-
Double-standards anyone? Get your double-standards here!
Evotards are so freakin' clueless. They attack ID and say IDists are being evasive because ID is not about the designer. Yet the evolutionitwits, by the same standard, are being evasive for trying to separate the ToE from the origin of living organisms.
Sure they will say that the ToE is only about living organisms- but ID is only about the design, so what the fuck? Double-standard.
Then they say that the mechanism of deign is devoid of content = empty because we don't know the designer. Yet when applied to their position it means the theory of evolution is devoid of content = empty because it doesn't say anything about te OoL. Yet the just brush that off and prattle on about ID. Double-standard.
The point is if the evotards apply 1/2 the skepticism they have for ID towards their position they wouldn't be evolutionists.
"Yet the evolutionitwits, by the same standard, are being evasive for trying to separate the ToE from the origin of living organisms."
ReplyDeleteAre they also being evasive for separating OOL from the origin of organic chemistry, separating organic chemistry from chemistry, separating chemistry from physics and separating physics from metaphysics?
"Yet the evolutionitwits, by the same standard, are being evasive for trying to separate the ToE from the origin of living organisms."
ReplyDeleteRichtard:
Are they also being evasive for separating OOL from the origin of organic chemistry,
Do they?
You can study organic chemistry without studying OOL. Many do. Or do you think every Organic Chemist is currently working on OOL?
ReplyDeleteRich,
ReplyDeleteYou don't even understand that you are making my point for me. That's hilarious.
Why is it that some theories can separate themsleves from others while you dickheads won't allow ID to do the same?
Is your head that far up your ass that you can't see the obvious double-standard?
I think design and designer are a bit more entangled than origin and diversity.
ReplyDeleteDiversity doesn't make a-prior assumptions about origin, design does (designer).
Rich:
ReplyDeleteI think design and designer are a bit more entangled than origin and diversity.
I think you are full of shit.
I provided the reasoning why the OoL is directly linked to any subsequent diversity. You ignored it because you think your ignorance is a refutation.
Rich:
Diversity doesn't make a-prior assumptions about origin
It has to for the reasons already provided.
Rich:
, design does (designer).
Nope, no a-priori assumptions. The evidence leads us to infer thre was a designer at one point.
Design and designer share the same root word, Joe.
ReplyDeleteDiversity would in fact be fine with a design OOL hypothesis, it's just that there's no evidence for that. But Diversity (evolution) could exist as a discipline.
A love that fact that the worse you do, the more you swear.
Rich:
ReplyDeleteDesign and designer share the same root word, Joe.
So what?
The origin of living organisms and the diversity of living organisms share two words. four if we include "the" and "of".
Rich:
Diversity would in fact be fine with a design OOL hypothesis,
Nice content-free response.
A designed OoL = a designed to evolve scenario.
Rich:
it's just that there's no evidence for that.
You mean no evidence taht you will accept- and it is worth noting you can't produce any positive evidence for your position.
Rich:
A love that fact that the worse you do, the more you swear.
The fact is the more you lie and misrepresent is what triggers my swearing...
Gotta go.
" The origin of living organisms and the diversity of living organisms share two words. four if we include "the" and "of". "
ReplyDeleteWhere is 'living' comming from? need to bolster your word count. Are you suggesting we don't study dead ones, you maroon? Gosh you are dense.
"of" and "the" - yes, these are highly specified aren't they? Quick, to the CSI mobile, TARDMAN.
" The origin of living organisms and the diversity of living organisms share two words. four if we include "the" and "of". "
ReplyDeleteRich:
Where is 'living' comming from?
Dictionaries, textbooks, encyclopedias.
Biology is the study of living organisms:
Biology is a natural science concerned with the study of life and living organisms, including their structure, function, growth, origin, evolution, distribution, and taxonomy
Do you want its origin?
Rich:
Are you suggesting we don't study dead ones, you maroon?
Dead organisms were once living Rich. And dead organisms don't diversify very well.
I like how we're talking OOL and Diversity (evolution), but you have to offer a definition of BIOLOGY to get your specified work.
ReplyDeleteNice work Tardman. Move them goalposts.
Richtard:
ReplyDeleteI like how we're talking OOL and Diversity (evolution), but you have to offer a definition of BIOLOGY to get your specified work.
YOU wanted to know where the word "living" came from you idiot.
Its not in the definition of OOL or evolution (but you added it in both) so you have to try and shoe horn teh definition of biology in there. Nice work. Keep moving them goal posts.
ReplyDeleteRich:
ReplyDeleteIts not in the definition of OOL or evolution
1- OoL stands for the origin of life which is the origin of living organisms.
2- Evolution is about the diversity of living organisms.
IOW it is in the definition of both.
Evolution (also known as biological, genetic or organic evolution) is the change in the inherited traits of a population of organisms through successive generations.
ReplyDeleteIn biology, an organism is any contiguous living system (such as animal, plant, fungus, or micro-organism). (bold added)
"IOW it is in the definition of both."
ReplyDeleteBwahahaha - yes, those definitions YOU just MADE up.
Sorry Joe trying to push back to the definition of organism doesn't work because "through successive generations." clearly suggests most aren't alive.
Idiot.
"IOW it is in the definition of both."
ReplyDeleteRich:
Bwahahaha - yes, those definitions YOU just MADE up.
Except I didn't make them up. Two were from wikipedia- I provided the links.
And the OoL speaks for itself.
Rich:
Sorry Joe trying to push back to the definition of organism
Except I ain't pushing back anything.
Ric:
doesn't work because "through successive generations." clearly suggests most aren't alive.
You're seeing a whole team of psychiatrists and psychologists aren't you?
Joe, the word only exists in the deifnitions that you made up for OOL and evolution. You provided links to OTHER things.
ReplyDeleteKeep spinning, Joe..
Rich:
ReplyDeleteJoe, the word only exists in the deifnitions that you made up for OOL and evolution.
They ain't made up. If you knew anything about either you would know those definitions fit perfectly.
IOW Rich your ignorance is not a refutation.
What does OoL stand for Rich?
ReplyDeleteabiogenesis:
ReplyDeleteIn natural science, abiogenesis (pronounced /ˌeɪbaɪ.ɵˈdʒɛnɨsɪs/, AY-bye-oh-JEN-ə-siss) or biopoesis is the study of how life on Earth arose from inanimate matter.
Wow it is about the origin of living organisms!
And have already provided a reference to support that evolution is about the diversity of living organisms.
So all Richtard can do is drool on his keyboard...
This comment contains two links- one to evolution and one to organism- and they support my claim:
ReplyDelete2- Evolution is about the diversity of living organisms.
"This comment contains two links- one to evolution and one to organism- and they support my claim:
ReplyDelete2- Evolution is about the diversity of living organisms."
No they don't, because:
"Sorry Joe trying to push back to the definition of organism doesn't work because "through successive generations." clearly suggests most aren't alive.
Idiot."
Idiot.
Hey moron dead organisms do not diversify.
ReplyDeleteThe theory of evolution is about the diversity of living organisms- even the organisms that are now dead- because they were once LIVING.
"Hey moron dead organisms do not diversify."
ReplyDeleteDo not or did not, Joe? Lots did. Including your great great great grandparents.
I know you find this hard. You'll be asking for a fight aagin soon.
I have provided references to suport my claims:
ReplyDelete1- OoL stands for the origin of life which is the origin of living organisms.
2- Evolution is about the diversity of living organisms.
(dead organisms were once living and as such part of the theory, either as some ancestor/ descendent or as a forgotten foot note)
And all Richie ReTardo can do is drool, shit himself and pound the table.
Nicely done...
why are't they teh study of "living or once living" then, if you honestly believe what you write, which I doubt.
ReplyDeleteRich:
ReplyDeletewhy are't they teh study of "living or once living" then,
Well paleontology would be the study of the once-living.
"Well paleontology would be the study of the once-living."
ReplyDeleteReally? Does paleontology study you great greag great grandparents?
"Well paleontology would be the study of the once-living."
ReplyDeleteRich:
Really?
Really, look it up.
Rich:
Does paleontology study you great greag great grandparents?
A paleontologist could if he/ she found them.