Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: donh
I patiently await your refutation of the three journal articles

You can wait a long time. If you have proof - you post it here. I will not do your work for you. I post my proof right here where everyone can see it.

The truth of the matter is that you have no proof, you do not even have the names of the articles. You are a total phony who has completely lost the argument and are lying. If there were such articles and they had refutations, you would have given the refutations right here.

Evloutinists like evolution itself always say the proof is somewhere else. Like McCarthy they have the proof right in their hands - but will not tell it to anyone.

150 posted on 09/27/2001 6:35:39 PM PDT by gore3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies ]


To: gore3000

The truth of the matter is that you have no proof, you do not even have the names of the articles. You are a total phony who has completely lost the argument and are lying. If there were such articles and they had refutations, you would have given the refutations right here.

Anyone can see, in post #100 above, that I, in fact, did give the titles of the articles, which are a direct and palpable refutation of several key predictions Behe made in his book, which, quite obviously, you also did not read. Persistently ignoring or misrepresenting what's said to you only serves you well for a while--eventually everyone catches on.

Now, lets take up your theory of light bulbs. I am aware of your spurious theory of light bulbs, BUT, yesterday, I screwed in a light bulb, and IT DID NOT LIGHT, and furthermore, that's happened to me more than once! So, you see, there are these irrecoverable light gaps in the theory of light bulbs, and no one will ever see the missing light. So much for your vaunted Edison, you fraud.

...

Try to learn the difference between a proof, and an inductive demonstration. A proof requires a formal domain of discourse, a set of theorems, and an hypothesis demonstrated in deductive steps on the theorems to reach the conclusion. An inductive demonstration, or a million inductive demonstrations, help improve your confidence, but they do not constitute a proof.

153 posted on 09/27/2001 7:56:05 PM PDT by donh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies ]

To: gore3000

You can wait a long time. If you have proof - you post it here. I will not do your work for you. I post my proof right here where everyone can see it.

uh huh. If you posted your proof, than it should only take you a few seconds to point out to me what the domain of discourse is, and where the tabular list of lemmas that lead to the conclusion are.

You are a total phony who has completely lost the argument and are lying. If there were such articles and they had refutations, you would have given the refutations right here.

I already told you I wouldn't be posting the articles from scientific journals for your amusement. That you don't understand the nature of proof, and disdane the practices of modern scholarly & technical debate is no reflection on me. When you learn to belly up to the intellectual bar like a man instead of acting like a bullying three-year old going "oh, yea!" over and over, you might discover that people persistently treat what you have to say with a bit of respectful attention. It might be a refreshing experience.

159 posted on 09/28/2001 6:46:41 AM PDT by donh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson