[ Post a Response | No Answers in Genesis Discussion Board ]
Posted by ohyes on July 3, 2009, 2:47 pm, in reply to "Re:Good, because apparently, you are not."
69.130.137.141
"Speaking of bad arguments, considering that Darwinists use the "all the FACTS are in" argument all the time to justify THEIR theory, your "argument" rings rather hollow. "
Odd, i don't recall positing that. That doesn't mean that others haven't, I just don't think I have used that argument because I find the idea repulsive.
Why you feel the need to attack my short argument as "bad" is puzzling. Did I slight you unintentionally?
"Getting post-modern on us are we? If you imagine yourself able to fly like Superman and I say its impossible is that a "lack of imagination" on my part? No. Its an utter lack of understanding on your part of the laws of physics, aerodynamics and other scientific laws on your part.
"
I think you are hitting on one of the flaws of the ontological argument here. http://www.philosophyofreligion.info/theistic-proofs/the-ontological-argument/st-anselms-ontological-argument/gaunilos-perfect-island/
"No one said that every thing that happens is an act of God. Lying (which you've just done) is also a poor form of argumentation. "
Well some people do say that in fact. Why call me a liar, what fact did I change?
Let us take a closer look at what I said:
"Things can be difficult to divine, not being able to succinctly define how a thunderstorm forms does make every thunderstorm an act of God. "
That seems true to me, the underlying notion being that ignorance of how something works does not necessarily imply supernatural machinations. Why you would call me a liar for that opinion, and that is all it was, is beyond me. Why the vitriol? Why the liar blast?
">>In any event the process of the evolution of the flagellum is well explained.<<
Bullshit. The process of the "evolution" of the flagellum is not explained. That makes two lies in one post. Nice going. "
I think it is nicely explained, at least to my satisfaction. Again with the liar blast. When someone disagrees with you it doesn't make them a liar.
Look at it this way, if I have information that is incomplete I might come to a faulty conclusion. That doesn't make me a liar anymore than it makes a one year old a liar when he says 10 x 10 is 10.
I've been completely honest, I haven't made any wild assertions and yet you seem genuinely irritated.
This type of discourse does not interest me. Is there a specific reason you find it necessary to stoop to this level?
I appreciate the ad homs as a tactic but I was just trying to talk.
Nice while it lasted I guess.
Message Thread:
« Back to thread