Today’s Teabagger News: Only 41% of Texans know humans did not live with dinosaurs

RStringfield said:
No, the weight of evidence leaves us with that as the reasonable conclusion.
It does not mean there is no possible alternative or other significant factors.
Click to expand...

No other alternative has been presented. If you wish to present one, go for it! The weight of the evidence is overwhelming and irrefutable. When a human sperm and egg cell combine, a living human organism begins life. No other alternative has been suggested or presented, and it would fly in the face of what we've already observed. But if you want to try, I encourage you to do so... who knows, you may lead us to a new viewpoint!

Okay, so what do you propose a human fetus could be, other than a human life? The things we know for reasonable certain is, the organism is multi-celled and living. It is the product of a human egg and sperm cell. Nothing else is added to make it change properties or alter what it is, only time to gestate. Present your evidence that it's some other form of living organism, and I will give it some thought, but I really think you are going to have some problems with doing that.
 
Dixie said:
No, for a blueprint to become a house, it requires materials and labor. What else does a fetus require to become a human life? Nothing!
Click to expand...

Onceler said:
That's theoretical, and tentative. It is not fact.
Click to expand...

Yurt said:
o'rly...what else does a fetus require to become a human being then? too funny, you don't know the link between proof and fact, yet, you claim this is theoratical and tentative all the while insulting those who believe or even aren't sure whether man and dinosaurs roamed the earth when that conclusion is also theoretical and tentative....

i love your intellectually dishonest stances onceler, i think you try to hard to look smart and ultimately trip yourself up
Click to expand...

here is the full context onceler....

how is it theoritical and tentative? seriously, what else is required? it really is a simple question. it boggles the mind why you would run from this given our past debates regarding abortion, you and i actually agree on some of the issues.....so i'm puzzled by you running away now....

and really, how is your stance not contradictory?
 
RStringfield said:
Listen dumbfuck. I am not getting into your hair splitting over word definitions. I use proof to mean evidence sufficient to form a conclusion. That is what it means.

If your evidence is sufficient to gain my conviction then the jury has decided that it is proof.
Click to expand...

Thank you once again for confirming there is a stark difference between evidence and proof. I know that was a tough hurdle for you, and I am proud you were actually able to learn something today.
 
Dixie said:
It's a fact that humans can't breath water because the evidence shows our lungs can't process water and we drown. It's a fact that gravity exists because the evidence shows when we drop something it falls to the ground. It's a fact that Earth revolves around the sun, because we've observed it doing this for many years without deviation in a regular orbit. How many FACTS do I need to present here? I am not understanding your point! You have presented NO FACTS pertaining to humans on Earth at the time of the dinosaurs. You have given us a speculative opinion on the matter, and that is fine, it's just not a proven fact.
Click to expand...

How is that lack of evidence concerning orbit deviation proves something as fact while the lack of evidence concerning the coexistence of dinos and humans does not?
 
Yurt said:
here is the full context onceler....

how is it theoritical and tentative? seriously, what else is required? it really is a simple question. it boggles the mind why you would run from this given our past debates regarding abortion, you and i actually agree on some of the issues.....so i'm puzzled by you running away now....

and really, how is your stance not contradictory?
Click to expand...

You didn't read the whole thread.

I'm making fun of Dixie, but it's all ruined now. You've come in with your whole "running away"/chest-beating routine, and the mood is shot.
 
Dixie said:
Those are all designated terms for various stages of a human being. Are you NOT a human because you are an ADULT? That is what you are saying here!

A human kidney is not an independent living organism, it is a part of the human organism. We've already established (you made the point) that a fetus/embryo is NOT the mother, so you can now drop the kidney analogy as it is irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Various stages. You think so? What would happen if your local butcher shop advertised three whole chickens for one dollar and when you went to purchase them the butcher handed you three eggs?

There are places where he would be fined for false advertising. Do you think his argument before a Judge that the egg is a chicken in a stage of life would go over? Do you think a DNA expert witness would convince the Judge?

Or maybe your local grocer advertising tomatoes, 10 for a dollar. When you show up he hands you 10 tomato seeds. Would a DNA expert convince a Judge the grocer was correct? More importantly, what would YOU think?
 
Onzies said:
You didn't read the whole thread.

I'm making fun of Dixie, but it's all ruined now. You've come in with your whole "running away"/chest-beating routine, and the mood is shot.
Click to expand...

Translation: Thank you for saving me from my own stupidity, because I am far too ignorant to realize I was being made a fool of, and if you hadn't interjected, I would have continued being a total fuckwit. Now I can save face and exit stage left while no one is watching!
 
Onceler said:
You didn't read the whole thread.

I'm making fun of Dixie, but it's all ruined now. You've come in with your whole "running away"/chest-beating routine, and the mood is shot.
Click to expand...

yet you can't take the time to explain what it is you think i missed....

you are running away, if you weren't you would have simply said:

yurt, i was kidding, i didn't mean what i said, i was making fun of dixie or whatever

:pke:
 
Dixie said:
Thank you once again for confirming there is a stark difference between evidence and proof. I know that was a tough hurdle for you, and I am proud you were actually able to learn something today.
Click to expand...

No, I just stated that proof is evidence. For all intents and purposes it simply means a lot of evidence or strong evidence. There is no magic threshold at which point evidence changes its physical properties and becomes proof. Any pretense of a difference is subjective and rather arbitrary.
 
Dixie said:
Translation: Thank you for saving me from my own stupidity, because I am far too ignorant to realize I was being made a fool of, and if you hadn't interjected, I would have continued being a total fuckwit. Now I can save face and exit stage left while no one is watching!
Click to expand...

See this?

Thank you, Yurt, o' spoiler of good fun, and loyal ally of the psychotic poster known as "Dixie" (or, on days of heightened strangeness, "Rebel")
 
apple0154 said:
Various stages. You think so? What would happen if your local butcher shop advertised three whole chickens for one dollar and when you went to purchase them the butcher handed you three eggs?

There are places where he would be fined for false advertising. Do you think his argument before a Judge that the egg is a chicken in a stage of life would go over? Do you think a DNA expert witness would convince the Judge?

Or maybe your local grocer advertising tomatoes, 10 for a dollar. When you show up he hands you 10 tomato seeds. Would a DNA expert convince a Judge the grocer was correct? More importantly, what would YOU think?
Click to expand...

Well a chicken and an egg are two different things. Just as a female egg and a baby are two different things. A tomato seed and a tomato are two different things, just as a male sperm seed and baby are two different things.

Once the human sperm cell and egg cell have combined, they become a multi-cell living organism, independent of the mother, and you have not been able to define the organism as anything other than human. You want to delineate some distinction based on stage of development, but a teenager is no less a human being than a senior citizen, a toddler is no less human than an infant. These are all stages of the same living organism... zygote, embryo, fetus, infant, toddler, adolescent, adult, geriatric. The changing stages doesn't alter what they are.
 
Dixie said:
No other alternative has been presented. If you wish to present one, go for it! The weight of the evidence is overwhelming and irrefutable. When a human sperm and egg cell combine, a living human organism begins life. No other alternative has been suggested or presented, and it would fly in the face of what we've already observed. But if you want to try, I encourage you to do so... who knows, you may lead us to a new viewpoint!

Okay, so what do you propose a human fetus could be, other than a human life? The things we know for reasonable certain is, the organism is multi-celled and living. It is the product of a human egg and sperm cell. Nothing else is added to make it change properties or alter what it is, only time to gestate. Present your evidence that it's some other form of living organism, and I will give it some thought, but I really think you are going to have some problems with doing that.
Click to expand...

Batshit-crazy explanations are your forte.

The weight of the evidence is overwhelming and irrefutable. When a human sperm and egg cell combine, a living human organism begins life. No other alternative has been suggested or presented, and it would fly in the face of what we've already observed.
Click to expand...

It's not irrefutable. That is, it is possible to refute it.

Other than that, we could apply the above word for word to the conclusion that man and dinos did not coexist.
 
RStringfield said:
No, I just stated that proof is evidence. For all intents and purposes it simply means a lot of evidence or strong evidence. There is no magic threshold at which point evidence changes its physical properties and becomes proof. Any pretense of a difference is subjective and rather arbitrary.
Click to expand...

LMFAO.... Yes, evidence is NOT proof! It is EVIDENCE! It MAY be proof, but that is highly subjective and dependent on the individual threshold for proof. There is no "physical properties" for evidence or proof, they are terms used to define something, words... not physical things with properties. You are getting dumber with every post, you should really just stop while you still have some degree of intellectual credibility. Keep going, and we will have to put you in the same special class as Onzies and Apple!
 
RStringfield said:
Batshit-crazy explanations are your forte.
Click to expand...

Whatever. You haven't demonstrated anything to be 'batshit crazy' except yourself!

It's not irrefutable. That is, it is possible to refute it.

Other than that, we could apply the above word for word to the conclusion that man and dinos did not coexist.
Click to expand...

The biological finding that a human sperm cell permeates a human egg cell and human life begins, is not refutable. It is not possible to refute it, unless you want to argue that we don't know whether we really exist or not... save for some existential argument for existence, there is no refutation of what was presented.
 
Dixie said:
LMFAO.... Yes, evidence is NOT proof! It is EVIDENCE! It MAY be proof, but that is highly subjective and dependent on the individual threshold for proof. There is no "physical properties" for evidence or proof, they are terms used to define something, words... not physical things with properties. You are getting dumber with every post, you should really just stop while you still have some degree of intellectual credibility. Keep going, and we will have to put you in the same special class as Onzies and Apple!
Click to expand...

The only important thing you said...

It MAY be proof, but that is highly subjective and dependent on the individual threshold for proof.
Click to expand...

...too bad you don't actually seem to understand it.

Exactly, the difference between evidence and proof is purely subjective and arbitrary. Before you claimed there was some stark contrast. There is not.
 
RStringfield said:
The only important thing you said...

...too bad you don't actually seem to understand it.

Exactly, the difference between evidence and proof is purely subjective and arbitrary. Before you claimed there was some stark contrast. There is not.
Click to expand...

Oh yes there is a stark contrast. They certainly are not synonymous, as you alluded earlier. Thanks for admitting that much, generally you pinheads fight kicking and screaming and refuse to give an inch, it's refreshing to see one of you actually recant what you said and admit I am right about something.
 
Onceler said:
See this?

Thank you, Yurt, o' spoiler of good fun, and loyal ally of the psychotic poster known as "Dixie" (or, on days of heightened strangeness, "Rebel")
Click to expand...

post 211

and i'm sure dixie views me as an ally :rolleyes:

you haven't read his scathing insults to me in numerous posts, you just jumped in here and had to say him and i are allies :pke:

more hypocrisy from you
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top