RE: Why did Communists promote Evolution?
July 27, 2023 at 11:07 pm
(This post was last modified: July 27, 2023 at 11:21 pm by The Architect Of Fate.)
Quote:Lol. I'll take just 2 for now.Good thing I didn't say any of that.
"The Atheist No True Scotsman/Scientist Logical Fallacy:
"1. I, an Atheist, dogmatically affirm that No True Scientist could ever possibly support Creation and/or Intelligent Design.
2. I am then presented with loads of unimpeachable evidence that Scientists with the highest of Academic Credentials do this.
3. Therefore, I, an Atheist, affirm that, since No True Scientist could ever possibly support Creation and/or Intelligent Design (as I, an Atheist, stated without proving it in the first premise), therefore Creation Scientists and ID Scientists are allegedly not Scientists."
Sophisms, sophisms, and more sophisms.
Saying Denton should submit his work to peer review is not saying he's not a scientist and A creationist can be a scientist with credentials while their belief creationism is not science. Just like a believer in free energy can be an engineer that doesn't make free energy a valid engineering principle. And anyone who pushes something that's not science as science is a crank regardless of credentials or academic achievement.
You are really bad at this
As for your second "argument," it's of no relevance so i don't really care
"Change was inevitable"
Nemo sicut deus debet esse!
“No matter what men think, abortion is a fact of life. Women have always had them; they always have and they always will. Are they going to have good ones or bad ones? Will the good ones be reserved for the rich, while the poor women go to quacks?”
–SHIRLEY CHISHOLM
Nemo sicut deus debet esse!
“No matter what men think, abortion is a fact of life. Women have always had them; they always have and they always will. Are they going to have good ones or bad ones? Will the good ones be reserved for the rich, while the poor women go to quacks?”
–SHIRLEY CHISHOLM