Sorry to offend you. It would have been much more mature of me to post silly pictures.
Posted on 09/15/2009 8:09:13 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
“Angst? How quaint.”
I don’t understand—what is quaint about angst? Was you statement meant to be taken literally, or were you simply seeking a phrase to somehow diminish the impact of my observation?
Really, I want an answer. I want to be sure that I understand your concern. Like a good counselor.
You posted a lie and followed up with a lie. Then you proclaimed yourself a destroyer of strawmen. Why not simply defend the lies or retract them?
I see, you didn’t understand my response. Allow me to rephrase: I didn’t lie.
Is that better, Len?
“Why does ID need ‘science’ to proclaim that life is too complex to investigate further?”
You knew that this was a dishonest representation so you followed up with a false definition of irreducible complexity which you also knew to be false.
Now, after a bunch of nonsense on your part, you claim to believe that your misrepresentations are true? Cool! Point me to the creationist who claims that life is too complex to investigate.
Ah, clarity at last! You don’t understand ID!
More obfuscation? I asked you to point me to the creationist who claims that life is too complex to investigate.
I’m sorry, but I’ve reached my limit for responses to idiots for today. If you wish to continue this discussion, you have two choices:
o You may resume the exchange tomorrow, or
o You can increase your IQ by at least 30 points.
If you choose the latter option, I would require a written affirmation of a 30 point or more increase in your IQ from an accredited intelligence testing agency. Please fax the results to me if you wish to resume the conversation tonight.
I do hope that this choice does not cause you more angst. Please let me know your selection within 10 minutes.
Thank you!
You may resume to obfuscate whenever you like. If you make a blanket statement, however, be man enough to back it up.
What makes you think you are communicating with a man? Buck challenges you to raise your IQ thirty more points, but that would put you twice Buck's allotment instead of only around 60% higher than Buck's. I also think we have to realize that since Buck mentions meds a lot, Buck is fixated on his problem.
Andy, you are noble and brave, but clearly out of your league. Don’t you have a strawman to build for me to burn?
Yes, I am out of my league. I am in the majors and you are in the sandlot. You really need to get treatment for your hallucinations. Speaking of your strawman, evidently I am not an IDer since I think the earth is around 4 billion years old. But then you are delusionary.
Congratulations on your enlightenment regarding the age of the earth! You have your leagues reversed, but with therapy you’ll eventually see the light.
Talk about a weak response and your last one is the epitome. My two year grandson comes up with better repartee than that. Try again.
“Talk about a weak response and your last one is the epitome.”
I’m sorry—I didn’t realize that English wasn’t your first language. Perhaps a few sessions with your grandson’s Dick and Jane primer is in order.
Actually it isn't. Spanish was my first language, but I have acquired a few more including English. And thanks for recognizing my two year old's inherited precociousness. That might explain why his repartee is still leagues ahead of yours. The Dick and Jane mention sheds a whole lot of light on how you think and what you use as reference material.
I wish you all could be an ‘outsider’ and read these comments.
It’s like being a visitor at kindergarten at the playground.
“You are.”
“No I’m not, you are”.
“Unn-uh.”
“UH-huh.”
What makes you think I don't read the comments? It started with a strawman definition of irreducible complexity. I pointed out the strawman. The response came and I followed in kind. I don't want to leave the guy behind in language he apparently doesn't understand. If you disagree with me that the definition of irreducible complexity used by ID'ers is not what was posted in post 19, then you can do what BuckW failed to do and back up the assertion with an actual quotation from somewhere. Otherwise, step out of the line of fire. It is really a simple solution, but the support for the assertion is not here. In fact the strawman is further embellished in post 13 with a further assertion that ID proponents hold to a "6000 year old earth fantasy". I class those assertions "strawmen".
You didn’t offend me.
The picture you posted was to Allegra and humblegunner and if you were ‘aware’ and actually read all the posts, you would understand what it was about.
Unfortunately, some posters here seem so locked in to the “I’m right, you’re wrong, nana nana booboo”, that they can’t see that they are acting like children.
If my comment bothered you, then maybe there is a reason.
Oh, I agree with your assertion that some (or many) are using strawman arguments.
I just think the word is getting a bit overused, and the conversation sounds more like “You are. No you are. No I’m not, you are”.
Everybody is going round in circles chasing each other, so I’ll just wait until you all run out of breath.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.