Joined: July 2006
|Quote (Southstar @ Nov. 22 2011,03:26)|
|Well even if you have, all the ingridients of a recipe, you don't really have a way of backing the cake. But worse you don't even know what cake you are baking or even if it is a cake at all.|
But what's wrong with that?
We start from knowing nothing and progress from there.
They start from already knowing the answer and never changing their mind.
Given the short amount of time that this has been undergoing research compared to the thousands of years they've had (as the default position) I think our position has done fantastically well.
You have the outline of a sketch of a cake. They have a blank piece of paper with "poof" written on it.
Call them on it! Ask them why they demand evidence to a standard that they cannot themselves provide! Ask them why their position is more logical then "we're not sure but here are some plausible pathways".
Give them the link I provided to the Nasa workshop and ask them how filling that cake is compared to their cake?
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
if there are even critical flaws in Gaugerís work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand