Antievolution.org :: Antievolution.org Discussion Board The Critic's Resource on Antievolution

Antievolution.org Discussion Board > From the Panda's Thumb > After the Bar Closes... > AFDave Wants You to Prove Evolution to Him

Pages: (18) < ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 ... >

sir_toejam Posts: 846 Joined: April 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 20 2006,18:07    Quote Buddy, I don't mind losing but I like to play first. so would the rest of us, but Dave's rules don't make enough sense to even get started, and he won't accept the rules the rest of humanity uses. Maybe a good game of dodgeball would suit him better?

normdoering Posts: 287 Joined: July 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 20 2006,18:20    Quote (sir_toejam @ May 20 2006,22:38) How old were you when you wrote this? Over a decade younger than I  am today. Quote What were you doing (in your life) when you wrote this? Either typing on a computer keyboard or carving something into stone, I  forget. Quote How close are the ideas presented to what your ideas are now? I don't think Arrius Piso wrote the New Testament any more. (wasn't all that convinced back then.)

sir_toejam Posts: 846 Joined: April 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 20 2006,18:21    i'll take it the questions aren't welcome. fair enough.

ericmurphy Posts: 2460 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 20 2006,18:36    Quote (afdave @ May 20 2006,17:32) And I see Rilke is not willing to back up her outrageous claims of intellectual superiority with any money at all. I do see that Steve has come up with his own little wager of $1000. Dave, if you think "Although the vocabularies of Spanish and Portuguese are quite similar, phonetically Portuguese is somewhat closer to Catalan or to French" means that Portuguese is a mixture of Spanish and French, you know even less about linguistics than I do. Phonetic resemblance has nothing to do whatsoever with whether a language is derived from another language. English is closer to French phonetically than German is; that doesn't mean English is more closely related to French than it is to German. I still think you're gonna lose this bet. -------------- 2006 MVD award for most dogged defense of scientific sanity "Atheism is a religion the same way NOT collecting stamps is a hobby." —Scott Adams

BWE Posts: 1902 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 20 2006,18:37    OK, so here is the deal. Davey-dog is an idiot. He has proven over and over and over that he is an idiot. He finally thinks he has a piece of information that he can defend. I think he is so stupid that he can't even defend a defendable position so I challenged him to back up what he says. He won't do it for the fundy-creo crap because, as most people know, it can't be defended. But I think he is so bone headed that he can't even brush his teeth let alone explain an idea when he is offered a counter argument. In fact, I am so sure that I offered to take him up on his bet. The stakes are different because I don't want his money nor do I want to spend mine. But the winner still gets something good: a chance to post a creationist post on my blog or the chance to post an FSMist type post on his blog. He seems pretty sure of himself so he probably knows a lot about the subject. I only have a passing interest so I figure it's equal. Idiot Davey-dog with info to start with and me having to look it up. One thing I am fairly confident of is that he will admit defeat in this subject if he loses or know when he has won if he wins. He may be dumber than his ideas about creationism but he isn't so attached to this. And, Sir T, I too am examining a pathology. And what's good in it for me is that I don't care about the results. It's still funny. And fun. Now, where did my sheep go? -------------- Who said that ev'ry wish would be heard and answered When wished on the morning star Somebody thought of that, and someone believed it Look what it's done so far The Daily Wingnut

sir_toejam Posts: 846 Joined: April 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 20 2006,18:42    ahhh, that explains it. Davey thought I was you. Dave said: Quote Hey Toejam ... I remember something about you promising to become a Creo if you saw me win an argument on an unrelated topic ... still not exactly what you offered, but close enough for Dave to confuse not only what you said, but who actually said it. yikes. pathology, indeed. good luck

ericmurphy Posts: 2460 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 20 2006,18:46    Quote (afdave @ May 20 2006,21:12) **gasp**  can't let this Creo have a victory  **sigh** You're joking, right? It's pretty clear at this point that Portuguese is not a mixture of French and Spanish, which is what you originally claimed. You've presented no evidence whatsoever that Portuguese is somehow a combination of the two (even in the sense that English is a Germanic tongue into which Latin grammar has been shoehorned). No one would claim that English is a mixture of Germanic and French, despite the huge number of French cognates in English. How do you get a "victory" out of a statement that Portuguese is "phonetically closer to French than Spanish"? The fact that a language is pronounced in a similar fashion to another language says nothing about their relationship to each other. -------------- 2006 MVD award for most dogged defense of scientific sanity "Atheism is a religion the same way NOT collecting stamps is a hobby." —Scott Adams

sir_toejam Posts: 846 Joined: April 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 20 2006,18:53    Quote How do you get a "victory" out of a statement that Portuguese is "phonetically closer to French than Spanish"? answer your own question. How does one get a "victory" out of being totally incorrect? only one way i can think of.

BWE Posts: 1902 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 20 2006,18:55    Ericmurphy, Um, I could make as good of an argument that English is a mix of germanic and french as I can that Portuguese is not what Davey-dumbo says it is. Typically, the history of a language is classified by the surviving writing. After William, most writing (that was'nt in Latin) from England, was in French for a longish period. I believe that the first written government document that showed a hybridization was around 1300. That's a lot of french. Arden? Uh-Oh. Dave, It looks like you have me over a barrel here. Just don't be too mean in what you write in your post if I lose, OK? -------------- Who said that ev'ry wish would be heard and answered When wished on the morning star Somebody thought of that, and someone believed it Look what it's done so far The Daily Wingnut

ericmurphy Posts: 2460 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 20 2006,19:04    Quote (BWE @ May 20 2006,23:55) Ericmurphy, Um, I could make as good of an argument that English is a mix of germanic and french as I can that Portuguese is not what Davey-dumbo says it is. Typically, the history of a language is classified by the surviving writing. You might be able to, but I don't think any linguist would agree with you that English is a romance language, like  French, Spanish, Italian, and yes, Portuguese. English is definitely a Germanic tongue. -------------- 2006 MVD award for most dogged defense of scientific sanity "Atheism is a religion the same way NOT collecting stamps is a hobby." —Scott Adams

Arden Chatfield Posts: 6657 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 20 2006,19:15    Quote (ericmurphy @ May 21 2006,00:04)     Quote (BWE @ May 20 2006,23:55) Ericmurphy, Um, I could make as good of an argument that English is a mix of germanic and french as I can that Portuguese is not what Davey-dumbo says it is. Typically, the history of a language is classified by the surviving writing. You might be able to, but I don't think any linguist would agree with you that English is a romance language, like  French, Spanish, Italian, and yes, Portuguese. English is definitely a Germanic tongue. English is a Germanic language. Period. Its grammar and core lexicon are Germanic. Granted, after the Norman invasions it acquired a huge amount of French vocabulary, but that does not make it a Romance language. It makes it a Germanic language with a big French influence. Not the same thing. (And Portuguese doesn't even have that.) To say that English is Romance, one would have to say that Japanese is both Chinese and English, since Japanese has a huge number of loans from both those languages. No one would want to make either statement. The question of whether English is a 'mix' of Germanic and French is somewhat more interesting. I don't think most linguists would go so far as to say that English is a mixed language, since fundamentally, the grammar of English owes very little to French. And, as I said, most of the core everyday vocab of English is still Germanic. The influence of French on English is much bigger than that of French on Portuguese, and yet phonetically French and English are very different. This shows that impressionistic phonetic 'similarities' really count for very little. -------------- "Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

sir_toejam Posts: 846 Joined: April 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 20 2006,19:18    Quote English is a Germanic language. Period. I knew there was some reason I studied German.

sir_toejam Posts: 846 Joined: April 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 20 2006,19:46    @norman: finished. I found this line of particular interest in the current discussion: Quote The believer can no longer imagine, comfortably, a world view without his faith, his illusions.  The emotion attached to these religious ideas is stronger than the emotion attached to the concepts and ideas in a more rational mind. yup.

BWE Posts: 1902 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 20 2006,19:55    I guess that would have been my basic argument. That, although the language of the countryside prevailed, it was drastically changed by the addition of the french. Read Chaucer then read Shakespeare, one right after another and you'll see what I mean. But, yes, English is Germanic in most syntax. The language itself is something I know very little about. That holds for french and portuguese too. The history of western europe however, I picked up osmotically from my father who was a European History professor for 40 years and wrote 6 or 8 books on the period from roughly 1000 to Henry the Navigator. Honestly, I have never read the books. I also only took one european history course in college where my only recollection is writing a paper on the education system under charlemaigne and one that was a comparison of the Burgundian codes to Roman law. and that was 30 years ago. The point I guess is that, although you could win if we had to debate linguistics. Davey has a fightin chance. If I had a linguistics question, I'd ask you. Funny, but that's because I understand what being an expert is. That's why I would go to a bunch of folks here for info. Or other experts. Davey-dog on the other hand is too stupid to pour his own water but he thinks his wife is crazy for telling him that the flat part of the cup goes on the bottom. -------------- Who said that ev'ry wish would be heard and answered When wished on the morning star Somebody thought of that, and someone believed it Look what it's done so far The Daily Wingnut

afdave Posts: 1621 Joined: April 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 21 2006,00:14    Eric ... don't make yourself look ridiculous like Rilke did ... you're one of the guys here whose intellect I respect ... shake it off, my friend ... It's not that bad ... you just lost a stupid little side argument that doesn't even matter in the big scheme of things ... -------------- A DILEMMA FOR THE COMMITTED NATURALIST A Hi-tech alien spaceship lands on earth ... DESIGNED. A Hi-tech alien rotary motor found in a cell ... NOT DESIGNED. http://afdave.wordpress.com/....ess.com

afdave Posts: 1621 Joined: April 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 21 2006,00:40    Alright, I have some questions on Evolution ... (since this is supposed to be an "Evolution" thread) You guys say there is no such thing as "upward evolution," right?  And I think I've heard someone say that the bacteria are winning. So presumably, a million years from now, there might be only bacteria ... no mammals, right? My question is ... why didn't the bacteria win before mammals appeared?  Weren't they evolving just as rapidly early in earth history as they are now? -------------- A DILEMMA FOR THE COMMITTED NATURALIST A Hi-tech alien spaceship lands on earth ... DESIGNED. A Hi-tech alien rotary motor found in a cell ... NOT DESIGNED. http://afdave.wordpress.com/....ess.com

jeannot Posts: 1201 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 21 2006,00:54    Quote (afdave @ May 21 2006,05:40) So presumably, a million years from now, there might be only bacteria ... no mammals, right? My question is ... why didn't the bacteria win before mammals appeared?  Weren't they evolving just as rapidly early in earth history as they are now? EDIT: oops, I misunderstood 'from now'. A million years ago, humans were walking in Africa, so I don't see any reason why bacteria should take over the world that fast. They've been coexisting with other life forms for billions of years. Also, evolution is not only a matter of who wins and who loses. You know, ecosystems... Each one of your cells is like an ecosystem where bacteria (mitochondria) cooperate with your chromosomes.

JonF Posts: 634 Joined: Feb. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 21 2006,02:59    Abandoning your lingusitcs discussion? That's a shame; your pathetic efforts are really comical. Quote (afdave @ May 21 2006,05:40) You guys say there is no such thing as "upward evolution," right?  And I think I've heard someone say that the bacteria are winning. "Winning" does not necessarily mean "eradicating all other life forms", and almost certainly doesn't mean that here.  In this case it probably means something like "there are more individual bacteria than any other organism" or "all the bacteria weigh more than any other group of organisms", both of which are true. Quote So presumably, a million years from now, there might be only bacteria ... no mammals, right? A million years isn't all that long.  But there could be only bacteria, but it's incredibly unlikely; about as likely as it is that we're seriously wrong about the age of the Earth. Quote My question is ... why didn't the bacteria win before mammals appeared?  Weren't they evolving just as rapidly early in earth history as they are now? In the senses listed above, they did win long before mammals appeared, and long before dinosaurs appeared. The reason why bacteria have not eradicated all other living organisms is that bacteria, successful as they are, cannot and do not fill all possible ecological niches.

stevestory Posts: 13407 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 21 2006,03:15    Quote So presumably, a million years from now, there might be only bacteria ... no mammals, right? My question is ... why didn't the bacteria win before mammals appeared?  Weren't they evolving just as rapidly early in earth history as they are now? Dave, the comic book you learned evolution from--was it even in English?

Russell Posts: 1082 Joined: April 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 21 2006,03:17    Quote Eric ...you just lost a stupid little side argument that doesn't even matter in the big scheme of things ... There it is again... what did I miss? What did Eric contend that davey proved wrong? I suspect another instance of the Cordova Cockstrut here. -------------- Must... not... scratch... mosquito bite.

jeannot Posts: 1201 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 21 2006,03:36    Quote (JonF @ May 21 2006,07:59) "Winning" does not necessarily mean "eradicating all other life forms", and almost certainly doesn't mean that here.  In this case it probably means something like "there are more individual bacteria than any other organism" or "all the bacteria weigh more than any other group of organisms", both of which are true. mmm. I'm not sure. I recently heard that viruses represent the majority of biomass in oceans. But you may not consider viruses as true organisms, after all. Anyway, the notion of 'victory' doesn't mean squat in science.

normdoering Posts: 287 Joined: July 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 21 2006,03:50    Quote (afdave @ May 21 2006,05:40) You guys say there is no such thing as "upward evolution," right? That would be because there is no real "up" in evolution. There is no priviledged direction in search space. Define what you think "upward" means in terms of evolution? Are we talking more complex, smarter, bigger, faster, more adaptable? Quote ... I've heard someone say that the bacteria are winning. That depends on what race you think is being run. Quote So presumably, a million years from now, there might be only bacteria ... no mammals, right? If we get hit by a comet, then we humans and most mammals and lizards and fish could go extinct, but bacteria would probably survive and evolve again into more complex creatures over another billion years.... well, if the roaches don't beat them to it. Quote ... why didn't the bacteria win before mammals appeared?  Weren't they evolving just as rapidly early in earth history as they are now? What do you mean by "win" ? You have a really wrong idea about how this all works. Do you think some single type of life form has to take over and beat every other? That doesn't happen because all the different life forms live in different niches. It's all part of one ecology where things become dependent on other things. Right now there are more bacterial cells in your body than there are human cells, you couldn't live without them and they can't live without you.

Bing Posts: 144 Joined: Mar. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 21 2006,05:00    Quote (normdoering @ May 21 2006,08:50) You have a really wrong idea about how this all works. Do you think some single type of life form has to take over and beat every other? That doesn't happen because all the different life forms live in different niches. It's all part of one ecology where things become dependent on other things. Right now there are more bacterial cells in your body than there are human cells, you couldn't live without them and they can't live without you. AFDave's hopelessly stuck in that "And God hath given Dominion over all living things to Man" meme.

Arden Chatfield Posts: 6657 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 21 2006,05:54    Quote (stevestory @ May 21 2006,08:15) Quote So presumably, a million years from now, there might be only bacteria ... no mammals, right? My question is ... why didn't the bacteria win before mammals appeared?  Weren't they evolving just as rapidly early in earth history as they are now? Dave, the comic book you learned evolution from--was it even in English? It was probably in a mix of French and Spanish.   -------------- "Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

Bing Posts: 144 Joined: Mar. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 21 2006,06:21    Quote (stevestory @ May 21 2006,08:15) Dave, the comic book you learned evolution from--was it even in English? Chick tracts are written in English, so the answer is presumably 'yes'.

Arden Chatfield Posts: 6657 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 21 2006,06:23    Quote (Bing @ May 21 2006,11:21) Quote (stevestory @ May 21 2006,08:15) Dave, the comic book you learned evolution from--was it even in English? Chick tracts are written in English, so the answer is presumably 'yes'. Sad to say, I once found some Spanish-language Jack Chick tracts on a bus bench, so all bets are off.   -------------- "Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

stevestory Posts: 13407 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 21 2006,06:27    OOOOO speaking of that... Hey Dave! Go and read this Big Daddy? and tell us what you think.

stevestory Posts: 13407 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 21 2006,06:32    I especially love that painting on the wall. I want that for my living room. The banana's a nice touch.

Arden Chatfield Posts: 6657 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 21 2006,06:39    Quote (stevestory @ May 21 2006,11:32) I especially love that painting on the wall. I want that for my living room. The banana's a nice touch. I want a t-shirt with that gorilla on it. With the banana. And the 'OUR FATHER' caption. Has anyone else ever noticed that in Jack Chick tracts, the evil professors always look Jewish, and the noble Christians who save the day always look Nordic? Leni Riefenstahl couldn't have asked for better. -------------- "Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

stevestory Posts: 13407 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 21 2006,06:45    I think everyone has noticed that. :-) Supposedly there were some tracts he no longer publishes which were more explicit about nonwhites.

Pages: (18) < ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 ... >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

© 2002-2009 Antievolution.org Powered by Ikonboard 3.0.2a © 2001 Ikonboard