In a message dated 9/25/2000 2:26:54 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
Bertvan@aol.com writes:
<< >Susan:
>Bertvan doesn't really like to debate. (Why she remains on a debate list is
>a continuing mystery to me.) She merely wants to state her beliefs
>publically. She gets really annoyed if someone tries to show her that her
>beliefs have no underpinnings. Her beliefs are dogmatic, rigidly held, and
>require no underpinnings. They are true because she believes them to be
>true and she has a right to her beliefs, so there.
>being rather obstinate myself, I have kept pestering her with questions and
>observations about her beliefs and I think she finally put me in her
>killfile.
Hi Susan,
I'm not sure there is such a thing as a debate with a Darwinist. Steve seems
>>
I am sure that there is no such thing when the ID'er refuses to engage in a
debate. But to blame the Darwinist for this is somewhat silly.
<< to manage without descending to your level, but I don't see the purpose of
any discussion with someone who calls people with whom they disagree liars.
>>
"Descending to your level"? What does that refer to?
<< I learn of interesting articles on the list, and occasionally I think of a
point I want to make. Actually, I thoroughly enjoy posts such as your above.
It gives a clear picture of the caliber of the opposition.
>>
Certainly the refusal to engage in a debate of issues gives a clear picture.
I'd say that ID has all to gain from not getting engaged in scientific
debates.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Sep 25 2000 - 23:28:49 EDT