Discussion on the how it all started

[renniks]

Now you are beginning to break site rules. Since what I know is demonstrable it is not a delusion. You refuse to learn even the basics of science. As a result you are unable to judge. And wasn't there someone that even warned you about that? Let's see how does that go "Judge not lest ye . . . "

You first.

 

[renniks]

Now look at this. This is not honest. Since you do not understand the proper thing to do is to ask questions.

That was a question...so what is your issue?

 

[Subduction Zone]

You are a laugh a minute I'll give you that. Go ahead and insult medieval scientists some more.

I cannot help it if you have no education in the sciences. Medieval scientists is a bit of a oxymoron. Without a scientific method one cannot have scientists by definition. In fact the word "scientist" is a very recent one. It was coined in 1833. Though there were scientists before then, it is pretty hard to say that there were any before Galileo.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You first.

I am not claiming to be a Christian. But it is odd that when it comes to discussing evolution that the atheists are more "Christian" than the creationists.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That was a question...so what is your issue?

That was a very dishonest post.

 

[renniks]

I am not claiming to be a Christian. But it is odd that when it comes to discussing evolution that the atheists are more "Christian" than the creationists.

I have not seen that. I have seen a lot of insults by atheist. Mainly condescending comments, as if belief in nothing somehow equals intelligence.

 

[Speedwell]

No, you all called them facts. When they are in fact, theorys.

When? I don't believe I have ever called theory a fact. I know the difference.

 

[renniks]

When? I don't believe I have ever called theory a fact. I know the difference.

Perhaps it was the other guy...

 

[Subduction Zone]

I have not seen that. I have seen a lot of insults by atheist. Mainly condescending comments, as if belief in nothing somehow equals intelligence.

That is only because you purposefully keep yourself ignorant of the sciences. For the most part you have been corrected It is only when you go out of your way to attack others that you get the same in return. If you can be polite and honest others will be polite to you. And look at you, once again you try to insult others. You don't see Christians attacking you for "make believe". People have respected your religious beliefs. It is when you try to apply your religious views to science, views which were refuted over a hundred years ago, that you get a bit of flack.

 

[Larniavc]

I just told you.

No you did not. You said you don’t believe in ToE.

Which bit?

I assert that you will not answer because you do not know which specific part of ToE is wrong and will unable to provide evidence to support that.

Further, I assert that this is because you have not taken taken the time to learn what the ToE actually predicts.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, you all called them facts. When they are in fact, theorys.

You have been told this before, theories explain facts. Is gravity a fact? There is the fact of gravity and the theory that explains it. The same applies to evolution. We can see that life evolved both in the present and the past. The theory of evolution explains those facts.

 

[Godistruth1]

Really?

Again?

Since u cant prove there is an actual link between the earlier specie and prove even the existence of earlier specie also u the fact u agree the theory can be wrong, we can agree to disagree

 

[Godistruth1]

Yes, the theory of evolution can be wrong. But the theory of evolution is not evolution.

Tell me, is gravity a fact?

Gravity can be observed right now. Not a fish becoming a crocodile or something. Unless u can prove it happens

 

[Subduction Zone]

Gravity can be observed right now. Not a fish becoming a crocodile or something. Unless u can prove it happens

We can observe evolution in the fossil record. We can observe evolution in the independent "trees of life" that are formed by different metrics again and again. This is actually more reliable than seeing it directly since we are seeing the same thing again and again while being measured in totally different methods.

Don't give too much credit to "right now".

You should learn how science works, then you might understand better. It is unwise to deny science when one is using highly technical devices that depend upon the science that one is denying. If you want to deny science you really should not be benefiting from it. What do you call somebody who says one thing but does another?

 

[Godistruth1]

Maybe so, but people who know quite a bit more about it than either of us say not, so I see no problem in going along with it. Perhaps you could study paleontology yourself and prove them wrong.

Like i said lot of what is said are hypothesis. We cant really be sure. U are assuming they might know better and u trust them. Same as people who believe in their priests. Unless you yourself can prove it not trust them its no different

 

[Speedwell]

Like i said lot of what is said are hypothesis. We cant really be sure. U are assuming they might know better and u trust them. Same as people who believe in their priests. Unless you yourself can prove it not trust them its no different

The question then becomes, why should we prove it to you?

 

[disciple Clint]

What about the Gods of other religions? Were they created?

They are all dead which is not a condition the real God has to endure.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Since u cant prove there is an actual link between the earlier specie and prove even the existence of earlier specie also u the fact u agree the theory can be wrong, we can agree to disagree

You should drop the word "prove" from your vocabulary when dealing with science. One cannot "prove" gravity by that standard. We do have endless scientific evidence for evolution.

 

[Subduction Zone]

They are all dead which is not a condition the real God does not endure.

How would you prove that? What evidence do you have that other God's are dead? What evidence do you have for your God?

 

[Godistruth1]

YES!

Any theory can be shown to be wrong.

But you need to supply evidence that cannot be explained by ToE.

An example of that would be a rabbit in strata dated in the pre cambion. That would be very hard for ToE to explain.

The thing is, as yet, no one has been able to supply this kind of contracting evidence.

Just because TOE explains some things does not mean its true which u agree to. God is also an explanation then. Both are similar unless we can be very sure and have very good evidence.