Quote:
Quote by: leegao And that’s how this round will continue to do so infinitely because neither constitutes any impact to the other whatsoever.
Please explain how.
First of all when have I ever said I didn’t accept what the definition of a theory is? Please go through all my post and see where I have explicitly stated that I’m negating your definition of “theory.” Secondly, let’s not go into personal contentions here. Thirdly the smugness of your tone tells me that you have this pretense that you were never “ignorant” before in your life since you’re immune to that ignorance. Now I’ve been playing this debate solely on your grounds, the problem is there’s multiple grounds in this debate. The sole fact that you believe that someone else is ignorant of science is relative. Of course, I’m pretty sure it’s in your most honorable intention to play down a 16 year old and call him uneducated and make him insecure yet despite all efforts you’ve never even tried to go deep into what other’s points are, so let me reiterate this for you one more time.
The fact that the pro-creationists and the pro-evolutionists throw out arguments that doesn’t stick with the other side necessitates that we give one ground precedence over the other. For example:
Presuming that we’re talking about reality and not some theoretical universe
Taking in the premise that empiricism can be observed in reality time and time again whereas superstitious “miracles” found in the “divine books” are only observed rarely and are often able to be explained through empirical means it’s natural that empiricism should take precedence over superstition, therefore the best ground to uphold in this debate should be empiricism thus all arguments regarding this topic will have absolutely no impact unless it can always come back to empiricism.
And dude, I’m in Highschool… |
How did that happen? I was under the impression that our educational system was not producing intelligent people like yourself. They must have forgotten to tell you not to think for your self.