User talk:LowKey

/Archive 1

Switch to your real first name and last initial

"Lowkey", I've grown tired of reverting your silly edits, and even more tired of your user id. Either request conversion of your id. to your real first name and last initial and improve your quality, or please move on. Lots of other sites with lower quality would welcome you. Thanks and Godspeed.--Andy Schlafly 23:40, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Andy, I am taking a short-to-medium break while I consider my options. LowKey 17:23, 17 January 2009 (EST)

Excluded middle edits

And don't make ideological edits like this one. It is only evolutionists who insist that every criticism of evolution is necessarily a "religious" argument - on their excluded middle grounds. This is a fallacy, because it leaves out "unknown" causation.

If life did not emerge because of know physical causes, this doesn't mean a supernatural cause is the only other possibility. They are just using that to have a legal excuse to suppress criticism of evolution. --Ed Poor ^Talk 15:58, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Ed, there is not a correct statement in your post. The law of the excluded middle is in invoked by creationists on logical grounds. It is not a fallacy, it is a valid logical argument. The options are not "physical", "supernatural", or "other"; they are "natural and "supernatural", evidence against one origin (natural) are necessarily arguments for the other origin (supernatural). The argument that you present above is the one that evolutionists actually use to suppress criticism, and the law of the excluded middle is invoked by creationists to refute the evolutionists. Sorry, but you have it backwards. My edit there was not ideological, but was an example of how the law of the excluded middle is used. Odd how you seem to have assumed I am an evolutionist, when my only non-neutral edits have been anti-evolution and pro-creation. New standard number one in action again, it seems.LowKey 17:23, 17 January 2009 (EST)