)CDF47 Wrote: I did not use your exact words.  What are you talking about.  I had to re-phrase the entire thing to make it accurate.  

And, yes, I do understand the conversation and topic at hand.

---

Yes, no where in there do I mention the Intelligent Design movement.  My point is on DNA.

---

---

 

It's the "Nothing can falsify it" bit where CDF47 jumps the shark, M4X.
Though bravo for padding up and stepping onto the crease for CDF47.
Rather sad that he's already swung his bat back through the stumps.
Still... we'll see how long the thread continues to run.

I say in the OP that it is proven so this nothing new where I state nothing can falsify it.

Quote: You are now REPEATING that the concept of I.D. cannot be falsified.

I am not misquoting you.

Perhaps trying to say your thoughts using different words?

Are you not now wording better-er?

Where do I state the concept of ID?

(January 23, 2019 at 12:21 am)CDF47 Wrote:

(January 23, 2019 at 12:05 am)Anomalocaris Wrote: The second sentence makes it clear that you continue to think that a Jesus freak like you know anything real at all.

Can you argue the facts rather than try to throw sand in the eyes.  It's a manipulative debate tactic that gets no where quick.

Talking to you about reality is a tactic that gets nowhere quick, within the first 25 posts or in in this interminable thread, as a Matter of fact.

(January 23, 2019 at 12:21 am)CDF47 Wrote:

---

Where do I state the concept of ID?

No CDF47.

It's not whether or not you extrapolate as what the ideas are behind/for I.D.

At this point it is that you have posted multiple (Like three?) time that:

 "I say in the OP that it is proven so this nothing new where I state nothing can falsify it."

So... again I ask you for sake of clarity.

What might possibly falsify the ideas I.D. ?

(January 23, 2019 at 12:27 am)Anomalocaris Wrote:

(January 23, 2019 at 12:21 am)CDF47 Wrote: Can you argue the facts rather than try to throw sand in the eyes.  It's a manipulative debate tactic that gets no where quick.

Talking to you about reality is a tactic that gets nowhere quick, within the first 25 posts or in in this interminable thread, as a Matter of fact.

OK, I feel the same about you.

---

(January 23, 2019 at 12:43 am)Peebo-Thuhlu Wrote:

(January 23, 2019 at 12:21 am)CDF47 Wrote:

---

Where do I state the concept of ID?

No CDF47.

It's not whether or not you extrapolate as what the ideas are behind/for I.D.

At this point it is that you have posted multiple (Like three?) time that:

 "I say in the OP that it is proven so this nothing new where I state nothing can falsify it."

So... again I ask you for sake of clarity.

What might possibly falsify the ideas I.D. ?

Not sure what would falisfy some ID ideas.  That has nothing to do with the fact that the information bearing properties of DNA proves the Creator's existence.

1k pages later and it still hasn't.

(January 23, 2019 at 12:44 am)CDF47 Wrote: Not sure what would falisfy some ID ideas.  That has nothing to do with the fact that the information bearing properties of DNA proves the Creator's existence.

Okay.. so you can't think of something that would/might falsify I.D.

Got it.

Could you go off and find some one who has gotten an idea of what would falsify I.D ?

Please post your definite thoughts on whether the ideas of I.D. can be falsified?

Here's the same idea from the evolution side of things.

To make the same claim about Evolution, one could make the claim that:

"To falsify the aspect of the fossil record bolstering the current theory of evolution one needs but find a rabbit fossil along side a trilobite."

Interestingly. You can run that idea kind of in reverse. Such that.

"I predict, using the theory of evolution and how fosils relate to said theory that if we go to certain rocks of a certain age we will find a fossil of this type of life form."

To whit the rpediction and subsequent finding of the fossil of Tiktaalik.

Hence, my previous question to yourself CDF47 about what the current ideas of I.D. might actually predict about life if we might find such on the moons of Jupiter or Saturn?

(January 22, 2019 at 3:32 pm)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote:

(January 22, 2019 at 2:21 pm)pocaracas Wrote: LOL. I don't remember making any claim.
I'm just trying to educate you on the subject of evolution. You're the one excusing yourself in order to maintain your ignorance.
Good luck with that.

I don't need you to educate me, nor did I ask.  If someone makes a claim, they should support it.  If you want to help them, that's your choice.  If you don't care to, and they don't, then I don't care either.  Not going on a hunt for information people claim exists if they don't even know where it exists.

Maybe I'm trying to educate you on the subject of evolution, because that was the claim? That evolution works and can provide a satisfactory explanation for how a self-replicating structure is also responsible for putting together a few proteins that enable it to perform that self-replication in ever more efficient ways?

Honestly, I no longer remember what the claim was... you manage to argue with people in such a way that it all gets lost in a swarm of useless words.
To prove this point, you're going to address this last phrase, while ignoring the question marks above where I basically ask (like many have) "what was the claim that you want proof for?"
And, just because I pointed it out, now you're going to do exactly that.
And, because I now added this, you might just decide to ignore this whole post.

Best of luck with that!