Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10
71
General Religious Discussion / Re: The EET (Evangelical Extra Terrestrials)
« Last post by jdawg70 on January 12, 2017, 04:31:53 PM »
For the followers of Drof:
Can we see these calculations?
72
Unfortunately, I have to put my moderator hat on at this point.

OAA, as a user, you are obligated to follow the rules of the forum.  That means, among other things, not publicly accusing other members of trolling, stupidity, lying, or other things which are clearly disruptive or provocative.  That is why the Report to Moderator link is put in every post, in order to allow users to report misconduct without leveling public accusations at other members.  However, electing not to use this option, for whatever reason, does not excuse violations of the rules such as described above.

Please refrain from doing so in the future.
73
Yup, putting you on the good old ignore list. You're either trolling or too stupid to understand what I'm writing, and I don't care which.
Who you put on your ignore list is your own business, OAA, but posts like this are far from appropriate, especially when they're regarding subjects which are as controversial as this one.  If you seriously think another member is trolling - which is a rule violation - you should report that post to a moderator.  And calling another member stupid, aside from being an ad hominem, pretty much is a rule violation in and of itself, since it is both disruptive and tends to provoke hostile responses.

The day I see a user being warned for less-than-completely-obvious trolling (eh!, skeptic54768, BibleStudent), I'll start reporting them for such. Until then, I'll resort to letting them know I know and blocking them, hoping others will have the common sense to do the same. Same thing goes for being a filthy liar.
74
Yup, putting you on the good old ignore list. You're either trolling or too stupid to understand what I'm writing, and I don't care which.
Who you put on your ignore list is your own business, OAA, but posts like this are far from appropriate, especially when they're regarding subjects which are as controversial as this one.  If you seriously think another member is trolling - which is a rule violation - you should report that post to a moderator.  And calling another member stupid, aside from being an ad hominem, pretty much is a rule violation in and of itself, since it is both disruptive and tends to provoke hostile responses.
75
You pointed out to me, yourself, once that knowledge is not intrinsic. Not everybody is going to know what hyperbole is!

I appreciate you trying to help, but Mr. Blackwell and I have interacted enough times for me to know when he's being a pedantic dick/trolling. He knew full well it was a hyperbole, because he knows full well I'm a proponent of nature over nurture, but, for whatever reason, decided to pretend otherwise.
76
Children are blank slates.

No. Children are not blank slates. To say that would be to deny all of evolutionary biology, genetics and heredity. Why would you say such a thing?

I swear to Me, some of you people...
Do you really need it spelled out to you? Does the context of that statement not help you in figuring out what it serves as? It starts with "h" and ends in "yperbole to emphasize the fact that children can go either way - contributing to society or helping its downfall - and we have no way of knowing which unless they're actually born; to pretend all aborted fetuses would've made invaluable contributions to society is nothing more than guilt tripping". I mean, albeto got it just fine, since the rest of my comment indicates that's the purpose of that statement. How come you couldn't? Did you stop reading there just to take that sentence out of context and be a pedantic dick?

You pointed out to me, yourself, once that knowledge is not intrinsic. Not everybody is going to know what hyperbole is! I actually didn't, till I saw this post and decided to look up the definition as a result.

I can see that you immediately followed that up with the sentence "You're assuming every single one of them would've made a positive contribution to the world, but we don't know how they would've turned out".

But that could be easily interpreted as one making a literal statement and then following it up with a comment about how the person would turn out later - after not being such a blank state anymore once grown up - by somebody not already familiar with the term hyperbole. There's also nothing in your post before that to make it obvious that you were using a hyperbole statement. As such, that could be considered to be ambiguous writing.

I know you want to move the conversation on, but I felt this was a point worth making. After all, I'm sure you don't want such a misunderstanding to happen again - even if for no reason other than to save yourself future annoyance/inconvenience.

Mr Blackwell:

In case you didn't know (getting the impression that's most likely the case), hyperbole refers to exaggerated claims statements not meant to be taken seriously. There's more info available on google.  8)
77
It sounds like a "nature versus nurture" argument to me. OAA's post suggests that nurture is more influential that nature.

I agree.

Now what?  :-\

What makes you believe that Jag? Scientific evidence/findings?
78
OAA's post suggests that nurture is more influential that nature.

No? It suggests that an aborted fetus could have grown up to be either detrimental or helpful to society, and we have no way of knowing which. To assume the latter is wishful thinking, as jaimehlers put it, and an unrealistic view of people.

I don't really agree with; ''we don't really know which''.  The chances that my aborted fetus would be a good person is actually quite high.   If I had kept the baby I would have loved it and nurtured it.

No disrespect meant Junebug, but a likely outcome and a definite outcome are not the same things. Therefore, you still don't know (as any kind of sure certainty) how it would turn out.
79
OAA's post suggests that nurture is more influential that nature.

No? It suggests that an aborted fetus could have grown up to be either detrimental or helpful to society, and we have no way of knowing which. To assume the latter is wishful thinking, as jaimehlers put it, and an unrealistic view of people.

Listen, an aborted fetus never grows up to be anything.

Yup, putting you on the good old ignore list. You're either trolling or too stupid to understand what I'm writing, and I don't care which.
80
All three choices involve a life or death decision.

A life or death of what decision?

Slaughtering beef is a life or death of a cow decision.  Should that carry more, or less, weight than the life of an entity that has less agency than the cow does?
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10