Progress after the Royal Society conference?

[Mercer (John Mercer)]

@lee_merrill

Just (as I have mentioned) they dismiss other statements that they see come from nonreasoning causes, just as you all do here, when you claim my statements are due to some non-reason, such as being sheer speculation, or due to some unthinking commitment to intelligent design, etc.

Well, you provide a perfect example of that!

@lee_merrill

And indeed I know what an ad hominem fallacy is, people use this all the time on me, for example, saying I don’t understand words, or that I just obfuscate, contradict myself, and wander around at random!

None of those are ad hominem. Why not just admit that you don’t know what it means?

@lee_merrill

My view is that natural selection could possibly produce a brain that has valid reasoning, just like a tornado could assemble my laptop!

That’s just regurgitation of an invalid analogy:

1. Your laptop is not alive. It does not replicate.
2. Natural selection is not random.

Nothing about that analogy suggests an ability to reason.

@lee_merrill

I think I used that example.

It’s an example of your inability to engage in basic reasoning.