RE: Evolution Theory - please show the proofs
August 26, 2010 at 4:17 pm
(This post was last modified: August 26, 2010 at 6:18 pm by TheDarkestOfAngels.)
(August 26, 2010 at 4:00 pm)Minimalist Wrote: True, but the next asshole to come along will demand to see a crocoduck fossil, too.
These people aren't just stupid. They are intentionally stupid.
I honestly think that this is where everything would lead. I think it's why Nogodaloud didn't bother to state his own position on several of these matters because it would be far more apparent of his illogical superstitions than his fallacious arguementation style.
Self-induced ignorance. He didn't come here to learn, to honestly debate, or have an open mind. He came here to prove god by telling us what proof we can show and limiting the debate so it was intentionally designed for our position to fail.
His one question concerning the MIT paper was proof of that. He wasn't interested in hearing that the entire paper was about evolution. He wanted one quote from it that proved evolution for me.
I said it was invalid and he wouldn't accept that answer as anything other than "I don't have proof." Pure strawman. You can't prove or disprove something based on one piece or one quote of one paper. It'd be like being forced to prove that a working Boeing 747 can fly based on one piece of its design, independantly of the rest of the plane.
I can't prove a plane can fly based on one jet engine, one wing, one fin, or the cockpit, or any other piece until I at least have enough of a plane to prove the concept any more than I can prove evolution because of one quote from one paper. I can at least make the case based on the overall paper but I can't prove evolution on any one part of it.
I would still be willing to bet that if this debate had continued and he did bother to actually state what we would need to do to prove 'macro-evolution' that we would have needed to prove croc-a-duck.
... or that brocolli can give birth to a girbil. (A video that I cannot unwatch.)
It was utterly ridiculous.
EDIT: By the by, what's the difference between being "Banned" and being "The Condemned"?
If today you can take a thing like evolution and make it a crime to teach in the public schools, tomorrow you can make it a crime to teach it in the private schools and next year you can make it a crime to teach it to the hustings or in the church. At the next session you may ban books and the newspapers...
Ignorance and fanaticism are ever busy and need feeding. Always feeding and gloating for more. Today it is the public school teachers; tomorrow the private. The next day the preachers and the lecturers, the magazines, the books, the newspapers. After a while, Your Honor, it is the setting of man against man and creed against creed until with flying banners and beating drums we are marching backward to the glorious ages of the sixteenth centry when bigots lighted fagots to burn the men who dared to bring any intelligence and enlightenment and culture to the human mind. ~Clarence Darrow, at the Scopes Monkey Trial, 1925
Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first. ~Ronald Reagan
Ignorance and fanaticism are ever busy and need feeding. Always feeding and gloating for more. Today it is the public school teachers; tomorrow the private. The next day the preachers and the lecturers, the magazines, the books, the newspapers. After a while, Your Honor, it is the setting of man against man and creed against creed until with flying banners and beating drums we are marching backward to the glorious ages of the sixteenth centry when bigots lighted fagots to burn the men who dared to bring any intelligence and enlightenment and culture to the human mind. ~Clarence Darrow, at the Scopes Monkey Trial, 1925
Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first. ~Ronald Reagan