Quote:
Originally posted by aphex@Sep 6 2003, 12:31 AM
geoff332: I'm sorry you found my posts so awfully repulsive. You said my methods have no value to them, yet you did nothing to back yours up, you merely expressed your opinion of them. If you had been carefully following the posts between myself and fedfem, you would have noticed that both of our arguments included several sources of support in addition to our own, yet your posts seem to contain little but opinion, a strong falacy of debate.
As far as my dealings with the philosophical side of the issue, fedfem and myself were expressing interests in including a more philosophical side to the argument, so I am assuming you either missed this or are ignoring them.
By saying creationism is not science, again you are introducing no support. If this was the case, somehow I think the whole controversy would have disappeared a century ago and evolutionary science would have risen to the seclusive majesty it proclaims of itself, and evolutionary scientists would not be so paranoid about creation science (note link posted earlier: http://www.icr.org/pubs/btg-a/btg-109a.htm ).
I am pretty convinced that you are, as you say a "trained philosopher of science" as your post used nothing more than the usual mudslinging found so common in evolutionist 'arguments' which is an obvious sign that there is no knowledgeable support to be offered on the part of the arguer.
It makes me wonder though why you react in such anger and frustration rather than calmly showing the 'trained' argumentation and support that you should have to offer. But I guess I didn't realize that simply practically calling your opponent an idiot was enough to solve the entire evolution/creation debate.
Since you are so determined to not return to this post, maybe we can return to stating arguments and evidence rather than name calling. |
I find your argument hilarious. Creationism is not science because it requires a creator/intelligent designer, and as you know we can't control the creator hence we can't do experiments that are valid to show that it was creator whom is/was present to action x etc. The whole controversy is still here because there are many religious ppl who are unwilling to here to the facts and have been brainwashed with stories about their imaginary friend known as God.
Put simply, you have no valid scientific data to support Creationism beyond reasonable doubt unlike Evolution, which has enough to bury you ten thousand feet under.
Try to live in the real world, it's time to move on from the fantasies and face the facts.