How to choose between creation and evolution.

[OldWiseGuy]

... this is how I avoid having to admit that I am out of my league... I give an irrelevant, folksy 'analogy'... Cuz that is the sort of thing that swayed me into rejecting science that I don't understand...

How many 78 year olds do you know that are still able to climb trees (not an analogy, I actually climb trees).

 

[DogmaHunter]

How many 78 year olds do you know that are still able to climb trees (not an analogy, I actually climb trees).

Very little.
So what?

 

[hecd2]

I just read about 12 post on this subject and not one included any verifiable evidence.

Here's an honest question....
When you request for evidence... what exactly is it, that you hope to receive?
Can you describe what kind of evidence you are looking for? Don't be afraid to be specific here.

Because you keep shooting everything down for no apparant reason.

So instead of leaving us guessing what you are looking for, perhaps try to be a bit more specific.

Use an example if that makes it easier.
What would be a valid piece of evidence, in your opinion?

There isn't one, because he has already made his mind up. Asking for evidence is a piece of cheap rhetoric, not an honest request for information.

He's had relevant references twice and just pretended twice that theuy don't exist - he'll never ever engage with anything that weighs against his prejudice. If you've got nothing, not even a basic understanding of the science, just easier to pretend nothing has been presented and hope that people are so stupid that they don't realise he's lost. Thing is, no-one is that stupid.

 

[hecd2]

How many 78 year olds do you know that are still able to climb trees (not an analogy, I actually climb trees).

...and therefore, God?

 

[tas8831]

How many 78 year olds do you know that are still able to climb trees (not an analogy, I actually climb trees).

You can climb trees, therefore, creation is true?

This is a big 'fall from grace', considering your earlier condescending anti-science posts.

If this is what you plan to do from here on in, then you have, in essence, had your fangs removed and are now a docile little pup.

 

[tas8831]

God's design doesn't allow for misuse. Only man's designs do this.

Empty, baseless, question-begging assertions.

Nothing to see here, folks. All hat, no cattle.

 

[tas8831]

I have many "personal experiences" that are quite successful that many others fail at.

Doesn't everyone?

Because they fail and I don't does that mean that they are right and I am wrong?

That is how you think life should apply to you and your brethren re: creation, is it not?

You have admitted that you do not understand biology, yet are insistent that your shallow, uninformed take on the matter is correct because bible.

Sounds like more like beta than alpha.

To my car analogy, if my car was poorly designed I couldn't get the mileage that I do. It's designed to last much longer than people realize, but only if they follow the maintenance schedules, especially fluid changes.

And yet the original factory-produced cars were death traps. Only via testing and trial and error and research have cars gotten to the point they are today.

So, are you saying God is a tinkerer that starts out with a mediocre product and has to keep at it?


Creationists rarely seem to think through their analogy-based proclamations/implications

 

[tas8831]

Not all scientists agree with you.

https://evolutionnews.org/2011/08/the_spines_design/

Do you think Klinghoffer is a scientist?

Or are you referring to Lieberman?

Lieberman is an evolutionary biologist. I find it hilarious that creationists will nit-pick issues like this to pretend that they have support for a claim, ignoring that the source for their "support" is someone that quite likely thinks creationism to total BS...

Can we play this game, too?

After all, there are 2 camps of creationists - young earthers and old earthers.

Seeing as how creationists cannot even agree as to whether the earth is 6000 years old or billions, pointing out a disagreement by 2 individual evolutionary biologists (most would not agree with Lieberman, by the way, especially the extinct part - he seems to be a pan-adaptationist) seems at the very least desperately hypocritical, and at worst maliciously deceptive.

No, but you go on as you have been of late.

Makes our jobs much easier.

 

[tas8831]

What's funny about overexertion and lack of rest? You should dedicated a full day each week for rest. I think you'll be surprised by the benefits, physical and mental.

And you just keep doing it.


Still waiting on that creation-proving anatomy that you claimed to have studied.

Oh right - you think your 'seeing it' is sufficient.

Will that work for us, too? Or just creationists with no relevant knowledge base but plenty of Dunning-Kruger effect?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Very little.
So what?

So I know a little about health and fitness (just one of my many talents).

 

[OldWiseGuy]

...and therefore, God?

Therefore, Paul C. Bragg.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

You can climb trees, therefore, creation is true?

This is a big 'fall from grace', considering your earlier condescending anti-science posts.

If this is what you plan to do from here on in, then you have, in essence, had your fangs removed and are now a docile little pup.

I'm not the one who arrived on the forums with fangs bared.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Doesn't everyone?


That is how you think life should apply to you and your brethren re: creation, is it not?

You have admitted that you do not understand biology, yet are insistent that your shallow, uninformed take on the matter is correct because bible.

Sounds like more like beta than alpha.



And yet the original factory-produced cars were death traps. Only via testing and trial and error and research have cars gotten to the point they are today.

So, are you saying God is a tinkerer that starts out with a mediocre product and has to keep at it?


Creationists rarely seem to think through their analogy-based proclamations/implications

I think early man was an inferior product.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Do you think Klinghoffer is a scientist?

Or are you referring to Lieberman?

Lieberman is an evolutionary biologist. I find it hilarious that creationists will nit-pick issues like this to pretend that they have support for a claim, ignoring that the source for their "support" is someone that quite likely thinks creationism to total BS...

Can we play this game, too?

After all, there are 2 camps of creationists - young earthers and old earthers.

Seeing as how creationists cannot even agree as to whether the earth is 6000 years old or billions, pointing out a disagreement by 2 individual evolutionary biologists (most would not agree with Lieberman, by the way, especially the extinct part - he seems to be a pan-adaptationist) seems at the very least desperately hypocritical, and at worst maliciously deceptive.

No, but you go on as you have been of late.

Makes our jobs much easier.

There is no doubt in my mind; the earth is very old.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Still waiting on that creation-proving anatomy that you claimed to have studied.

Oh right - you think your 'seeing it' is sufficient.

Some things are obvious.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Empty, baseless, question-begging assertions.

Nothing to see here, folks. All hat, no cattle.

You protesteth to mucheth (don't you get tired of spinning your wheels here?).

 

[hecd2]

Therefore, Paul C. Bragg.

I had to google him. "Until he died at 81, Bragg stated that every human being could live to 120 by following his regimens."

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I had to google him. "Until he died at 81, Bragg stated that every human being could live to 120 by following his regimens."

I defer to the bible on that one. Bragg's program can't undo generations of genetic damage, but it's still the best one out there.

He also said that (those who followed his regimen) would see their loved ones and friends sicken and die before their time while we would maintain robust health long after their passing. I have found this to be true in my own life.

I strongly recommend his book, "The Miracle of Fasting", called by many the 'bible of health'.

 

[xianghua]

How do you know they are not?

What is your alternative explanation for these sequences?

Coincidence? If so, please show the math supporting this.

what about the possibility that retroviruses were created from a genome parts?

 

[xianghua]

No, that's just you misrepresenting said graph.

It talks about a "higher power". Not a designer.
They are not synonymous.

so higher power isnt a designer? fine.