I can support my claims. However that is not the thread topic Is it?
Not with more than blind accusations. You have no hard evidence.
One shot you can perhaps research until that day is that Indohyus is not an evolutionary intermediate but is a variety of mouse deer of which is alive and well today, is semi aquatic which explains its bulla, and it most certainly does not look like it is morphing into a whale. So although the bible is accurate, I can aptly use your scientific research, fossil evidence as opposed to sketched misrepresentations, as a basis for my theoretical hypothesis as opposed to an evolutionary one. But this is for another thread.
And see, this is the best you can do. You can point to fossils and say "I don't see what you say I should see". You have no evidence of your own. All you do is point fingers and accuse. That's not science, that's not even proper behavior.
IF you want to be taken seriously: Provide evidence. Pointing fingers and constantly misunderstanding that which you criticize - which may or may not be the case here - brings you nothing.
Jazer wants to discuss various creationists thinking. All you appear to want to do is spam the thread with evolutionist rhetoric and use it as a diary page reflecting your thoughts on creationists.
Jazer has put too big words in his mouth. He makes claims he can't back, and claims that make less sense than a fish with a bicycle.
Besides, what's an 'evolutionist'? There are creationists and then there are people who are not creationists. Don't make this into a religious topic. Creationism might be, but evolution is not. Evolution is a dynamic theory describing the evolution of life. It is observed, and applied in various commercial processes. It has holes, all theories do, but it is the best description/model we have. And no, creationism is no model. It does not describe what we see, it does not explain how we can do what we can in the lab, nor can the things we do be extrapolated from it. Hence it is worthless in science.
The days are over where evolutionists can claim all creationists are ignorant. Well credentiled scientists such as Sarfarti, Sandford(ex atheist) and many more understand evolutionist claims and reject them.
Nnno. Those days aren't over at all. So you've convinced another one to fall for your nonsense. That's not new. With enough rhetoric you can convince anyone of anything. It's called
brainwashing.
And yes. I know you think the same about 'evolutionism'. But come now. That isn't even a real term but one you concocted.
*sigh* You see, the difference here is that you guys have claims, we have hard evidence. Hard evidence. Testable evidence. We do biological engineering all the time for example. That's evolution put into practice. It is not a theory the way you think of it. It's concepts are used daily in industrial and r&d applications.
You guys have
opinions. See the difference?
Biology isn't politics. You may win adherents by yelling loudly, but you won't change facts. This is science. That means the only goal is to describe reality. You can't change reality by popular vote or in the court of law. Not this kind of reality. You'll still have mutations, you'll still see new species emerge. So all you'll do is HIDE reality from people.
The claim that all creationists are ignorant is no more than an unsupported claim that perhaps gives evolutionists some passing jollies at the expense of their credibility. It is really quite unfair to charge creationists of being ignorant of evolutionary theory while they themselves often have no idea of creationist theory and the credibility of some creationists that stand behind it.
Unfair? No. Not at all. You can claim whatever you want. But if you want to be taken seriously you need to have evidence. You don't. You point where you think there are mistakes and yell 'falsified!'. Sometimes you hit spots where there are unclarified issues or things we can't explain - yet. But most often you guys have misunderstood basic concepts.
Now, if you want to be taken seriously: Provide testable evidence for your own position. Anyone can point fingers. Care to bring forth some hard evidence though?
You need to take a deep breath and calm down. You appear to be irritated.
Hah. You think? I wonder why. Could it be because creationists yet again bring forth unsubstantiated claims, logical fallacies, refuse to back their claims with facts, dismiss any relevant fact they don't understand or don't like, treat science as if the only thing that mattered was how well spoken you are, facts are apparently of no import. Could it perhaps be because they keep on pushing the blatant falsehood that creationism somehow equates to christianity and evolution equates to atheism? COuld that perhaps be the reason? I mean, it's not like most christians are creationists. Only a few are. Most of them Americans. And you know what else? Those people yell so loudly that people leave christianity here because they can't keep their act together in the states and have the decency and tact to act as Christians should: With integrity. Actually back their position with facts, research and avoid the personal attacks, the slander, the fallacies and the outright lies they so often use in defense of their position.
And I should
not be irritated?
I suppose you're right. I shouldn't. I should be hopping mad!
