24 Nov 18
@wolfgang59 saidReally?
KJ has not put forward an argument.
He has been asking lots of questions which I have had the
patience to answer. But many of his questions demonstrate
his total lack of basic knowledge and he is asking me to
defend ridiculous ideas which no evolutionist would ever subscribe to.
"Unlike the guy I'm asking you to watch I don't call myself an Intelligent Design
believer, I'm a creationist, a young earth creationist to be very specific. I agree
with those that do accept ID because I think it is there, but I don't agree millions
of years were required. Looking at what is needed, having more time isn't a good
thing, it would be very bad if we are looking for random things needing to come
together in the same place, at the same time, in the proper amounts and
conditions in optimal settings and so on.
After spending 20 years in R&D working on the next generation of CPU, timing is
everything, you must have all the right things in the proper place doing the
necessary work to get what is required. If there is a crap shoot on anything
necessary, your CPU will not be able to function let alone produce what is desired.
More time only means more things can go wrong, so for me it’s all about
windows of opportunities when it all comes together properly!
1. If there is anything lacking that is required everything else is meaningless.
2. If the proper amounts are not mixed at the proper time it is all meaningless.
3. If everything all arrives at the same place, at the same time, and the
environment isn’t favorable but prohibitive it is all meaningless.
So many things all must line up its mind boggling, but some believe it's because
they think time is the answer, countless chances mean success. This is a huge
assumption, it assumes all these things can occur without direct intervention as if
life were but a huge combination for a lock, just tweak the numbers over and over
and at some point, no matter how long it takes, the lock will open. I don’t see this
as something that can be shown true, only accepted on faith.
These “hopeful monsters” of yours are an abomination to small changes over time,
instead they reek of an explosion of new genetic code (information) being
introduced into the gene pools by an event that has no guiding force behind
them. So not only didn't everything die, instead the dice for life was thrown and
immediately life not only continues through this huge event, we also have all of
these new monsters that were not brought about by slow changes in DNA
overlong periods of time.
Not very consistent concerning the theory of small changes over time if you ask
me. An event like that would disprove it in my opinion not enhance the validity
of it."
@kellyjay saidIf KJ understood natural selection, he would simply explain the underlying concepts of natural selection in his own words. But of course he doesn't and knows he doesn't, so he finds excuses not to. Unfortunately this type of behavior isn't out of character for him.
You keep talking about Jesus that hasn't forced you into answering questions put
to you. If you are going to suggest I must pass a test to comment please before you
open you mouth about Jesus Christ answer that which has been asked to you by
almost everyone here! If there is a point of contention where what I have said does
not line up with natural selection highlight it ...[text shortened]... r in the whole process of life, because
it is just a piece of the puzzle not the whole ball of wax.
As I said earlier:
You keep claiming to understand natural selection. You can easily demonstrate that you do by explaining the underlying concepts of natural selection in your own words. The topic of the discussion is natural selection. This is right on topic.
If KN or WG asks you to back up your claim by explaining the underlying concepts of natural selection in your own words, what intellectually dishonest excuse are you going to make up to refuse them?
Hopefully either KN or WG will ask KJ to back up his claim. It might prove interesting to see what intellectually dishonest excuses he makes up for refusing them. However it's not unlikely that they've both tired of KJ pretending to understand it and won't be back on this thread to continue.
@thinkofone saidSo what are you doing in this thread, attempting to play with adults, because you
If KJ understood natural selection, he would simply explain the underlying concepts of natural selection in his own words. But of course he doesn't and knows he doesn't, so he finds excuses not to. Unfortunately this type of behavior isn't out of character for him.
As I said earlier:
[quote]You keep claiming to understand natural selection. You can easily demonstrate t ...[text shortened]... t they've both tired of KJ pretending to understand it and won't be back on this thread to continue.
don't have an independent thought of your own you have beg others to take up
your points? Why don't you present a position instead of just barking about
others who do one way or another, and be specific your wining about broad
issues are meaningless. Pick a topic, something you can actually address yourself
and make a point of your own.
Bad mouthing others isn't expressing a point on topic it only shows you have
nothing to add so you shout at those who do. How high school of you! There isn't
much you seem to add to any discussion I have ever seen your input as you give
cheap shots at those who are in them, and the illusive mystery you paint yourself
with as if you are speaking for Christ when He walked the planet, whatever that
means in your little world between your ears.
I have a ton of respect for those I'm discussing this with, not so much you. They at
least are attempting to communicate, you just about the insult nothing more.
24 Nov 18
@KellyJay
Here's something which might lighten the mood.
Creationist theory;
God with his life - giving staff
One day thought of having a laugh
So he made something tall
Which made no sense at all
And this thing did he call a giraffe.
Evolutionist theory;
When it came to its' own evolution
The giraffe sought to find resolution
And he thought 'What the heck,
I'll grow a long neck'
And it seemed like the perfect solution.
Okay, as you were...
24 Nov 18
@indonesia-phil said😉
@KellyJay
Here's something which might lighten the mood.
Creationist theory;
God with his life - giving staff
One day thought of having a laugh
So he made something tall
Which made no sense at all
And this thing did he call a giraffe.
Evolutionist theory;
When it came to its' own evolution
The giraffe sought to find resolution
And he thought 'What the heck,
I'll grow a long neck'
And it seemed like the perfect solution.
Okay, as you were...
@kellyjay saidIt's really simple KJ.
So what are you doing in this thread, attempting to play with adults, because you
don't have an independent thought of your own you have beg others to take up
your points? Why don't you present a position instead of just barking about
others who do one way or another, and be specific your wining about broad
issues are meaningless. Pick a topic, something you can actually ...[text shortened]... t so much you. They at
least are attempting to communicate, you just about the insult nothing more.
You claim that you understand the underlying concepts of natural selection.
However, the arguments you've put forth indicate that you don't.
In such a situation, the reasonable way forward is for you to explain the underlying concepts of natural selection in your own words. Your explanation will provide one of two things:
1) An indication that you do in fact understand natural selection - your arguments not withstanding.
OR
2) An indication of the places where your understanding of natural selection is incorrect.
Thus far you've refused. Thus far you've only offered intellectually dishonest excuses for your refusal - for the most part in the form of ad hominem attack directed at me.
With that in mind, the reasonable way forward from here is for someone else to request that you explain the underlying concepts of natural selection in your own words.
Whether or not you want to admit it, you're acting like a petulant child.
25 Nov 18
@thinkofone saidditto
It's really simple KJ.
I've given you a lot of my time.
Please respect my answers, give them some thought.
25 Nov 18
@kellyjay saidSilliness.
zzzzzzzz
Pick an argument or a statement I made, and show me how I'm wrong. Blanket
statements like "you don't know what your talking about" really have no teeth.
Get specific if you know how.
You entered this debate refuting evolution.
You don't even understand evolution (as demonstrated by your posts)
If you want to argue from ignorance ... why do Christians say Jesus had 3 legs?
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
25 Nov 18
@wolfgang59 saidWhich posts specifically demonstrate that he doesn’t understand evolution and why?
Silliness.
You entered this debate refuting evolution.
You don't even understand evolution (as demonstrated by your posts)
If you want to argue from ignorance ... why do Christians say Jesus had 3 legs?
@kellyjay saidPick an argument or a statement I made, and show me how I'm wrong.
zzzzzzzz
Pick an argument or a statement I made, and show me how I'm wrong. Blanket
statements like "you don't know what your talking about" really have no teeth.
Get specific if you know how.
You've created a straw man of what the underlying concepts of natural selection entails and keep attacking it. You've been shown that you don't understand natural selection many a time on this thread as well as others. You've repeatedly lacked the integrity to address it. When pressed, you act like a petulant child who insists that he understands - when all the adults know full well that he doesn't.
If KJ actually understood natural selection, he would simply explain the underlying concepts of natural selection in his own words. But of course he doesn't and knows he doesn't, so he finds dishonest excuses not to. When pressed he becomes more and more like a petulant child who knows that they are wrong, but can't bring themselves to admit it. Unfortunately this type of behavior isn't out of character for him.
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
@thinkofone saidAnd yet you are unable to quote even one sentence that Kelly wrote and demonstrate why it is a straw man. Neither can you demonstrate why he lacks understanding of the underlying concepts of natural selection. When pressed to do it you simply claim that Kelly doesn't understand anything. You are the one acting like a petulant child who insists that Kelly doesn't understands - when all the adults know full well that he does. Unfortunately this type of behavior isn't out of character for you.
Pick an argument or a statement I made, and show me how I'm wrong.
You've created a straw man of what the underlying concepts of natural selection entails and keep attacking it. You've been shown that you don't understand natural selection many a time on this thread as well as others. You've repeatedly lacked the integrity to address it. When pressed, you act l ...[text shortened]... t bring themselves to admit it. Unfortunately this type of behavior isn't out of character for him.
25 Nov 18
@wolfgang59 saidI actually do respect you, I'm not going to call you stupid, insult your intelligence
ditto
I've given you a lot of my time.
Please respect my answers, give them some thought.
or any other insult simply because we disagree. You think I've shown you disrespect
here in anything I have said so far?
25 Nov 18
@thinkofone saidI'm not sure what you think I'm wrong on, simply saying I'm wrong without giving
Pick an argument or a statement I made, and show me how I'm wrong.
You've created a straw man of what the underlying concepts of natural selection entails and keep attacking it. You've been shown that you don't understand natural selection many a time on this thread as well as others. You've repeatedly lacked the integrity to address it. When pressed, you act l ...[text shortened]... t bring themselves to admit it. Unfortunately this type of behavior isn't out of character for him.
specifics isn't saying anything at all. Show me one place where I spoke about
natural selection in a manner you think shows a lack of understanding. Give a
specific example, if not it will once again be clear it is your lack of understanding
that is at work here.
25 Nov 18
@wolfgang59 saidGive specifics please
Silliness.
You entered this debate refuting evolution.
You don't even understand evolution (as demonstrated by your posts)
If you want to argue from ignorance ... why do Christians say Jesus had 3 legs?