Post deleted (Oct, 17, 2010) at the request of R. Lampel due to errors in in it (see comments). R. Lampel will revise this article. With our sincere apologies to our dear readers. YSO
"I, Natan Slifkin, admit that I do not know any scientific proof supporting the evolution of the species, neither the mechanisms of evolution, nor the common ancestry (the so called “fact” of evolution)."
That's not what I said. I am appalled that my words are being edited.
What I said was that I do not know of any IRREFUTABLE scientific proof. Which I explained to mean that NOTHING is irrefutable for those who are determined to refute it.
Natan, I cut and pasted what was there. I did not edit it.
Maybe you changed it? But I accept that you meant to say "irrefutable."
Which I explained to mean that NOTHING is irrefutable for those who are determined to refute it.
That's a little misleading. I'm cutting and pasting it again, and again without editing just putting in into italics), as it appears currently:
With regard to what you want me to write - no problem! I just want to modify it very slightly. Here are two versions for you:
I, Natan Slifkin, admit that I do not know way of proving the evolution of the species, neither the mechanisms of evolution, nor common ancestry, to Dr. Isaac Betech.
Another version:
I, Natan Slifkin, admit that I do not know of any irrefutable scientific proof supporting the evolution of the species, neither the mechanisms of evolution, nor the common ancestry (the so called “fact” of evolution).
Now can we move on? I'm looking forward to hearing your explanation of your model, including a description of when each group of animals lived.
So, you didn't explain it there.
However, you did say this sevara elsewhere, and I agree that this is what you meant all along.
My post still addresses the sevara you and others have also presented making a point that it is reasonable to accept the current academia version of origins because "it is more likely" than the traditional/conventional one.
Bli nedder I'll edit my post to reflect these changes.
"Natan, I cut and pasted what was there. I did not edit it."
Removing words from a sentence is also editing. I specifically told Betech that I would have to modify the statement that he wanted - either to add "to Dr. Betech" at the end, or to place "irrefutable" in the middle. You took the first version, but took out the words "to Dr. Betech" from the end. That is called editing it to change my meaning.
I think that there is overwhelming evidence for evolution (in terms of common ancestry). I also think that any objective person would see it as such. But I cannot prove it to certain people who are religiously opposed to it, just as I cannot prove the moon landing to those people who are religiously opposed to it.
Natan, I did not remove words. It could be that I mistakenly cut and pasted the wrong paragraph, in which case I'm sorry. You have to trust me that I would not purposely change what you wrote. That would be dishonest and stupid.
Zvi, in view of Natan's comments, I think you should modify the oppening paragraph of your post to reflect his actual words as follows:
Either add the words "to Dr. Betech" at the end of the paragraph, or, quote the following:
I, Natan Slifkin, admit that I do not know of any irrefutable scientific proof supporting the evolution of the species, neither the mechanisms of evolution, nor the common ancestry (the so called “fact” of evolution).
or, just delete the whole thing. Personally, I think your post is valid irrespective of Rabbi Slifkin's attitudes.
"I, Natan Slifkin, admit that I do not know any scientific proof supporting the evolution of the species, neither the mechanisms of evolution, nor the common ancestry (the so called “fact” of evolution)."
ReplyDeleteThat's not what I said. I am appalled that my words are being edited.
What I said was that I do not know of any IRREFUTABLE scientific proof. Which I explained to mean that NOTHING is irrefutable for those who are determined to refute it.
Natan, I cut and pasted what was there. I did not edit it.
ReplyDeleteMaybe you changed it? But I accept that you meant to say "irrefutable."
Which I explained to mean that NOTHING is irrefutable for those who are determined to refute it.
That's a little misleading. I'm cutting and pasting it again, and again without editing just putting in into italics), as it appears currently:
With regard to what you want me to write - no problem! I just want to modify it very slightly. Here are two versions for you:
I, Natan Slifkin, admit that I do not know way of proving the evolution of the species, neither the mechanisms of evolution, nor common ancestry, to Dr. Isaac Betech.
Another version:
I, Natan Slifkin, admit that I do not know of any irrefutable scientific proof supporting the evolution of the species, neither the mechanisms of evolution, nor the common ancestry (the so called “fact” of evolution).
Now can we move on? I'm looking forward to hearing your explanation of your model, including a description of when each group of animals lived.
So, you didn't explain it there.
However, you did say this sevara elsewhere, and I agree that this is what you meant all along.
My post still addresses the sevara you and others have also presented making a point that it is reasonable to accept the current academia version of origins because "it is more likely" than the traditional/conventional one.
Bli nedder I'll edit my post to reflect these changes.
I don't know why everything is coming out in italics.
ReplyDelete"Natan, I cut and pasted what was there. I did not edit it."
ReplyDeleteRemoving words from a sentence is also editing. I specifically told Betech that I would have to modify the statement that he wanted - either to add "to Dr. Betech" at the end, or to place "irrefutable" in the middle. You took the first version, but took out the words "to Dr. Betech" from the end. That is called editing it to change my meaning.
I think that there is overwhelming evidence for evolution (in terms of common ancestry). I also think that any objective person would see it as such. But I cannot prove it to certain people who are religiously opposed to it, just as I cannot prove the moon landing to those people who are religiously opposed to it.
Natan, I did not remove words. It could be that I mistakenly cut and pasted the wrong paragraph, in which case I'm sorry. You have to trust me that I would not purposely change what you wrote. That would be dishonest and stupid.
ReplyDeleteIf anyone using Internet Explorer is wondering what I meant by "everything...coming out in italics," I see it's only a problem with Firefox.
ReplyDeleteZvi, in view of Natan's comments, I think you should modify the oppening paragraph of your post to reflect his actual words as follows:
ReplyDeleteEither add the words "to Dr. Betech" at the end of the paragraph, or, quote the following:
I, Natan Slifkin, admit that I do not know of any irrefutable scientific proof supporting the evolution of the species, neither the mechanisms of evolution, nor the common ancestry (the so called “fact” of evolution).
or, just delete the whole thing. Personally, I think your post is valid irrespective of Rabbi Slifkin's attitudes.
In the interest of eliminating any falsehoods, I would like the post deleted until I redo it.
ReplyDeleteThanks.