UPDATE: The dialogue on this blog has given me an idea that I probably won't be able to cash in on until several years from now. Hopefully it will encourage people to raise the level of discourse on any subject really.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
"If i was going to say that, I would have. I did not..."
You did claim that Behe has done nothing beyond proofs by assertion, so I would think that
would apply to what he's written so far.
"I'm claiming Micheal Behe repeatedly restates that irreducible complexity is true when each
of his arguments he uses to support that claim has been contradicted, repeatedly."
Now we're beginning to scratch the surface here. Can you elaborate on what these repeated
contradictions are? Miller? Matzke? Anything along those lines?
+
"If I asserted "the sky is blue", and then wondered off into the distance, would you shout after
me "that was a Bare Assertion Fallacy you fool!"."
No, I consider that to be almost axiomatic, but if I someone argued that ID was either just as
self-evident or just as verifiably wrong, I would ask for a little more than just a bare assertion.
"I may make a 'Bare Assertion', but that does not mean it is unsupported, only that I have
not provided said 'support'."
Then why not provide the said support?
And we find no disagreement here on the bible.
"So, having addressed your implied claim that my assertion was 'unsupported',"
You admitted that you didn't provide said support so how did you address it?
"Arguing on the internet ROCKS! Love you!"
I wouldn't even consider this anywhere near an argument, I think you've been pretty civil so
far.
+
"These posts are not written with the intention of being anywhere near argumentatively
airtight or particularly persuasive to those who are ID proponents."
This makes more sense in that case then. I thus won't hold you to a standard that nobody
should intend to strive for since every disagreement is not settled by making the the other
side change their mind.
+
"Assertion is fine if everyone already can see your point and follow your logic implicitly."
I guess that's a good description of your approach then.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (MingW32)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=P8kK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments that aren't encrypted with my key and are also digitally signed with sender's own key go to the trash. I might skim them for lulz though...
This is the policy given to me by Janus. They don't agree with my views, but since they are willing to protect my real identity this is the least I can do in return.
Crypto-IDEA WA: Don't waste your time here. We have a far more cryptographically secure outpost than this one...