@YasMohammedxx @KDRasmussen You keep *interpreting* me. I don’t need to change my mind because I never took back the invitation. Likewise I never said anything like you insinuate above.
I believe the problem here is different. Let’s choose something unemotional to illustrate.
I believe the problem here is different. Let’s choose something unemotional to illustrate.
@YasMohammedxx @KDRasmussen Let’s say you said “Mammals are furry and give live birth.”
I might respond and say “No. That’s not true. Echidna are a counter example.”
You might respond “I know #NotAll mammals. I never said that.”
I’d say “No. The point is that the exceptions show the description is off.”
I might respond and say “No. That’s not true. Echidna are a counter example.”
You might respond “I know #NotAll mammals. I never said that.”
I’d say “No. The point is that the exceptions show the description is off.”
@YasMohammedxx @KDRasmussen You might say “Well. The vast majority of mammals give live birth.”
I might say “Perhaps, but the shift from the incorrect description is critically important. It’s the difference between a phylogenetic and descriptive understanding of biology. It’s not correct minus epsilon.”
I might say “Perhaps, but the shift from the incorrect description is critically important. It’s the difference between a phylogenetic and descriptive understanding of biology. It’s not correct minus epsilon.”
