Intelligent design
Out of context: Reply #159
- Started
- Last post
- 690 Responses
- discipler0
Tick -
You have not displayed that you know anything about the true science being discussed in this debate. You simply try to make legitimate issues into political and religious conspiracies. Why? Because that's what interests you and you see it as a way to feign the upper hand in a discussion.
And nobody really seems to understand the science here, except maybe mikotondria.
To this day, in conflict with what you just said, I have answered directly, the key questions and have tried to directly answer the legitimate questions posed by others in these discussions (keeping in mind there is 1 of me and a thousand of those who oppose me - though they may not be sure why). The burden lies with you to produce a single straw man argument (to understand straw man arguments: http://www.fallacyfiles.org/stra…) that I have put up and demonstrate how I'm "not credible". Again, give it shot.
Finally, my entire argument is based on the latest in scientific discovery. Your heckling (which is all it amounts to) is based on a philosophical bias, adopted from your political and philosophical gurus, which smacks of pseudo-intellectualism and an avoidance of the real issues.
So, I would conclude that it is your argument that is built on fiction... and agenda of course.