Trump Acquittal Thoughts?

again, it is not actual facts, it is a fable with perhaps some truth to it. Not enough to make it a law. There aren’t any Transitional forms for humans. None. When people believe it is absolute, when it is not, there is a problem. Just like a fairytale or fable, it provides some aspects of factual things that can happen, but it doesn’t make it absolute, Incomplete fossil records, a bone here and there can not be assumed that these are transition fossils, there is no way to know if there was a divergence,

one more thing, I just don’t give a fuck what you think and wonder if you ever do think for yourself.

 

You're just making unsupportable assertions, that are irrelevant at best and contrary to those of the overwhelming number of scientists who've studied the matter. You seem to be unable to grasp the basic distinction between whether or not evolution meets the scientific definition of a theory and whether it's true, and that shows that you're really obtuse. The distinction between evolution and Genesis is that the former is a testable refutable theory and the latter isn't-at least in the sense of leading to hypotheses that can be empirically tested. The presence or absence of transitional forms is debatable and irrelevant. The bottom line: no rabbits in the pre-Cambrian. The critical question is whether or not the fossil evidence recovered so far is consistent with the theory. Both evolution and Genesis have their uses. The former is supported by mountains of evidence from a variety of disciplines, making it not just a theory but one of the best scientific theories we have.The latter changed my life, converted me to Christianity and shapes my everyday thoughts, actions, and world view, so I won't knock it. Neither is necessarily factual. No getting through to you. I don't give a fuck whether or not you give a fuck what I think. I'll waste no further time on you.
Lines of evidence: The science of evolution
Evidence for Evolution — New England Complex Systems Institute
Human Evolution Evidence
What is the evidence for evolution? - Common-questions

 

Genesis is planet forbidden.

 

And you're talking to @Okiefreak that way?

The common tactic seems to be attack the left-leaning or make them seem less credible.

It honestly seems to me that your behavior, @Beach Ball Lady Balls, is unacceptable. You are attacking a reputable member of the forum who routinely voices valid opinions only to benefit yourself and others who would seek to discredit a more liberal agenda.

It's not cool.

 

The Christians whom I have taken time to speak-with say the Universe is only 5591 years old, because that's what the bible says about creation. They tell me God created stuff then he rested. When I asked about the dinosaurs, the Christians told me it's all compressed. Everything that has ever been created has been compressed into these 5591 years, because that's what the Christians say, and they voted to acquit Trump!

 

Let's me and you go and get some beans and corn bread like we was talkin' bout here a while back, Okie. I wouldn't waste another ten minutes on that beach button.

 

I and other progressive Christians I hang with have a different view. And they're all Democrats.

 

SHHHH … don't let that Canadian woman know what me and you know about the 5591 years of creation theory. Let's keep it secret between me and you for now.

 

How about adding her to your ignore list so that you don't have to read her thoughts.
She's on mine.

 

.

telling someone you don’t care what they think is unacceptable? Okie dokie! Lol Not looking to discredit left or right. I do not know how okie votes, don’t really care how he does either. Are scientists left or right wing? It is however not cool to suggest I have an agenda, when I don’t. It is funny, you know how it got here? Because someone said that Muslim’s we’re taking over, that Islam was the fastest growing religion and taking over. I said no, science is taking over. Now people suggest I am Christian too, to which they do not know, clearly don’t know. Next thing I will probably be called a creationist. What a joke. And it is true, I don’t really care how others think, including you. You are free to think of me however you want to. You are free to lie, you are free to come to conclusions no matter how wrong you are,

 

.i do have a question for you, is to disagree with someone an agenda? If someone is a respected member by one should everyone respect that member? I didn’t disrespect okie, in my opinion. If someone is considered a respected member does that mean he has to be treated better than others? Is their a hierarchy here? Do I care if I am disrespected? Not really but you get back what you give. I told him that I didn’t give a fuck what he thinks. It was honest, nor do I think he cares how I think. Which is fine too, That is more respectful, to be honest than continuing with a topic that has gone way off topic and will go no where. You will never know the answers, neither will I. Nor do scientists have the answers. Maybe one day someone will. Not in your lifetime! Does it really matter to you what people believe? If you have a need to push your belief on another, fine. Doesn’t mean the person you are talking to has to agree with you, listen, believe you, or care.

 

Pierce provide a model. Real life does not precisely follow any model. Frist rate scientific discoveries have been made, and seminal theories have been created in a variety of ways. In other words, the is no single "scientific method". Deductive reasoning was central to Newton's Theory of Gravitation.

Peirce- and I know very little about him- strikes me as a bit of a crank. Probably a brilliant crank, one with valuable insights, but a crank nonetheless. Certainly he was something of a tormented soul, given to expressing himself in turgid 19th century prose. To use such a man as an arbiter of what constitutes "the scientific method" strikes me as absurd.

While I am no expect on the matter, the idea that Newton, looking at planetary motion, created a very powerful and satisfying theory, one that is both descriptive and predictive in its sphere, without using a methodology well accepted by the scientific community is nonsense. A form of nonsense that you seem determined to pursue. Unless you do something like publish well-received, peer-reviewed papers on the matter, I think it unlikely that you will convince me that you are doing anything more than dressing up an untenable case with a patina of erudition. In turn, I have no hopes of convincing you of my opinion.

 

I think you know the answer.

You don't want to respect @Okiefreak? Then don't. But don't act all surprised and outraged when someone like me comes forward to tell you:

Excuse me. That someone who's integrity you're trying to call into question is someone who's the gold standard of repute on this site. Thank you. Have a nice day.

 

Word.

 

Why don't you learn to take your own advice instead of stinking up the forum with your vitriol that staff here have to either remove or edit.
Might be an idea to take the advice you're given otherwise everyone including the staff on here will get a bit more angry at you if you refuse.
I wouldn't be surprised if you get thread banned.

 

This is allowed right? To just post stupid irrelevant memes everywhere? Seems to be the case.

 

lol. Now just how did I call into question okies integrity? First I disrespected a so called respected member, and now I am brining into question his integrity? Lol. Incredible.

lol*. I thought you blocked me? We’re you lying? after you called people fuckwits and other names! To which I stood against when you called glenglen and Napoleon names just yesterday. you are playing a high and mighty card. What a joke.
It won’t be me who gets this thread locked, as I said, this thread is off track. The transition bones above, don’t know what dates are on them, where they are from ... who claims them as transitions and how did they conclusively say they connect. so get back on track or not.

 

Gold standard, what the hell is that? Guy didn't even know the difference between the theory of evolution and the theory of Evolution by natural selection

How about both of you engage in the points of the topic, or in this case the off topic topic, rather than just the usual ganging up, bullying tactics because one member doesnt agree with each other.We don't have enough active members here as it is.

And why is anyone; moderator or not a moderator implying banning as a threat?

 

Have you had a chance to read the forum guidelines yet?
Read number 4 in that thread and then come back to me with your answer