Posts: 3022
Threads: 34
Joined: May 11, 2013
Reputation:
30
RE: Argument #1: Transitional Fossils
April 24, 2014 at 6:39 pm
(April 24, 2014 at 6:09 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: Hold on just one cotton pickin' minute! You guys are putting me in a no win situation here.
1. I present an argument and it is ok for everyone to quote any source they want. I use AIG and I get lambasted.
At no point has anyone said its OK to use any source you want. Of course, you can paste whatever link you like but if you want us to believe what the link says, you better make sure it is reliable. AIG is not reliable for reasons stated earlier.
(April 24, 2014 at 6:09 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: 2. I put down a link with info to address an issue and I get a warning.
After being told again and again to stop doing it
(April 24, 2014 at 6:09 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: 3. I use quotes from Darwin and other scientists and I'm quote mining and called a liar.
You are a liar, unless you didn't read the quotes you posted. And you did quote mine. You took a chunk of text and left out the bits that would clarify the scientists position. That is exactly what quote mining is.
(April 24, 2014 at 6:09 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: 4. I share my beliefs and I'm called a nut and a ignoramus
You are called a nut and an ignoramus because you don't listen to anyone. Your standard of evidence for your god is laughably low while your standard of evidence for evolution is laughably high. And all this while not understanding the theory you are trying to debunk.
(April 24, 2014 at 6:09 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: 5. I make a slight joke and I get raked over the coals
You have not been making 'slight jokes' you respond to serious questions with them as a way of evading the question becasue you don't have an answer.
(April 24, 2014 at 6:09 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: 6. One of your atheist buddies tears me down and they get kudos and high fives
I can't speak for everyone here but when I give a kudos to someone it is because I agree with what they said or I thought the comment was funny. Apparently a lot of people think you are an idiot.
(April 24, 2014 at 6:09 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: what gives?
You ridicule and try to debunk a theory that you don't even understand. You display a great ignorance of the scientific method. You have lied repeatedly. You don't listen to anything anyone says. You keep posting links to creationist propaganda. Anything else?
'The more I learn about people the more I like my dog'- Mark Twain
'You can have all the faith you want in spirits, and the afterlife, and heaven and hell, but when it comes to this world, don't be an idiot. Cause you can tell me you put your faith in God to put you through the day, but when it comes time to cross the road, I know you look both ways.' - Dr House
“Young earth creationism is essentially the position that all of modern science, 90% of living scientists and 98% of living biologists, all major university biology departments, every major science journal, the American Academy of Sciences, and every major science organization in the world, are all wrong regarding the origins and development of life….but one particular tribe of uneducated, bronze aged, goat herders got it exactly right.” - Chuck Easttom
"If my good friend Doctor Gasparri speaks badly of my mother, he can expect to get punched.....You cannot provoke. You cannot insult the faith of others. You cannot make fun of the faith of others. There is a limit." - Pope Francis on freedom of speech
Posts: 1246
Threads: 14
Joined: January 5, 2014
Reputation:
9
RE: Argument #1: Transitional Fossils
April 24, 2014 at 6:40 pm
And rule#87 states.. no person or persons may use the term.. "cotton pickin" minute... not kool.. not kool..
Posts: 30974
Threads: 204
Joined: July 19, 2011
Reputation:
141
RE: Argument #1: Transitional Fossils
April 24, 2014 at 6:41 pm
Quote:2. I put down a link with info to address an issue and I get a warning.
Moderator hat on.
What gives is this is a *discussion* forum. Posting only a link or video as an argument or rebuttal is frowned upon here. As is quoting from sources without attribution or any indication that the material is not original. The former is contrary to the purpose of this forum, and the latter is dishonest.
In addition, you rarely respond to substantive rebuttals of your "arguments", if one can call them that. This runs contrary to the number one rule of this forum.
In short, this is a place to use your own words.
You are not being persecuted. The problem is with YOU.
Posts: 1246
Threads: 14
Joined: January 5, 2014
Reputation:
9
RE: Argument #1: Transitional Fossils
April 24, 2014 at 6:43 pm
(This post was last modified: April 24, 2014 at 6:44 pm by truthBtold.)
(April 24, 2014 at 6:41 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: Quote:2. I put down a link with info to address an issue and I get a warning.
Moderator hat on.
What gives is this is a *discussion* forum. Posting only a link or video as an argument or rebuttal is frowned upon here. As is quoting from sources without attribution or any indication that the material is not original. The former is contrary to the purpose of this forum, and the latter is dishonest.
In addition, you rarely respond to substantive rebuttals of your "arguments", if one can call them that. This runs contrary to the number one rule of this forum.
In short, this is a place to use your own words.
You are not being persecuted. The problem is with YOU.
Yes yes.... bring the rain...
I havent had this much fun since I watched a cock fight in a whore house...
Posts: 3634
Threads: 20
Joined: July 20, 2011
Reputation:
47
RE: Argument #1: Transitional Fossils
April 24, 2014 at 6:49 pm
(This post was last modified: April 24, 2014 at 6:52 pm by Simon Moon.)
(April 24, 2014 at 6:09 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: Hold on just one cotton pickin' minute! You guys are putting me in a no win situation here.
Do you honestly want to know how to improve your situation?
Provide us with demonstrable, testable, falsifiable evidence that supports your position.
Don't quote from organizations that are known to use dishonest tactics.
When someone refutes one of your obvious straw man arguments, admit that you were wrong. Or provide demonstrable evidence that supports your position.
Explain why none of the so called 'creation scientists' have ever shown up at a major scientific conference, or have submitted any papers to science journals.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
Posts: 5598
Threads: 112
Joined: July 16, 2012
Reputation:
74
RE: Argument #1: Transitional Fossils
April 24, 2014 at 6:50 pm
(April 24, 2014 at 6:09 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: 4. I share my beliefs and I'm called a nut and a ignoramus
If I came into your living room, uninvited, and threw a bag of dog shit in your face, would you appreciate how much I like to share? Because that's what you're doing here. You are a nut and you are an ignoramus. If you don't want us referring to you as such, stop earning the titles.
Posts: 1246
Threads: 14
Joined: January 5, 2014
Reputation:
9
RE: Argument #1: Transitional Fossils
April 24, 2014 at 6:52 pm
(April 24, 2014 at 6:50 pm)Ryantology (╯°◊°)╯︵ ══╬ Wrote: (April 24, 2014 at 6:09 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: 4. I share my beliefs and I'm called a nut and a ignoramus
If I came into your living room, uninvited, and threw a bag of dog shit in your face, would you appreciate how much I like to share? Because that's what you're doing here. You are a nut and you are an ignoramus. If you don't want us referring to you as such, stop earning the titles.
If u came to my house with that avitar.. I would motor boat u.... bbbbbbbbrrrbbbrbbrbbrbb
Posts: 15351
Threads: 118
Joined: January 13, 2014
Reputation:
117
RE: Argument #1: Transitional Fossils
April 24, 2014 at 6:53 pm
(April 24, 2014 at 6:09 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: Hold on just one cotton pickin' minute! You guys are putting me in a no win situation here.
1. I present an argument and it is ok for everyone to quote any source they want. I use AIG and I get lambasted. If any of us were to quote an unreliable source, we too would get lambasted. You're not special. If you want to quote sources evaluating science, you had better quote scientific ones, and not sources that start with the proposition that science cannot be correct.
(April 24, 2014 at 6:09 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: 2. I put down a link with info to address an issue and I get a warning. Not involved with this process, but I would imagine it came from when you plagiarized in this post. This is an example of you outright lying, representing those ideas as your own.
(April 24, 2014 at 6:09 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: 3. I use quotes from Darwin and other scientists and I'm quote mining and called a liar. You, intentionally or not, used people's words out of context. Coyne's and Schwartz's quotes in particular. You posted part of a quote, leaving out the important parts that would make the author's position clear, and most importantly different from the use you were making it out to be. This is another example of you lying.
(April 24, 2014 at 6:09 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: 4. I share my beliefs and I'm called a nut and a ignoramus Welcome to atheistforums.org.
(April 24, 2014 at 6:09 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: 5. I make a slight joke and I get raked over the coals When everything you post is superficial and disengaged, forgive us for not recognizing when you are joking.
(April 24, 2014 at 6:09 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: 6. One of your atheist buddies tears me down and they get kudos and high fives Around here, you get kudos for an especially astute refutation, a good joke, or just a thought well put down. Kudos doesn't necessarily translate to quality of post, though. Don't read too much into it.
(April 24, 2014 at 6:09 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: what gives? What gives is that we are tired of the same old Rev. You refuse to engage, you cannot back up your assertions, you continuously post links to wholly refuted websites, you have lied to us, been completely disrespectful to us, and then you act like a martyr when we call you out on it.
Sorry, but it doesn't work the way you want it to just because. Earn it.
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great
PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---
Posts: 19789
Threads: 57
Joined: September 24, 2010
Reputation:
85
RE: Argument #1: Transitional Fossils
April 24, 2014 at 7:12 pm
(April 24, 2014 at 6:09 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: Hold on just one cotton pickin' minute! You guys are putting me in a no win situation here.
1. I present an argument and it is ok for everyone to quote any source they want. I use AIG and I get lambasted.
2. I put down a link with info to address an issue and I get a warning.
3. I use quotes from Darwin and other scientists and I'm quote mining and called a liar.
4. I share my beliefs and I'm called a nut and a ignoramus
5. I make a slight joke and I get raked over the coals
6. One of your atheist buddies tears me down and they get kudos and high fives
what gives?
Half of the game is the quality of the source, most of the rest is how you use or misuse the sources.
It's not what you believe. It is what you can show to be true.
A good quality source is one that propounds position that the author and those interested in critically scrutinizing the author can show to be true.
The ways to misuse the source are:
1. Cite the quality source as an authority on a topics different from that in which the source has established its reputation for quality. Darwin's reputation is in the basic mechanics of natural selection. His reputation is not in having more clue than anyone else whether god exists or not.
2. Borrow the name of an quality source to say things different from what the source actually said
3. Invoke a source that was good for its time but has since been surpassed.
4. Pick phrases, sentences and passages from a quality source in such a way that it appear to read differently, and carry a different meaning, then what the source clearly intended.
This is the rule of the game. If you can't follow it, don't play.
Posts: 19644
Threads: 177
Joined: July 31, 2012
Reputation:
92
RE: Argument #1: Transitional Fossils
April 24, 2014 at 7:18 pm
(This post was last modified: April 24, 2014 at 7:19 pm by pocaracas.)
I can use ANY link and be taken seriously?!
REALLY?!?!
Landover Baptist Church forums Wrote:Mrs. Mary Whitford:
I was thinking about this today. According to the Darwinists, we came from monkeys. Monkeys have tails. So if why came from monkeys, why don't we have tails? WHERE IS MY TAIL, EVILUTIONISTS?!? I don't have one! 100% PROOF that EVILUTION IS A LIE!!!
Bob4God:
You know I have never met an evolutionist who could honestly and intelligently answer that question?
Another thing I'd like to know is, if humans came from monkeys, how come there aren't monkeys giving birth to humans to this day?
Pastor Ezekiel:
I'd also like to know what the atheists say to this: If humans "evolved" from monkeys, how come there are still monkeys in the world? Why didn't the ones in the zoo turn into humans?
There you have it atheists!
Check-mate!
|
