More proof evolution fails

[AndyDufresne]

I feel like the Off Topics forum is a prime example of evolution failing. **Barun-chink**

But on topic. What? What? What?


--Andy

[saxitoxin]

I don't understand why the evolution deniers don't just accept evolution and claim that God made it that way.

Few evolution deniers actually believe the science is wrong without believing that because of their religion, and therein lies the rub. To deny the validity of the Bible is to deny the validity of Christianity - because if one doesn't believe in the set of stories presented in the Bible, then Christianity is simply a way, as George Carlin excellently put it, for people to gather and compare clothes once a week. It would be no different from any generic belief, and functionally no different from abiding by a set of moral rules which happened to coincide with the ten commandments. These people aren't just believers in a higher power; they're a member of a social group, which powerfully shapes their views.

I am heartened that you have decided to set down, for a moment, the pitchfork and torch, excuse yourself from the mob you were forming and once again swing the pendulum of cognition back to Reason.

(We'll see how long it stays this time before swinging back in the roller-coaster of emotion that marks Met posts.)

While I agree with Mets I, nonetheless, am infinitely amused by the use of situational selective logic, posited without any sense of self-awareness.

[Metsfanmax]

I don't understand why the evolution deniers don't just accept evolution and claim that God made it that way.

Few evolution deniers actually believe the science is wrong without believing that because of their religion, and therein lies the rub. To deny the validity of the Bible is to deny the validity of Christianity - because if one doesn't believe in the set of stories presented in the Bible, then Christianity is simply a way, as George Carlin excellently put it, for people to gather and compare clothes once a week. It would be no different from any generic belief, and functionally no different from abiding by a set of moral rules which happened to coincide with the ten commandments. These people aren't just believers in a higher power; they're a member of a social group, which powerfully shapes their views.

I am heartened that you have decided to set down, for a moment, the pitchfork and torch, excuse yourself from the mob you were forming and once again swing the pendulum of cognition back to Reason.

(We'll see how long it stays this time before swinging back in the roller-coaster of emotion that marks Met posts.)

While I agree with Mets I, nonetheless, am infinitely amused by the use of situational selective logic, posited without any sense of self-awareness.

It is a logical fallacy to assume that emotion and logic are mutually exclusive. I may post emotionally, but everything I say is logically justified to the best of my knowledge.

[saxitoxin]

I don't understand why the evolution deniers don't just accept evolution and claim that God made it that way.

Few evolution deniers actually believe the science is wrong without believing that because of their religion, and therein lies the rub. To deny the validity of the Bible is to deny the validity of Christianity - because if one doesn't believe in the set of stories presented in the Bible, then Christianity is simply a way, as George Carlin excellently put it, for people to gather and compare clothes once a week. It would be no different from any generic belief, and functionally no different from abiding by a set of moral rules which happened to coincide with the ten commandments. These people aren't just believers in a higher power; they're a member of a social group, which powerfully shapes their views.

I am heartened that you have decided to set down, for a moment, the pitchfork and torch, excuse yourself from the mob you were forming and once again swing the pendulum of cognition back to Reason.

(We'll see how long it stays this time before swinging back in the roller-coaster of emotion ampthat marks Met posts.)

While I agree with Mets I, nonetheless, am infinitely amused by the use of situational selective logic, posited without any sense of self-awareness.

It is a logical fallacy to assume that emotion and logic are mutually exclusive. I may post emotionally, but everything I say is logically justified to the best of my knowledge.

Oh no! After all this you're really still seeing these phantasms? We've demonstrated, repeatedly, your situational application of logic in ways that confound the imagination and accost the reasoned senses. But still you're convinced you are a purveyor of Reason?

Mets - you're really Dr. John Nash, aren't you?

(BTW, with a tedious heart I feel it necessary to point-out your most recent logical fallacy. It's a logical fallacy - an amphiboly to be exact - to assume that "roller-coaster of emotion" equals "mutual exclusion of emotion and logic.")

[Metsfanmax]

I don't understand why the evolution deniers don't just accept evolution and claim that God made it that way.

Few evolution deniers actually believe the science is wrong without believing that because of their religion, and therein lies the rub. To deny the validity of the Bible is to deny the validity of Christianity - because if one doesn't believe in the set of stories presented in the Bible, then Christianity is simply a way, as George Carlin excellently put it, for people to gather and compare clothes once a week. It would be no different from any generic belief, and functionally no different from abiding by a set of moral rules which happened to coincide with the ten commandments. These people aren't just believers in a higher power; they're a member of a social group, which powerfully shapes their views.

I am heartened that you have decided to set down, for a moment, the pitchfork and torch, excuse yourself from the mob you were forming and once again swing the pendulum of cognition back to Reason.

(We'll see how long it stays this time before swinging back in the roller-coaster of emotion ampthat marks Met posts.)

While I agree with Mets I, nonetheless, am infinitely amused by the use of situational selective logic, posited without any sense of self-awareness.

It is a logical fallacy to assume that emotion and logic are mutually exclusive. I may post emotionally, but everything I say is logically justified to the best of my knowledge.

Oh no! After all this you're really still seeing these phantasms? We've demonstrated, repeatedly, your situational application of logic in ways that confound the imagination and accost the reasoned senses. But still you're convinced you are a purveyor of Reason?

Who exactly is "we," and when did said "we" actually demonstrate that? I recall no post where you actually showed in any way that I apply logic only selectively. You've simply asserted that without proof, and apparently you've said it enough times that you actually believe it now.

(BTW, with a tedious heart I feel it necessary to point-out your most recent logical fallacy. It's a logical fallacy - an amphiboly to be exact - to assume that "roller-coaster of emotion" equals "mutual exclusion of emotion and logic.")

I was referring to the "pendulum of cognition" analogy you made. Since the bob on a pendulum can only be at one place at one time, that analogy implies that I cannot post using both reason and emotion at the same time.

[saxitoxin]

Mets, after multiple posts across multiple threads I don't know how else to communicate to you the rocket ship ride you've been on. It's time to disembark. Ride's over.

[DirtyDishSoap]

Who cares?

People who understand that science is critical to our society.

If it really was critical I'd rather focus on the now then our past, dismiss religion and the theories of how we came about and have people start working on my flying car.

I want my flying car.

Developing a flying car requires understanding physics, aerodynamics, etc. While it is just barely possible to get those without knowledge upon which evolution is based, it is not possible to achieve much more without truly understanding science. Truly understanding science precludes believing young earth theories.

You don't have to know the constitution to know that you have rights in the US, but it helps!

Are you devolping my flying car? No?
Then poo on you!

[Metsfanmax]

Mets, after multiple posts across multiple threads I don't know how else to communicate to you the rocket ship ride you've been on. It's time to disembark. Ride's over.

That statement would have been correct if you had cut it off after the word communicate. You haven't said a single thing which makes any sense in the last two or three days; how do you expect me to understand the things you are supposedly trying to tell me? Every single one of your posts is an assertion without a warrant. That's no way to communicate to anyone.

[saxitoxin]

That statement would have been correct if you had cut it off after the word communicate. You haven't said a single thing which makes any sense [SAXI EDIT] to me [/SAXI EDIT] in the last two or three days; how do you expect me to understand the things you are supposedly trying to tell me? Every single one of your posts is an assertion without a warrant. That's no way to communicate to anyone.

Dog doesn't explain to his chew toy why he's fun.

Chew toy doesn't need to know.

Chew toy just needs to squeak when bitten.

[Metsfanmax]

That statement would have been correct if you had cut it off after the word communicate. You haven't said a single thing which makes any sense [SAXI EDIT] to me [/SAXI EDIT] in the last two or three days; how do you expect me to understand the things you are supposedly trying to tell me? Every single one of your posts is an assertion without a warrant. That's no way to communicate to anyone.

Dog doesn't explain to his chew toy why he's fun.

Chew toy doesn't need to know.

Chew toy just needs to squeak when bitten.

Well, as anyone who understands basic logic knows, asserting that something makes sense to you does not mean it is logically correct (after all, if that were not true, we'd have a lot less of an argument against the religious folk). Since I'm apparently intellectually inferior to you, I'm just going to assume that you have no idea what you're talking about, since you are apparently incapable of explaining it. How can you fault a chew toy for making such an obviously unjustified assumption?

[King Doctor]

That statement would have been correct if you had cut it off after the word communicate.

Confucius say: Maybe he should have cut it off before 'the' and only kept the last half?

[DirtyDishSoap]

That statement would have been correct if you had cut it off after the word communicate. You haven't said a single thing which makes any sense [SAXI EDIT] to me [/SAXI EDIT] in the last two or three days; how do you expect me to understand the things you are supposedly trying to tell me? Every single one of your posts is an assertion without a warrant. That's no way to communicate to anyone.

Dog doesn't explain to his chew toy why he's fun.

Chew toy doesn't need to know.

Chew toy just needs to squeak when bitten.

Well, as anyone who understands basic logic knows, asserting that something makes sense to you does not mean it is logically correct (after all, if that were not true, we'd have a lot less of an argument against the religious folk). Since I'm apparently intellectually inferior to you, I'm just going to assume that you have no idea what you're talking about, since you are apparently incapable of explaining it. How can you fault a dog for making such an obviously unjustified assumption?

Maybe you should question the dog less and just squeak?

[tzor]

I want my flying car.

Then buy (or reseve) it. You may have to work overtime; it's really expensive.

Terrafugia "First customer delivery is anticipated to be in Q4 2011. Refundable airframe reservations are currently being accepted to hold a place in production. Over 70 aircraft have been reserved, representing an order backlog of $14 million." You need a $10,000 deposit to reserve your flying car and the anticipated purchase price is $194,000.

I'll stick to my Prius.

[Metsfanmax]

I want my flying car.

Then buy (or reseve) it. You may have to work overtime; it's really expensive.

Terrafugia "First customer delivery is anticipated to be in Q4 2011. Refundable airframe reservations are currently being accepted to hold a place in production. Over 70 aircraft have been reserved, representing an order backlog of $14 million." You need a $10,000 deposit to reserve your flying car and the anticipated purchase price is $194,000.

I'll stick to my Prius.

Oh wtf, I just read yesterday that it would cost $148,000. There goes my shot of getting it

[saxitoxin]

Well, as anyone who understands basic logic knows, asserting that something makes sense to you does not mean it is logically correct (after all, if that were not true, we'd have a lot less of an argument against the religious folk). Since I'm apparently intellectually inferior to you, I'm just going to assume that you have no idea what you're talking about, since you are apparently incapable of explaining it. How can you fault a dog for making such an obviously unjustified assumption?

Mets, seriously, are you okay?

I'd normally make some trite comment about how I might prescribe you fluphenazine if you were nearer but, honestly, you actually do have me a little worried at this point. PM me if you need to talk.

Ref:
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 0#p2676183

[Metsfanmax]

Well, as anyone who understands basic logic knows, asserting that something makes sense to you does not mean it is logically correct (after all, if that were not true, we'd have a lot less of an argument against the religious folk). Since I'm apparently intellectually inferior to you, I'm just going to assume that you have no idea what you're talking about, since you are apparently incapable of explaining it. How can you fault a dog for making such an obviously unjustified assumption?

Mets, seriously, are you okay?

I'd normally make some trite comment about how I might prescribe you fluphenazine if you were nearer but, honestly, you actually do have me a little worried at this point. PM me if you need to talk.

Ref:
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 0#p2676183

You're asking if I'm okay? I'm the one who's basically called you a moron several times, each time with your concession and even enthusiasm. I'm having fun, really.

[saxitoxin]

Well, as anyone who understands basic logic knows, asserting that something makes sense to you does not mean it is logically correct (after all, if that were not true, we'd have a lot less of an argument against the religious folk). Since I'm apparently intellectually inferior to you, I'm just going to assume that you have no idea what you're talking about, since you are apparently incapable of explaining it. How can you fault a dog for making such an obviously unjustified assumption?

Mets, seriously, are you okay?

I'd normally make some trite comment about how I might prescribe you fluphenazine if you were nearer but, honestly, you actually do have me a little worried at this point. PM me if you need to talk.

Ref:
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 0#p2676183

You're asking if I'm okay? I'm the one who's basically called you a moron several times, each time with your concession and even enthusiasm. I'm having fun, really.

It appears you've committed a logical fallacy, Mets. What we refer to, in the Latin, as argumentum verbosium.

(Not that you've missed one yet, but, FYI - this is your cue to squeak.)

[DirtyDishSoap]

I want my flying car.

Then buy (or reseve) it. You may have to work overtime; it's really expensive.

Terrafugia "First customer delivery is anticipated to be in Q4 2011. Refundable airframe reservations are currently being accepted to hold a place in production. Over 70 aircraft have been reserved, representing an order backlog of $14 million." You need a $10,000 deposit to reserve your flying car and the anticipated purchase price is $194,000.

I'll stick to my Prius.

Silence ground walker!

[Metsfanmax]

Well, as anyone who understands basic logic knows, asserting that something makes sense to you does not mean it is logically correct (after all, if that were not true, we'd have a lot less of an argument against the religious folk). Since I'm apparently intellectually inferior to you, I'm just going to assume that you have no idea what you're talking about, since you are apparently incapable of explaining it. How can you fault a dog for making such an obviously unjustified assumption?

Mets, seriously, are you okay?

I'd normally make some trite comment about how I might prescribe you fluphenazine if you were nearer but, honestly, you actually do have me a little worried at this point. PM me if you need to talk.

Ref:
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 0#p2676183

You're asking if I'm okay? I'm the one who's basically called you a moron several times, each time with your concession and even enthusiasm. I'm having fun, really.

It appears you've committed a logical fallacy, Mets. What we refer to, in the Latin, as argumentum verbosium.

(Not that you've missed one yet, but, FYI - this is your cue to squeak.)

Thanks for the tip, moron.

[Queen_Herpes]

I don't understand why the evolution deniers don't just accept evolution and claim that God made it that way.

(2 Peter 3:14-18)Therefore, beloved, since you await these things, be eager to be found without spot or blemish before him, at peace. And consider the patience of our Lord as salvation, as our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, also wrote to you, speaking of these things as he does in all his letters. In them there are some things hard to understand that the ignorant and unstable distort to their own destruction, just as they do the other scriptures. Therefore, beloved, since you are forewarned, be on your guard not to be led into the error of the unprincipled and to fall from your own stability. But grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and savior Jesus Christ. To him be glory now and to the day of eternity. (Amen.)

In other words they twist the "literal" words and miss out on the deeper more important lessons of the scriptures.

It seems that the "mystery" of God is an all encompassing mysteriously indecipherable being, yet, when it comes to creation, the holy-rollers seem to "know" that God created "man" straight up without taking some time to develop the creature "that would become man." I mean, if you believe God created it all, and you believe God did it in 6 days, do you also believe that God was using a 24-hour clock?

[tzor]

Silence ground walker!

Bah, flying is overrated. If I want to go to space, I'll take the elevator.

[jimboston]

Consider (sp) the term "Dark Ages." Where they really dark? I mean, look at anchient man and modern man.

Tzor... there is actually a theory that they were in fact dark... or darker than it was before or after.

This was due to an extremely large meteor impact, which threw a lot of debris into the environment. This darkened the skies which had a dominoe effect...
-> Causing it to be colder in Europe.
-> Harming crop growth, so there was less food... overall this decreased the nutrition of the masses.
-> Decreased nutrition and colder climate lead to more disease.
-> All these factors cause people to focus more on actual day-to-day living and less on things like arts and sciences.

The theory is that the debris stayed in the environment for many years... and that once Europe fell into this rut/depression it was hard to get out when the environment improved.

Just a theory.

[jimboston]

That statement would have been correct if you had cut it off after the word communicate. You haven't said a single thing which makes any sense [SAXI EDIT] to me [/SAXI EDIT] in the last two or three days; how do you expect me to understand the things you are supposedly trying to tell me? Every single one of your posts is an assertion without a warrant. That's no way to communicate to anyone.

Dog doesn't explain to his chew toy why he's fun.

Chew toy doesn't need to know.

Chew toy just needs to squeak when bitten.

I now vote Saxi as obviously the funniest poster on CC.

I am at work and it is taking all my control to not laugh out loud at this.

Saxi... you like biting things... 'eh?

Do you do tricks too?

You talk about incontinence... I have my dog trained, perhaps I can help you?

If you can't teach an old dog new tricks, maybe it's for "Saxi to go to a Farm where he will be very happy".

[DirtyDishSoap]

Silence ground walker!

Bah, flying is overrated. If I want to go to space, I'll take the elevator.

Why not a rocket? Go to space in style!

[saxitoxin]

Well, as anyone who understands basic logic knows, asserting that something makes sense to you does not mean it is logically correct (after all, if that were not true, we'd have a lot less of an argument against the religious folk). Since I'm apparently intellectually inferior to you, I'm just going to assume that you have no idea what you're talking about, since you are apparently incapable of explaining it. How can you fault a dog for making such an obviously unjustified assumption?

Mets, seriously, are you okay?

I'd normally make some trite comment about how I might prescribe you fluphenazine if you were nearer but, honestly, you actually do have me a little worried at this point. PM me if you need to talk.

Ref:
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 0#p2676183

You're asking if I'm okay? I'm the one who's basically called you a moron several times, each time with your concession and even enthusiasm. I'm having fun, really.

It appears you've committed a logical fallacy, Mets. What we refer to, in the Latin, as argumentum verbosium.

(Not that you've missed one yet, but, FYI - this is your cue to squeak.)

Thanks for the tip, moron.

It appears you've committed a logical fallacy, Mets, what we refer to in the Latin as argumentum ad misericordiam.