Science, Creation & EvolutionHello! 14 here.Unlike religion, science does not put its entire reputation behind a single claim and crumble should that claim happen to be proven false. The only constant in science is the adherance to logic and evidence. Change is not the fatal flaw you're fallaciously portraying. The rest of your argument is more of the same; attempting to portray change as a flaw (which it's not). Finally... ... if you're going to accuse someone of a fallacy please know what you're talking about. Argument from Ignorance (sometimes Argumentum ad Ignorantiam, from the Latin for "argument (aimed) at ignorance") is an informal logical fallacy where a participant draws a positive conclusion from a lack of contradictory evidence, frequently in an area where no such evidence can reasonably be expected. * "Changing a stance when new evidence invalidates old evidence is not a flaw" is in absolutely no way an argument from ignorance. It's not even close. ------------------- *http://www.skepticwiki.org/wiki/index.php/Argument_from_Ignorance |
🌈Pride🌈 goeth before Destruction
When 🌈Pride🌈 cometh, then cometh Shame