Announcement

Collapse

Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Einstein and peer review. (I've never been published in Nature, but...)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Omega Red
    replied
    Originally posted by Jorge View Post
    At least you do know how to follow directions ... you did "keep 'em coming" as I had instructed.

    "desperation - ire - boiling over - anger - slander - malice - deceit - blundered - dishonest - venom"


    All that said, you may now stop - I grow tired of this game. Your ad hominem agenda so as to divert attention from my substantive claims and arguments is childishly transparent. You've provided for me the best example ever of how you people attack the person when the argument has overwhelmed you.

    Speaking of which, have you check out my new thread " ... best answer ever"?
    Nah ... you'll probably avoid that also so as to focus on your ad hominem objective.

    Jorge
    Yup. All traits you have amply demonstrated in this thread. But you failed to follow any direction. I asked you to answer my questions below. I’ve answered yours, so you can return the favour and answer mine:

    You first stated an over-generalisation thatanything that criticizes the Evolution dogma - that paper paper [sic] will be toast before it even gets to 1st base of PR regardless of its scientific merits”. I posted 4 papers that showed your statement was wrong.

    In response you blundered by stating those 4 papers "are nothing more than imaginations / thoughts / hypotheses / etc. supporting the same Evolutionary paradigm within a Materialistic worldview". They were not.

    I challenged you to correct your blunder, but you said that these papers clearly show thatEvolution is taken as an ABSOLUTE GIVEN, only the mechanism is being questioned”. They did not.

    Do you deny you said these?
    Do you deny you erred and blundered?
    Do you deny that it shows your reading comprehension was poor?
    Do you deny that you simply responded blindly rather than having considered my post and did some background research?
    Do you deny that you have spent considerable time trying to turn the tables, calling me everything under the sun, in trying to escape responsibility for your words?
    Do you deny you tried to attribute my position against your goal shifted position and created a straw man?

    You’ve deviated slightly from the laugh-it-off exit strategy and begun to add more detestable debate tactics. Your ego is still in control and wants to fight me into submission. Your actual words are clear as linked to above and your attitude in your responses equally as transparent throughout this thread.

    Perhaps you are having trouble reading, it would not be the first time, so let’s try again: Quite simply, you cannot take the fact that you made a mistake and your pride prevents you from admitting it. The longer you maintain this attitude, the closer you are to rejection - see Matthew 7:23. Try practicing what you preach for a change; exercise some honesty in answering those questions.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jorge
    replied
    Originally posted by Omega Red View Post
    Yup. All traits you have amply demonstrated in this thread. Seeing as they did not work, you’ve switched tracks and are now trying to laugh away you errors and blunders, or you’ve simply forgotten them, so I’m guessing you need a reminder:

    You first stated an over-generalisation thatanything that criticizes the Evolution dogma - that paper paper [sic] will be toast before it even gets to 1st base of PR regardless of its scientific merits”. I posted 4 papers that showed your statement was wrong.

    In response you blundered by stating those 4 papers "are nothing more than imaginations / thoughts / hypotheses / etc. supporting the same Evolutionary paradigm within a Materialistic worldview". They were not.

    I challenged you to correct your blunder, but you said that these papers clearly show thatEvolution is taken as an ABSOLUTE GIVEN, only the mechanism is being questioned”. They did not.

    Do you deny you said these?
    Do you deny you erred and blundered?
    Do you deny that it shows your reading comprehension was poor?
    Do you deny that you simply responded blindly rather than having considered my post and did some background research?
    Do you deny that you have spent considerable time trying to turn the tables, calling me everything under the sun, in trying to escape responsibility for your words?
    Do you deny you tried to attribute my position against your goal shifted position and created a straw man?

    Try answering these questions for a change. The rest of NS301 readers just laugh at how you erred and blundered in your rabid attack on a non-YEC and stated that those papers were in support of the evolutionary paradigm when anyone who had done an ounce of checking would have known they were the opposite. But you didn’t just claim it once, but twice! When it was finally explained to you, you had to back track with dishonest debate tactics and venom. Quite simply, you cannot take the fact that you made a mistake and your pride prevents you from admitting it. The longer you maintain this attitude, the closer you are to rejection - see Matthew 7:23. Try practicing what you preach for a change; exercise some honesty in answering those questions.
    At least you do know how to follow directions ... you did "keep 'em coming" as I had instructed.

    "desperation - ire - boiling over - anger - slander - malice - deceit - blundered - dishonest - venom"


    All that said, you may now stop - I grow tired of this game. Your ad hominem agenda so as to divert attention from my substantive claims and arguments is childishly transparent. You've provided for me the best example ever of how you people attack the person when the argument has overwhelmed you.

    Speaking of which, have you check out my new thread " ... best answer ever"?
    Nah ... you'll probably avoid that also so as to focus on your ad hominem objective.

    Jorge

    Leave a comment:


  • HMS_Beagle
    replied
    Originally posted by Jorge View Post
    Yes, I have. As I wrote previously, "that you do not wish to acknowledge this is not my problem"
    NS301 posters: "Please give us answers Jorge"

    Jorge: "I already did, I just won't tell you where"

    NS301 posters: Where Jorge? No one can find them.

    Jorge: Listen you poopy heads I said I already provided them!!

    NS301 posters: You say a lot of things that aren't true Jorge. Just link to answers you say you gave, or post them again.

    Jorge: You won't accept MY TROOTH!! so I'm not wasting time on all you who HATE JESUS!!

    NS301 posters: Yeah Jorge, whatever...


    That really sums it up.

    Leave a comment:


  • Omega Red
    replied
    Originally posted by Jorge View Post

    "desperation ... ire ... boiling over ... anger ... slander ... malice ... deceit"

    Bwahahahahahaha!!!

    Keep 'em comin', Mr. Red ... please don't stop!

    By the way, check out my new thread " ... best answers ever".
    It may be able to help you (I doubt it but, hey, what the heck).


    Jorge
    Yup. All traits you have amply demonstrated in this thread. Seeing as they did not work, you’ve switched tracks and are now trying to laugh away you errors and blunders, or you’ve simply forgotten them, so I’m guessing you need a reminder:

    You first stated an over-generalisation thatanything that criticizes the Evolution dogma - that paper paper [sic] will be toast before it even gets to 1st base of PR regardless of its scientific merits”. I posted 4 papers that showed your statement was wrong.

    In response you blundered by stating those 4 papers "are nothing more than imaginations / thoughts / hypotheses / etc. supporting the same Evolutionary paradigm within a Materialistic worldview". They were not.

    I challenged you to correct your blunder, but you said that these papers clearly show thatEvolution is taken as an ABSOLUTE GIVEN, only the mechanism is being questioned”. They did not.

    Do you deny you said these?
    Do you deny you erred and blundered?
    Do you deny that it shows your reading comprehension was poor?
    Do you deny that you simply responded blindly rather than having considered my post and did some background research?
    Do you deny that you have spent considerable time trying to turn the tables, calling me everything under the sun, in trying to escape responsibility for your words?
    Do you deny you tried to attribute my position against your goal shifted position and created a straw man?

    Try answering these questions for a change. The rest of NS301 readers just laugh at how you erred and blundered in your rabid attack on a non-YEC and stated that those papers were in support of the evolutionary paradigm when anyone who had done an ounce of checking would have known they were the opposite. But you didn’t just claim it once, but twice! When it was finally explained to you, you had to back track with dishonest debate tactics and venom. Quite simply, you cannot take the fact that you made a mistake and your pride prevents you from admitting it. The longer you maintain this attitude, the closer you are to rejection - see Matthew 7:23. Try practicing what you preach for a change; exercise some honesty in answering those questions.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jorge
    replied
    Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
    Sure you have.
    Yes, I have. As I wrote previously, "that you do not wish to acknowledge this is not my problem".


    Ran to yet another thread because you couldn't deal with all the errors you were caught in on other threads? Well, that shouldn't be a surprise...
    Terror: "Give me answers ... give me answers ... I demand answers!!!"

    Jorge: "Sure, Terror, here you go ..."

    Terror: [not bothering to read/study answers] "Give me answers ... I demand answers!!!"

    Jorge: Huh?

    Terror: "You never give any answers ... I demand answers!!!"

    Jorge:


    That about sums it up.

    Jorge

    Leave a comment:


  • lilpixieofterror
    replied
    Originally posted by Jorge View Post
    For a "second"? I've been honest all along!
    Sure you have.

    That you do not wish to acknowledge this is not my problem.

    By the way, check out my new thread " ... best answers ever".
    It may be able to help you.
    Ran to yet another thread because you couldn't deal with all the errors you were caught in on other threads? Well, that shouldn't be a surprise...

    Leave a comment:


  • Jorge
    replied
    Originally posted by Omega Red View Post
    Yup. Your pride and ego got in the way of you admitting you made mistakes in this thread. Your anger has been boiling over for several posts now because this non-YEC highlighted your blunders and also explains why you are so desperate to turn the tables, escape the spotlight and keep venting as much slander, malice and deceit my way. It’s easily understood why you would take this exit track. You may think it is a good laugh, but you leave your errors, your blunders, your detestable debating tactics and your anti-scriptural practises for all to see, which will hound you for the remainder of your time in NS301.

    "desperation ... ire ... boiling over ... anger ... slander ... malice ... deceit"

    Bwahahahahahaha!!!

    Keep 'em comin', Mr. Red ... please don't stop!

    By the way, check out my new thread " ... best answers ever".
    It may be able to help you (I doubt it but, hey, what the heck).


    Jorge

    Leave a comment:


  • Jorge
    replied
    Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
    Well, since you rip the Bible out of context, ignore parts of it you don't want to hear, and make up things about it as you go along; guess I shouldn't be surprised when you do the same thing to my entire paragraph. Can't be honest for a second, eh Jorge?
    For a "second"? I've been honest all along!
    That you do not wish to acknowledge this is not my problem.

    By the way, check out my new thread " ... best answers ever".
    It may be able to help you.

    Jorge

    Leave a comment:


  • Omega Red
    replied
    Originally posted by Jorge View Post
    "... desperation and ire ..." Bwahahahahahaha!!!


    Thanks for brightening up my day, OR ... I really needed a good laugh!!!

    Jorge
    Yup. Your pride and ego got in the way of you admitting you made mistakes in this thread. Your anger has been boiling over for several posts now because this non-YEC highlighted your blunders and also explains why you are so desperate to turn the tables, escape the spotlight and keep venting as much slander, malice and deceit my way. It’s easily understood why you would take this exit track. You may think it is a good laugh, but you leave your errors, your blunders, your detestable debating tactics and your anti-scriptural practises for all to see, which will hound you for the remainder of your time in NS301.

    Leave a comment:


  • lilpixieofterror
    replied
    Originally posted by Jorge View Post
    Thank you so much, Terror, for coming out and helping me prove my claim.
    Too bad that your comrade Omega Red isn't as forthcoming.

    Anyway: Your Honor, I rest my case!

    Jorge
    Well, since you rip the Bible out of context, ignore parts of it you don't want to hear, and make up things about it as you go along; guess I shouldn't be surprised when you do the same thing to my entire paragraph. Can't be honest for a second, eh Jorge?

    Leave a comment:


  • Jorge
    replied
    Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
    Because it is all about you and your beliefs Jorge.
    Thank you so much, Terror, for coming out and helping me prove my claim.
    Too bad that your comrade Omega Red isn't as forthcoming.

    Anyway: Your Honor, I rest my case!

    Jorge

    Leave a comment:


  • Jorge
    replied
    Originally posted by Omega Red View Post
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Blah ... blah ... blah ...................
    .
    .
    .

    ... And so your desperation and ire continue to mount.
    "... desperation and ire ..." Bwahahahahahaha!!!


    Thanks for brightening up my day, OR ... I really needed a good laugh!!!

    Jorge

    Leave a comment:


  • lilpixieofterror
    replied
    Originally posted by Jorge View Post
    If this weren't such a serious matter, you'd be funnier than a room full of clowns. We Biblical Creationists do everything we can to acquire and practice the proper meaning of God's Word - what Christ stated the Pharisees did NOT do. So clearly what you're insinuating is all jackassbackwards from reality.
    AKA the meaning that Jorge agrees with.

    Compare this with what Theistic Evolutionists such as yourself practice: you willingly / purposefully distort God's Word (including deletions, additions, reinterpretations, classifying as myth, allegory, and so on) just so that God's Word aligns itself with the edicts of a modern "science" establishment, an establishment that is chock-full of declared Humanists and Atheists.
    Irony at its finest, since you've been caught, several times, attempting to add things into the Bible, beyond its 'plain meaning' and than trying to weasel your way out of admitting you are doing just what you attack others for doing. What did Jesus say about hypocrites, Jorge?

    SUMMARIZING: The goal of Biblical Creationists is to be aligned with the actual meaning of God's Word. The goal of Theistic Evolutionists is to make God's Word align itself with what a secular "scientific" establishment has decreed is "Truth". One must then ask: exactly what "god" is it that Theistic Evolutionists serve ... whose side are they truly on?
    No Jorge, the goal of a TE is to attempt to understand faith in light of the physical evidence vs trying to write off all the physical evidence before us. If you think this is wrong, go ahead and just tell everybody why radioactive isotopes samples continue to support an old earth and not a single one supports a young earth? Why are we able to see star light from objects far further than 6,000 light years away? Why do the geological features we see around the world show a history of being laid down in layers that is inconsistent with a 6,000 year old earth? These are just a few things you need to provide answers for instead of just calling everybody, who dares to disagree with you, a bunch of names and failing to address what they say (while of course, complaining when people do what you do, I thought the Bible condemned hypocrisy, guess Jorge's version doesn't).

    In an earlier post you ask me if I actually read the posts that I respond to. For the most part, yes, I certainly do. Now I ask you if you even bother to think about what you write. Because let me tell you, many times it appears that you pulled it out from some bodily orifice with nary a thought. And don't take that personally - others here at TWeb practice as you do.
    Your delusions are quite amazing. Perhaps you could next explain why many of your fellow YEC's find you as an embarrassment to their cause and tend to avoid you.

    Leave a comment:


  • lilpixieofterror
    replied
    Originally posted by Jorge View Post
    You can keep trying to make this an issue about me and my beliefs, Terror.
    Because it is all about you and your beliefs Jorge. Anybody, who dares to disagree with you, is labeled as not being a 'True ChristianTM'. Why do you suppose so many of your YEC brethren avoid talking to you, distance themselves from you, and even actively go against you? It is because you're an embarrassment to them and they don't want to be associated with such an embarrassment to the faith. I can't blame them either.

    I have amply explained / demonstrated that it is nowhere near being about me or my personal beliefs, it is all about being properly aligned with what GOD says.
    Than why hasn't YEC become a critical doctrine of the faith and why is it that in 2,000 years, not a single church council has made it a center piece argument of the faith? You'd think if it really was what 'God says' instead of what Jorge thinks God says, it would be much more central to the doctrines of the church, yet it isn't. So the answer seems to be that you're worshiping a false idol and attempting to make the age of the earth the center of your faith instead of Christ. What does the Bible say about making anything, but Christ, the center of your life?

    Biblical Creationism is, Theistic Evolution is not - period ... end of story ... go home. Until you both accept and publicly acknowledge that fact, you will remain immersed in that delusional world that you reside in.
    Than you're welcome to demonstrate the above, but you can't and fail to do so, over and over again. What does the Bible say about making anything, but Jesus, the center of your faith? I thought it was pretty much condemning it. Funny, I try to actually follow what Christ teaches and make him the center of my faith and my life. When will you do the same?

    P.S. As you know, you have plenty of company in that delusional world so you shouldn't worry about being lonely.
    The only delusional one here, is yourself. Why do even your fellow YEC's avoid you and avoid associating themselves with you? Can you explain why many of them do that?

    Leave a comment:


  • Omega Red
    replied
    Originally posted by Jorge View Post
    If this weren't such a serious matter, you'd be funnier than a room full of clowns. We Biblical Creationists do everything we can to acquire and practice the proper meaning of God's Word - what Christ stated the Pharisees did NOT do. So clearly what you're insinuating is all jackassbackwards from reality.

    Compare this with what Theistic Evolutionists such as yourself practice: you willingly / purposefully distort God's Word (including deletions, additions, reinterpretations, classifying as myth, allegory, and so on) just so that God's Word aligns itself with the edicts of a modern "science" establishment, an establishment that is chock-full of declared Humanists and Atheists.

    SUMMARIZING: The goal of Biblical Creationists is to be aligned with the actual meaning of God's Word. The goal of Theistic Evolutionists is to make God's Word align itself with what a secular "scientific" establishment has decreed is "Truth". One must then ask: exactly what "god" is it that Theistic Evolutionists serve ... whose side are they truly on?

    In an earlier post you ask me if I actually read the posts that I respond to. For the most part, yes, I certainly do. Now I ask you if you even bother to think about what you write. Because let me tell you, many times it appears that you pulled it out from some bodily orifice with nary a thought. And don't take that personally - others here at TWeb practice as you do.

    Jorge

    If you had said that you would do anything you can to support and defend your interpretation of God’s Word, you might have been closer to the mark. You had already disclosed your approaches to science in hermeneutical methodology:

    Originally posted by Jorge View Post
    ...science (true science) is in my biblical exegesis/hermeneutic from the start and all throughout.
    I do not allow science-falsely-so-called -- the speculations and vain, agenda-loaded imaginations of men -- to dictate how to read God's Word. I constantly remind myself of the difference between operational science and historical science just as I always keep in mind that, when there is conflict or doubt, the vote is cast for God's Word, not for theories and worldly philosophies. In this my logic is irrefutable - it's a win-win strategy (maybe you can figure out why - left as an exercise).
    In order to derive understanding of the Biblical passages you use an exegetical method that incorporates science from the start, but in order to determine which science is allowed you only select that which is in harmony with the understanding of the Biblical passage. Circular reasoning, logically fallacious, and wholly inconsistent when you approach issues on interpretation of thura, raqia and the time it took for the creative acts in Genesis 1. To wit, you’ll just dispose of anything that contradicts your interpretation and retain anything that supports your interpretation. So much for science being there from the start and throughout.

    I suppose you’ll deny the context of your own post, but I guess that’s why you state “my arguments are quite solid, thank you very much. In fact, they are so solid that they've withstood decades of attacks”. The Black Knight always wins. Bury your head in the sand to the errors and keep up the bluster.

    Originally posted by Jorge
    In an earlier post you ask me if I actually read the posts that I respond to. For the most part, yes, I certainly do.
    Is this finally an admission you erred and blundered in this thread?

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-18-2024, 12:15 PM
48 responses
135 views
0 likes
Last Post Sparko
by Sparko
 
Started by Sparko, 03-07-2024, 08:52 AM
16 responses
74 views
0 likes
Last Post shunyadragon  
Started by rogue06, 02-28-2024, 11:06 AM
6 responses
46 views
0 likes
Last Post shunyadragon  
Working...
X