Primates, not monkeys.
See my sig.
If you wish to believe your ancestors are monkeys...you have that right read God's word when/if you mature a bit though.
Who is this "Yahweh" your video is talking about?
Few experiments are conducted without an expectation of the outcome, or more usually possible outcomes. For example, if A happens that suggests X is true, if B happens then Y is likely true, if C happens, we need to do some more thinking. So, yes the results are observed, but rarely without a hypothesis or three as to the possible outcomes.
A great many of them. Feel free to list exceptions.
Nonsense. There are nuances as to details of finescale mechanisms, that expand and clarify the theory. Common descent powered by natural selection/sexual selection/genetic drift of variability arising through mutations.
Keep telling yourself that. It won't make it true.
In my lexicon an axiom can hardly be an assumption, or vice versa.
An ordered universe that can be understood by humans might now be considered axiomatic, but that is because the result of centuries of scientific investigation are best explained if those assumptions are true. Personally, I still consider the assumptions provisional, like all results in science: to date they appear to be valid, but that could all change tomorrow. Until it does the results seem amazingly useful.
Your example presents a fundamentalist argument and is not typical of the thinking of most Christians, in my experience.Science can handle anything that comes along.
Religion is hard and brittle, subject to shattering.
We've heard as much admitted, by statements like:
"If there was no Flood then then Jesus was
a liar, the Bible is a lie".
Dry land.What did Jesus turn water into?
Did he turn water into wine or did he turn it into grape juice?Dry land.
Genesis 1:9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
Oh but they are, and again, axioms are accepted to be true without discussion, but they can well be false, they are provisional to a given argument.The assumptions on an ordered physical universe and that the human mind can comprehend reality are not provisional; they are believed to be axiomatic. If invalid then the whole science enterprise would have to be abandoned.
The religion of the Antichrist, in my opinion.Regarding education, you still show no sign
that you know what "scientism" even is.
Yes.Did he turn water into wine or did he turn it into grape juice?
Here we go again, I learned axiom as a mathematical term with a specific definition, but as we keep seeing, it also has a muddy colloquial definition that leads to all manner of equivocation.In my lexicon an axiom can hardly be an assumption, or vice versa.
An ordered universe that can be understood by humans might now be considered axiomatic, but that is because the result of centuries of scientific investigation are best explained if those assumptions are true. Personally, I still consider the assumptions provisional, like all results in science: to date they appear to be valid, but that could all change tomorrow. Until it does the results seem amazingly useful.