RE: Genesis Creation vs. Darwin's Macroevolution Myth
June 23, 2013 at 9:27 pm
(This post was last modified: June 23, 2013 at 9:31 pm by Alter2Ego.)
(June 23, 2013 at 8:31 pm)popeyespappy Wrote: Unfortunately A2E I am forced by your posts on this forum to agree with the mod's assessment of you. The only difference is I would add intentionally ignorant before moron.ALTER2EGO -to- POPEYES PAPPY:
Unfortunately, popeyespappy, when the moderator Stimbo referred to me as a "maroon," it was because Stimbo thought I was the one making the fallacious claim that evolution "theory" is fact. It turns out that Esquilax was the one making that fallacious claim about "theory" being fact and I was merely correcting Esquilax.
(June 14, 2013 at 3:24 am)Esquilax Wrote: No: because over a century of science says so. You know, that "the earth was once thought to be X, therefore science can't be trusted" argument is so flawed; once we had the ability to test it it became pretty quickly clear that a flat earth, or a geocentric universe, or whatever else was untenable.
But when we gained the ability to test evolution, multiple times over since we've developed genetic, geological and observational tests since the inception of the theory, evolution only becomes a more clear fact. We keep running tests... and those tests keep confirming that evolution is true.
In other words, the title of "maroon" was misdirected. It was intended for the person (Esquilax) who was making the claim about "theory" being a fact. Notice again what Stimbo said at Post 126. This time, keep your eyes on the words that are bolded in light blue.
(June 23, 2013 at 8:47 am)Stimbo Wrote:(June 22, 2013 at 7:32 pm)Alter2Ego Wrote: ALTER2EGO -to- EQUILAX:
FYI: There is no such thing as "evolution fact." There is only evolution theory, and theories are merely attempts at explaining why a phenomena occurred. Or didn't you realize that?
Anyone feel like telling this maroon that theories explain how - not why - phenomena occur, that they are made up of facts and laws, and that no amount of testing will turn a theory into a fact because they are totally different things (it would be like expecting a painting of a sunset to turn into the real landscape)?
Because clearly s/he doesn't reaise that.
@ popeyespappy:
Did you see why Stimbo used to word "maroon"? It was directed at the person who argued that evolution "theory" is fact, and Stimbo thought I was the one arguing it. As you can see, I was arguing against evolution theory being fact.
Now you have also made the same fallacious claim about "theory" being "fact." According to Stimbo, a person who thinks "theory" is fact is a "maroon". You follow my drift?
