Originally posted by ushomefreemy view of you....well this is gonna be harsh. you basically post propaganda and when you argue your points you may use fancy language but you are EXTREMELY unconvincing. my dead grandmother makes better arguments than you do. none of questions inspire thought or have meaning and are usually to further your own agenda rather than enlighten anyone
Shakyamunison and DigiMark007-This entire conversation started after I posted a video via YouTube, and simply asked, "Is anyone going to see this move"? Then things got complicated! Feel free to re-cap, starting on page 184, and fizzling out on page 186. I am going to put the entire situation in retrospect, not to mention context. Those of you who felt compelled to make statements, I responded with a question--demanding more than a blanket statement--to support your views. Almost NEVER--and I am being conservative--did I get a "direct" response! Read for yourself. And yet, I am deemed dodging issues?! Except for my last post to Shakyamunison, all I did was ask questions (pertaining to statements made and/or "witty" comments. Period. Not me, but you, were guilty of "dodging the issues." I am just stating the truth of the matter folks.
[NOTE: IF I AM WRONG, PLEASE BRING IT TO ME ATTENTION; PROVIDE QUOTES (ON BOTH SIDES), AND PROVIDE THEM IN "CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER," PLEASE. FOR MYSELF AND OTHER MEMBERS OF THE FORUM. THANK YOU.]
The reason I moved on to "Yes or No" questions, is because, "I COULD NOT GET A STRAIGHT ANSWER FROM ANYONE, NOT EVEN DIGI!" I asked him--this is not verbatim, I do not think--"Does Charles Darwin know more about single celled organisms than molecular biologists do today"? I had a point in being this direct; but it had nothing to do with deception and/or committing intellectual suicide. In other words, it was not a "trap." And I think, EVERYONE KNEW THIS! BUT WAS CHALLENGED/INTIMIDATED BY DIRECT QUESTIONING!
Love me or hate me, everyone should give me the benefit of the doubt, at minimum, I am critical. I do not like unsubstantiated statements. Have I, myself, made them in the past? I am sure that I have. But when questioned, I try to remain on the topic at hand, and THIS IS RATHER DIFFICULTY BEING BOMBARDED BY--AT WHAT SEEMS TO BE--THE ENTIRE FORUM!
With all in mind, as I have addressed DigiMark007--the same applies--I do not dislike anyone on this forum; instead, I get frustrated--and that is not to say that you do not as well. Regardless, I made the statement, and I meant it. DigiMark007, brother, I have nothin' but love for you! Nonetheless, a member of the forum actually challenged my sincerity. Absolutely amazing!
Let us suspend the entire thread for a moment. All of you, I ask: "What are you views about me"? No need to hold back; be honest! All I ask, is that you take a moment to think hard about the views you have "in themselves, and why you have them." Then, please, present your views in a fair manner, and I need not explain. I assume we are young adults. Well... Shakyamunison could be our grandfather (ha ha ha)! But that is just friendly fun.
Outstanding! But first, are you willing to discuss reasons as to why and how you came to the conclusion that Charles Darwin knows as much as Molecular Biologists do today? If your response is no, than so be it; we will move on. No harm done. Otherwise, we can begin on your initial opinion: no, Molecular Biologists (today) do not know more than Charles Darwin did in his day. I really think it is imperative to know why and how you came to such conclusions. Such will help me understand--put into perspective--latter discussion (not to mention, you views of my original question). What is your verdict?
Originally posted by ushomefreeNo to the "first". Yes to the general idea. I will discuss it with you after you tell me the questions.
Outstanding! But first, are you willing to discuss reasons as to why and how you came to the conclusion that Charles Darwin knows as much as Molecular Biologists do today? If your response is no, than so be it; we will move on. No harm done. Otherwise, we can begin on your initial opinion: no, Molecular Biologists (today) do not know more than Charles Darwin did in his day. I really think it is imperative to know why and how you came to such conclusions. Such will help me understand--put into perspective--latter discussion (not to mention, you views of my original question). What is your verdict?
Also, I said "No, Charles Darwin did not know more than them" not the other way around.
Please read.
Originally posted by ushomefree
Bardock42-This is the original "Yes or No" question presented to DigiMark. In all fariness, he did state, that he may not respond; but I really didn't understand his inability to do so. It was a simple question. And is read, "Charles Darwin: in his lifetime, did he know more about single celled organisms than molecular biologists do today? Yes or No"?
Originally posted by Bardock42
I'd say "no". I would like to look at the whole list of questions though, please.
As a friendly warning, I would ask, that you be explicit, in what you are trying to communicate; your statement, following the statements above, could, and has been construed as confusing.
In short, you seem to contradict yourself--not that you are.
Listen!
In stating, "No to the 'first'. Yes to the general idea. I will discuss it with you after you tell me the questions. Also, I said 'No, Charles Darwin did not know more than them' not the other way around."
I will give you the benefit of the doubt--just once; please, again, I stress... communicate yourself explicitly.
With all in mind, let us move on.
As I present this question, keep in mind, it is not to so-called, "corner you!" This question, and others that I will provide, challenge the crutch of the issue and/or claims behind Darwinian evolution. In short, I am speaking on terms of "documented evidence."
[Note: this will not be a one-sided discussion; when this discussion has been exhausted, questions can (and should) be addressed to me. Also, if you feel unprepared to answer the question(s), please, feel free to designate someone to provide a response--just one!]
First question: in conjunction with countless theories regarding Darwinian theory--specifically Natural Selection--has the genome of an organism and/or single celled organism been shown to increase?
"Charles Darwin: in his lifetime, did he know more about single celled organisms than molecular biologists do today?"
- No, Charles Darwin, in his lifetime, did not know more about single celled organisms than molecular biologists do today
How was that confusing to you?
in conjunction with countless theories regarding Darwinian theory--specifically Natural Selection--has the genome of an organism and/or single celled organism been shown to increase?
- I don't know
What do you define as increase of a genome?