Coldest Winter in 100 Years

2010-01-12-humor-lb0111cd.jpg

2010-01-12-humor-decline.jpg

2009-12-15-humor-EPA.jpg

Cartoon%20-%20Frightening%20the%20People%20%28500%29.jpg

Easily the equivalent of 5,000 words.
 
I asked that a list of facts which are mere conjecture be provided. I don't see how that appeals to ignorance. Please explain.

Sorry. I didn't mean ignorance. You are saying that since an individual does not believe in evolution, he cannot be correct about anything else.



No, I'm saying that since this individual believes in Creationism as scientific theory, he is not to be trusted.
If someone believes in A, and it is untrue

Then if they believe in B, and it IS true

they cannot be right in B because they believe in A.

Not to mention the fact that A is not necessarily untrue, but only thought to be untrue by another who may or may not be wrong themselves.

Love the logic. :rolleyes:
 
If someone believes in A, and it is untrue

Then if they believe in B, and it IS true

they cannot be right in B because they believe in A.

Not to mention the fact that A is not necessarily untrue, but only thought to be untrue by another who may or may not be wrong themselves.

Love the logic.

Of course you love the logic, you came up with it. Congrats!
 
If someone believes in A, and it is untrue

Then if they believe in B, and it IS true

they cannot be right in B because they believe in A.

Not to mention the fact that A is not necessarily untrue, but only thought to be untrue by another who may or may not be wrong themselves.

Love the logic.

Of course you love the logic, you came up with it. Congrats!
snapshot-2009-02-28-11-21-00.jpg

That don't make no sense!

The funny part is, you still think that way. If someone believes in a supernatural source of creation, they can't be right in their assessment of Global Warming is a hoax.

What next? Disliking green beans will disqualify you from being a philosopher?
 
Green beans, a can of mushroom soup and french fried onions will get you a great side dish.
 
If someone believes in A, and it is untrue

Then if they believe in B, and it IS true

they cannot be right in B because they believe in A.

Not to mention the fact that A is not necessarily untrue, but only thought to be untrue by another who may or may not be wrong themselves.

Love the logic.

Of course you love the logic, you came up with it. Congrats!
snapshot-2009-02-28-11-21-00.jpg

That don't make no sense!

The funny part is, you still think that way. If someone believes in a supernatural source of creation, they can't be right in their assessment of Global Warming is a hoax.

What next? Disliking green beans will disqualify you from being a philosopher?

If someone claims to be a scientist, then states that evolution is has not happened, his claim is invalid.

From the fossils in the rocks, to the shared genetics of all life, the evidence is simply overwhelming that evolution has happened, is happening, and will continue to happen as long as there is life.
 
If someone claims to be a scientist, then states that evolution is has not happened, his claim is invalid.

Nope. It is not. There is no proof of macro-evolution. It is a THEORY and subject to being proven to this day. That's what it still is... the THEORY of Evolution, not the LAW of Evolution.

But of course, to you warmists... the science is settled isn't it?

What we CAN show is that micro-evolution, meaning mutation can be proven quite clearly.

Fast and loose with the scientific method again, I see.
 

Forum List

Back
Top