Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
. It’s because Goddidit is a belief. Scientists need a lot more verifiable physical evidence before they’ll say its a fact. A SSN , fingerprint ,photo anything . Sometimes I wish God would give us this evidence
So what do you hope to accomplish by asking creationists a question that science has yet to answer and how is the scientific explanation more valid than a biblical one?
"God didn't do it." is a belief as well. A belief that is no more valid than saying "Goddidit". I would also argue that there is a wealth of evidence that points to God. The problem is that "evidence" is entirely subjective on one's level of skepticism. So I will ask you a simple question. What would "evidence" for creation look like for you?
To answer the question as to whether or not God selectively breeds animals is difficult to answer seeing how you do not want to hear biblical references. The Bible suggests that the answer is yes but as you stated in the OP, you are not interested to hear about what the Bible says. However, we do see evolution of animal species happing today in how humans breed animals today. From dogs to cattle, animals are selectively bred for specific purposes. In nature, Darwin describes how nature (through natural selection and environmental factors) effect what animals are able to procreate and share the genetic characteristics best suited to their environment. However, Darwin acknowledged that his view on macro-evolution was a theory, not a fact. He called it the “theory of evolution” as opposed to the “theory of Creation,” phrases he used many times in On the Origin of Species (e.g., 235, 435, 437) . Technically, macro-evolution is more an unconfirmed hypothesis than a theory. Many, including some evolutionists, believe it is an unfalsifiable tautology. Robert H. Peters, in The American Naturalist, stated that evolutionary theories “are actually tautologies and, as such, cannot make empirical testable predictions. They are not scientific theories at all”. Others, like Stephen Toulmin and Langdon Gilkey have come to similar conclusions, calling it a “scientific myth”.
This goes a little beyond mere curiosity, if you ask me.I'd give it to the Illuminati probably.
Haven't you ever wanted to know something just for the sake of satisfying personal curiosity? Do you not get curious about how things work?
I understand what the OP topic is. I was responding to a statement made by another poster. I think it is a fare question to ask what evidence for theistic creation would look like to a skeptic.
