Scientific Theories. Lets look at tho...
First Prev
of 9
Next Last

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#164 Jan 26, 2014
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> The importance of Hilbert's program for the axiomatization of physics is essential for understanding Hilbert's atlas, the set of all logically consistent model universes.
Side note: you claimed these "poor mathematicians", the population geneticists, have supposedly gone wrong.

When challenged to back your arrogant claim, you leap into a Hilbert Space!
Level 6

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#165 Jan 26, 2014
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Side note: you claimed these "poor mathematicians", the population geneticists, have supposedly gone wrong.
When challenged to back your arrogant claim,...
You missed it. It's post #161: http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/TTQ...

“Maccullochella macquariensis”

Since: May 08

Melbourne, Australia

#166 Jan 26, 2014
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Side note: you claimed these "poor mathematicians", the population geneticists, have supposedly gone wrong.
When challenged to back your arrogant claim, you leap into a Hilbert Space!
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> You missed it. It's post #161: http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/TTQ...
OK, let's look at that:
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> The importance of Hilbert's program for the axiomatization of physics is essential for understanding Hilbert's atlas, the set of all logically consistent model universes.
Well, Shoob, that's just another assertion. I doesn't back up anything. I guess you failed to back yourself up again when challenged. You're consistent, I'll give you that.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#168 Jan 26, 2014
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> You missed it. It's post #161: http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/TTQ...
Weirdly, my sequence goes from #160 to 162, and there is no 161.

Perhaps you could repeat it

Since: Nov 07

St. James, NY

#169 Jan 27, 2014
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> It appears that the funnel of smoke is hiding. Why can't he face the experimental evidence that supports devolution?
About 2 years ago I asked you why, if you have evidence that disproves Evolution, do you waste your time arguing on a forum whose only purpose is to feed pay-per-click advertisers, instead of actually going out and presenting your research. And now, two years later, you are still here arguing with the same people using the same arguments. Let me reserve the date two years from now so I can stop back in and say hi.
Level 6

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#171 Feb 8, 2014
This is what topix blocked in post #161 because of the link to evidence it contained:

Natural brilliance has no problem understanding the universal, empirical principle for devolution theory. Now compare that to those who are so perfectly brainwashed and mesmerized by their own conceit and natural selection to actually admit believing that introducing 100 copying errors into textbooks year after year via random misspellings and by the duplications and deletions of sentences, is a valid way to improve textbook quality.

“Maccullochella macquariensis”

Since: May 08

Melbourne, Australia

#172 Feb 8, 2014
Shubee wrote:
This is what topix blocked in post #161 because of the link to evidence it contained:
Natural brilliance has no problem understanding the universal, empirical principle for devolution theory. Now compare that to those who are so perfectly brainwashed and mesmerized by their own conceit and natural selection to actually admit believing that introducing 100 copying errors into textbooks year after year via random misspellings and by the duplications and deletions of sentences, is a valid way to improve textbook quality.
Failed analogy. You've already been told this. Your an fool to keep repeating the same patently false crap to people that actually have an understanding of the subject at hand. It might impress you idiot fundamentalist friends but it won't work here. Oh, wait, your drivel is too stupid even for your fundy friends, isn't it? Didn't they throw you out for being to crazy even for them?
Level 6

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#173 Feb 8, 2014
Bluenose wrote:
Failed analogy.
I never understood Sanford's comically method to improve textbook quality to be an analogy. The comedy is that evolutionists in a competing forum to topix, which topix management doesn't want you to see, said that the method will work.
Level 6

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#174 Feb 8, 2014
comical
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#175 Feb 18, 2014
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> I never understood Sanford's comically method to improve textbook quality to be an analogy.
It has no choice to be, since it sure doesn't represent reality.(shrug)

Maybe in a few decades you'll finally get around to addressing that.
Level 6

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#176 Feb 18, 2014
The meaning of Sanford's comical method to improve textbook quality is the fact that there are evolutionists that say it will work.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#177 Feb 19, 2014
Congratulations. You dodged again in favour of repeating your straw-man.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 9
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 4 hr Eagle 12 - 32,607
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 4 hr Eagle 12 - 80,071
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 5 hr 15th Dalai Lama 163,801
News Intelligent design (Jul '15) Sat Dogen 571
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) Sep 23 ChromiuMan 222,780
What's your religion? Sep 22 Zog Has-fallen 4
Life started in Tennessee proof. Sep 15 Science4life 1
More from around the web