Posts: 67166
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
162
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 4, 2019 at 9:38 pm
You haven’t pointed out any flaw in the existing theory, John.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 19789
Threads: 57
Joined: September 24, 2010
Reputation:
85
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 4, 2019 at 9:39 pm
(This post was last modified: August 4, 2019 at 9:41 pm by Anomalocaris.)
(August 4, 2019 at 9:38 pm)Gae Bolga Wrote: You haven’t pointed out any flaw in the existing theory, John.
The flaw is it doesn’t accord with his opinion. His salvation, in his opinion, depends on his opinion being right because in his opinion, Jesus told him that is the right opinion.
Posts: 1697
Threads: 15
Joined: August 2, 2019
Reputation:
6
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 4, 2019 at 9:44 pm
(August 4, 2019 at 9:38 pm)Gae Bolga Wrote: You haven’t pointed out any flaw in the existing theory, John.
I agree, I really haven't. I've said numerous times that nothing in the OP is controversial; I'm only pointing to an explanatory gap which you are welcome, and even encouraged, to fill in with evolutionary accounts. For all I know, the answer is already out there, and one of you have come across it and can share it with me.
Posts: 9915
Threads: 53
Joined: November 27, 2015
Reputation:
92
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 4, 2019 at 9:52 pm
(This post was last modified: August 4, 2019 at 10:31 pm by LadyForCamus.)
(August 4, 2019 at 9:26 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: (August 4, 2019 at 9:15 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: Well, sure it does, implicitly. “If the eye couldn’t have evolved, Therefore Jesus”, right? I mean, if you’re a Christian then that is your argument. It kind of has to be, or else you aren’t a Christian, lol. And I’m pointing out that your argument from ignorance is fallacious. Do you not believe that god created everything? You can’t expect atheists to explain the evolution of the eye to you down to the finest detail, while not proffering any sort of mechanism for your own hypothesis. Remember, lying for Jesus is still lying.
Christianity is more in conflict with origins than it is with whatever happens after. Evolution falls in the safe zone, which as a mechanism it doesn't say anything about origins. But to be fair, if a conflict does exist, then I'm sure most Christians would say "God did it, therefore it couldn't have evolved" not "It couldn't have evolved, therefore God did it."
I'm not sure why a new hypothesis needs to be offered in order to point out that the existing one is flawed? Can you expound on that further?
One doesn’t. But, if you, a Christian, came here to an atheist forum with the intention of pointing out a perceived flaw in evolution and then tipping your hat at us on the way out without a word about Christ, I’ll eat both my shoes. Do you think this is our first rodeo?
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.
Posts: 1697
Threads: 15
Joined: August 2, 2019
Reputation:
6
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 4, 2019 at 9:58 pm
(August 4, 2019 at 9:52 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: (August 4, 2019 at 9:26 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: Christianity is more in conflict with origins than it is with whatever happens after. Evolution falls in the safe zone, which as a mechanism it doesn't say anything about origins. But to be fair, if a conflict does exist, then I'm sure most Christians would say "God did it, therefore it couldn't have evolved" not "It couldn't have evolved, therefore God did it."
I'm not sure why a new hypothesis needs to be offered in order to point out that the existing one is flawed? Can you expound on that further?
One doesn’t. But, if you, a Christian, came here to an atheist forum with the intention of pointing out a perceived flaw in evolution, then tipping your hat at us on the way out without a word about Christ, I’ll eat both my shoes. Do you think this is our first rodeo?
Don't worry, I don't think this is your first rodeo. The ecological fallacy only occurs when inference about an individual are deduced from assumptions about a group. The purpose of memory is to guide future behavior, so its understandable why you would look towards previous experiences and apply them to your interactions with me.
Posts: 19789
Threads: 57
Joined: September 24, 2010
Reputation:
85
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 4, 2019 at 10:00 pm
(August 4, 2019 at 9:58 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: (August 4, 2019 at 9:52 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: One doesn’t. But, if you, a Christian, came here to an atheist forum with the intention of pointing out a perceived flaw in evolution, then tipping your hat at us on the way out without a word about Christ, I’ll eat both my shoes. Do you think this is our first rodeo?
Don't worry, I don't think this is your first rodeo. The ecological fallacy only occurs when inference about an individual are deduced from assumptions about a group. The purpose of memory is to guide future behavior, so its understandable why you would look towards previous experiences and apply them to your interactions with me.
“No” would suffice in literal meaning, but would be gravely deficient in airs.
Posts: 3413
Threads: 25
Joined: August 9, 2015
Reputation:
27
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 4, 2019 at 10:30 pm
(August 4, 2019 at 9:52 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: (August 4, 2019 at 9:26 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: Christianity is more in conflict with origins than it is with whatever happens after. Evolution falls in the safe zone, which as a mechanism it doesn't say anything about origins. But to be fair, if a conflict does exist, then I'm sure most Christians would say "God did it, therefore it couldn't have evolved" not "It couldn't have evolved, therefore God did it."
I'm not sure why a new hypothesis needs to be offered in order to point out that the existing one is flawed? Can you expound on that further?
One doesn’t. But, if you, a Christian, came here to an atheist forum with the intention of pointing out a perceived flaw in evolution, then tipping your hat at us on the way out without a word about Christ, I’ll eat both my shoes. Do you think this is our first rodeo?
So this isn't our usual sock filled friend? I assumed he was being he skipped the intro entirely and went straight into the rhetoric.
"For the only way to eternal glory is a life lived in service of our Lord, FSM; Verily it is FSM who is the perfect being the name higher than all names, king of all kings and will bestow upon us all, one day, The great reclaiming" -The Prophet Boiardi-
Conservative trigger warning.
Posts: 9915
Threads: 53
Joined: November 27, 2015
Reputation:
92
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 4, 2019 at 10:33 pm
(August 4, 2019 at 9:58 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: (August 4, 2019 at 9:52 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: One doesn’t. But, if you, a Christian, came here to an atheist forum with the intention of pointing out a perceived flaw in evolution, then tipping your hat at us on the way out without a word about Christ, I’ll eat both my shoes. Do you think this is our first rodeo?
Don't worry, I don't think this is your first rodeo. The ecological fallacy only occurs when inference about an individual are deduced from assumptions about a group. The purpose of memory is to guide future behavior, so its understandable why you would look towards previous experiences and apply them to your interactions with me.
Is Christ your savior?
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.
Posts: 5664
Threads: 219
Joined: June 20, 2016
Reputation:
61
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 4, 2019 at 10:34 pm
(August 4, 2019 at 10:30 pm)Nay_Sayer Wrote: (August 4, 2019 at 9:52 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: One doesn’t. But, if you, a Christian, came here to an atheist forum with the intention of pointing out a perceived flaw in evolution, then tipping your hat at us on the way out without a word about Christ, I’ll eat both my shoes. Do you think this is our first rodeo?
So this isn't our usual sock filled friend? I assumed he was being he skipped the intro entirely and went straight into the rhetoric.
John is not a sock. I have been arguing with him for years. For what it is worth!
God thinks it's fun to confuse primates. Larsen's God!
Posts: 1697
Threads: 15
Joined: August 2, 2019
Reputation:
6
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 4, 2019 at 10:36 pm
(August 4, 2019 at 10:34 pm)chimp3 Wrote: (August 4, 2019 at 10:30 pm)Nay_Sayer Wrote: So this isn't our usual sock filled friend? I assumed he was being he skipped the intro entirely and went straight into the rhetoric.
John is not a sock. I have been arguing with him for years. For what it is worth!
What is a sock lol. And what is the introduction I skipped?
|
![[Image: s-l640.jpg]](https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/DjAAAOSwpIhe1HCM/s-l640.jpg)
