Originally posted by ushomefree
DigiMark007-May I ask you a series of questions, and have you answer them in "yes or no" fashion?
Probably not, since yes/no questions can easily be configured in such a manner that I either have to agree with you or agree with something preposterously silly. Why not just talk?
Originally posted by Da Pittman
Digi--Have you stopped beating your wife? Yes or No 😉
😂
Also, no.
😐
Originally posted by ushomefree
Well, Digi, let's give it a shot.
Wait, I just declined the offer and you're choosing to go ahead with it anyway? Ok, shoot. Just be forewarned...I doubt you'll get a yes/no answer out of me for any of them. So you'd really be better off just talking to me like most people do, whereas it's usually Q&A with us ("Well what about this...huh? Pokes a hole in your precious science, eh? *evil cackle*" etc. etc. ). But I suppose it's in the nature of creationists to be Socratic in their methods, so whatever floats your boat.
Originally posted by ushomefree
Digi, Charles Darwin, in his lifetime, did he know more about single celled organisms than molecular biologists do today? Yes or No?
Did Columbus Know everything about America when he DISCOVERED it? The answer is no.
Darwin did not know everything about evolution when he DISCOVERED it.
We still don't know everything about evolution. What we do not know does not support what you believe. An unknown is not evidence.
Originally posted by Shakyamunisonyou are correct sir 😉
Did Columbus Know everything about America when he DISCOVERED it? The answer is no.
Darwin did not know everything about evolution when he DISCOVERED it.We still don't know everything about evolution. What we do not know does not support what you believe. An unknown is not evidence.
Shakyamunison-
The following statement, that I am prepared to make, should not be interpreted as arrogant (on your part). Fact of the matter is, Charles Darwin knew less than what molecular biologist know today. This is an obvious fact, and I am pleased that you and I agree.
You stated, however, in the latter portion of your post, "We still don't know everything about evolution. What we do not know does not support what you believe. An unknown is not evidence."
You are correct in stating that scientists are not all knowing in regard to Evolution; but your premise is completely ignorant of what scientists "do know." Your objection is completely unwarranted, and well... a little ridiculous.
May I ask you questions, and have you answer them in "Yes or No" fashion? If so, great; but we will have to continue this thread in time. I am going to bed.
Originally posted by ushomefree
Shakyamunison-The following statement, that I am prepared to make, should not be interpreted as arrogant (on your part). Fact of the matter is, Charles Darwin knew less than what molecular biologist know today. This is an obvious fact, and I am pleased that you and I agree.
You stated, however, in the latter portion of your post, "We still don't know everything about evolution. What we do not know does not support what you believe. An unknown is not evidence."
You are correct in stating that scientists are not all knowing in regard to Evolution; but your premise is completely ignorant of what scientists "do know." Your objection is completely unwarranted, and well... a little ridiculous.
May I ask you questions, and have you answer them in "Yes or No" fashion? If so, great; but we will have to continue this thread in time. I am going to bed.
Yes.
What question are you talking about? You seem to agree, but the insult me. This does not look good from my point of view.
Is the lack of evidence sufficient evidence to prove a point?
Originally posted by ushomefreeWhat the hell is up with these Yes/No questions and why are you trying to have everyone answer the loaded questions? Also what did I do to tick you off that you will answer everyone else but not my question after I answered yours and took time to respond to your question even though you were being rude. Just my 2 cents
Shakyamunison-The following statement, that I am prepared to make, should not be interpreted as arrogant (on your part). Fact of the matter is, Charles Darwin knew less than what molecular biologist know today. This is an obvious fact, and I am pleased that you and I agree.
You stated, however, in the latter portion of your post, "We still don't know everything about evolution. What we do not know does not support what you believe. An unknown is not evidence."
You are correct in stating that scientists are not all knowing in regard to Evolution; but your premise is completely ignorant of what scientists "do know." Your objection is completely unwarranted, and well... a little ridiculous.
May I ask you questions, and have you answer them in "Yes or No" fashion? If so, great; but we will have to continue this thread in time. I am going to bed.
Originally posted by Da Pittman
What the hell is up with these Yes/No questions and why are you trying to have everyone answer the loaded questions? Also what did I do to tick you off that you will answer everyone else but not my question after I answered yours and took time to respond to your question even though you were being rude. Just my 2 cents
You were being totally unfair by asking the one question that would expose him. Shame on you.
Can I have your autograph?
😆 😉