If PETA as the organization is behind it, you know
***I don’t necessarily KNOW that.
it cannot be for the eating of meat. If the Discovery Institute is behind it, you know it cannot be about the advancement of methodological science because that is 180 degrees from their goals.
***That is a conclusion, and your ad hominem reasoning proceeded from your own conclusion, creating a vicious circular reasoning pattern. It’s a form of antagonism, which is not allowed on ecumenical threads — as far as I know.
It would be highly irrational to think that PETA suddenly supported eating meat when veganism is part of their core platform. It would be highly irrational to think that the DI suddenly supports methodological science when a theistic form of discovery is part of their core platform.
That is a conclusion, and your ad hominem reasoning proceeded from your own conclusion
It is a conclusion derived from the Discovery Institute's clear statements opposing "materialistic science" a.k.a., the science that is taught in schools. An organization that is opposed to something cannot be honestly trying to make it better, only trying to destroy and replace it. It's all in the Wedge Document.
It’s a form of antagonism
Isn't calling all debate "ad hominem" and accusing me of creating a "vicious circular reasoning pattern" even when accompanied by clear evidence and argument a form of antagonism in itself? Isn't being obtuse in positing that the PETA would support the eating of meat antagonism?
All I have been presenting is logical argument and evidence. I expect such in return on an ecumenical thread instead of off-hand dismissal. So far the only difference I have seen between you and a creationist on a regular crevo thread is that this hasn't devolved into harsh personal attacks yet.
I expected more, which is why I posted here.