• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Scientific Evidence for Universal Common Descent

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jose Fly

Fisker of men
It is standard practice in creationist propaganda to use quotes, usually out of context, often altered, sometimes fabricated.
It is all they have, and it is largely a dishonest, lazy tactic. But as it is all they have, and they know it is dishonest, they project their own shallowness and dishonesty onto all others.
It is really something.
What's the saying? "Every accusation is a confession". We're seeing that in spades with @usfan and @Jim .
 

Jose Fly

Fisker of men
So precious - the 4 decades of study superstar - Dr.Eve gene, ignores those whose refutations he cannot deal with.

The Broflakery is strong among creationists.

I wonder if he knows that I am still refuting his naive assertions and still pointing out his errors and fabrications, and that everyone else can see them???

:tonguewink::tonguewink::tonguewink:
Here's how I see it. Any "lurkers" who might be persuaded by @usfan's posts are not the sort of people I'd want on our side anyways.
 

usfan

Well-Known Member
Here's how I see it. Any "lurkers" who might be persuaded by @usfan's posts are not the sort of people I'd want on our side anyways.
..interesting you view a scientific theory in groupthink terms.. :shrug:

Isn't that what it really is? A religious belief, masquerading under the mantle of 'Science!', to fool the simple minded and lazy thinkers? Groupthink loyalty is the cry! Rally the Faithful to defend the faith from the blasphemers! :eek:

Your 'side', seems to consist of gullible indoctrinees, and jihadists. I'm alone, here, as you guys like to point out, with only science and reason to defend myself. I find those completely adequate.

mahatmagandhi1-2x.jpg


I doubt there are many lurkers, anyway, who can follow this mockery of a 'debate'. Distortions, straw men, and gratuitous ad hominem is mostly what they'll see, not an intelligent discussion.

Anyway, enjoy your 'side', and your reassuring mob confirmation. ;)
 

usfan

Well-Known Member
I'll say it again....Creationism is such an inherently dishonest position, it's simply not possible to advocate it in an honest manner.
Who's talking about creationism? :shrug:
This thread is an examination of the theory of Universal Common Ancestry..

Did you think this was a comparative religion thread?
 

Dan From Smithville

What's up Doc?
Staff member
Premium Member
Here's how I see it. Any "lurkers" who might be persuaded by @usfan's posts are not the sort of people I'd want on our side anyways.
Agreed. I see no value in fascist, authoritarian, prevaricators that thrive on projection, frightened group thinking and the creation of hostile atmospheres founded on false claims. Besides, we have one already and that is enough to see denial of science and evidence replaced with narcissism and politics.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Who's talking about creationism? :shrug:
This thread is an examination of the theory of Universal Common Ancestry..

Did you think this was a comparative religion thread?

Do you think that anyone is fooled by your little act? You at least know that there is no evidence for your myths and you are trying to engage one long Tu Quoque Fallacy where you accuse your opposition of your flaws. As to the title of this thread scientific evidence has been posted time after time and the absolute best opposition that you could come up with was denial. I don't think even dad would be convinced by this dog and pony show that you try to put on.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
I doubt there are many lurkers, anyway, who can follow this mockery of a 'debate'. Distortions, straw men, and gratuitous ad hominem is mostly what they'll see, not an intelligent discussion.

Anyway, enjoy your 'side', and your reassuring mob confirmation. ;)

Since those are your tactics and your tactics alone here you have only yourself to blame for that.
 

Jose Fly

Fisker of men
..interesting you view a scientific theory in groupthink terms
Not at all.

Isn't that what it really is? A religious belief, masquerading under the mantle of 'Science!', to fool the simple minded and lazy thinkers?
No, not at all.

Your 'side', seems to consist of gullible indoctrinees, and jihadists.
Jihadists? Lol....:rolleyes:

No, my side consists of biologists, geneticists, paleontologists, and other life scientists from around the world over the last 150+ years.

I doubt there are many lurkers, anyway, who can follow this mockery of a 'debate'. Distortions, straw men, and gratuitous ad hominem is mostly what they'll see, not an intelligent discussion.
Agreed.

Anyway, enjoy your 'side', and your reassuring mob confirmation. ;)
Yes, I will enjoy the fact that my views are in line with the world's life sciences community and are supported by the data. That, plus the fact that the other side is entirely composed of folks like you does provide some reassurance. Certainly if I was on the side of a debate that was made up of folks who behaved like you, that would cause me to re-evaluate my position.
 

Jose Fly

Fisker of men
Agreed. I see no value in fascist, authoritarian, prevaricators that thrive on projection, frightened group thinking and the creation of hostile atmospheres founded on false claims. Besides, we have one already and that is enough to see denial of science and evidence replaced with narcissism and politics.
Well, to be perfectly honest his "response" to the Larget et al. paper was worse than I expected. Even after watching him completely bungle mtEve, the canid info, and the E. coli work, I was still surprised at how he obviously didn't even really look at the paper I linked to yet still attempted to act like he had and had actually rebutted it.

I've seen quite a few bizarre creationists in my time, but this guy is a real piece of work. What I wonder is if he truly thinks anything he does here is of any real consequence. I tried asking him that earlier, but he refused to answer.
 

Dan From Smithville

What's up Doc?
Staff member
Premium Member
What's the saying? "Every accusation is a confession". We're seeing that in spades with @usfan and @Jim .
I have seen a lot of logic, research and evidence posted in support of the theory of common descent, but I have seen nothing but narcissistic, political views and arguments of incredulity to counter that. Unless there is research that is just now leaving a lab in report form, I am not aware of anything that refutes the theory.

In the event of some cutting edge report invalidating the theory, one of us would still have to explain it to 40 years of research, so that it would be understood.
 

Dan From Smithville

What's up Doc?
Staff member
Premium Member
Well, to be perfectly honest his "response" to the Larget et al. paper was worse than I expected. Even after watching him completely bungle mtEve, the canid info, and the E. coli work, I was still surprised at how he obviously didn't even really look at the paper I linked to yet still attempted to act like he had and had actually rebutted it.

I've seen quite a few bizarre creationists in my time, but this guy is a real piece of work. What I wonder is if he truly thinks anything he does here is of any real consequence. I tried asking him that earlier, but he refused to answer.
Personally, I see the main opposition on this thread acting mostly on the levels of narcissism and politics with religion playing a minor, supporting role. There is a delusional or near delusional grasp of the issues.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
No, not really. Experience hath taught me that a rational, civil debate on this tooic is impossible, due to the triggered True Believers, who charge into the topic with jihadist zeal. ;)
you have a vivid imagination, if you 'see!' that, in the nearly 100 pages of this thread.

ONE STUDY, has been the centerpiece for over 30 pages, and the 'evidence' from it has not even been analyzed or examined, except by me. Assertions and outrage seem preferred to scientific analysis.
I've considered you that for some time now.. likely since our initial exchange. :D
Progressive indoctrinees usually, and typically, lash out in unscientific, hysterical outrage, instead of calm, evidentiary based reason.

I don't obsess over the hecklers, just point out that this is their tactic, to deflect attention from the impotence of the science and reason. Seldom has anyone addressed my rebuttals, and NEVER on this chimp/human computer statistics study. Mostly i get jeering and ridicule, or indignation, like from you, here, as a substitute for a reasoned rebuttal.

It is the essence of ad hominem, to direct your comments 'to the man', instead of to the topic.

My offer stands. If you wish to debate the science, and ditch the ad hom. I'm willing to do a 'reset', and start anew. But i have little hope of that either, as my offer usually falls on deaf ears, that prefer the joys of fallacy, to the mundane practice of reason.


yeah yeah...

Any time you wish to address my posts that were actually ont-topic, instead of this peeing contest...
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
Isn't that what it really is? A religious belief, masquerading under the mantle of 'Science!', to fool the simple minded and lazy thinkers?

That would be creationism.

"god-dun-it", is the lazy and simple-minded answer.

Conclusions resulting from 2 centuries of rigorous research and facing hard scientific scrutiny at every turn in evolutionary biology, is the opposite of being lazy and simple-minded.


Your 'side', seems to consist of gullible indoctrinees, and jihadists


PS: I love how I've observed you "accuse" us of being "jihadists" several times now. How juvenile of you, to try and sneak in not-so-hidden attacks at the address of a rivaling religion as a piggy back to your insults at the address of "atheists".

It's hilarious how you whine and whine in this thread about "hecklers" and "ad hominims", while 90% of your entire case "against" evolution in this thread has consisted of nothing but strawmen and silly actual attempts at ad hominims, even trying several times to dehumanize muslims as combo points.

Maybe you should reflect on that a bit.


I'm alone, here, as you guys like to point out, with only science and reason to defend myself.

I haven't seen you use science OR reason, once. All I see you doing is complain, engage in dishonest misrepresentations of the actual science, juvenile attempts at dehumanization of your "opponents" and just overall condescending trollish behaviour.

You may now start your complaining about me using "ad homs" (and use it incorrectly once more...)

I doubt there are many lurkers, anyway, who can follow this mockery of a 'debate'. Distortions, straw men, and gratuitous ad hominem is mostly what they'll see, not an intelligent discussion.

Yep. You're only deeply mistaken about which side is using such tactics.

Anyway, enjoy your 'side', and your reassuring mob confirmation. ;)

Says the creationist.
 

usfan

Well-Known Member
Well, to be perfectly honest his "response" to the Larget et al. paper was worse than I expected. Even after watching him completely bungle mtEve, the canid info, and the E. coli work, I was still surprised at how he obviously didn't even really look at the paper I linked to yet still attempted to act like he had and had actually rebutted it.

I've seen quite a few bizarre creationists in my time, but this guy is a real piece of work. What I wonder is if he truly thinks anything he does here is of any real consequence. I tried asking him that earlier, but he refused to answer.
:rolleyes:

So, you wish to align with the hecklers, with no pretense of scientific discussion..

It is what you have projected all along.. :shrug:

Ad hom deflections, and ignoring the topic you really aren't familiar with..
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
Who's talking about creationism? :shrug:
This thread is an examination of the theory of Universal Common Ancestry..

Did you think this was a comparative religion thread?

Ow please......................................


I have yet to meet anyone who's so franticly opposed to evolution theory who does NOT have a religious agenda behind it with some type of creationist story that is incompatible with evolution.

It's also curious (well, not really....) how your debate tactics AND arguments, seem to come right out of the creationist playbook.

Sorry, you're not fooling anyone.
 

usfan

Well-Known Member
Ah, well.. i never expected it to be easy.. though ignoring the worst hecklers has been a welcome respite from the verbal abuse.. looks like a couple of others intend to pick up the slack! :D
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
:rolleyes:
So, you wish to align with the hecklers, with no pretense of scientific discussion..

When you are presented with scientific arguments, all you do is either completely ignore the post OR you argue strawmen.

A person will only try so many times before judging your behaviour - at which point it's not "heckling" or "ad hom". At that point, it's just making an honest assessment of your dishonesty and drawing the obvious conclusion: discussion is a waste of time, since you refuse to play by the rules.

Ad hom deflections, and ignoring the topic you really aren't familiar with..

And here we go again......
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top