57
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 614:
Line 614: + + + + + +
Talk:Counterexamples to Evolution (view source)
Revision as of 02:24, October 9, 2009
, 02:24, October 9, 2009→Several points
:Reaganetics, you've nitpicked about a half-dozen minor examples from nearly 40 counterexamples. An open mind is a prerequisite to intelligent discussion; we're not here to reassure your preconceptions. If you can open your mind and admit that evolution may well be false, then let's discuss as long as you like. But if you're an atheist or someone who bought into the theory of evolution as a student and who refuses to accept that you could have been duped, then I'll spend my time on translating the Bible here instead. Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:53, 8 October 2009 (EDT)
:Reaganetics, you've nitpicked about a half-dozen minor examples from nearly 40 counterexamples. An open mind is a prerequisite to intelligent discussion; we're not here to reassure your preconceptions. If you can open your mind and admit that evolution may well be false, then let's discuss as long as you like. But if you're an atheist or someone who bought into the theory of evolution as a student and who refuses to accept that you could have been duped, then I'll spend my time on translating the Bible here instead. Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:53, 8 October 2009 (EDT)
::I am certainly interested in discussing these issues, and, as I repeatedly noted, I'm perfectly open to the possibility that I might be wrong. That is why I repeatedly suggested that I was open to clarifications or corrections, and that is why I suggested that certain counterexamples be *strengthened* by adding references.
::To be frank, that is also why I find your comment to be a disappointment. It presents no evidence to counter any of my arguments. It characterizes my arguments as nitpicking (how is it nitpicking to point out declarative statements that appear to be false?) and characterizes the points I criticized as minor (if the points are too minor to merit criticism, why are they presented at all? If truth is important, shouldn't we be interested in ensuring the accuracy of all of our statements, minor or major?)
::Perhaps someone else can provide a more substantive response. [[User:JasonS|JasonS]] 22:24, 8 October 2009 (EDT) (formerly Reaganetics)