Posted on 09/27/2006 9:56:09 AM PDT by SirLinksalot
Show me someone who doesn't have an sinful thought once a day. Also, how does a baby sin? Read Psalm 51 and then tell me that you and every human being doesn't sin every day.
That is not what that statement means - it is a qualitative statement - we are debating a quantitative statement from you ("there is no evidence")
"in the eyes of the beholder" means qualitative judgment varies from person to person - not quantitative judgment as you are trying to argue.
“I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) dwelleth no good thing,” Rom. 7:18. Positively, man is inclined only to evil: “The imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth,” Gen. 8:21. Whatever we desire, think, speak, or do, of ourselves, by the prompting of our own original nature, is “only evil continually,” Gen. 6:5. “There is none that doeth good, no, not one,” Rom. 3:12. “For there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not,” Eccles. 7:20.
I still see nothing there that has the qualities I associate with "evidence". The assesment is based on a qualitative judgement.
you just don't get it...
You are making a quantitative judgment and are trying to support it with qualitative statements. I am guessing you don't understand the difference between qualitative and quantitative.
Wanna bet?
You are making a quantitative judgment and are trying to support it with qualitative statements. I am guessing you don't understand the difference between qualitative and quantitative.
"Existence" is a quality, so is "non-existence". The evidence is non-existent. Is that better?
No. The evidence clearly exists, you just don't accept it. Your quantitative statement ("there is no evidence") is clearly false and your opinion of the evidence ("non-existence") is a qualitative statement.
You refused to accept anything but a "qualitative statement", so I gave you one. Apparently you needed that in order to dismiss it.
I will amend my "qualitative" statement about the evidence to something that will give you the implicit agreement that it exists that you want so badly.
The evidence is fraudulent.
3 things for ME to look at to prove YOUR assertion?
Sorry, but that's YOUR responsibility.
Still no 'daily' ;^)
Do you understand the difference between qualitative and quantitative?
You can continue to argue apples vs. oranges...with somebody else
We must agree to disagree.
Do you? You claim I have made a "quantitative" assesment of the evidence. I know enough about the difference between qualitative and quantitative to know that you can't make a quantitative assesment of something that doesn't have a quantitative unit of measure.
You've erroneously interpreted "no evidence" to be quantitative when it is not, and cannot be.
So now you are claiming the amount of evidence does not have a quantitative unit of measure - do you realize how silly of a statement you just made.
Like I said, you can dig as deep of a hole as you desire - your arguments lack understanding of the terms - not to mention your statements lack reasoning - you just want to "win"
We will have to agree to disagree.
It's not silly at all. Are you saying it does have a quantitive unit of measure? If so, what is it?
Psst, psst. Point me in the direction of the "perfect" people. That's for you to prove.
Here are the definitions of the words you seem to be having trouble with:
Quantitative: How much evidence - the quantity of evidence
Qualitative: How good the evidence may be - your opinion.
Why don't you look up the words rather than ask me to explain it to you - don't be so intellectually lazy.
You are making a quantitative statement (speaking of the amount of evidence) and then you try to back it up by making qualitative statements (you don't think the quality of the evidence is good) - very illogical.
And what exactly is the unit of measure of evidence that I am expressing a quantity of? You do understand "unit of measure" don't you? You claim that in is inaccurate to say that there is "no evidence" there. If that is the case, perhaps you can tell me exactly how much evidence there is.
I've already agreed to change my assesment from "no evidence" to "non-existent evidence" and then to "fraudulent evidence" to try and find something that suits you. What more do you want?
Whatever the author provides as evidence - is evidence. That is not up to you - you are not in control of the quantitative aspect of somebody else's position. You can provide your opinion - that is the qualitative aspect. Based on your qualitative judgment you can claim you feel the evidence is not evidence at all - this is still a qualitative judgment - you can not change the quantitative aspect unless you rewrite the article.
So you can't tell me how much evidence there is? That's probably because there isn't any. That's what we call a "clue".
Whatever...
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.