Originally posted by mrvdreamknight
"repeatedly warned?" - right. How about I share with you their private messages so you can see what they were really saying? But of course I'm
sure that would get me in to some kind of trouble. So I guess I won't.
I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Are you implying that the mods are secretly supporting you but not posting in the threads themselves?
But for the record, the one warning I received was for posting 'nope' and 'nope' - for which I apologized to the mod and promised not to do
it again. I was unaware of the rules here but I have since read and refer to the rules often.
You apparently still are: "No 1-Liners: Please do not create minimal "me too," "I agree," or similar very-short replies." But you continue to do
Boy, you're good. You attacked me again and I responded.
Not at all. I'm attacking the fact that you post almost no meaningful content in your posts and then claim victory on behalf of others. It's fine if
you want to show support for another poster, but one-liners that add nothing to the conversation aren't the way to do it. That's why ATS has the
stars & flags system.
The truth of the matter was that the thread you are referring to was called, Creationism: prove it, or something like that. When I reminded
the op that we were there to prove creationism, he about blew a gasket. And the thread stalled for a bit but then it picked up steem again because he
suckered in some more people to argue about evolution, even though that is not what the thread is suppose to be about. The op has since opened a new
thread with a corrected title, proving I was right. (I guess I must have made at least one logical argument there - hunh?)
That's the truth? Interesting. Here's what I remember, and can back up by referring to the original thread: the thread is called
"Creationism/Intelligent Design: PROVE IT!", you were repeatedly posting off-topic by trying to disprove evolution as if that would be tantamount to
positive evidence for creationism, the OP asked that you stay on topic and provide positive evidence for creationism, the mods then warned you three
times about your one-line no-content posts, you started threatening to report people to the mods if they didn't stay within your view of what
on-topic was for the thread. Since you've left that thread, it's continued to grow and is up over 300 posts at this point. The OP opened this thread
because he wanted to provide a forum for people like edmc^2 to post evidence to falsify evolution. There, I brought the truth to you.
Since comparing evolution to creationism is like comparing apples to oranges I see no point of debating them anymore.
That's fine. This isn't a thread about comparing evolution and creationism. This is a thread for people to post evidence which they believe
falsifies evolution. Then people will post their reasons for why that presented evidence does not falsify evolution. And back and forth. That's the
debate for this thread.
Evolution does a fair job of explaining how things have gone since it all began but offers no thought on our origin - and it may or may not end
up being true.
You're right, it doesn't offer any thoughts on our origin... because it's not supposed to. That's what things like abiogenesis are for. It may
turn out someday that evolution is found to not be the truth, but simply saying that isn't a falsification of evolution. Theories can and should be
constantly tested in light of new evidence.
Creationism offers one possible explanation of how it all began and it may end up being proven true or not.
Fine. So take your positive evidence or creationism over to the "Creationism/Intelligent Design: PROVE IT!" thread.
The point? Neither of them have been proven. Henceforth why there has been countless threads about these subjects.
Evolution has a preponderance of the evidence, and by preponderance I mean "all of it", while there has been zero evidence provided for creationism.
But, again, that's discussion meant for the "Creationism/Intelligent Design: PROVE IT!" thread.
Whenever either subject is debated the other subject always comes in to play.
Hardly. When asked to prove evolution, people don't try and disprove creationism. The only people I see regularly bringing the two together are
creationists who try to invoke falsification of evolution to prove creationism. But it doesn't work that way, does it?
Why? I do not know. But it makes zero sense to me. Because even if evolution or creationism is disproved does it really prove the other
theory correct? No, it does not. So what is the point of debating them then?
Because we're not debating evolution vs creationism. The three threads that are active on the topic now boil down to the following: one thread for
providing positive proof for creationism, one for providing positive proof of evolution, one for providing falsification of evolution. We're
discussing each of these on their own merits.
Will you or I change our beliefs? Not hardly.
So then why debate it? Really, why?
Sure we can share our ideas, views, and beliefs, but hasn't this all been done before by far greater intellects than ours?
I have read thousands of posts on ATS about this subject since my first posts here and have learned what a futile debate this really is.
Not at all. Honestly, if you've been participating in these threads and haven't had an idea sparked by something or learned some new fact or
something substantive, then you really aren't reading them with an open mind.
So, please, go ahead and keep attacking me or call me names or whatever you do to try and discredit people with different views than yours. I
will have no part of it.
I haven't attacked you or called you names, and I haven't tried to discredit anyone. I'm more than happy to post counter evidence when it exists,
but you haven't posted anything that would amount to a falsification of evolution, so there's not much I can do until then. Remember, you replied to
my post to edmc^2, not the other way around.
I only offered my support to this op because I believe in what he is saying.
It is my opinion.
I am entitled to it.
No matter how much it may offend you.
And that's why we have the stars & flags system. Your opinion doesn't offend me at all and I would never begrudge someone their beliefs.
Now, how my positive affirmation of a fellow human being justifies you attacking me I'll never understand. My posts were not directed towards
you. I meant you no offense. I apologize if I did offend you. But I will continue to offer my support to the people who hold similar beliefs to
Again, you weren't being attacked. I'm not sure why you continue to assert you were. If you want to show support, either stick to stars & flags or
make a substantive post of your own that bolsters that person's evidence.
All that being said, I'm still waiting to hear edmc^2's follow up to "Can I say Lucy? Can I say Piltdown Man?" comment. I'd love to see why he
thinks those two things provide falsification of evolution.