It's up to you, KalvinB
Consider a Biblical citation. If one cites the Bible as their interpretation of history, that's certainly fine, though people might ask for corroboration; if one cites the Bible for a moral standard and leaves it without content, we can only assume that the citation, in its proper context, speaks for the poster who offers no other commentary.
Let's say we're discussing physics. I tell you an event is impossible because of earth's gravitational accelleration and the terminal velocity of the object in motion. In order to "prove" it to you, and move onto the next point, is the record of physical experimentation and principle suitable? Or should I build a website so you can watch the QT of me dropping objects off tall buildings?
In terms of Biblical contradictions: for the time being, the list should suffice. Godless could have, I suppose, gone page by page through the Bible, entered it all onto his computer, made the correllations out of a database, and then scrawled out the list by hand and then scanned that to an image he could post so that you could verify he had done the work himself. Would you have been so upset if he came up with an identical list? It seems to me that your primary complaint at the time was that the list was too big for you to handle.
If we choose the longer process described in the preceding paragraph, then we oblige all of Sciforums' Creationist posters to go out and do the field work before complaining about science. We oblige anyone who favors the Drug War to go out and get high so that they know what they're talking about; we oblige anyone who objects to homosexuality to go out and have gay sex in order to experience the emotions of being a homosexual in modern society.
It really just depends, KalvinB on when you wish to speak with your own voice and when you deem it proper to cite others.
1) Then pick one and go with it. You know, kind of like I pointed out when you were whining at Godless for not posting according to your argumentative standards?
2) Well, we could point out the effort you're putting into complaining about these posts, the substance of which you are averse to addressing.
The best thing for you to do, KalvinB, would probably be to shut up. After all, then you don't have to give it any effort at all. And that's even less effort than it takes to be petulant.
thanx,
Tiassa
It's up to you. It's a matter of priority and goal.I know a 10 page or more response to 101 contradictions. Should I just post that? Would that make you happy.
Consider a Biblical citation. If one cites the Bible as their interpretation of history, that's certainly fine, though people might ask for corroboration; if one cites the Bible for a moral standard and leaves it without content, we can only assume that the citation, in its proper context, speaks for the poster who offers no other commentary.
Let's say we're discussing physics. I tell you an event is impossible because of earth's gravitational accelleration and the terminal velocity of the object in motion. In order to "prove" it to you, and move onto the next point, is the record of physical experimentation and principle suitable? Or should I build a website so you can watch the QT of me dropping objects off tall buildings?
In terms of Biblical contradictions: for the time being, the list should suffice. Godless could have, I suppose, gone page by page through the Bible, entered it all onto his computer, made the correllations out of a database, and then scrawled out the list by hand and then scanned that to an image he could post so that you could verify he had done the work himself. Would you have been so upset if he came up with an identical list? It seems to me that your primary complaint at the time was that the list was too big for you to handle.
If we choose the longer process described in the preceding paragraph, then we oblige all of Sciforums' Creationist posters to go out and do the field work before complaining about science. We oblige anyone who favors the Drug War to go out and get high so that they know what they're talking about; we oblige anyone who objects to homosexuality to go out and have gay sex in order to experience the emotions of being a homosexual in modern society.
It really just depends, KalvinB on when you wish to speak with your own voice and when you deem it proper to cite others.
A couple points:I don't have the time to go through every one of them and considering how simple many of them are, machaon
has apparently made no effort on his part so why expect any effort on mine?
1) Then pick one and go with it. You know, kind of like I pointed out when you were whining at Godless for not posting according to your argumentative standards?
2) Well, we could point out the effort you're putting into complaining about these posts, the substance of which you are averse to addressing.
I'll hold you to this, KalvinB. You've just hamstrung your rhetorical potential, though I admit I wonder if you care.That way, like machaon, I don't have to think for myself saving me time and you get your answers PLUS you don't have to do research which apparently is below all you people.
The best thing for you to do, KalvinB, would probably be to shut up. After all, then you don't have to give it any effort at all. And that's even less effort than it takes to be petulant.
thanx,
Tiassa