Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
From: "Piorokrat" <piorokrat@autograf.pl>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.uncle-davey
Subject: Re: Evolution - Blind Heart Surgery
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 07:23:50 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: Tadex Niejadex
Lines: 35
Sender: root@darwin.ediacara.org
Approved: robomod@ediacara.org
Message-ID: <bvd0pc$jcp$3@news.onet.pl>
References: <laurieappieton-20040124035057.21792.00000635@mb-m06.aol.com> <Xns947A4B5CBF133cheezitsnetzeronet@129.250.170.83> <butoq1$4hq$0@pita.alt.net> <7418dcc4.0401241026.5ed5e62@posting.google.com> <buuke4$o53$0@pita.alt.net> <sblb101kdfsqj3uuji1p2jrfs1j96v3hlu@4ax.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: darwin
X-Trace: darwin.ediacara.org 1075447430 79290 128.100.83.246 (30 Jan 2004 07:23:50 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@darwin.ediacara.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 07:23:50 +0000 (UTC)
Fake-Sender: piorokrat@autograf.pl@r-213-158-201-107.ppp.eranet.pl
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: r-213-158-201-107.ppp.eranet.pl
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
X-Spamscanner: mailbox3.ucsd.edu (v1.4 Dec 3 2003 15:07:19, 0.7/5.0 2.60)
X-Spam-Level: Level
X-MailScanner: PASSED (v1.2.8 48220 i0U7MS52062491 mailbox3.ucsd.edu)
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.fan.uncle-davey:1973
news:sblb101kdfsqj3uuji1p2jrfs1j96v3hlu@4ax.com...
> In <buuke4$o53$0@pita.alt.net>, "Uncle Davey" <noway@jose.com> wrote:
>
> >> How tall would the Tower of Babel have been if it had been completed?
> >> (Note: I recommend you use the archaeological record to justify your
> >> answer.)
> >
> >This is a mere irrelevance. Kindly posit a common ancestor of Indo
European
> >and Finno-Ugric.
>
> And thus we see the Uncle Davey method of argumentation in all its
> glory: He must assign others arguments to defend (whether they assert
> them or not), but he himself need never defend anything.
>
Nice try, Jack, but I'm afraid unless you can show me what the common
ancestor between Finno-Ugric and INdo-European, then evolution doesn't apply
to the origins of these language families. And if evolution can't account
for the rise of labguage families, then what does? How did those language
families come into being? What theory of them would be consistent with what
evolution claims about man's origins?
This is an important question. It was also what this argument was about when
I brought it up. The architectural aside is the distractor, thrown in by
someone who couldn't answer the question, so she decided to change the
question. Don't criticise my debating techniques, it was Anne Broomhead who
swept in with that one.
Uncle Davey
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 |
| 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 |
| 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | 110 | 111 | 112 | 113 | 114 |
|