PDA

View Full Version : Arguing with a woo is impossible when they change the rules...



Sgt Badass
24th September 2006, 07:53 PM
I just had a guy say that bacterial resistance to drugs doesn't occur through evolution, but through adaptation.

I mean, where are you supposed to go with that?!

Admin
24th September 2006, 09:16 PM
Don't they adapt via evolution?

It sounds like he doesn't accept evolution but realises that species do evolve. So he calls evolution 'adaption' and thinks he's right. ;D

Sgt Badass
24th September 2006, 09:36 PM
Don't they adapt via evolution?

It sounds like he doesn't accept evolution but realises that species do evolve. So he calls evolution 'adaption' and thinks he's right. ;D


Yeah, he said "Evolution is the slow change of organisms through many years etc.etc.. adaptation is a quick change i.e. when bacteria adapts to drugs".

I said "How the hell do you think they adapt? Do they read a book!!??"

Bloody frustrating.

Aardvark
30th September 2006, 02:57 PM
I am not sure that this post belongs here but I have just ploughed my way through the latest Watchtower publication, ' Is there a Creator who cares about you' 191 pages including quotations from ' Science guys'

Basically the Witnesses have jumped on the ID bandwagon and have put together a well placed document that would convince many people of ID.

I am striggling to point out the specific arguments as to why they are wrong. There are some Straw men arguments and quite a few conclusions based on false logic and in general the arguemnt is, how could all this beauty and complexity have become if it hadnt been created by a God with a huge brain and endless power.

Sgt Badass
30th September 2006, 06:26 PM
ID is the new great excuse for God. It's a complete crock of course, but it's a well documented crock with lots of technical bollocks wrapped around it.

Trouble is, as many people in the street either don't care about evolution or just don't understand it, it's an easy 'science' to swallow.

Most people in the street are idiots, unfortunately you can't call people idiots, they get upset.

I *honestly* find it absolutely stunning that grown people with kids, who work to earn a living and who are allowed to drive cars have such low intelligence and believe the stuff they believe.

It might sound harsh, but sod it, I've just about had it with people in general. They act stupid, they believe stupid things and they are, at the end of the day, just plain stupid.

</rant>

Right, I'm off to the pub to kill some brain cells....

Mojo
30th September 2006, 11:47 PM
Basically the Witnesses have jumped on the ID bandwagon...

But have they figured out how to count up to 144,000 yet?

Hazen
1st October 2006, 12:31 AM
ID is the new great excuse for God. It's a complete crock of course, but it's a well documented crock with lots of technical bollocks wrapped around it.

Trouble is, as many people in the street either don't care about evolution or just don't understand it, it's an easy 'science' to swallow.

Most people in the street are idiots, unfortunately you can't call people idiots, they get upset.

I *honestly* find it absolutely stunning that grown people with kids, who work to earn a living and who are allowed to drive cars have such low intelligence and believe the stuff they believe.

It might sound harsh, but sod it, I've just about had it with people in general. They act stupid, they believe stupid things and they are, at the end of the day, just plain stupid.

</rant>

Right, I'm off to the pub to kill some brain cells....


RAmen, brother

Nucular
26th October 2006, 03:08 PM
Don't they adapt via evolution?

It sounds like he doesn't accept evolution but realises that species do evolve. So he calls evolution 'adaption' and thinks he's right. ;D


Yeah, he said "Evolution is the slow change of organisms through many years etc.etc.. adaptation is a quick change i.e. when bacteria adapts to drugs".

I said "How the hell do you think they adapt? Do they read a book!!??"

Bloody frustrating.


Don't know if you'll agree, but from the way you've described it, it sounds to me like he means bacterial resistance to drugs is an adaptation of the individual organism - like people get immunity to a disease, perhaps - rather than an evolutionary change over many generations? Wrong on many, many levels of course, but perhaps not quite as confusing as it first appeared?