Nope you just have to be wrong.I don't need one to reject yours.
I don't need one to reject yours.
Your stories about eye evolution definitely didn't demonstrate that.Nope you just have to be wrong.
If there is no hope there is no hope. I will die an optimist. You should too .He'll only flip if it's in his self-interest to do so. Liberals enabling his game only does the opposite.
If there is no hope there is no hope. I will die an optimist. You should too .
Sure it did. Plus you've already stated in this thread that you agree to each little part of the theory. You just don't like where that path takes you.Your stories about eye evolution definitely didn't demonstrate that.
No I didn't. There are correct things about it, it wouldn't survive otherwise. And no it didn't. Your story was a tautology. Assume the eyes evolved to show that they evolved.Sure it did. Plus you've already stated in this thread that you agree to each little part of the theory. You just don't like where that path takes you.
Sorry.
I think thats extreme, denazification. I get the point of view but the point is that an open democracy should dwarf those ideas in its own right.I wouldn't say there's no hope for degenerates as the Germans proved otherwise with denazification. The problem is that american liberals are too fond of their own right wing to support denazification.
While I am amazed at your persistence, you have to know that he has absolutely zero interest in engaging with you honestly. He is not debating you from a position of fact or logic. He is a religious zealot, wholly indoctrinated in anti-evolution dogma, and his only interest is preserving that programming. You could literally show him an example of an amoeba evolving into a whale in front of his very eyes, and he would still deny your evidence was adequate, or he would duhvert off onto a tangent, or he'd ignore you outright. Such is the bubble he's erected to preserve his faith.Sure it did. Plus you've already stated in this thread that you agree to each little part of the theory. You just don't like where that path takes you.
Sorry.
I think thats extreme, denazification. I get the point of view but the point is that an open democracy should dwarf those ideas in its own right.
Open democracy was rather supportive of slavery, and when that was removed by another process, the next best thing in segregation, and that too was removed by processes other than the ballot box. Considering how much of the us population are self-interested in biblical creation, I wouldn't be so sure evolutionary or other sciences would survive a vote in many places.
Democracy only works with a population good enough for it, that's why the founders were smart enough to include said other processes.
Suggesting that tautological arguments aren't fallacious is dishonest.While I am amazed at your persistence, you have to know that he has absolutely zero interest in engaging with you honestly. He is not debating you from a position of fact or logic. He is a religious zealot, wholly indoctrinated in anti-evolution dogma, and his only interest is preserving that programming. You could literally show him an example of an amoeba evolving into a whale in front of his very eyes, and he would still deny your evidence was adequate, or he would duhvert off onto a tangent, or he'd ignore you outright. Such is the bubble he's erected to preserve his faith.
While I am amazed at your persistence, you have to know that he has absolutely zero interest in engaging with you honestly. He is not debating you from a position of fact or logic. He is a religious zealot, wholly indoctrinated in anti-evolution dogma, and his only interest is preserving that programming. You could literally show him an example of an amoeba evolving into a whale in front of his very eyes, and he would still deny your evidence was adequate, or he would duhvert off onto a tangent, or he'd ignore you outright. Such is the bubble he's erected to preserve his faith.
Agreed. Here is the thing though, if we are not quite ready for it we will need an administration that moves us towards that goal. The goal of all goals. Right?
I don't need a source in order to reject your tautologies.Oh I know. Part of it is I'm interested in figuring out where the (dis)information he relies on comes from. Most of these guys will link to biblical anti-evolution sites but BS rarely if ever provides a reference. It's most likely because he knows his source is unsupported but he's slavishly devoted to it.
See post 42 in this thread and compare it to:Oh I know. Part of it is I'm interested in figuring out where the (dis)information he relies on comes from. Most of these guys will link to biblical anti-evolution sites but BS rarely if ever provides a reference. It's most likely because he knows his source is unsupported but he's slavishly devoted to it.
I don't need a source in order to reject your tautologies.
He couldn't show me that and I would not deny that evidence. That would be very convincing evidence. Him telling fairy tales about eyes is not convincing and it shouldn't be to anybody.You could literally show him an example of an amoeba evolving into a whale in front of his very eyes, and he would still deny your evidence was adequate, or he would duhvert off onto a tangent, or he'd ignore you outright.
I will try to explain to you what I see in your words'
abj13: In some ways you are and are not arguing for a meta-ethical moral relativism. This type of moral relativism describes that one's viewpoint/culture/traditions guides what is a moral act and that there is not a universal moral act. That would mean that any act deemed good/bad/evil by commonly accepted morals in our society could be deemed the exact opposite in another society. To give an extreme example, what may be seen as rape here, would be seen as a perfectly acceptable act in another culture.
M: I would argue that anybody making such an argument is full of shit.
abj: On the more extremes of this approach is that there are no universal truths. 2+2= whatever you want it to mean. The sky doesn't scatter light 474-476 nm, it is whatever number you want it to be. Pi is not the ratio between the circumference divided by two time the radius, it can be 2 today, 6.14159 tomorrow. If everything is relative and dependent on one's culture, then there are no universal truths.
M: Consider the possibility that everything that people take as moral truth is false conditioning. What that fails to note, what is always missed is the truth of what we feel. The universal reality is that false morality is imposed on a fixed reality, our original natures, our true selves, what we are without conditioning. What person who is conditioned would know what that is. That is why we don't know what the truth is, we don't know who we are. And why? Because to know what we really are we would have to remember how we got that way, we would have to relive our conditioning, and since our conditioning told us we are the most worthless things that ever existed we will not go down that road. We refuse to relive the pain. And this applies to ever single person who is still conditioned. The result is all these monsters in this thread who want others to feel the pain they themselves will not feel. The truth, in fact, is hideous and that's why nobody will see it.
abj: It seems that you agree that there are universal truths (2+2=4).
M: And that no conditioned person has the faintest idea what they are
abj: However, that's the issue with buckshot. He adjusts truths to fit his reality while sensible and just people fit their reality to truths.
M: Those sensible and just people posting in this thread spewing their conditioned hate at buckshot are not just people but monsters. Every conditioned person adjusts truth to fit his or her conditioning. It's a law and a truth but one that can only really be understood by those who have removed some critical level of their own conditioning,
abj: Case in point, he made several false statements about biology. Numerous people point out that his statements from any objective viewpoint are false. Instead of articulating why his reality is valid, he provides zero evidence and accuses everyone of lying about him. He complains about people making posts only about him, and turns around and to make posts centered only about other posters. He claims to fight misinformation, but then repeatedly and consistently provides false information. He manipulates universal truths to justify the validity of his posts on this forum. He complains about one issue and turns around and commits the very immoral act he rails against.
M: And as a reward all the rage and hatred of those conditioned to a different reality, dump their hatred on him. The depth of the blindness is staggering. You are all the same, rabid fanatics. Nobody anticipated, I guess, that somebody who can see would happen along and upset the apple cart. Who thought that self reflection would reveal a pile of maggots, eh? Well I didn't either but I found out a long time ago.
abj: To suggest he represents just some "other viewpoint" is a mischaracterization of his posts. If you accept there are universal truths, then he is the very poster who warps an universal truth when it is convenient and justifies his logic. That is why, at a fundamental level, people disagree with his posting style here so much. It is not just another view, he bastardizes logic,objectivity, intellectual honesty, and universal truths for his own internal rationalizations.
M: Pure garbage. There are no threats to those things. The truth is always there for those who have erased their egos. Your reasoning is completely illogical because it is based on fear, the fear the truth can be lost, and that is because it is actually you who has lost it. Now let's give up on punishing buckshot and get down to the real business of destroying me. Did I mention, I already won? Not my first rodeo, Mr. Jones.
That's true enough, too many liberal don't believe that terribly degenerate people exist.
You can say that again. And even when I tell you you're one of them, you still can't see it. Doh!
Are you kidding. My God is better than his god any day. Mine is the best only God there is. My god is actually also multiple times better than your god, that Mr. God of Pathetic Arrogance.Perfect demonstration of what religion can do to people, and also why it's attractive to the selfish. Because they believe in the same God, moonbeam and buckshot know they got each other's back no matter what.
Are you kidding. My God is better than his god any day. Mine is the best only God there is. My god is actually also multiple times better than your god, that Mr. God of Pathetic Arrogance.