The evidence for evolution for Kenny'sID thread

[bhsmte]

This is completely absurd, I already did.



Science is unreliable because it is rife with fraud, how does that NOT follow.



Nope, that is an honest admission that it must be questioned and that much of what passes for "evidence" is highly questionable.

I'm getting the distinct impression that you would like me to simply accept science and its various claims as fact.

Sorry, no can do.

Have a lovely day.

Look up the word 'rife' and then prove science is rife with fraud.

 

[amariselle]

Specific examples please.

Scroll up. I already gave specific examples.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Science has done no such thing. Scientists even continue to use, and put forward as evidence, things that were revealed as fraudulent years and years ago.

Haeckel's embryo's were shown to have small problems, but the hypothesis was accurate and his studies are accepted by biologists.
Piltdown Man was claimed to be a human ancestor by non-scientists and was proven wrong BY SCIENTISTS.
And evolution is not wrong.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

This is completely absurd, I already did.

Where did you show that deliberate fraud is highly prevalent?

Science is unreliable because it is rife with fraud, how does that NOT follow.

As I said above, "rife with fraud" implies that fraud is highly prevalent. Where have you established this?

Nope, that is an honest admission that it must be questioned and that much of what passes for "evidence" is highly questionable.

I'm getting the distinct impression that you would like me to simply accept science and its various claims as fact.

Sorry, no can do.

Classic projection.

 

[amariselle]

Haeckel's embryo's were shown to have small problems, but the hypothesis was accurate and his studies are accepted by biologists.
Piltdown Man was claimed to be a human ancestor by non-scientists and was proven wrong BY SCIENTISTS.
And evolution is not wrong.

Believe that all you like. I disagree and I have given several reasons why.

And no, Haeckel's embryos has much more than just "small problems." Perhaps you should look into that further.

Oh well.

I've made my decision. As I said, I will always trust God and the Bible over man and science.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

What do you mean it has done no such thing? What hasn't it done (in relation to my post)?

Oooh! I know! I know!
It fails to take a literal reading of the Bible in to account, specifically Genesis, even though practically none of the claims made in Genesis can be supported with actual scientific evidence.

 

[bhsmte]

Oooh! I know! I know!
It fails to take a literal reading of the Bible in to account, specifically Genesis, even though practically none of the claims made in Genesis can be supported with actual scientific evidence.

And hence, they must be rejected at all costs.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I've made my decision. As I said, I will always trust God and the Bible over man and science.

Why would you do that? What is the track record of religion like?

 

[bhsmte]

This just keeps getting better.

 

[amariselle]

The inability/unwillingness by some to admit to the very real problems and even outright lies throughout the field of science is, quite frankly, mind boggling.

It might be amusing if it wasn't so serious.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

@amariselle, if you think science is unreliable because of some cases of fraud, then let me introduce you to religion...

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Believe that all you like. I disagree and I have given several reasons why.

And no, Haeckel's embryos has much more than just "small problems." Perhaps you should look into that further.

Oh well.

I've made my decision. As I said, I will always trust God and the Bible over man and science.

Yeah, the funny thing is though: Haeckel's original drawings are no longer accepted and they have been refined and shown to be more accurate. Can you guess who did that? Scientists.

Your need to create his boogeyman who threatens a literal reading of the Bible really says so much about you more than anything else.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

The inability/unwillingness by some to admit to the very real problems and even outright lies throughout the field of science is, quite frankly, mind boggling.

It might be amusing if it wasn't so serious.

Oh stop it with the strawmen already. You're looking foolish.

 

[amariselle]

@amariselle, if you think science is unreliable because of some cases of fraud, then let me introduce you to religion...

Exactly, the same goes for much of religion. Perhaps you should look at some of the threads I started here on the forum.

As for God? He is not unreliable.

Mankind is, and they will twist and corrupt everything.

Therefore, I don't trust "religion" either.

 

[amariselle]

Oh stop it with the strawmen already. You're looking foolish.

STRAWMAN!!!!! I am right you are wrong, now I can dismiss you!

 

[Archaeopteryx]

STRAWMAN!!!!! I am right you are wrong, now I can dismiss you!

Do you know what a strawman argument is?

 

[bhsmte]

Exactly, the same goes for much of religion. Perhaps you should look at some of the threads I started here on the forum.

As for God? He is not unreliable.

Mankind is, and they will twist and corrupt everything.

Therefore, I don't trust "religion" either.

You can trust your personal interpretation of god as infalliable though, would that be correct?

 

[amariselle]

Yeah, the funny thing is though: Haeckel's original drawings are no longer accepted and they have been refined and shown to be more accurate. Can you guess who did that? Scientists.

Your need to create his boogeyman who threatens a literal reading of the Bible really says so much about you more than anything else.

The problem is, Haeckel's drawings were a key component in supporting the idea of a common ancestor. The fact that they were inaccurate should have been very damaging to that theory, but scientists have somehow managed to clean up that mess quite well.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Exactly, the same goes for much of religion. Perhaps you should look at some of the threads I started here on the forum.

As for God? He is not unreliable.

Mankind is, and they will twist and corrupt everything.

Therefore, I don't trust "religion" either.

Except if it's your religion.

 

[bhsmte]

Do you know what a strawman argument is?

Doesnt look like it.