Is evolution a fact?

[Deleted member 619]

No that's the quote... Aron Ra is claiming he can prove evolution without bringing evidence. Being a bad atheist when making claims.. But think about it...

Our agreement was to prove evolution... Not bring evidence.

Lol

Not what he said. You're a liar, which is pretty much the same as saying you're a cretinist, so that won't be an issue for you.

 

[Mr_Wilford]

And now it's dem Titans brings a bad version.. Why not... Wow.

If yr going to bring whole thing at least have it in its quotes that way we can differentiate with what I said and Aron Ra said. You know context,

But don't worry somebody will jump on that bad quote... It's atheists here.

Forgive me for my phone acting up, it's the best I can do right now

 

[SpecialFrog]

But of course I'm flat out lying... Heck maybe I'm a hacker and typed it under Aron's name right? Sky's the limit for trolls isn't it?

It simply doesn't say what you are claiming it does. I suspect you understand the distinction between what he said and how you are interpreting it.

 

[Deleted member 619]

Lol hack your pitiful.

I brought the quote. Read it.

I did. It doesn't say what you said it did.

And you still can't master the 2nd person conjugation of the verb 'to be'.

 

[Deleted member 619]

I have to say that Blowhard is presenting an exceptional case for being an atheist here. Claims the moral high ground, can't fucking occupy an inch of it.

Lying twat.

 

[Mr_Wilford]

So what part about "proving evolution but not bring evidence" are you not understanding?

Its clear that you're misrepresenting him. There's a reason I checked for context

 

[Mr_Wilford]

AronRa wrote:
The challenge is that I will prove to your satisfaction that evolution is a fact. Since I'm going to try to educate someone who is determined not to learn, then I can't just tell you things that you're already pre-programmed to reject. I have to engage you, to get you to think about this, and understand what we're talking about; to agree on what will be acceptable answers. That means we'll have to do a few rounds of Q&A, and you'll be expected to acknowledge certain points in sequence -to confirm that you are learning. The onus is on me, but only as long as you participate. If you repeatedly ignore direct questions or refuse to properly address critical points, you will default this conversation -as every other creationist on this forum has done so far. Do you understand and accept?

Youre misrepresenting what he said and aren't fooling anyone. Chew on that

 

[SpecialFrog]

I don't claim to have moral high ground. I simply have evidence.

Is that a problem hack?

If your reading comprehension is that poor I wonder what you think the Bible actually says.

He clearly explained he wouldn't just be bringing evidence and that bringing evidence was not in and of itself what he agreed to.

But since you are back on the subject of evidence, do you want to talk about how you agree that horizontal gene transfer can increase genetic information but mutation can't?

 

[Deleted member 619]

I don't claim to have moral high ground. I simply have evidence.

Is that a problem hack?

It's only a problem when you can't present a scrap of it. Getting to that anytime soon, or is it just the lies and the trolling?

 

[Mr_Wilford]

Oh the cognitive dissonance... Is palpable..

"Our agreement was not to bring evidence but prove evolution"

I think that is a gem... You know a top 3 quote on this thread... Who agrees?

Oh the dishonesty, it's palpable.

 

[Deleted member 619]

Tell you what; as a sop to you, I'll take Aron's challenge. I'll bring evidence, and I'll demonstrate conclusively that evolution is an observed fact.

This is well outside my remit (physics and cosmology is my thing), but I think I have sufficient grasp of the primary literature to demonstrate beyond the doubt of anybody not lying to himself and everybody else that evolution is a fact.

If you're game, we'll have one of the admins set up something in the debate forum, just you and I.

Whaddya say? I'm not quite the scalp that Aron is, but I'm reasonably well-known in the rationalist community.

My last debate was with an academic-level philosopher that's often cited in the apologetics literature, and he ran away like a little girl. Got the stones, liar?

 

[Mr_Wilford]

AronRa wrote:
The challenge is that I will prove to your satisfaction that evolution is a fact. Since I'm going to try to educate someone who is determined not to learn, then I can't just tell you things that you're already pre-programmed to reject. I have to engage you, to get you to think about this, and understand what we're talking about; to agree on what will be acceptable answers. That means we'll have to do a few rounds of Q&A, and you'll be expected to acknowledge certain points in sequence -to confirm that you are learning. The onus is on me, but only as long as you participate. If you repeatedly ignore direct questions or refuse to properly address critical points, you will default this conversation -as every other creationist on this forum has done so far. Do you understand and accept?

Youre misrepresenting what he said and aren't fooling anyone. Chew on that

He literally elaborated on what he meant right below your quote. You gonna keep lying?

 

[SpecialFrog]

The Bible according to Bernhard:

Thou shalt have no other gods before me. But feel free to have some afterwards.

 

[Deleted member 619]

Sure I'm in.

Is it a debate or is it just you going to bring evidence?

And if debate.. What's the topic?

Tell you what, although I already stated that the topic will be the title of thread as detailed by Aron, I'll let you decide the topic. You can, in fact, decide all the particulars of the debate. I'll go with whatever you like. It isn't like you're going to present any fucking challenge.

 

[SpecialFrog]

Note that Bernhard has already agreed that horizontal gene transfer can increase genetic information (according to his unspecified definition). Prior to this agreement he had stated that such an increase would demonstrate evolution but changed his mind afterwards.

 

[Deleted member 619]

thread title : evidence for evolution.

Is that what you are postulating hack?

Or. Is evolution a fact?

I take the neg. you take the positive?

Either premise is good for me, since they're entirely compatible.

Evolution is a fact.

Seems to encapsulate the issue sufficiently to define a position.

Send a message to the admins. They will set up a thread in the debate forum. I'll take your terms, as long as at least a few days is given for response to each post, as time is limited for me. I'm happy to defend, which means I post first. If you want to go first, simply recast so that your position is the affirmative.

Some words of advice: Debates here are usually accompanied by a 'peanut gallery', in which posters on the forum comment on the ongoing debate. I advise that you don't read it. It's considered bad form to actually post in it, but that will be up to you as defined in the terms of the debate. I won't read this thread until after the debate is concluded (I only do so to see what I might have missed, but that's not good during the debate).

Stay focused, and bring your 'A' game. Stick to the facts, and stay away from ads hominem. I will be extremely formal during the debate, as I consider it a serious setting.

If I sense duplicity on your part, or I'm given any indication that you're not taking it seriously, I will end the debate.

Good for you? If so, set the terms with the admins, and point them to my post here that indicates I cede all debating terms to you other than those detailed herein. They will set everything up.

I'm off bed now. I'll check in here in about 8 hours to see what's on the table.

 

[Deleted member 619]

I've already had drinks. Luckily, I don't need all my cognitive faculties for a task of this magnitude. I'll sort the thread out.

 

[Deleted member 619]

Setup request has been sent to admins.

Edit: You're about to find out what a commitment a formal debate is. I should also point out that I won't be nearly as forgiving as Aron would have been.

That's all the trash talk I can be bothered with. Good luck.

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

My last debate was with an academic-level philosopher that's often cited in the apologetics literature, and he ran away like a little girl. Got the stones, liar?

I would love a link to this.

Note that Bernhard has already agreed that horizontal gene transfer can increase genetic information (according to his unspecified definition). Prior to this agreement he had stated that such an increase would demonstrate evolution but changed his mind afterwards.

He also said if he were shown a whale with legs, he would accept evolution. He also wanted "direct ancestral transitional" fossils and evidence that telomeres fused. All were provided, all were dismissed without thought.

 

[Deleted member 619]

My last debate was with an academic-level philosopher that's often cited in the apologetics literature, and he ran away like a little girl. Got the stones, liar?

I would love a link to this.

No can do, I'm afraid. It was on the now-extinct Dawkins forum.

TBH, it wasn't that good.