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... > FL "Debate Thread"

Pages: (100) < ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 ... >

FloydLee Posts: 577 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,13:02    Quote Floyd Lee's current tactic is to pretend his "Big Five " have not been addressed. Certainly not by Pope Benedict, as we have seen. Furthermore, where his speeches may  impact on our discussion of the Big Five, we have seen that his words actually REINFORCE the first two incompatibilites, creating clear clashes with evolutionary theory as currently taught by evolutionist scientists.  Nor has he offered any reconciliations for ANY of the Big Five. Y'all gotta do a much much better job of hiding behind his skirts, if that is your intention. Incidentally, nobody has yet shown how evolution supposedly "embiggens" (love that word!) Christianity. FloydLee

Lou FCD Posts: 5455 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,13:08    Quote (FloydLee @ Sep. 23 2009,11:22) Okay, now I see what's happening.  Apparently, anything I post on the peanut thread is automatically being redirected to the main debate thread. Well, no problem.  But that explains why the post about the Flood appeared here. Quote Bugs painted on a car, by turtlemom4bacon -------------- “Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas? Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

deadman_932 Posts: 3094 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,13:11    Quote (deadman_932 @ Sep. 23 2009,12:50) Just as a point of information: Floyd Lee's current tactic is to pretend his "Big Five " have not been addressed. This is coupled with his avoiding answering those points raised against his claims (so he can pretend those responses don't exist). In doing so, Floyd Lee has abandoned his own agreement to engage in good-faith debate. As I stated to Floyd Lee prior to starting this thread; " debate is dialogue, not monologue, and that civility (well, to a decent, ethical person) would require *directly* addressing the points of your opponent ... fail to adhere to good-faith discussion/debate standards and all “rules” go out the window. Your choices determine that. Floyd Lee's own choices have determined that other posters are no longer obliged to treat Floyd Lee as anything more than a fraud willing to go back on his word -- a fanatic without ethics or honor. It appears that's exactly what he wants to be able to claim "persecution" and "victory" based on emotional appeal rather than the strength of his argument and logic (since he has none of the latter). Myself, I find mockery of his stupidity, dishonesty, childlike views and blatantly false claims is enough. Others can do as they wish, of course. There are no longer any special rules to this thread. Floyd Lee has seen to that. Just to repeat this , for convenience -------------- AtBC Award for Thoroughness in the Face of Creationism

deadman_932 Posts: 3094 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,13:16    Quote (FloydLee @ Sep. 23 2009,13:02)     Quote Floyd Lee's current tactic is to pretend his "Big Five " have not been addressed. Certainly not by Pope Benedict, as we have seen. Furthermore, where his speeches may  impact on our discussion of the Big Five, we have seen that his words actually REINFORCE the first two incompatibilites, creating clear clashes with evolutionary theory as currently taught by evolutionist scientists.  Nor has he offered any reconciliations for ANY of the Big Five. Y'all gotta do a much much better job of hiding behind his skirts, if that is your intention. Incidentally, nobody has yet shown how evolution supposedly "embiggens" (love that word!) Christianity. FloydLee The term "embiggens" is -- much like yourself, Floyd Lee -- a joke. It's a term lifted from an episode of "The Simpsons," ...  a fact suited to your cartoonishly childlike refusal to answer/respond to questions and points put directly to you in the past pages of this thread -- where your "Big Five" have already been refuted. Edit: While I'm sure your childlike mind considers hiding from the facts to be a "winning" strategy, Floyd Lee, it's amusing that any reader can simply glance through any given page of this thread and notice that you have been answered to each and every point you have raised. This stands in stark contrast to you also leaving every page strewn with points and questions against your claims--  that you refuse to deal with in any way except to pretend they don't exist. Interested readers may wish to glance at Glenn Morton's (a former creationist) useful "explanation" of this weird "pretend it doesn't exist" phenomena seen in fundamentalist fanatics: "Morton's Demon -------------- AtBC Award for Thoroughness in the Face of Creationism

FloydLee Posts: 577 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,13:31    Quote It appears that's exactly what he wants to be able to claim "persecution" and "victory".... I haven't suggested anything about claiming either "persecution" or "victory" in this debate.  At all.  Not even thinking in those terms. Perhaps slow down a little Deadman?  Cool off?  Take a break, eat some Little Debbies with the oatmeal cream inside, knock out a couple PlayStation football games?  Would that help?

deadman_932 Posts: 3094 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,13:36    No "cooling off" is needed here, Floyd. Typing is easy and simple, much like yourself. You pretending to know my emotions or my work schedule or anything at all about me is indicative of your willingness to delude yourself, FloydLee. Since you post more than me, by my count -- you might want to take the time to actually address the questions  that you deliberately blind yourself to in previous pages.   Rather than trying to play "internet mind reader." -------------- AtBC Award for Thoroughness in the Face of Creationism

Robin Posts: 1431 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,13:37    Quote (FloydLee @ Sep. 23 2009,13:02) Quote Quote Floyd Lee's current tactic is to pretend his "Big Five " have not been addressed. Certainly not by Pope Benedict, as we have seen. False, as I pointed out. Furthermore it demonstrates an internal contradiction with your claims that you still have not addressed. I suppose I should not care about the latter however... -------------- we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

deadman_932 Posts: 3094 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,13:42    Robin reiterates my point about you failing to address issues that refute your claims , Floyd. You'll ignore that, too? Even when ANY reader can simply click back and see that? -------------- AtBC Award for Thoroughness in the Face of Creationism

FloydLee Posts: 577 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,14:42    Quote Since you post more than me, by my count.... Hmm.  I wonder if your honest concession that I post more than you do, might possibly undercut your claim that I am ignoring the issues/points. After all, unlike you, I am responding to multiple posters within this debate.   :) (At least you're not doing any more hand-wringing over the Flood post.  I should be thankful, I suppose.) FloydLee

deadman_932 Posts: 3094 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,14:54    Quote (FloydLee @ Sep. 23 2009,14:42)   Quote Since you post more than me, by my count.... Hmm.  I wonder if your honest concession that I post more than you do, might possibly undercut your claim that I am ignoring the issues/points. After all, unlike you, I am responding to multiple posters within this debate.   :) FloydLee Putting up contentless "response" posts is easy. Sure, you can post up hundreds of such posts. Numbers alone won't show that you addressed relevant issues, though. As an example, your last one again simply ignores Robin's clear and direct point that you avoided the internal contradictions of your claims. Your response? To avoid it...pretend it doesn't exist... while making another irrelevant post. -------------- AtBC Award for Thoroughness in the Face of Creationism

Dale_Husband Posts: 118 Joined: April 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,15:37    On what basis does FL, or anyone else, have to claim that the Bible is inerrant? Or that the inerrancy of the Bible is the only reason to beleive in Christianity? Or that we must believe every part of the Bible from Genesis to Revelation? If we threw out the first eleven chapters of Genesis and just kept the Gospels, we would still have the foundation of Christianity. So FL's claim that evolution and Christianity are incompatable are not based on any definite proof at all. The claim that the Bible is the Word of God, and that we know God is real from the Bible, is circular reasoning that has no value whatsoever. You can have faith in the Bible, but not to the point of stupidity. God gave us minds to seek truth and expose and reject falsehoods. We insult God by not using those minds. http://www.care2.com/c2c....pg.html -------------- If you need a man-made book to beleive in a God who is said to have created the universe, of what value is your faith? You might as well worship an idol.

Albatrossity2 Posts: 2780 Joined: Mar. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,15:42    Quote (FloydLee @ Sep. 23 2009,14:42) After all, unlike you, I am responding to multiple posters within this debate. No, your typings here are not in the category of "responding". For example, I gave you pretty clear evidence of something you said didn't exist in a high-school or university genetics textbook. It does exist. Your response is what does not exist. Carry on. -------------- Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind Has been obligated from the beginning To create an ordered universe As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.                         - Pattiann Rogers

Robin Posts: 1431 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,15:47    Quote (FloydLee @ Sep. 23 2009,14:42) Quote Since you post more than me, by my count.... Hmm.  I wonder if your honest concession that I post more than you do, might possibly undercut your claim that I am ignoring the issues/points. After all, unlike you, I am responding to multiple posters within this debate.   :) (At least you're not doing any more hand-wringing over the Flood post.  I should be thankful, I suppose.) FloydLee Quote Hmm.  I wonder if your honest concession that I post more than you do, might possibly undercut your claim that I am ignoring the issues/points. Umm...no, it really doesn't, because as has been shown, a number of your posts are non-sequiturs. But let's be frank...even if they weren't non-sequiturs, the fact that you keep repeating claims demonstrated invalid or questionable several posts (if not pages) earlier indicates that you are indeed ignoring the issues/points addressed. Quote After all, unlike you, I am responding to multiple posters within this debate.   :) While this is true Floyd, you could be intellectually honest and stop pretending that your Big Five haven't been addressed even if you aren't going to respond directly to the posters. But when you say things like "certainly not by the Pope as we have seen" when there have been several posts noting this is inaccurate, you are demonstrating that you are ignoring the issues/points addressed and being intellectually dishonest. -------------- we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

FloydLee Posts: 577 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,16:24    I think we can simpify this discussion regarding the Pope.  We won't agree on it, but it can be simplified.   Quote So in fact, the Pope has NOT actually addressed the specific Big Five Incompatibilities at all, let alone provided a solution for them. This statement is specifically true, (otherwise refuting that statement would be as easy as directly quoting the Pope on it and that's that.) Robin ducks the point.  Stanton ducks the point.  Deadman ducks the point.  Because, after all, the Pope honestly has NOTeven addressed or reconciled the specific Big Five items.   All he has said (and you are challenged to prove me wrong) is that evolution is compatible with Christianity, and even then---and this is the part that you guys clearly ignored until I pointed it out---the Pope makes that statement only under specific conditions, conditions that not only re-introduce the first two incompatibilities, but actually REINFORCE those first two. (And yes, I provided the quotations to back that up.  And no, the Pople hasn't yet issued additional statements to resolve the clash (for example) between his own teleological "intelligent project" statements and evolutionary theory's NT-NCF position, quoted earlier.) So, we might as well be laid back like a Pop Tart about everything, because clearly we can do mutual accusations of avoiding points/issues all day long if that's what you want, but that kind of thing won't resolve anything. Instead, why not admit the possibility that the Pope, even though he's a TE for sure, is clearly NOT the best guy to use as a defense against the Big Five at this time?  Find me a TE that reconciles the otherwise irrconcilable Big Five.  Gotta be one somewhere in the Virgo Galactic Cluster, I'm sure. FloydLee

deadman_932 Posts: 3094 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,16:31    And once again, in an inflated, content-less post that nonetheless implies that Floyd has addressed the already-present responses to his "big five" ....Floyd avoids the direct, clear point that Robin made. Floyd's posts seem to consist of nothing but that -- avoid, misdirect, pretend, ignore, issue contentless post....repeat. The fact is that the pope is undeniably a christian who believes evolution to be well within God's "plan" . For Floyd to say, as the irrelevant person that he is, that the pope has to address *Floyd's* PERSONAL points...is beyond stupid. It's merely a tactic to pretend that the pope (and by extension, any  like-minded christian) "need" to address "Floyd" at all. As others have mentioned, one can easily throw out all of Floyd's "big Five" and  still claim to be a Christian, validly. Floyd is not arbiter of who is or is not Christian, nor are the "foundational issues" in his "Big Five" necessary and sufficient to declare someone "Not a Christian" if they fail to address them at all.   It's a large, elaborate red herring, based on false authority...a pile of fallacy upon fallacy, with only Floyd "agreeing" on the validity of his pile of fallacies And for Floyd to contnue with this pretense,  he MUST continue to ignore all the facts, points, and issues raised against him in all preceding pages. It's a tour-de-force of Morton's Demon and Floyd's own lack of ethics and duplicity. But that was also demonstrated in Floyd ALSO simply abandoning his "word" in agreeing to rules here. At any rate, Floyd will continue to ignore all the objections to his claims already raised by a dozen posters in this thread already. ETA: Floyd, I have never personally dealt with an honest YEC. Your willingness to use *any* low, dishonorable, fallacious, dishonest tactic...is evidence of the evil that fanatic religion can lead to. But the fact is also that you, personally, are intellectually incapable of fooling anyone but yourself, here. And that's funny as hell. -------------- AtBC Award for Thoroughness in the Face of Creationism

Chayanov Posts: 289 Joined: Dec. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,16:56    Quote For Floyd to say, as the irrelevant person that he is, that the pope has to address *Floyd's* PERSONAL points...is beyond stupid. That's really the part that baffles me. At least two Popes, in the past, have asserted that evolution is not incompatible with Christianity. Because these Popes have not specifically addressed, point by point, a completely arbitrary list FL made a few days ago, that means they're wrong. Their own reasons FL dismisses (without even knowing what they are) as irrelevant. FL likewise dismisses all Christians who accept evolution, again because none of them have, at any time in the past, addressed his completely arbitrary list that he made up a few days ago.* I'd be shocked, except that this is completely typical behavior from him. *Edited to add: Except for those here who are Christians and have addressed his points, who FL has also dismissed out of hand. -------------- Help! Marxist literary critics are following me!

Lou FCD Posts: 5455 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,16:59    For the record, Southern Methodist University also thinks Floyd is full of shit. Lauri Lebo is heading there to talk about KvD for SMU's Year of Darwin celebrations. -------------- “Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas? Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

JohnW Posts: 3217 Joined: Aug. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,17:30    Quote (deadman_932 @ Sep. 14 2009,03:07) On that note, I'm going to post the syllogistic argument Dan set forward in the "Peanut Gallery" : 1. The Pope is a Christian. 2. The Pope holds that evolution happens. 3. Therefore, Evolution is compatible with Christianity. A simple three-line proof. FL now has only five options: A -- Contend that statement 1 is false. B -- Contend that statement 2 is false. C -- Contend that the reasoning deriving statement 3 from statements 1 and 2 is wrong. D -- Accept that statement 3 is true. OR E -- Change the subject by saying something irrelevant like "Some of you boys have already experienced either the LOSS of your Christian faith, or at least a SERIOUS EROSION of your Christian faith. And your slide (your back-slide, that is) is partly or indirectly due to the impact of evolution-claims on your own beliefs." Which will it be, FL? Keep in mind that debate is dialogue, not monologue, and that civility (well, to a decent, ethical person)  would require *directly* addressing the points of your opponent (as I have with you). Respond directly and thoroughly to the points above, keeping in mind that you've already lost. Just for the record, this was posted on page 1.   Nine days ago.   Floyd still hasn't addressed this directly, except to imply that while the Pope may be a Christian, he isn't as good a Christian as Floyd. I think we're done here.  Floyd's wasting his time and ours.  Floyd, may I suggest you take this up with the Pope? -------------- Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it. - Robert Byers There isn't any probability that the letter d is in the word "mathematics"...  The correct answer would be "not even 0" - JoeG

FloydLee Posts: 577 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,17:47    Quote Floyd still hasn't addressed this directly, except to imply that while the Pope may be a Christian, he isn't as good a Christian as Floyd. You may want to go back and check the pages on this one.  AND when you find my response to the "simple three-line proof", you may want to read for comprehension, and quote what I said in an accurate fashion (you don't need to risk incorrect paraphrasing anymore, just use the quote button instead), and THEN offer your assessment. I trust that's not beyond your current abilities John. (But please let me know if you need help on it!)

FloydLee Posts: 577 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,17:50    In fact, just in case, let's go ahead and offer at least a hint for you.  My response to the "simple three-line proof" (the response you're going to carefully read again for comprehension) would fall under option "C".

deadman_932 Posts: 3094 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,17:55    Quote (FloydLee @ Sep. 18 2009,12:58)     Quote 1. The Pope is a Christian. 2. The Pope holds that evolution happens. 3. Therefore, Evolution is compatible with Christianity. A simple three-line proof. So, let's check out this "proof".  Let's ask a few questions.  Better yet, let's just ask one question. What exactly does (1) have to do with (2)? Note carefully:  It is entirely possible, according to your 3-point set-up, that the Pope is affirming that "evolution happens" even though it creates a conflict with his personal belief in Christianity.  That would kinda wreck the claim of "proof." (After all, you'll notice that nowhere in your e-point set-up did you actually claim that the Pope says that evolution is compatible with Christianity, nor is any evidence provided by the Pope to support such a claim, nor does the Pope offer any specific resolutions of any of the Big Four Incompatibilities.) FloydLee Note Floyd's "response"  from page 4 of this thread. Note that Floyd fails to deal with the refutations/points made regarding this on that page, or in the following pages. Floyd's "point" seems to be that just because the Pope is a Christian who holds that evolution is *not* in conflict with Christianity...that....well, something. -------------- AtBC Award for Thoroughness in the Face of Creationism

FloydLee Posts: 577 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,18:06    Quote Note carefully:  It is entirely possible, according to your 3-point set-up, that the Pope is affirming that "evolution happens" even though it creates a conflict with his personal belief in Christianity.  That would kinda wreck the claim of "proof." Notice that my paragraph--whether it's 100 percent right or 100 percent wrong--clearly places my response under your Option "C". You remember what you said your Option "C" was, don't you Deadman?     Quote C -- Contend that the reasoning deriving statement 3 from statements 1 and 2 is wrong. So in fact, your post received a straight-up, direct response.  I actually gave you the type of response that you specifically asked for in your post:       Quote ....*directly* addressing the points of your opponent NOW wha'cha got to say dude?   No escaping that you at least got the sort of response that you asked for, even though you didn't (and don't) agree with the response itself.   Can you at least acknowledge that much, or is that too much for you to handle right now?     :)

khan Posts: 1554 Joined: May 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,18:14    Quote (FloydLee @ Sep. 23 2009,19:06) Quote Note carefully:  It is entirely possible, according to your 3-point set-up, that the Pope is affirming that "evolution happens" even though it creates a conflict with his personal belief in Christianity.  That would kinda wreck the claim of "proof." Notice that my paragraph--whether it's 100 percent right or 100 percent wrong--clearly places my response under your Option "C". You remember what you said your Option "C" was, don't you Deadman?     Quote C -- Contend that the reasoning deriving statement 3 from statements 1 and 2 is wrong. So in fact, your post received a straight-up, direct response.  I actually gave you the type of response that you specifically asked for in your post:       Quote ....*directly* addressing the points of your opponent NOW wha'cha got to say dude?   No escaping that you at least got the sort of response that you asked for, even though you didn't (and don't) agree with the response itself.   Can you at least acknowledge that much, or is that too much for you to handle right now?     :) Do you think you're making sense? -------------- "It's as if all those words, in their hurry to escape from the loony, have fallen over each other, forming scrambled heaps of meaninglessness." -damitall That's so fucking stupid it merits a wing in the museum of stupid. -midwifetoad Frequency is just the plural of wavelength... -JoeG

Stanton Posts: 266 Joined: Jan. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,18:15    So then how come you refuse to address the problem of how you appear to consider the concepts of predation, old age, and internal parasites to be worse than divinely mandated genocide, divinely commanded murder, and using child slaves as a reward for either behaviors?

deadman_932 Posts: 3094 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,18:15    Floyd...seriously, do you imagine that you're making a valid point here? If the Pope (1) Is a Christian that (2) Holds evolution to be compatible with Christianity, then (3) Christianity is held compatible with Evolution by a Christian. That's all the "proof" consists of. (1) and (2) are simply facts, as we have seen, FloydLee. Deriving (3) from facts one and two is ...well, axiomatic. Now, what IS your point? Note: I'm sorely tempted to simply bring in the Lolcats after this display of stupid on the part of FloydLee. -------------- AtBC Award for Thoroughness in the Face of Creationism

Stanton Posts: 266 Joined: Jan. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,18:16    Quote (khan @ Sep. 23 2009,18:14) Do you think you're making sense? FL does, but, he's the only person to think so.

Stanton Posts: 266 Joined: Jan. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,18:31    Quote (deadman_932 @ Sep. 23 2009,18:15) Floyd...seriously, do you imagine that you're making a valid point here? If the Pope (1) Is a Christian that (2) Holds evolution to be compatible with Christianity, then (3) Christianity is held compatible with Evolution by a Christian. That's all the "proof" consists of. Deriving (3) from facts one and two is ...well, axiomatic. Note: I'm sorely tempted to simply bring in the Lolcats after this display of stupid on the part of FloydLee. According to FL's logic, because FL was taught to hate, fear and despise evolution, the Pope doesn't believe in evolution, despite statements to the direct contrary.

deadman_932 Posts: 3094 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,18:37    Earlier today on this page, FloydLee made a comment about me "needing" to "cool off" -- as if FloydLee *knew* (and better than me) what my "actual" emotional state was. That would fit a hypothetical pattern of FloydLee "thinking" that FloydLee knows (better than the Pope) what the Pope "really" thinks... Which is pretty fuckin' nuts. -------------- AtBC Award for Thoroughness in the Face of Creationism

carlsonjok Posts: 3326 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,18:40    Quote (deadman_932 @ Sep. 23 2009,18:15) Note: I'm sorely tempted to simply bring in the Lolcats after this display of stupid on the part of FloydLee. HA HA THIS IS YOU -------------- It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

deadman_932 Posts: 3094 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2009,18:46    Oh, well now you JUST HAD to go ahead and do that, didn't you, Carlsonjok, you big flaming oklahomo, you. The gates are burst asunder, the walls breached and the barbarians are pouring in the citadel, THANKS TO YOU. edit: TeeHee. -------------- AtBC Award for Thoroughness in the Face of Creationism

Pages: (100) < ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 ... >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

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