(May 20, 2016 at 11:18 am)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote:(May 20, 2016 at 11:14 am)LadyForCamus Wrote: And it's on purpose, and it's not the first time he's done it:
Direct quote from AAA out of the most recent "Intelligent Design" thread back in November:
"It isn't without evidence. Did you read the last response where I listed many intricate systems? Can you honestly tell me that it doesn't at least give the appearance of design? Even Richard Dawkins acknowledges that life gives the appearance of being designed for a purpose. He just thinks that this is an illusion. It is not irrational or an assertion to say that the appearance of design may be due to the fact that it was designed. Why do I have to do mental gymnastics to avoid the obvious conclusion to try to find some other answer that may or may not exist?"
He knows exactly what he's doing.
Yep. And that's why I mock and condescend to him. And rather enjoy his "innocent" protestations.
I have no patience for people who refer to a generic chapter title, and use false equivalence arguments that have been debunked here (and everywhere else), and who disrespect the work of those scientists and authors by misrepresenting the claims they make.
People like this deserve nothing but scorn.
Ugh...what is their end game then, if it's intentional? In AAA's case, is it just to stir the pot for the fun of it? Or do you think he actually believes he can sucker someone into believing?
Nay_Sayer: “Nothing is impossible if you dream big enough, or in this case, nothing is impossible if you use a barrel of KY Jelly and a miniature horse.”
Wiser words were never spoken.
Wiser words were never spoken.
