Exactly, which is why when buying a car, I skip over absurd named products like:
Honda
Ford
Cheverolet
BMW
Volvo
and always go with cars companies like "CarMaker", "AutoManufacturer", "TruckProducer", or "SedanMasters". I'm currenlty driving a SedanMaster model named "SedanWithNiceFeaturesAndALargeEngine". It's pretty sweet.
He had an opinion on the subject-matter, and he stated it. You are free to disagree with his opinion, but does that mean that he shouldn't voice his opinion?
Why is there always someone who feels the need to point out the right of someone to say someting? Is there someone being silenced here? Is there someone even suggesting that another person doesn't have the right to say something. Sheesh. Shut the fuck up already.
It seems you have difficulty being honest on basic questions of content, as well as in terms of embedding logical falsehoods in terms like "trivially true"... is this an issue you commonly have, personally?
I really don't know what you're trying to say here. No really, could you be more clear when you are talking down to simpletons like myself?
Address the points I brought up. I'm just trying to pin down what the ID proposition is, something which I believe you've mischaracterized, as I've shown, and you've ignored. Everything else you've replied with is really beside the point, and frankly, a little too slippery for me to respond to.
I'm sorry, I'm going to have to interpret your reluctance to speak concretely about claims you and I've made as evidence that you are indeed a troll. Again, for the recored, I think you are a troll. I may be wrong - you might just be so damn intelligent your discussion is going right over my head. You've failed to communicate or succeeded to troll, either way, this discussion can server no useful purpose.
"Trivially true" as in true by saying very little. As in
Defendent: "I'm innocent some of the time."
Look, Emperic, either you have a reading comprehension problem or you are trolling me. Even the testimony you post hints at Behe's true position. Let me paraphrase your original post to which I replied:
"3. Evolution explains many things"... is...
actually the position of ID according to Behe
So that's "trivially true" in that all of the crucial information about Behe's position and the ID argument is tied up in that one vague, innocent word "some". Does Behe mean by "some"
that evolution doesn't explain gravity
or that evolution doesn't explain abiogenesis
or that some paths in evolution are still not understood
or that only so-called mirco-evolution is explained while change between species is not explained (so-called macro-evolution)
or that some biolochemical structures are so complicated that in would be impossible for them to arise through the process of evolution
?????. Behe's true position is closes to the last bullet. What a great word, "some". He and ID add to this tenent the conclusion that since evolution can't account for this biochemical complexity, it have been designed. As in, "evolution is flawed enough that a creator is required".
It seems like you are having trouble being honest about what ID really is - are you a proponent of the the theory and if so, is this a common tactic among ID's supporters?
I don't think that ID has any merit, I was just stating my take on the ID argument. Agrue with Empiric, he seems to be the only proponent of ID in the immediate vicinity.
Your #3 is a blatant mischaracterization of the ID position. It may be trivially true, but it misses the point pretty badly. The Dover testimony is only testimony, I've read Behe, and I stand by my statement.
Wow, me an thousands of other people used the install images without seeing corrupt packages but you didn't. Strange. Obviously, the packages are corrupt at the source and it's not some problem with your hardware or between your keyboard and chair.
LOL. 1 in 100000 "common interactions" are obviously fair - that's rich. Are you for real? If so, sign me up for your newsletter - we have a crackpot in the making. Get in on the ground floor, folks - this one is fresh.
Slashdot Mirror
Your follow-up post is a further demonstration of staggering stupidity or a lack of reading comprehension skills.
I'm having trouble parsing this one; if it's radical, it can hardly be common place, no?
This is a statement of staggering stupidity.
and always go with cars companies like "CarMaker", "AutoManufacturer", "TruckProducer", or "SedanMasters". I'm currenlty driving a SedanMaster model named "SedanWithNiceFeaturesAndALargeEngine". It's pretty sweet.
I don't think htat is a typi so much as a mistakee.
Yeah, like The Abyss.
Not even close to being remotely true, from what I understand, but I don't have reference to surveys handy.
Does the "Kred" in "DocKred" stand for "Kredulous"? Why do I feel like you are represent the median output of today's schools?
Also, this only works during the day. At night, the sun is of course black.
be sure to stare at it for three or four minutes. Initially, it may appear yellow, but as you stare at it you'll notice that it is really red. hth.
With apologies to Larry Niven.
Why is there always someone who feels the need to point out the right of someone to say someting? Is there someone being silenced here? Is there someone even suggesting that another person doesn't have the right to say something. Sheesh. Shut the fuck up already.
Cute. And by cute, I mean stupid.
I really don't know what you're trying to say here. No really, could you be more clear when you are talking down to simpletons like myself?
Address the points I brought up. I'm just trying to pin down what the ID proposition is, something which I believe you've mischaracterized, as I've shown, and you've ignored. Everything else you've replied with is really beside the point, and frankly, a little too slippery for me to respond to.
I'm sorry, I'm going to have to interpret your reluctance to speak concretely about claims you and I've made as evidence that you are indeed a troll. Again, for the recored, I think you are a troll. I may be wrong - you might just be so damn intelligent your discussion is going right over my head. You've failed to communicate or succeeded to troll, either way, this discussion can server no useful purpose.
Goodbye.
Unless you're deployed in Iraq where nobody drinks. Ha ha ha.
Yeah, the Xbox, generation-X, X-men, X-games, are all marketing disasters.
Look, Emperic, either you have a reading comprehension problem or you are trolling me. Even the testimony you post hints at Behe's true position. Let me paraphrase your original post to which I replied:
So that's "trivially true" in that all of the crucial information about Behe's position and the ID argument is tied up in that one vague, innocent word "some". Does Behe mean by "some"
?????. Behe's true position is closes to the last bullet. What a great word, "some". He and ID add to this tenent the conclusion that since evolution can't account for this biochemical complexity, it have been designed. As in, "evolution is flawed enough that a creator is required".
It seems like you are having trouble being honest about what ID really is - are you a proponent of the the theory and if so, is this a common tactic among ID's supporters?
Your #3 is a blatant mischaracterization of the ID position. It may be trivially true, but it misses the point pretty badly. The Dover testimony is only testimony, I've read Behe, and I stand by my statement.
4. Evolution is flawed enough that a creator is required.
Wow, me an thousands of other people used the install images without seeing corrupt packages but you didn't. Strange. Obviously, the packages are corrupt at the source and it's not some problem with your hardware or between your keyboard and chair.
FC4 has been better than FC3 in my experience, fwiw.
LOL. 1 in 100000 "common interactions" are obviously fair - that's rich. Are you for real? If so, sign me up for your newsletter - we have a crackpot in the making. Get in on the ground floor, folks - this one is fresh.