Joined: Jan. 2012
|Quote (Freddie @ Aug. 23 2012,16:14)|
|Quote (midwifetoad @ Aug. 23 2012,15:05)|
|Barry Arrington continues his quest to push inconvenient questions off the first page. He has started what is at least the third thread at UD dealing with Upright Biped's semionic theory.|
So he can start the whole thing over as if the links to TSZ don't exist, no one ever asked UB how his theory supports ID, whether he has evidence that the genetic code existed in its current form in the first replicator, or what the existence of red plastic balls has to do with evolution.
I predict that if anyone brings this up or posts links to the threads UB ran away from, they will conveniently stop posting after being warned of more serious forms of correction.
"Having finished typing his rather grandiose OP, Barry sensed a nagging feeling that something was wrong ..."
|I take the following from an excellent comment UP made in a prior post. UP lays out his argument step by step, precept by precept. Then he arrives at a conclusion. In order for his argument to be valid, the conclusion must follow from the premises. In order for his argument to be sound, each of the premises must be true.|
Now here is the challenge to our Darwinist friends. If you disagree with UP’s conclusion, please demonstrate how his argument is either invalid (as a matter of logic the conclusion does not follow from the premises) or unsound (one or more of the premises are false). Good luck (you’re going to need it).
Without further ado, here is UP’s argument:
Is he fucking serious? He asks the "Darwinists" to dissect "UP"'s theory in a thread to which most of them can't comment? Meantime they have extensively dissected the logic of the argument, and the relevance of said logic to chemistry, over at TSZ. Presumably, KF is shortly going to say "chirp chirp chirp".
I give UB some credit for discussing over there, even if it made not a dent in his certainties, but Barry ... you're a fucking buffoon.
SoapySam is a pathetic asswiper. Joe G
BTW, when you make little jabs like â€śI thought basic logic was one thing UDers could handle,â€ť you come off looking especially silly when you turn out to be wrong. - Barry Arrington