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.
I can show you "atheistic evolution" in Wikipedia.
Can you show me "atheistic chemistry" from the same source?
Go paraphrase something, that should keep you entertained for a bit.
You would have to point them out, first.
That all of life is the result of only, completely, solely, random, meaningless, mindless, purposeless (other than procreation) and directionless natural mechanisms acting on a single life form from long long ago.
Wanna talk about the guesses and suppositions of the creation of humanity? You know, relating to the topic of this board.
That all of life is the result of only, completely, solely, random, meaningless, mindless, purposeless (other than procreation) and directionless natural mechanisms acting on a single life form from long long ago.
That's a faith-based creationist belief system based on guesses and suppositions.
That is not a supposition made by the theory of evolution, or by Darwin.
"There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved."--Charles Darwin, "Origin of Species"
The theory works just as well with multiple origins of life.
Secondly, the theory never states that the proposed mechanisms are the sole mechanisms.
As usual, you lie about the theory.
That is not a supposition made by the theory of evolution, or by Darwin.
"There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved."--Charles Darwin, "Origin of Species"
The theory works just as well with multiple origins of life.
Secondly, the theory never states that the proposed mechanisms are the sole mechanisms.
As usual, you lie about the theory.
I'm certainly willing to be corrected. What other mechanisms, other than natural mechanisms, were involved in the creation of humanity?
Oh oh! You told justlook that he told a lie. Be ready for a diatribe about how that is a personal attack and against the rules here.
Then why does Wikipedia document it as a valid term, and not the others?What is the difference? Both propose natural mechanisms as explanations for natural phenomena. If the theory of evolution is atheistic for only proposing natural mechanisms, then so too is chemistry.
I'm certainly willing to be corrected. What other mechanisms, other than natural mechanisms, were involved in the creation of humanity?
If your continual 'yer a liar' doesn't bother the admins, it sure doesn't bother me.
Carry on.
The theory does not make absolute statements of what is or isn't involved. That's what you fail to understand at every turn. Methinks you don't want to understand it so you can keep uttering the same lies and ignorant statements.
Then why does Wikipedia document it as a valid term, and not the others?
Then why does Wikipedia document it as a valid term, and not the others?
This term has been in use since at least 1906 in The Metaphysical Magazine,[4] and is contrasted with theistic evolution, which asserts that God used evolution to create the universe.[5][6] Owen Gingerich, a historian of science at Harvard University, has stated that both views are outside the domain of scientific empiricism:
I ask again, what other impetus, other than natural mechanisms, are allowed, promoted or suggested in the creation of humanity?
I guess if you ignore the question it will go away.....until it comes up again.
If your continual 'yer a liar' doesn't bother the admins, it sure doesn't bother me.
Carry on.
I ask again, what other impetus, other than natural mechanisms, are allowed, promoted or suggested in the creation of humanity?
I guess if you ignore the question it will go away.....until it comes up again.
Show me.The article you are referring to points out that "atheistic evolution" is a bogus term.
SOURCEAtheistic evolution (also known as dysteleological evolution)is the view referring to biological evolution occurring "apart from any supernatural process." This term has been in use since at least 1906 in The Metaphysical Magazine, and is contrasted with theistic evolution , which asserts that God used evolution to create the universe. Owen Gingerich, a historian of science at Harvard University, has stated that both views are outside the domain of scientific empiricism: "Can mutations be inspired? Here is the ideological watershed, the division between atheistic evolution and theistic evolution; and frankly, it lies beyond the capability of science to prove the matter one way or the other."
In the Southern United States, Gallup found that "49 percent accepted creation, 34 percent believed in theistic evolution, and only 6 percent accepted atheistic evolution." A supporter of atheistic evolution is author Richard Dawkins, and evolutionary biologist and outspoken member of the New Atheism movement. However, atheistic evolution has also received criticism from Francis Collins, a physician-geneticist notable for his leadership of the National Institute of Health and Human Genome Project, who stated "A conclusion which is actually quite comfortable for me as a believer and for me as a scientist [is] that yes, Darwin was right, and a brilliant insight he had, but that all he was really doing was to deduce the mechanism of God's creation.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?