The evolution of the eye

[DavidFirth]

And thus you illustrate why providing you with scientific info is a waste of time. You didn't even look at it.

No need to. But I did look at some of it. It is just the same old junk over and over again. It proves nothing.

 

[Revoltingest]

That's funny, but I feel no obligation to be nice to certain groups of people.

True, we're not obligated.
But it's easy & subversive.
Win win I say.

 

[Jose Fly]

No need to. But I did look at some of it. It is just the same old junk over and over again. It proves nothing.

So you admit that you see "no need" to look at what people post for you, while simultaneously demanding people post more material for you.

You should probably stop and think on that a bit.

 

[Jose Fly]

True, we're not obligated.
But it's easy & subversive.
Win win I say.

Kill them with kindness, eh? All righty then....

 

[DavidFirth]

So you admit that you see "no need" to look at what people post for you, while simultaneously demanding people post more material for you.

You should probably stop and think on that a bit.

I actually asked for proof. What I got wasn't proof. What I get is never proof.

Why don't you and Christine stop posting stuff that isn't proof when someone asks you for proof?

I didn't ask for scientific thought or assumption or what some scientists thinks. I asked for proof.

 

[Revoltingest]

Kill them with kindness, eh? All righty then....

It really works at times.
Lull them into thinking I'm safe to talk to.
Find common ground.
And reason from that to challenge wrong beliefs.
The occasional detente or even change of mind is rewarding.

But I still enjoy the alternative.....to crush my enemies, see them
driven before me, & hear the lamentation of their partners!

 

[Jose Fly]

I actually asked for proof. What I got wasn't proof. What I get is never proof.

Why don't you and Christine stop posting stuff that isn't proof when someone asks you for proof?

I didn't ask for scientific thought or assumption or what some scientists thinks. I asked for proof.

Again, by that standard that the earth orbits the sun is merely "what some scientists thinks [sic]".

So if some scientists see right before their eyes a population evolve from say, unicellular organisms into multicelluar organisms, and they document it, would you consider that "proof" of macroevolution?

 

[Jose Fly]

It really works at times.
Lull them into thinking I'm safe to talk to.
Find common ground.
And reason from that to challenge wrong beliefs.
The occasional detente or even change of mind is rewarding.

But I still enjoy the alternative.....to crush my enemies, see them
driven before me, & hear the lamentation of their partners!

You must be better at it than me, because I've tried the nice approach and it's never worked.

 

[Revoltingest]

You must be better at it than me, because I've tried the nice approach and it's never worked.

A successful result is far from a daily affair, so my skill is questionable.
Think of being nice as offering several options....
1) It fosters discussion rather than arguing.
2) It keeps one calm, & allows a wider focus, which is useful in seeing opportunities.
3) It's a weapon to keep the enemy off guard.

Edit:
I still enjoy giving the occasional spanking when deserved.
.

 

[ChristineM]

And thus we see why it is pointless to show science to creationists. The question I have is, why did Christine try?

I enjoy an impossible challenge.

And love to see the depths of inhumanity that creationists will stoop in an attempt to justify a bronze age myth.

David has not disappointed me.

 

[Jose Fly]

I enjoy an impossible challenge.

And love to see the depths of inhumanity that creationists will stoop in an attempt to justify a bronze age myth.

David has not disappointed me.

I can relate. The primary reason I even do this at all is how fascinating I find creationists to be from a behavioral standpoint.

 

[Revoltingest]

I enjoy an impossible challenge.
And love to see the depths of inhumanity that creationists will stoop in an attempt to justify a bronze age myth.
David has not disappointed me.

The different ways that people reason & see the world is fascinating.
Tis interesting that one staffer here says I'm the most dishonest poster here.
He simply cannot believe that I really believe what I post.
So little imagination.
We are all capable of great & sincere weirdness.

 

[DavidFirth]

Again, by that standard that the earth orbits the sun is merely "what some scientists thinks [sic]".

So if some scientists see right before their eyes a population evolve from say, unicellular organisms into multicelluar organisms, and they document it, would you consider that "proof" of macroevolution?

That isn't a valid comparison. We can see that the earth revolves around the sun. We cannot see apes become men or fish become birds, etc.

 

[Revoltingest]

That isn't a valid comparison. We can see that the earth revolves around the sun.

I can't personally see it.
I must take the word of people who have more direct experience
with the pheneno.....phonemon.....phenonomo........thing.

 

[DavidFirth]

I can't personally see it.
I must take the word of people who have more direct experience
with the pheneno.....phonemon.....phenonomo........thing.

Okay. But the people you hear actually saw it happen and could see it happen. Who saw an ape become a man or a fish become a bird?

 

[Revoltingest]

Okay. But the people you hear actually saw it happen and could see it happen. Who saw an ape become a man or a fish become a bird?

I know there's a difference.
But still, astronomy is based largely upon indirect observation followed by
sophisticated interpretation. We don't "see" it...other than little points of
light in the sky....& a couple big'ns.
Evolution requires more in the way of intepretation of data, & familiarity with
stochastic processes in system analysis, biology, geology, archeology & even
computer simulation methods. This removes it even more from our limited
personal experience. So I can begin to grok how so many would reject evolution.

 

[ChristineM]

I can relate. The primary reason I even do this at all is how fascinating I find creationists to be from a behavioral standpoint.

Good fun isn't it?

 

[ChristineM]

The different ways that people reason & see the world is fascinating.
Tis interesting that one staffer here says I'm the most dishonest poster here.
He simply cannot believe that I really believe what I post.
So little imagination.
We are all capable of great & sincere weirdness.

This wouldn't happen to be a certain staffer who resides in the southern states ?

 

[ChristineM]

Okay. But the people you hear actually saw it happen and could see it happen. Who saw an ape become a man or a fish become a bird?

Who saw a god... Ever... Period.

 

[DavidFirth]

Who saw a god... Ever... Period.

I never claimed I had proof. You did, however.