Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Occam's Aftershave · 07-30-2007, 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ericmurphy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Faid

You know, I can't help wondering whether dave will show up on yet another forum, with his usual boasting and the same old refuted claims.

And, of course, claiming that the poll results on who won his debate here were "somewhat one-sided" (like he said here about the poll done for his other debate at RD.net).

If he does, I don't think he'll tell any of us which one it is. But with Google, Dave can run, but he can't hide.

He probably won't use the nick "AFDave" again as it's too easy to find. We'll have to Google "Millions of dead things buried in rock layers, laid down by water all over the Earth."

rfmwinnie · 07-30-2007, 10:15 PM

I don't care about what Dave has done or not done before this debate. I've read this debate from the beginning. I tried and tried to understand what he was saying. I really wanted to see how he'd marshall his evidence and present it. Same thing for CM. And one thing that is astonishing to me is something I knew but never directly saw. That was how ridiculous ID arguments are.

I used to be just like Dave. I had left behind my fundementalist beliefs a long time ago. But it wasn't until a couple of years ago when I took an evolution college course that I truly understood just how much evidence for evolution there was. I truly felt like I had been lied to my whole life.

OTOH, most creationsists, and YEC in particular, are using the same arguments they have used in various ways and forms for the past 200 years. The only thing that has changed is that their arguments rest on increasingly obscure technical "issues" instead of big ones. That isn't science and this kind of debate shows why "both sides of the debate" shouldn't be taught in school. There is no debate to be had!

Sven · 07-31-2007, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by biblethumping

I'm still a fan of Daves narrow view of creation but just to clear the record, I did not vote in favor of afdave. I am a babelist at heart and Dave's notion of 'the truth of written record' is completely wrong under that assumption. His aggruments were very pursuasive but CM was able to counter all of them. This what you would expect if God had and STILL IS confusing the tongues of mankind (and thier so called scientific papers) in order that we not 'know' the truth of heaven.

This is parody! :notworthy:

On a related note, here's Dave's explanation for the poll result:

Quote:

Originally Posted by afdave

[...] CM was supposed to demonstrate (let me bold that) DEMONSTRATE the reliability of his beloved Lake Suigetsu dating system so as to DEMONSTRATE the falsity of Genesis ...

... and he failed to do so.

Yet we have 100+ people here who WANT Genesis to be false, so they voted for him anyway. Interesting isn't it?

Just for everyone to see who missed it in the other thread.

Yep, folks: We are all filthy liars.

Apparently even the Christians who voted against Dave. They apparently also WANT Genesis to be false.

Makes perfect sense.

As everything else Dave says.

View Poll Results: Who won the "Is Genesis Historically False" debate
Constant Mews won	128	97.71%
AFDave won	2	1.53%
It was a tie	1	0.76%
Voters: 131. You may not vote on this poll

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-30-2007, 10:15 PM	#52
rfmwinnie Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Phoenix Posts: 1,494	I don't care about what Dave has done or not done before this debate. I've read this debate from the beginning. I tried and tried to understand what he was saying. I really wanted to see how he'd marshall his evidence and present it. Same thing for CM. And one thing that is astonishing to me is something I knew but never directly saw. That was how ridiculous ID arguments are. I used to be just like Dave. I had left behind my fundementalist beliefs a long time ago. But it wasn't until a couple of years ago when I took an evolution college course that I truly understood just how much evidence for evolution there was. I truly felt like I had been lied to my whole life. OTOH, most creationsists, and YEC in particular, are using the same arguments they have used in various ways and forms for the past 200 years. The only thing that has changed is that their arguments rest on increasingly obscure technical "issues" instead of big ones. That isn't science and this kind of debate shows why "both sides of the debate" shouldn't be taught in school. There is no debate to be had!

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.