Search results

Inferences arise only in cases where the evidence is circumstantial, but overwhelming. When the evidence is direct then there is no need for inferences. Abiogenesis at this point is still an unproven theory. In other words, it is not even inferred. It is speculated. But even at the...

How many people here have the courage to admit a mistake? I did. Show me that you admitted your mistakes, even once. My original point (that a drug can heal more patients than an existing drug does not mean that the drug is necessarily effective), however, is still valid. (Null hypothesis was...

You misrepresented/misquoted the scientists, as pointed out by others in this thread. You're continuing with your misrepresentation here. No one has made the inference that the universe is designed. BTW, I'm curious where you see my "backpedaling." Are you again having trouble with reading?

Not true. The travelgate was reported widely and caused enough outrage for Clintons to back off. It's not the Democrats' fault the the Republican congress chose to focus on the Lewinsky affair instead of the political corruptions. In any case, just because it happened in a previous...

How about hedging it 50-50? On second thought, maybe we should establish a short position here just in case you were wrong?

You're pretending that the discussion about self-organization and emergent properties a thousand posts ago didn't happen. You were humiliated in that discussion. And yet you have the nerve to bring back the argument that was shown to be a joke.

So is everything else in science. Inference is the central tool of science. If something is inferred, then it is considered proven in science. So where are the empirical data from which ID can be inferred/proven?

We're not talking about the law here. We're talking about political and ethical standards. Firing people without cause in the middle of a term, especially when the firing is done by political appointees, is viewed with strong suspicion for very good reasons. Society places a high barrier to...

Inference is the reasoning involved in drawing a conclusion or making a logical judgment on the basis of circumstantial evidence and prior conclusions rather than on the basis of direct observation. Although "inference" denies the direct observation, it does however involve logical deduction...

When did Bush take office? Last November?

Knowledge of a crime does not equal accessory to the crime. The bar for a president, OTOH, should be much higher than not being a criminal. Same goes for the AG. "No law is broken" cannot be used as an excuse. Otherwise why would Nixon try to coverup since he broke no law himself (at least...

In what language?

What law did Nixon break? Answer: None.

You used the word "inference." Maybe you think inference is closer to suspicion. But inference is in fact a form of proof: Inference: 1. The act or process of deriving logical conclusions from premises known or assumed to be true. 2. The act of reasoning from factual knowledge or...

According to this logic, appearance of guilt equals to proof of guilt. This guy doesn't know what is critical thinking.

Simple. Just move an inch. Empirical proof right there! But no one has offered a similar proof of a designer.

Bad taste. You just don't understand what liberalism is about. The ACLU vigorously defended neo-Nazi's right to march in Skokie, IL.

Check the ACLU website: http://www.aclu.org/scotus/2006term/28625res20070220/28625res20070220.html It's true that there are a couple of Christian organizations on the same side as the ACLU. But most of the participants are your traditional liberal groups. Didn't the conservatives attack the...

This is a classic ACLU case. Didn't know that you were such a liberal.

Other quotes from Coulter include: They Shot the Wrong Lincoln "I've often wondered if an errant kick to the head by one of his charges would account for Chafee's rudimentary cognitive abilities." N.Y. TIMES: BETTER DEAD THAN READ "I prefer a firing squad, but I'm open to a debate on...