Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Two personal questions for tinroad6g!

Expand Messages
  • rlbaty50
    Hey, tinroad6g! Here are some questions for you, as requested, personally. Question #1: Is the following a valid argument? ... If no, tinroad6g, see archives
    Message 1 of 5 , May 18, 2008
      Hey, tinroad6g!

      Here are some questions for you, as requested, personally.

      Question #1:

      Is the following a valid argument?

      > Major premise:

      > If God's word (the text) says
      > everything began over a period
      > of six days, is interpreted by
      > some to mean it was six 24-hour
      > days occurring a few thousand
      > years ago, and there is empirical
      > evidence that some thing is
      > actually much older than a few
      > thousand years, then the
      > interpretation of the text by
      > some is wrong.

      > Minor premise:

      > God's word (the text) says
      > everything began over a period
      > of six days, is interpreted by
      > some to mean it was six 24-hour
      > days occurring a few thousand
      > years ago, and there is empirical
      > evidence that some thing is
      > actually much older than a few
      > thousand years.

      > Conclusion:

      > The interpretation of the text
      > by some is wrong.

      If no, tinroad6g, see archives for the proof of validity and return
      when you can answer correctly, "Yes, the above is a valid argument".

      If you answer "yes", tinroad6g, then here's the second question.

      Question #2:

      Is the following hypothetical proposition true?

      > If God's word (the text) says
      > everything began over a period
      > of six days, is interpreted by
      > some to mean it was six 24-hour
      > days occurring a few thousand
      > years ago, and there is empirical
      > evidence that some thing is
      > actually much older than a few
      > thousand years, then the
      > interpretation of the text by
      > some is wrong.

      If you answer "true", tinroad6g, then you qualify to be considered
      for a discussion of the minor premise shown below:

      > God's word (the text) says
      > everything began over a period
      > of six days, is interpreted by
      > some to mean it was six 24-hour
      > days occurring a few thousand
      > years ago, and there is empirical
      > evidence that some thing is
      > actually much older than a few
      > thousand years.

      Tinroad6g, will you answer the two questions...here and now?

      If so, we can build on that!

      Sincerely,
      Robert Baty
    • rlbaty50
      Tinroad6g, of the DebunkingEvolutionism list, asked to be addressed directly and personally...so I have. He s been notified of the questions addressed
      Message 2 of 5 , May 18, 2008
        Tinroad6g, of the DebunkingEvolutionism list, asked to be addressed
        directly and personally...so I have. He's been notified of the
        questions addressed directly and personally to him for response via
        my posting to the DebunkingEvolutionism list at:

        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DEBUNKINGEVOLUTIONISM/message/83243

        We'll now see if he can be mannerly, mature and direct enough to
        answer the questions correctly.

        Sincerely,
        Robert Baty


        --- In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com, "rlbaty50" <rlbaty@...> wrote:

        Hey, tinroad6g!

        Here are some questions for you, as requested, personally.

        Question #1:

        Is the following a valid argument?

        > Major premise:

        > If God's word (the text) says
        > everything began over a period
        > of six days, is interpreted by
        > some to mean it was six 24-hour
        > days occurring a few thousand
        > years ago, and there is empirical
        > evidence that some thing is
        > actually much older than a few
        > thousand years, then the
        > interpretation of the text by
        > some is wrong.

        > Minor premise:

        > God's word (the text) says
        > everything began over a period
        > of six days, is interpreted by
        > some to mean it was six 24-hour
        > days occurring a few thousand
        > years ago, and there is empirical
        > evidence that some thing is
        > actually much older than a few
        > thousand years.

        > Conclusion:

        > The interpretation of the text
        > by some is wrong.

        If no, tinroad6g, see archives for the proof of validity and return
        when you can answer correctly, "Yes, the above is a valid argument".

        If you answer "yes", tinroad6g, then here's the second question.

        Question #2:

        Is the following hypothetical proposition true?

        > If God's word (the text) says
        > everything began over a period
        > of six days, is interpreted by
        > some to mean it was six 24-hour
        > days occurring a few thousand
        > years ago, and there is empirical
        > evidence that some thing is
        > actually much older than a few
        > thousand years, then the
        > interpretation of the text by
        > some is wrong.

        If you answer "true", tinroad6g, then you qualify to be considered
        for a discussion of the minor premise shown below:

        > God's word (the text) says
        > everything began over a period
        > of six days, is interpreted by
        > some to mean it was six 24-hour
        > days occurring a few thousand
        > years ago, and there is empirical
        > evidence that some thing is
        > actually much older than a few
        > thousand years.

        Tinroad6g, will you answer the two questions...here and now?

        If so, we can build on that!

        Sincerely,
        Robert Baty

        -------------------------------------
        -------------------------------------
      • rlbaty50
        Despite his whining about wanting to be babied and asked questions directly and personally, tinroad6g is simply not man-up to coming around here and
        Message 3 of 5 , May 18, 2008
          Despite his whining about wanting to be babied and asked questions
          directly and personally, tinroad6g is simply not "man-up" to coming
          around here and answering the questions.

          Tinroad6g's refusal to deal with the two simple questions can be
          found at:

          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DEBUNKINGEVOLUTIONISM/message/83244

          However, he has been advised that if he changes his mind he knows
          where he can find me and post his answers.

          Sincerely,
          Robert Baty


          --- In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com, "rlbaty50" <rlbaty@...> wrote:

          Hey, tinroad6g!

          Here are some questions for you, as requested, personally.

          Question #1:

          Is the following a valid argument?

          > Major premise:

          > If God's word (the text) says
          > everything began over a period
          > of six days, is interpreted by
          > some to mean it was six 24-hour
          > days occurring a few thousand
          > years ago, and there is empirical
          > evidence that some thing is
          > actually much older than a few
          > thousand years, then the
          > interpretation of the text by
          > some is wrong.

          > Minor premise:

          > God's word (the text) says
          > everything began over a period
          > of six days, is interpreted by
          > some to mean it was six 24-hour
          > days occurring a few thousand
          > years ago, and there is empirical
          > evidence that some thing is
          > actually much older than a few
          > thousand years.

          > Conclusion:

          > The interpretation of the text
          > by some is wrong.

          If no, tinroad6g, see archives for the proof of validity and return
          when you can answer correctly, "Yes, the above is a valid argument".

          If you answer "yes", tinroad6g, then here's the second question.

          Question #2:

          Is the following hypothetical proposition true?

          > If God's word (the text) says
          > everything began over a period
          > of six days, is interpreted by
          > some to mean it was six 24-hour
          > days occurring a few thousand
          > years ago, and there is empirical
          > evidence that some thing is
          > actually much older than a few
          > thousand years, then the
          > interpretation of the text by
          > some is wrong.

          If you answer "true", tinroad6g, then you qualify to be considered
          for a discussion of the minor premise shown below:

          > God's word (the text) says
          > everything began over a period
          > of six days, is interpreted by
          > some to mean it was six 24-hour
          > days occurring a few thousand
          > years ago, and there is empirical
          > evidence that some thing is
          > actually much older than a few
          > thousand years.

          Tinroad6g, will you answer the two questions...here and now?

          If so, we can build on that!

          Sincerely,
          Robert Baty
        • rlbaty50
          To get some perspective on just how hard tinroad6g was hit with the force of sound reasoning regarding the two simple questions he continues to not answer,
          Message 4 of 5 , May 31, 2008
            To get some perspective on just how hard tinroad6g was hit with the
            force of sound reasoning regarding the two simple questions he
            continues to not answer, just review his following rant at:

            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DEBUNKINGEVOLUTIONISM/message/84196

            Yep, my "Goliath of GRAS" has vanquished another wannabe "young-earth,
            creation-science" promoter in the character/caricature of tinroad6g.

            Still no "David"!

            Sincerely,
            Robert Baty


            --- In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com, "rlbaty50" <rlbaty@...> wrote:
            >
            > Hey, tinroad6g!
            >
            > Here are some questions for you, as requested, personally.
            >
            > Question #1:
            >
            > Is the following a valid argument?
            >
            > > Major premise:
            >
            > > If God's word (the text) says
            > > everything began over a period
            > > of six days, is interpreted by
            > > some to mean it was six 24-hour
            > > days occurring a few thousand
            > > years ago, and there is empirical
            > > evidence that some thing is
            > > actually much older than a few
            > > thousand years, then the
            > > interpretation of the text by
            > > some is wrong.
            >
            > > Minor premise:
            >
            > > God's word (the text) says
            > > everything began over a period
            > > of six days, is interpreted by
            > > some to mean it was six 24-hour
            > > days occurring a few thousand
            > > years ago, and there is empirical
            > > evidence that some thing is
            > > actually much older than a few
            > > thousand years.
            >
            > > Conclusion:
            >
            > > The interpretation of the text
            > > by some is wrong.
            >
            > If no, tinroad6g, see archives for the proof of validity and return
            > when you can answer correctly, "Yes, the above is a valid argument".
            >
            > If you answer "yes", tinroad6g, then here's the second question.
            >
            > Question #2:
            >
            > Is the following hypothetical proposition true?
            >
            > > If God's word (the text) says
            > > everything began over a period
            > > of six days, is interpreted by
            > > some to mean it was six 24-hour
            > > days occurring a few thousand
            > > years ago, and there is empirical
            > > evidence that some thing is
            > > actually much older than a few
            > > thousand years, then the
            > > interpretation of the text by
            > > some is wrong.
            >
            > If you answer "true", tinroad6g, then you qualify to be considered
            > for a discussion of the minor premise shown below:
            >
            > > God's word (the text) says
            > > everything began over a period
            > > of six days, is interpreted by
            > > some to mean it was six 24-hour
            > > days occurring a few thousand
            > > years ago, and there is empirical
            > > evidence that some thing is
            > > actually much older than a few
            > > thousand years.
            >
            > Tinroad6g, will you answer the two questions...here and now?
            >
            > If so, we can build on that!
            >
            > Sincerely,
            > Robert Baty

            ----------------------------
            ----------------------------
          • Mind Over Splatter
            Pretty pathetic, but then that s what I ve come to expect from the YECs. MOS rlbaty50 wrote: To get some perspective on just how hard
            Message 5 of 5 , Jun 1 1:12 AM
              Pretty pathetic, but then that's what I've come to expect from the YECs.
              MOS

              rlbaty50 <rlbaty@...> wrote:
              To get some perspective on just how hard tinroad6g was hit with the
              force of sound reasoning regarding the two simple questions he
              continues to not answer, just review his following rant at:

              http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DEBUNKINGEVOLUTIONISM/message/84196

              Yep, my "Goliath of GRAS" has vanquished another wannabe "young-earth,
              creation-science" promoter in the character/caricature of tinroad6g.

              Still no "David"!

              Sincerely,
              Robert Baty


              .





              “… the supporting cast of ignornat and evil in OK’s state and national politics appear unrivalled.”
              -- Unknown





              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.