Maybe this will help JWs
There Was No First Human
by cofty 266 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
KateWild
Understood, you no answer. Got it.-Viv
I have answered. You are being willfully uncooperative now, especially if you refuse to read my post 503 on page 3 the thread I posted, you can then comment on that thread. It's simple, I am trying to take this conversation to where it belongs.
Kate xx
-
jws
Given an exact definition of what red is, yes I can. I can look at the RGB values for each pixel in the above photo and determine what meets the category of "red" and what doesn't.
Given exacting criteria of what is human, there had to be a first to fit that definition.
And, btw, if you define "red" as RGB values of Red: 255, Green: 0, and Blue: 0, none of the colors is red. They all have some degree of blue and green.
-
Viviane
I have answered. You are being willfully uncooperative now, especially if you refuse to read my post 503 on page 3 the thread I posted, you can then comment on that thread. It's simple, I am trying to take this conversation to where it belongs.
Show me the answer then, if you have done it on this thread. You brought it up here so I am just asking for to tell me what you mean so there is no confusion. I read your post, you didn't use the word "fundie" or "fundamentalist", you simple explained why you object some things he wrote. So, no, you have not, as of yet, defined what you mean when you call him a "fundie".
-
KateWild
Viv,
I don't believe you are being sincere when you are asking me questions. So there is no discussion with you. Your motive is to purely pick holes in other posters comments.
The reasons why I think Richard Dawkins is a fundamentalist are clear in my post 503. In my opinion he is a radical atheist more so than many atheists who don't belittle church goers as being uneducated.
Just because I didn't actually use the word, fundie, it doesn't mean that I cannot use this post as a basis for my opinion. You are talking semantics now. I don't even think you are truly interested in why I believe what I believe. All my 3000 posts are available for you to read if you want to get to know me better, sadly I don't think you do
It is only my opinion at that, if you feel he is not then that is your opinion, and we simply disagree
-
Viviane
You've baselessly accused me of being dishonest, intimidating, been insulting and had none of that returned to you. I forgive you. That forgiveness, however, as before, in no way gives you the right to say what my motives are as you are 100% ignorant of them. I've politely asked you to stop previously and yet you continue to do so.
Having said that, you haven't provided a definition of what you mean. You've why you think that you do when you say "fundie", but you still haven't defined what you mean by that. Semantics are important, it's how we understand what we mean when we communicate.
-
KateWild
The reasons why I think Richard Dawkins is a fundamentalist are clear in my post 503. In my opinion he is a radical atheist more so than many atheists who don't belittle church goers as being uneducated.
-
Viviane
Your reasons ARE clear, Kate. Just we just need to know specifically what you mean by "fundamentalist".
-
KateWild
In my opinion he is a radical atheist
-
Viviane
What do you mean by radical?