where else can you find us?

The League of Reason still has some social media accounts! You can find us on Facebook or on Twitter for some interesting links and things.

EFF vs LoR - Round 2

Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 1
 [ 8 posts ] 
EFF vs LoR - Round 2
Author Message
Master_Ghost_KnightContributorUser avatarPosts: 2630Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 11:57 pmLocation: Netherlands Gender: Male

Post EFF vs LoR - Round 2

gilbo12345 wrote:Where did this alleged "whipping" occur? (Your imagination?) Perhaps you can post some links to the discussion, lest you don't want the lurkers to see what actually happened... Or do people here simply make claims with no evidence? Is that what you deem scientific? :lol:

Actually there is, and you can read it:
http://evolutionfairytale.com/forum//in ... 642&page=2
"I have an irrefutable argument for the existence of...." NO, STOP! You are already wrong!
Sun Jun 01, 2014 6:14 pm
gilbo12345Posts: 93Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2012 9:30 am Gender: Male

Post Re: onceforgivennowfree

Master_Ghost_Knight wrote:
gilbo12345 wrote:Where did this alleged "whipping" occur? (Your imagination?) Perhaps you can post some links to the discussion, lest you don't want the lurkers to see what actually happened... Or do people here simply make claims with no evidence? Is that what you deem scientific? :lol:

Actually there is, and you can read it:
http://evolutionfairytale.com/forum//in ... 642&page=2


Can it be?

BeesKnees?...


EDIT: Nope not Bees Knees... :)
Last edited by gilbo12345 on Sun Jun 01, 2014 7:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sun Jun 01, 2014 6:36 pm
gilbo12345Posts: 93Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2012 9:30 am Gender: Male

Post Re: onceforgivennowfree

Master_Ghost_Knight wrote:
gilbo12345 wrote:Where did this alleged "whipping" occur? (Your imagination?) Perhaps you can post some links to the discussion, lest you don't want the lurkers to see what actually happened... Or do people here simply make claims with no evidence? Is that what you deem scientific? :lol:

Actually there is, and you can read it:
http://evolutionfairytale.com/forum//in ... 642&page=2



What does tentative mean... If a hypothesis is tentative then does that allow you to assume it is true BEFORE testing it?

Actually here is post #22

http://evolutionfairytale.com/forum//in ... 42&p=95092








It seems YOU keep ignoring me since I will say again the world TENTATIVE ensures that you cannot assume the hypothesis is true.



ten·ta·tive (tebreve.gifnprime.giftschwa.gif-tibreve.gifv)
adj.
1. Not fully worked out, concluded, or agreed on; provisional: tentative plans.
2. Uncertain; hesitant.

http://www.thefreedi...y.com/tentative



Oh provisional, like making the hypothesis and then VERIFYING it by an experiment... Oh exactly what I have been telling you...



Additionally I refer you to the links you continue to ignore...


In order to test whether your hypothesis is true or not, you have to carry out some research to see if you can back it up.
http://www.null-hypo...null_hypothesis

If you are testing to see whether the hypothesis is true or not then you are not assuming it is true...





When you hypothesize something, you are not asserting anything about whether the hypothesis is true. It might be known true, known false, probable, improbable, completely unknown, or whatever. Usually the intention is to determine at some later stage the truth or falsity or probability of the hypothesis.
http://www.av8n.com/.../hypothesis.htm



When you hypothesize something, you are not asserting anything about whether the hypothesis is true.




as·sume (schwa.gif-soomacr.gifmprime.gif)
tr.v. as·sumed, as·sum·ing, as·sumes
1. To take upon oneself: assume responsibility; assume another's debts.
2. To undertake the duties of (an office): assumed the presidency.
3. To take on; adopt: "The god assumes a human form" (John Ruskin).
4. To put on; don: The queen assumed a velvet robe.
5. To affect the appearance or possession of; feign.
6. To take for granted; suppose: assumed that prices would rise. See Synonyms at presume.
7. To take over without justification; seize: assume control.
8. To take up or receive into heaven.



As I keep telling you it is a TENTATIVE assumption, you cannot claims something which is TENTATIVE is True... Because being true (or false) is the opposite of tentative.


Again I refer you to the word TENTATIVE.... TENTATIVE = UNSURE



If you are unsure of something then it is irrational to assume it is true



BeesKnees, on 14 Oct 2013 - 9:40 PM, said:


If the prediction is correct, the hypothesis is confirmed. That is how science is done. Look at the steps I quoted above.




Oh so the hypothesis that we are the centre of the universe is correct because that prediction was correct also... (As I told you earlier on the other thread and you ignored it).



Where does your links claim what you say here? Oh look what one of them say?... Exactly what I have been saying to you...

In physics, as in every experimental science, "experiment is supreme" and experimental verification of hypothetical predictions is absolutely necessary.

http://teacher.nsrl..../appendixe.html



Oops.... So I guess your links only apply to whatever you want to include and all else can go over a cliff? That is called cherry picking.






I have told you this over and over

Predicting plant growth will increase is a TENTATIVE assumption it is not known for sure, because I hadn't done the experiment yet... That is what I have been trying to teach you.... There is no requirement to assume the hypothesis is true for any prediction. I think this is where you are majorly confused. In order to make a prediction you do not need to assume your hypothesis is true, you simply grant that it is TENTATIVE, that it is possible, that it is an unknown.



Additionally I already told you if you assume your hypothesis is true then you cannot create predictions from it since if you claim it is true then what you claim follows from the hypothesis is simple a claim about it, since you assume it is true there is no need for a prediction because you assume it is true and whatever follows will come to pass. Meaning in order to make a prediction in the first place you cannot assume the hypothesis is true.



Therefore there is no reason for you to claim to assume the hypothesis is true.



Your prediction fails.


In fact you already conceded with this statement



BeesKnees, on 14 Oct 2013 - 6:10 PM, said:

Now, assuming (tentatively of course), that the hypothesis is true, then what do we predict?




You've changed your stance from assuming the hypothesis is true, to assuming it is tentative (you can forget adding the word true since it carries no meaning with the tentative in front of it, you can say tentatively false and it would mean the exactly the same thing). This is what I have been telling you over and over you don't assume it is true, you merely take it as an unknown, you don't know if its true or not that is why you are doing the tests... Finally starting to teach you something.







Ok lets for arguments sake allow you to assume "evolution did it", (even though you have given no reason for assuming it is correct making predictions doesn't require you to assume it is correct).... Now what?



You (tentatively) assume evolution was the cause of similarities in fossils, ok then where is the experiment to confirm that hypothesis? You know all those links you posted, they all claim that you verify a hypothesis with an experiment, so even if I allow you to assume the hypothesis is true and you make these predictions (based on an unverified assumption), where is the experiment which supports such an assumption?



Now I know you will claim that having those predictions come true, (if they are valid predictions not ad hoc ones in the first place) is your verification... However that is NOT what your links say. As I have been trying to teach you, there may well be an unknown cause or reason for these observations, meaning you cannot simply assume whatever you imagine to be true is true.



As I told you earlier...


Hypothesis: The Earth is the centre of the universe

Prediction: The sun and stars will all revolve around the Earth



Apparently using your "logic" this hypothesis holds true, because its prediction is correct. However we now know this hypothesis is false due to the fact that there is a different reason, (an unknown hypothesis), for the observations which confirmed the prediction.



This is why you NEED experiments to verify your hypothesis!


Because all I or any other Creationist needs to do is simply point out that you are basing your beliefs on an unverified assumption, unverified assumptions are not scientific... And bam there goes your claims, your predictions, everything, due to the bad foundation they were based on. As I said your house of cards fall down.
Sun Jun 01, 2014 6:45 pm
gilbo12345Posts: 93Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2012 9:30 am Gender: Male

Post Re: EFF vs LoR - Round 2

I f people follow the thread you will see that MGK ignores this post directed to him... Rather he cuts one sentence and responds to that

http://evolutionfairytale.com/forum//in ... 42&p=95263

Certainly not the arse kicking he claimed to have conducted.... Hmm so who was posturing?
Sun Jun 01, 2014 7:08 pm
Darkprophet232User avatarPosts: 226Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2012 7:42 pm Gender: Male

Post Re: EFF vs LoR - Round 2

gilbo12345 wrote:I f people follow the thread you will see that MGK ignores this post directed to him... Rather he cuts one sentence and responds to that

http://evolutionfairytale.com/forum//in ... 42&p=95263

Certainly not the arse kicking he claimed to have conducted.... Hmm so who was posturing?


It's pretty hard to follow the thread, because his posts HAVE BEEN DELETED. All we have to go on are the points you felt worthy of response.
“The man who believes that the secrets of the world are forever hidden lives in mystery and fear. Superstition will drag him down." -The Judge
Cormac McCarthy, Blood Meridian
Sun Jun 01, 2014 7:10 pm
gilbo12345Posts: 93Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2012 9:30 am Gender: Male

Post Re: EFF vs LoR - Round 2

Darkprophet232 wrote:
gilbo12345 wrote:I f people follow the thread you will see that MGK ignores this post directed to him... Rather he cuts one sentence and responds to that

http://evolutionfairytale.com/forum//in ... 42&p=95263

Certainly not the arse kicking he claimed to have conducted.... Hmm so who was posturing?


It's pretty hard to follow the thread, because his posts HAVE BEEN DELETED. All we have to go on are the points you felt worthy of response.


I always try post the full quote of what someone says... I don't like having my points cut out so therefore I don't do it to other people. What I do cut out (if anything) is insults etc..

However post #29 #31 #34 #50 are all from MGK so not sure where you guys are claiming they deleted his posts...


Was this the so called arse-kicking? Oh wait its my post ;)

What experiments? I continue to ask and all anyone can do is claim there are some, yet never give examples..


You realise that people reading this do have brains in their heads, they can call a bluff when they see one. If you really did have experiments then you would give examples of them, rather than waste your time with personal attacks.

How can my claims be indefensible when you have yet to answer them? Perhaps you merely claim this in order to "save face" or to help pick up the pieces of your shattered ego.

Your dodging of my point verifies my claim that evolutionists generally do not want to answer the tough questions.

http://evolutionfairytale.com/forum//in ... 42&p=95302
Sun Jun 01, 2014 7:22 pm
Master_Ghost_KnightContributorUser avatarPosts: 2630Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 11:57 pmLocation: Netherlands Gender: Male

Post Re: onceforgivennowfree

I have zero interest in engaging with gilbo until I hear an apology.
"I have an irrefutable argument for the existence of...." NO, STOP! You are already wrong!
Sun Jun 01, 2014 7:26 pm
gilbo12345Posts: 93Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2012 9:30 am Gender: Male

Post Re: onceforgivennowfree

Master_Ghost_Knight wrote:I have zero interest in engaging with gilbo until I hear an apology.


Where was this sense of aversion before when you were talking smack about how you great you were...

Kinda demonstrates that you had no intention of backing up your claims since now the cat is out of the bag and people can read the conversation that took place, they can see that you did nothing of what you claimed to do... Or do you really think that avoiding my call for experimental analysis and simply claim there are some, despite never giving a single example is you on the high-ground... :facepalm:

So what am I apologising about? That I demonstrated on EFF that you had no basis for your claims? Should I demand an apology from you about your ill-sense of bravado and claiming how you "whipped the floor" with me with your stint at EFF.. Despite such a thing is now exposed as the lie it was..

No need, I don't require such a thing...
Mon Jun 02, 2014 1:09 am
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 1
 [ 8 posts ] 
Return to Creationism/ID

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests
cron