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

To: Ichneumon; OneVike; Nathan Zachary; metmom
“Wow, Fich -- that attempt to re-define words on the fly in order to avoid admitting you told a whopper is even more desperate and transparent than Bill Clinton's "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is"...” [excerpt]
Quit sounding like you've been throughly pwned.

“You claimed that evolutionists "do not make scientific discoveries".” [excerpt]
Evolutionists, or anyone using a naturalistic methodology, do not discover scientific facts, they only propose conventions.

“I pointed out how ludicrous this is -- there are thousands of such scientific discoveries, large and small, as anyone who has ever cracked a biology journal (or even read pop-sci coverage) is fully aware of.” [excerpt]
These ‘discoveries’ are nothing more than conventions that have turned into dogmas.

“When called on your transparently false claim, you did what anti-evolutionists typically do -- you failed to admit that you had made a false claim,” [excerpt]
Why would I when I haven't?

“You goofily tried to redefine "scientific discovery" in a way that made them not "discoveries", but "proposed conventions",” [excerpt]
Uh, no.

In methodological naturalism, there are no scientific discoveries of fact, only proposed conventions.

“whatever in the hell *that* might mean on Planet Fichori...” [excerpt]
Easy ol' boy, you don't want to blow a fuse.

“Oh, come ON!” [excerpt]
LOL!

“Evolutionists do make scientific discoveries, Fich.” [excerpt]
Only if they are not using a naturalistic methodology.

“Just admit it, and admit that you got caught telling a big fat untruth when you said they didn't, and that you were being silly when you tried to re-define simple terms to magically make your initial falsehood somehow "true".” [excerpt]
I don't break for bullies.

“Fich, if you're done playing your silly "discoveries aren't discoveries" word games, it's time to go ahead and admit that you told a whopper, retract it, and apologize for wasting out time with blatant falsehoods.” [excerpt]
I have no statements I wish to retract at this point, and I certainly will not be apologizing for, as you put it, wasting out time.

In a naturalistic methodology, you do not discover facts, you only propose conventions.

Sorry if that makes you queasy.

“But don't expect it to help your credibility any, and don't expect me to waste much time talking with you -- the dodging and weaving and gameplaying gets really old really fast. I prefer to discuss and debate issues with people who actually have things of value to add to the conversation.” [excerpt]
I'm so devastated! *pout*

“I have -- so are you going to respond to my amazement at your blatent misrepresentation?” [excerpt]
I have — You have only misrepresented what I've said.


Nice job stomping on the flaming paper bag ;-)
327 posted on 04/05/2009 10:06:13 PM PDT by Fichori (The only bailout I'm interested in is the one where the entire Democrat party leaves the county)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 326 | View Replies ]


To: Fichori
Nice job stomping on the flaming paper bag ;-)

That looks like an admission you put it there, and set fire to it.

329 posted on 04/06/2009 5:24:05 AM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 327 | 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