18 May 12
Originally posted by twhiteheadWell, this video present comments from Dawkins, a strong supporter of evolution, and comments of biological scientists that see problems with believing in evolution as proven fact. I think it is worth taking a look at so you can better make an informed decision.
Since every other time you have posted what you claimed were 'Problems with Darwin's theory of Evolution', you later admitted that they were wrong, why don't you admit it now so we don't have to bother watching the videos?
18 May 12
Originally posted by RJHindsI remember when you first came to this forum (this was before before you started 'pumpkin eating'😉 you through your toys out the pram and promptly left declaring you would never come back because all people did here was talk about evolution. You wanted to talk about the Bible and scripture with people, now just over a year later you start more threads about evolution than the rest of us put together. Rather odd don't you think?!
Well, this video present comments from Dawkins, a strong supporter of evolution, and comments of biological scientists that see problems with believing in evolution as proven fact. I think it is worth taking a look at so you can better make an informed decision.
18 May 12
Originally posted by RJHindsI have already been to school and studied biology (unlike you) and that was more than enough to understand evolution and how it works. You repeatedly posting what you know to be lies and falsehoods is not going to change that.
Well, this video present comments from Dawkins, a strong supporter of evolution, and comments of biological scientists that see problems with believing in evolution as proven fact. I think it is worth taking a look at so you can better make an informed decision.
So, why don't you simply admit at the start of each thread that you know that what you post is false and that the only reason you post it is because you think it makes your religion look more believable. Instead you wait until people point out all your mistakes, then you make the admission - and start a new thread with a new set of falsehoods.
18 May 12
Originally posted by Proper KnobVery odd. But to man it seems, the Lord works in mysterious ways. HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord! 😏
I remember when you first came to this forum (this was before before you started 'pumpkin eating'😉 you through your toys out the pram and promptly left declaring you would never come back because all people did here was talk about evolution. You wanted to talk about the Bible and scripture with people, now just over a year later you start more threads about evolution than the rest of us put together. Rather odd don't you think?!
18 May 12
Originally posted by twhiteheadWell you have failed to point out any lies and falsehoods in this video yet. But I'm sure you can do it or at least conjure up some.
I have already been to school and studied biology (unlike you) and that was more than enough to understand evolution and how it works. You repeatedly posting what you know to be lies and falsehoods is not going to change that.
So, why don't you simply admit at the start of each thread that you know that what you post is false and that the only reason you ...[text shortened]... ur mistakes, then you make the admission - and start a new thread with a new set of falsehoods.
18 May 12
Originally posted by RJHindsBut whats the point? You know yourself that there are lies and falsehoods in the video. Once I point them out, you will happily admit them and start a new thread.
Well you have failed to point out any lies and falsehoods in this video yet. But I'm sure you can do it or at least conjure up some.
18 May 12
Originally posted by twhiteheadIn my experience, he very rarely admits them. He starts another thread on another topic and then, a few weeks later, when the first thread has dropped off the radar, repeats the first lies and falsehoods in a slightly different way.
But whats the point? You know yourself that there are lies and falsehoods in the video. Once I point them out, you will happily admit them and start a new thread.
--- Penguin
18 May 12
Originally posted by PenguinInteresting. I haven’t been here long enough to observe this myself -but now I know.
In my experience, he very rarely admits them. He starts another thread on another topic and then, a few weeks later, when the first thread has dropped off the radar, repeats the first lies and falsehoods in a slightly different way.
--- Penguin
….repeats the first lies and falsehoods in a slightly different way.
I take it that he does it in a “slightly different way” in the hope that we wouldn't notice he is repeating the same falsehoods so we have to put much more time effort into debunking them.
18 May 12
Originally posted by humyInteresting. I haven’t been here long enough to observe this myself -but now I know.
Interesting. I haven’t been here long enough to observe this myself -but now I know.
….repeats the first lies and falsehoods in a slightly different way.
I take it that he does it in a “slightly different way” in the hope that we wouldn't notice he is repeating the same falsehoods so we have to put much more time effort into debunking them.
No, you don't. Just because I have said it, doesn't make it true. I have not provided any evidence to back this up and it may well be that I am mis-remembering.
I take it that he does it in a “slightly different way” in the hope that we wouldn't notice he is repeating the same falsehoods so we have to put much more time effort into debunking them.
I will try to find a few examples. I think it's just that he finds another way of phrasing the argument, or another web-page or you-tube video to post. It's possible that we all do this if a debate tails off without being resolved in a desired direction. I have probably done it myself in arguments against God. Of course I thank that I am doing it because the theists didn't understand it the first time and the theists are probably exactly the same as us but in the other direction.
I don't want to be seen as attacking RJ specifically, he is just one of the more prolific examples.
--- Penguin.
18 May 12
1 edit
Originally posted by PenguinI have just wasted significant time that I can't afford going about this the wrong way. I found about 50 threads that RJ started and was going through them each, looking at the thread, whether it was an attack on Evolution or science in general, whether it contained logical fallacies, whether his points were refuted, whether he had acknowledged the refutation and particularly whether he was repeating a previously refuted argument.
Interesting. I haven’t been here long enough to observe this myself -but now I know.
No, you don't. Just because I have said it, doesn't make it true. I have not provided any evidence to back this up and it may well be that I am mis-remembering.
I take it that he does it in a “slightly different way” in the hope that we wouldn't notice he is attacking RJ specifically, he is just one of the more prolific examples.
--- Penguin.
What I should have done was collected all of his posts and gone through those. I really need to set up a database for this, rather than a spreadsheet. Unfortunately, this is a project I really can't afford to spend the time on. Maybe someone with spare time could have a go. I certainly don't mind if they want to apply the procedure to my posts as well.
It would certainly be interesting to see if there actually is any evidence to support my evaluation of RJ's (or anyone else's) behaviour.
--- Penguin