Wed 6 Jun, 2012 06:59 pm - [quote]Your baby trick of trying to line up those who don't think the fossil record shows anything like you claimed with a denial of the fossil record ought to be banned from A2K because it... (view)
Tue 29 May, 2012 05:45 pm - 1 That's not a normal situation at all, and there is no inference of confusion which would apply to normal recognition
2 It's not the recognition process at all which became confused... (view)
Mon 28 May, 2012 09:43 pm - That's an interesting way to put it, but I wouldn't agree. That's a statement of certainty about something, and how would you make the determination with it "going too fast a... (view)
Mon 28 May, 2012 06:23 am - There is one subtle error in ID arguments: design is not detected by means of inference; design is recognized.
Everyone employs recognition. If you are reading this successfully, you are... (view)
Tue 22 May, 2012 01:46 am - [quote]What is meant by negative? It really doesn't have to do with grammatical negative. "Not this." There are positive and negative claims. What is a positive claim? A positive... (view)
Tue 22 May, 2012 01:43 am - [quote]It is possible to prove negatives. A simple example is a deductive proof: given A, and A => ¬B, then you can prove ¬B. [/quote]
You must be a newcomer. It's been resolved.... (view)
Sun 20 May, 2012 12:23 pm - Negatives can be proven. Anyone who missed it, go back. No need to be distracted. ...Unless for some reason you want to. (view)
Sun 20 May, 2012 09:57 am - [quote]
You're mixing geometries--latitudes are Euclidean--longitudes aren't, longitudes are based on sperical geometry and even though the Earth isn't perfectly spherical it's... (view)
Sun 20 May, 2012 09:54 am - [quote]First Science proves nothing--Science is based upon an 'Idea' that explains observations and makes predictions--an 'idea' that through extensive review and test that... (view)
