The watchmaker

[Jose Fly]

Strange.
You are so highly educated, and you don't know what I mean by that.
Say I was not a Jehovah's Witness.
Say I was not a creationist.
Say I didn't even believe the Bible.
What would you say about me then?

I'm pretty sure if all of the above were true, you wouldn't be here trying to argue against evolution.

Even if I were an atheist, and denied the theory of evolution. Your remarks would still be condescending. Wouldn't they?

I don't see how they are condescending. I mean, they're accurate, which means they reflect reality. So perhaps your problem isn't with me, but with reality?

As long as anyone does not believe in what certain people believe, those certain people follow a particular pattern.

I say certain people, because I have conversed with people I consider to be reasonable, and even though they disagreed with me, and I with them, they didn't take on an air of pride and insult me.
Nor did I insult them.

We reasoned like two adults - each trying to show why the other can't be right.
Certain people on the other hand try to prove they are right by putting on an air of superiority - Their best argument.

What exactly do you consider to be insulting? Pointing out that you're a Jehovah's Witness? Noting that Jehovah's Witnesses have requirements of their members regarding evolution? Are you embarrassed by those things?

All that I have said in my previous four posts is designed for discussion. If anyone disagrees with what I said, they can feel free to discuss it.

The information is all from scientific sources. None of it - zero - is from any creationist website, or source. None of it comes from Jehovah's Witnesses. Every bit is from nPeace alone - using his own mind.

So if you're really interested in reasonable conversation, why do you avoid questions like the plague?

 

[nPeace]

I'm pretty sure if all of the above were true, you wouldn't be here trying to argue against evolution.


I don't see how they are condescending. I mean, they're accurate, which means they reflect reality. So perhaps your problem isn't with me, but with reality?


What exactly do you consider to be insulting? Pointing out that you're a Jehovah's Witness? Noting that Jehovah's Witnesses have requirements of their members regarding evolution? Are you embarrassed by those things?


So if you're really interested in reasonable conversation, why do you avoid questions like the plague?

Facts
Estimating the number of atheists in the U.S. is complicated. Some adults who describe themselves as atheists also say they believe in God or a universal spirit. At the same time, some people who identify with a religion (e.g., say they are Protestant, Catholic or Jewish) also say they do not believe in God.

But one thing is for sure: Along with the rise of religiously unaffiliated Americans (many of whom believe in God), there has been a corresponding increase in the number of atheists.

Not everyone who say they believe in God or the Bible, have faith in either of them.
Not everyone who claim to be an atheist, really are convinced they are.
Many people simply do not know what they believe, or what to believe.

Facts
According to a new Pew Research Center analysis, six-in-ten Americans (60%) say that “humans and other living things have evolved over time,” while a third (33%) reject the idea of evolution, saying that “humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time.”

These beliefs differ strongly by religious group. White evangelical Protestants are particularly likely to believe that humans have existed in their present form since the beginning of time. Roughly two-thirds (64%) express this view, as do half of black Protestants (50%). By comparison, only 15% of white mainline Protestants share this opinion.

There also are sizable differences by party affiliation in beliefs about evolution, and the gap between Republicans and Democrats has grown. In 2009, 54% of Republicans and 64% of Democrats said humans have evolved over time, a difference of 10 percentage points. Today, 43% of Republicans and 67% of Democrats say humans have evolved, a 24-point gap.

I answer questions. Some people don't listen. They want to hear only what they are interested in hearing. I'm no parrot, nor am I Toby - 'Sit boy! Sit! Stand boy! Stand! Good boy.'

 

[Jose Fly]

Facts
Estimating the number of atheists in the U.S. is complicated. Some adults who describe themselves as atheists also say they believe in God or a universal spirit. At the same time, some people who identify with a religion (e.g., say they are Protestant, Catholic or Jewish) also say they do not believe in God.

But one thing is for sure: Along with the rise of religiously unaffiliated Americans (many of whom believe in God), there has been a corresponding increase in the number of atheists.

Not everyone who say they believe in God or the Bible, have faith in either of them.
Not everyone who claim to be an atheist, really are convinced they are.
Many people simply do not know what they believe, or what to believe.

Facts
According to a new Pew Research Center analysis, six-in-ten Americans (60%) say that “humans and other living things have evolved over time,” while a third (33%) reject the idea of evolution, saying that “humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time.”

These beliefs differ strongly by religious group. White evangelical Protestants are particularly likely to believe that humans have existed in their present form since the beginning of time. Roughly two-thirds (64%) express this view, as do half of black Protestants (50%). By comparison, only 15% of white mainline Protestants share this opinion.

There also are sizable differences by party affiliation in beliefs about evolution, and the gap between Republicans and Democrats has grown. In 2009, 54% of Republicans and 64% of Democrats said humans have evolved over time, a difference of 10 percentage points. Today, 43% of Republicans and 67% of Democrats say humans have evolved, a 24-point gap.

?????????????? I have absolutely no idea how the above relates to our discussion.

I answer questions. Some people don't listen. They want to hear only what they are interested in hearing. I'm no parrot, nor am I Toby - 'Sit boy! Sit! Stand boy! Stand! Good boy.'

And this is how you're no different than just about every other creationist I've interacted with over the last 20 years. You apparently think merely saying "I can easily disprove evolutionary theory" is the same as actually doing it, and that everyone here should just take your claim as unquestioned gospel.

"Well, I used to be an evolutionist, but nPeace at Religious Forums said he can easily disprove evolutionary theory, so I assumed he was right and now I no longer recognize evolution as valid science."

Is that how you expected things to go down? If not, I have to wonder what you expected to happen.

 

[nPeace]

?????????????? I have absolutely no idea how the above relates to our discussion.


And this is how you're no different than just about every other creationist I've interacted with over the last 20 years. You apparently think merely saying "I can easily disprove evolutionary theory" is the same as actually doing it, and that everyone here should just take your claim as unquestioned gospel.

"Well, I used to be an evolutionist, but nPeace at Religious Forums said he can easily disprove evolutionary theory, so I assumed he was right and now I no longer recognize evolution as valid science."

Is that how you expected things to go down? If not, I have to wonder what you expected to happen.

?????????????????????????????????
Like I said, some people don't listen.......................

 

[Subduction Zone]

?????????????????????????????????
Like I said, some people don't listen.......................

Some people don't realize they can't make meaningful posts..

 

[Subduction Zone]

?????????????? I have absolutely no idea how the above relates to our discussion.


And this is how you're no different than just about every other creationist I've interacted with over the last 20 years. You apparently think merely saying "I can easily disprove evolutionary theory" is the same as actually doing it, and that everyone here should just take your claim as unquestioned gospel.

"Well, I used to be an evolutionist, but nPeace at Religious Forums said he can easily disprove evolutionary theory, so I assumed he was right and now I no longer recognize evolution as valid science."

Is that how you expected things to go down? If not, I have to wonder what you expected to happen.

When you have lost the debate obfuscate!

 

[Jose Fly]

?????????????????????????????????
Like I said, some people don't listen.......................

See, this is the sort of thing that indicates to me that you're not here to engage in meaningful discussion. You could have explained your point and described how it related to what we'd been discussing, but instead you just stuck your nose in the air, declared "some people don't listen", and walked away.

Combine that with your evasion of questions and refusal to even define your terms and my conclusion is entirely warranted.....you're no different than all the other internet creationist rabble before you.

 

[nPeace]

See, this is the sort of thing that indicates to me that you're not here to engage in meaningful discussion. You could have explained your point and described how it related to what we'd been discussing, but instead you just stuck your nose in the air, declared "some people don't listen", and walked away.

Combine that with your evasion of questions and refusal to even define your terms and my conclusion is entirely warranted.....you're no different than all the other internet creationist rabble before you.

Would you prefer I just follow your lead and ignore your post completely, and don't address anything from it? Is that a good reason to be here on these forums?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Would you prefer I just follow your lead and ignore your post completely, and don't address anything from it? Is that a good reason to be here on these forums?

You could try to debate properly and politely. Bring up one point at a time and ask questions when you don't understand.

 

[Jose Fly]

Would you prefer I just follow your lead and ignore your post completely, and don't address anything from it? Is that a good reason to be here on these forums?

Wait, wait, wait. Let's not lose sight of what's gone on up to this point.

You claimed you can "easily disprove evolutionary theory". But you dodged every request for you to do so.

Then you claimed you'd already disproved evolutionary theory. But you dodged every request for you to show where you'd done so.

You also claimed there are no "transitional fossils". But you dodged every request for you to say what the term "transitional fossil" means to you.

Then after all that dodging, you started on more subjects, and are now expecting everyone to forget all your earlier dodging and follow you down your latest set of rabbit trails.

I simply don't work that way. I expect conversations will generally stay on topic, participants will answer questions and clarify as needed, and only introduce new material after previous topics have been fully covered.

Can you do that?

 

[nPeace]

Wait, wait, wait. Let's not lose sight of what's gone on up to this point.

You claimed you can "easily disprove evolutionary theory". But you dodged every request for you to do so.

Then you claimed you'd already disproved evolutionary theory. But you dodged every request for you to show where you'd done so.

You also claimed there are no "transitional fossils". But you dodged every request for you to say what the term "transitional fossil" means to you.

Then after all that dodging, you started on more subjects, and are now expecting everyone to forget all your earlier dodging and follow you down your latest set of rabbit trails.

I simply don't work that way. I expect conversations will generally stay on topic, participants will answer questions and clarify as needed, and only introduce new material after previous topics have been fully covered.

Can you do that?

Can I do what?
All the above are not true.
Look. This has gone on for God knows how many posts. You are not budging. I am not budging. So two stubborn mules will not stop kicking until I don't know.

So you can either just keep kicking, or find something else to do, and I have given you four long posts, that you have plenty of things to bite. If you don't want to bite them. I'll be on my way.
After a while mules do get tired of the same old same.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Can I do what?
All the above are not true.
Look. This has gone on for God knows how many posts. You are not budging. I am not budging. So two stubborn mules will not stop kicking until I don't know.

So you can either just keep kicking, or find something else to do, and I have given you four long posts, that you have plenty of things to bite. If you don't want to bite them. I'll be on my way.
After a while mules do get tired of the same old same.

Can you debate properly and politely? So far you have only demonstrated a lack of knowledge of even the basics of science. That makes it very difficult to refute anything. Do you remember your failure in our discussion of LUCA? I gave you what was a rather easy idea to understand and instead of trying to understand it and giving a valid argument against it you ran away from the concept. And that was rather weak evidence for LUCA, something that you could have pointed out if you could have understood it. There was a possible valid objection to the evidence I gave you but you could not find it.

Like many creationists you cannot afford to let yourself understand the nature of evidence. You know that we have massive evidence for our beliefs so you have to live in abject denial. Education might make you a better debater. Of course it is more likely to raise your consciousness of how and why you are wrong.

 

[Jose Fly]

Can I do what?

Can you participate in a discussion in the manner I described?

All the above are not true.

Then we clearly have a diisagreement. Fortunately, this being a written medium, it's trivally easy to resolve. You claim that you have indeed falsified evolutionary theory and have stated your definition for "transitional fossil", so all you have to do is show where you did those things.

On the other hand, if you do not show where you did those things and you continue to dodge all attempts to get you to do so, the more you give the impression that you're not telling the truth.

Please proceed.

 

[nPeace]

Can you participate in a discussion in the manner I described?


Then we clearly have a diisagreement. Fortunately, this being a written medium, it's trivally easy to resolve. You claim that you have indeed falsified evolutionary theory and have stated your definition for "transitional fossil", so all you have to do is show where you did those things.

On the other hand, if you do not show where you did those things and you continue to dodge all attempts to get you to do so, the more you give the impression that you're not telling the truth.

Please proceed.

The thing is, the posts are all on record.
I like how my lord put it, "Let those who have ears, listen".
He also said that there will be those who have eyes, but can't see, and those who have ears, but can't hear.
I believe him. It is evident.

Your impression is not Gospel. It is only based on the quality of your vision, and it certainly doesn't have the same quality as every one.
Remember what you said to me.

Again, given that you are a Jehovah's Witness and given the severe restrictions that puts on you regarding this subject, you are about as biased as a person can be. So why should anyone take anything you say on this subject seriously?

Say I was not a Jehovah's Witness.
Say I was not a creationist.
Say I didn't even believe the Bible.
What would you say about me then?

I'm pretty sure if all of the above were true, you wouldn't be here trying to argue against evolution.

To me that makes it clear whats blurring your vision. Apart from your atheistic view.

 

[Jose Fly]

The thing is, the posts are all on record.

Exactly. So it should be trivially easy for you to show where you disproved evolutionary theory and defined "transitional fossil". All you have to do is say "right here in post #xxx".

As I noted, the more you post without doing so, the more you make it seem that you're not telling the truth.

To me that makes it clear whats blurring your vision. Apart from your atheistic view.

Where did you get the idea that I'm an atheist?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Exactly. So it should be trivially easy for you to show where you disproved evolutionary theory and defined "transitional fossil". All you have to do is say "right here in post #xxx".

As I noted, the more you post without doing so, the more you make it seem that you're not telling the truth.


Where did you get the idea that I'm an atheist?

Some people have the automatic assumption that accepting reality makes one an atheist. That tells us that they have severe doubts about their own beliefs.

 

[nPeace]

Exactly. So it should be trivially easy for you to show where you disproved evolutionary theory and defined "transitional fossil". All you have to do is say "right here in post #xxx".

As I noted, the more you post without doing so, the more you make it seem that you're not telling the truth.


Where did you get the idea that I'm an atheist?

Sorry. I got someone's statement mixed up with the wrong person.