Why evolution isn't scientific

[TheBear]

So are you saying that just because they are scientist they are incapable of lying for the reasons of gaining fame and grants?

Scientists are capable of fraud. That's true. Eventually, however, their fraud is discovered and exposed - not by creationists, but by other scientists and the scientific community. So, there's that.

 

[Kylie]

but you said that : An out of place fossil would be something like a rabbit in the precambrian - a fossil showing features that are shown evolving in later species.

so before i will give you such a case i want to be sure what do you mean by that. if i will show you an example of say 12354 instead of 12345 you will agree that evolution is false in this case or not?

If you can show me a case of something that evolution says is impossible, then I will consider it.

But I've seen creationists who have made this kind of claim, and what they present is either based on a misunderstanding of science or has some actual explanation which they don't bother to include.

So I'm not going to hold my breath.

 

[Kylie]

Aman:>>No animal posts because they don't have the intelligence necessary to post. Amen?



Amen. Find us ANY animal (Humans are not animals) who posts or carries on a conversation online. You cannot since they are too dumb to post. Amen?

That is the most ridiculous argument ever.

Animals can't use the internet, therefore God?

Are you serious? Do you expect me to take you seriously? If this is the best you've got, then it's not an argument, it's a joke.

 

[AV1611VET]

If you can show me a case of something that evolution says is impossible, then I will consider it.

Angels.

 

[VirOptimus]

Angels.

There is no evidence that suggests angels exist.

 

[Kylie]

Angels.

What part of the word "SHOW" did you miss?

 

[AV1611VET]

If you can show me a case of something that evolution says is impossible, then I will consider it.

Angels.

There is no evidence that suggests angels exist.

Because evolution would say it's impossible? correct?

 

[AV1611VET]

What part of the word "SHOW" did you miss?

What part of the word "CASE" did you?

 

[Speedwell]

Because evolution would say it's impossible? correct?

No. Because there is no evidence that angels are biological creatures.

 

[AV1611VET]

No. Because there is no evidence that angels are biological creatures.

Are they supposed to be?

 

[Speedwell]

Are they supposed to be?

I don't think so. Certainly that was not taught in my Sunday School, and that's why evolutionary biologists, whatever their religious beliefs about angels may be, have no scientific interest in them.

 

[AV1611VET]

I don't think so. Certainly that was not taught in my Sunday School, and that's why evolutionary biologists, whatever their religious beliefs about angels may be, have no scientific interest in them.

And therefore are biologically impossible ... right?

So if someone says, "Show me a case of something that evolution says is biologically impossible," I should make a case for angels ... correct?

 

[Speedwell]

And therefore are biologically impossible ... right?

So if someone says, "Show me a case of something that evolution says is biologically impossible," I should make a case for angels ... correct?

I don't think they are biologically impossible, there is just no evidence, scientific or theological, that are are biological creatures.

There is a difference between saying that angels are biologically impossible and saying that they are not known to be biological creatures.

 

[AV1611VET]

There is a difference between saying that angels are biologically impossible and saying that they are not known to be biological creatures.

Then show me on paper how angels are biological creatures.

Until then, my answer stands: angels.

(In case you don't know it, I've always submitted the fact that angels are examples of living creatures that exist completely apart from evolution. Thus life can exist without evolution.)

In addition, angels aren't the only ones.

I can give a much better example: God.

Both came well before anything ever evolved -- micro or otherwise.

Cain was the first person that ever showed up via microevolution.

 

[Kylie]

What part of the word "CASE" did you?

But Angels are NOT the case, are they?

Hence you being unable to show me any evidence for them.

Now stop quibbling and address the point.

 

[Kylie]

Because evolution would say it's impossible? correct?

No, because there isn't a single shred of evidence for them.

And before you try it, the Bible does not count as evidence, and people saying they had dreams about them does not count as evidence either, or anything else like that.

 

[Kylie]

Are they supposed to be?

You're the one presenting them as evidence for the validity or lack thereof of evolution, and since evolution REQUIRES biology, then if angels are going to be relevant to the discussion then they'd better be biological.

So this is just a waste of time?

 

[Kylie]

And therefore are biologically impossible ... right?

So if someone says, "Show me a case of something that evolution says is biologically impossible," I should make a case for angels ... correct?

By your logic, granite is an example of something which is biologically impossible, but that doesn't disprove evolution.

 

[Aman777]

That is the most ridiculous argument ever.

Is that what you say when you are stumped? Can't you find a really intelligent animal and have him say Hi to all the other evolutionists out there? That's what is ridiculous.

Animals can't use the internet, therefore God?

Do you have trouble communicating? How did you come up with that kind of tripe?

Are you serious? Do you expect me to take you seriously? If this is the best you've got, then it's not an argument, it's a joke.

They jokes on you sweetie. In the end you lose. God Bless you

 

[Aman777]

If you can show me a case of something that evolution says is impossible, then I will consider it.

Genesis/Creation. Deceiving others by refusing to tell us WHERE the creatures which they say are evolving, came from. They find it IMPOSSIBLE to believe anything but that they just appeared...from nothing.... Then, when they get to the 6th Grade, they tell them about abiogenesis or magical chemical generation.

Evolution appears to say that we are here and changing genetically. Big Deal. I suppose it helps deceive the very young until it's time to really indoctrinate them and tell them they are nothing but evolved Apes. First, dehumanize them when they are very young, and then tell them the rest of the made up false story.