Discussion on the how it all started

[Godistruth1]

You only have a possibility. We have evidence. Would you care to learn what is and what is not evidence?

What u have is not evidence but a hypothesis and u agree it can be wrong so how can u preach to be true again and again? U never proved it actually happened. U are being dishonest here

 

[Godistruth1]

I think it's true that God created the universe. What has that got to do with the theory of evolution?

Same answer

See i differ in the fact that how he made it. U say we evolved from a single cell specie. I dont need to believe it unless i can go back in time and observe for myself in fast forward mode it happened

 

[Subduction Zone]

What u have is not evidence but a hypothesis and u agree it can be wrong so how can u preach to be true again and again? U never proved it actually happened. U are being dishonest here

No, again I already explained this to you. We do have evidence. But one more time, here is the definition of a scientific hypothesis:

"A hypothesis is a suggested solution for an unexplained occurrence that does not fit into current accepted scientific theory. The basic idea of a hypothesis is that there is no pre-determined outcome. For a hypothesis to be termed a scientific hypothesis, it has to be something that can be supported or refuted through carefully crafted experimentation or observation. This is called falsifiability and testability, an idea that was advanced in the mid-20th century a British philosopher named Karl Popper, according to the Encyclopedia Britannica."

What Is a Scientific Hypothesis? | Definition of Hypothesis | Live Science

So what is evidence? In the sciences one uses scientific evidence:

"Scientific evidence is evidence that serves to either support or counter a scientific theory or hypothesis. Such evidence is expected to be empirical evidence and interpretation in accordance with scientific method. Standards for scientific evidence vary according to the field of inquiry, but the strength of scientific evidence is generally based on the results of statistical analysis and the strength of scientific controls."

Scientific evidence - Wikipedia

We have scientific evidence.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Same answer

Why do you think that God is dishonest? That makes no sense to me.

 

[Godistruth1]

No, again I already explained this to you. We do have evidence. But one more time, here is the definition of a scientific hypothesis:

"A hypothesis is a suggested solution for an unexplained occurrence that does not fit into current accepted scientific theory. The basic idea of a hypothesis is that there is no pre-determined outcome. For a hypothesis to be termed a scientific hypothesis, it has to be something that can be supported or refuted through carefully crafted experimentation or observation. This is called falsifiability and testability, an idea that was advanced in the mid-20th century a British philosopher named Karl Popper, according to the Encyclopedia Britannica."

What Is a Scientific Hypothesis? | Definition of Hypothesis | Live Science

So what is evidence? In the sciences one uses scientific evidence:

"Scientific evidence is evidence that serves to either support or counter a scientific theory or hypothesis. Such evidence is expected to be empirical evidence and interpretation in accordance with scientific method. Standards for scientific evidence vary according to the field of inquiry, but the strength of scientific evidence is generally based on the results of statistical analysis and the strength of scientific controls."

Scientific evidence - Wikipedia

We have scientific evidence.

Lol definitions don't make facts true or false. What i asked u is can u prove to me there is link between earlier specie of humans. Also u need to prove the specie actually existed. I already said the human skulls even now appear similar to ones depicted in the process so they were always human not some other specie. U agree the theory can be wrong yet u claim it to be absolutely true. U are contradicting your statements

 

[Godistruth1]

Why do you think that God is dishonest? That makes no sense to me.

What was he dishonest about?

 

[Speedwell]

What was he dishonest about?

Planting evidence which looks like evolution.

 

[Godistruth1]

Planting evidence which looks like evolution.

Looks can be subjective. Dont u agree? I do agree evolution of features do happen and specie do adapt and change. But specie do not change into altogether different specie.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Lol definitions don't make facts true or false. What i asked u is can u prove to me there is link between earlier specie of humans. Also u need to prove the specie actually existed. I already said the human skulls even now appear similar to ones depicted in the process so they were always human not some other specie. U agree the theory can be wrong yet u claim it to be absolutely true. U are contradicting your statements

Yes, I can show the links, but if you refuse to learn there is no way to understand. You also posted some falsehoods when you claimed that I have no evidence. That was why I posted the definitions of terms that you do not understand. And if you refuse to learn you can only either ignore the evidence when given to you or post more falsehoods about it. I know that you do not mean to post falsehoods on purpose, but when you make claims about others that are wrong you move from just being wrong to breaking the Ninth Commandment. As a Christian you should try to avoid that.

 

[Speedwell]

Looks can be subjective. Dont u agree? I do agree evolution of features do happen and specie do adapt and change. But specie do not change into altogether different specie.

In fact they do. Speciation has been observed. There is no doubt of it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What was he dishonest about?

As @Speedwell said, planting false evidence. That would be a from of lying.

 

[pitabread]

Yes God is an explanation. The lack of knowledge how he created it does not mean he did not.

This isn't about whether or not God created. It's about whether invoking a supernatural deity adds any explanatory power.

Merely stating that God made stuff doesn't add any explanatory power, and thus is not an explanation.

 

[Shemjaza]

Well i believe a creator is a better explanation than TOE. Since both are possibilities i think God is a more logical option than TOE. If u are imposing your possibility to be true then i dont see u any better then other believers in God imposing their beliefs. Unless the evidence is irrefutable i don't see the need to believe in TOE

The point is that the physical evidence is consistent with what we would expect from the theory of evolution.

And there is no justification for why a Creator would build a series of animals over history, replacing them with slightly different versions... unless they were both not all knowing and being deliberately deceptive.

 

[solid_core]

Concepts in the sciences can be tested. Faith is not allowed. The only "faith" is that the natural world can be explained.

There are many faiths and presuppositions based on philosophical development of society and you are not so naive not to know that, right?

Faith that the physical world is real.
Faith that the physical world is well represented by chemical processes in your brain.
Faith that the chemical processes in your brain are always working properly.
Faith that other people (and their experiments) exist (the problem of other minds).
Faith in the philosophical development chain rationalism - empirism - positivism.
Faith, that we are not dreaming.
Faith that we are not insane.
Faith that there is continuity of things and that the world is same today as it was yesterday (faith in the continuity of physical laws and in the validity of past experiments).
Faith that we are not intentionally misled.

And for you specifically - faith that atheism is a better system than Christianity to explain the reality of our existence and of our experiences.

 

[Godistruth1]

Yes, I can show the links, but if you refuse to learn there is no way to understand

I am ready to learn and i hope u can also learn some logic when looking at difference between a guess and a fact.

You also posted some falsehoods when you claimed that I have no evidence

No i can also claim to have evidence. Its a different thing to prove it. U blindly believe it as evidence when u yourself say it can be wrong. U cannot claim it to be true and it the same time claim it to be wrong.

That was why I posted the definitions of terms that you do not understand

Im not debating any definitions here. U understand my question and u are yet to prove your evidence. Your evidence no longer remained evidence the moment u said it can be wrong.

I know that you do not mean to post falsehoods on purpose, but when you make claims about others that are wrong you move from just being wrong to breaking the Ninth Commandment. As a Christian you should try to avoid that

U need to double check your evidence. Next time be sure to back up your claim as true evidence and not be unsure.

 

[Godistruth1]

In fact they do. Speciation has been observed. There is no doubt of it.

What specie changed into altogether different specie? Something like fly changing into a bird. Give me evidence that can be observed and tested not assumptions

 

[Godistruth1]

As @Speedwell said, planting false evidence. That would be a from of lying.

U both accept evolution to be true and also accept it to be possibly wrong. If u are not sure on what to believe then how are u different than a theist?

 

[disciple Clint]

That is the same as admitting that there is no evidence for God. Thank you.

No it is saying that it is a waste of time to try to correct those who have no desire to change

 

[NeverL0ved]

I wana discuss with atheists how this universe came into existence. Please keep it simple and easy to understand as i wana see the atheistic perspective. Maybe i got it wrong and maybe you are right. I want to keep it as honest, rational and easy as possible. I personally think God is the best explanation for this organised universe not a random process. Now how is evolution or some other explanation more logical?

No one knows, and that is the actual truth. Whatever our personal opinions are on this matter, we still won't know.

 

[Godistruth1]

This isn't about whether or not God created. It's about whether invoking a supernatural deity adds any explanatory power.

Merely stating that God made stuff doesn't add any explanatory power, and thus is not an explanation.

Again im telling u any explanation is not a correct explanation. Just because u make assumptions dont make them true until proven so. What u are saying is oh we see adaptation happenings lets put it under evolution and lets put change of specie into another specie also into evolution. And since adaptation is proven and can be tested now and since we put change of specie into another also under the evolution umbrella it must also be correct. Thats the most silly explanation i hear from atheists all the time. Just because u categorize them together does not make everything right. Some part may be right and some part might not have enough evidence to prove it right. If i deny one simple statement does not mean i reject the whole science.