Replies

I have given up thinking you will provide any evidence for it, because that would take integrity.

Oh you fine example of integrity(NOT). You are really a comedian. You get no evidence because it is my contention. I feel that way. It is a "glorified" opinion and I have no need nor desire to justify my opinion/contention to one such as you. Dr. Sternberg was treated shabbily and the fact that you cited a hack blogger to deny the mistreatment of the Dr. is evidence of your "integrity". So bluster all you want, use whatever adjective you wish, you are getting nothing.

And I repeat, I contend that Darwinism is also non-falsifiable.

"Oh you fine example of integrity(NOT)."

Speak for yourself. I'm willing to back up the statements I make, unlike you. :)

"You get no evidence because it is my contention. I feel that way."

So do people in mental institutions. Why should I think your claims are any better than theirs?

"It is a "glorified" opinion and I have no need nor desire to justify my opinion/contention to one such as you."

In other words, you CAN'T or WON'T back up your silly claims. Just like the guy in the straight jacket.

"Dr. Sternberg was treated shabbily..."

Um, no.

"and the fact that you cited a hack blogger to deny the mistreatment of the Dr. is evidence of your "integrity"."

The fact you have provided nothing to refute this blogger shows your integrity, or lack thereof.

"And I repeat, I contend that Darwinism is also non-falsifiable."

Yet you claim that there is evidence to falsify it.

Without being supported by evidence one contention is no better than another. You act as if the fact that a contention doesn't have to be supported by evidence to be called a contention means that a contention doesn't need to be supported by evidence to be taken seriously.

Unfalsifiable claims cannot, by definition, have evidence that goes against them. Yet you claim that evolution is both unfalsifiable AND has evidence that goes against it (which is vigorously suppressed by a secret conspiracy of evolutionists). There is a deep logical contradiction in your position, and you are not man enough to admit it.