Difference between revisions of "User talk:LowKey"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (Protected "User talk:LowKey": protecting user and talk page while editor is away for unspecified time--(we get lots of vandalism from vandal site members) ([edit=sysop] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite)))
(Replaced content with '{{retired}}')
Line 1: Line 1:
−
[[/Archive 1]]
+
{{retired}}
−
 
 
−
== 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.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:40, 15 January 2009 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
::Andy, I am taking a short-to-medium break while I consider my options. [[User:LowKey|LowKey]] 17:23, 17 January 2009 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
== Excluded middle edits ==
 
−
 
 
−
:And don't make ideological edits like [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Law_of_the_excluded_middle&diff=prev&oldid=611475 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. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 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.[[User:LowKey|LowKey]] 17:23, 17 January 2009 (EST)
 

Revision as of 03:39, August 11, 2009


RETIRED


Retrieved from "https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:LowKey&oldid=691317"