If evolution is true...

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Staff Edit
You can't expect to demonstrate a well-established scientific theory is wrong unless you have a thorough understanding of it. In order to be taken seriously in rejecting evolution, you need either to show how the multiple independent lines of evidence supporting it are wrong, or present a better theory - i.e. one that has greater overall predictive and explanatory power, testability, unification of knowledge, simplicity, and consistency with existing knowledge. Each of these lines now has so much evidence accrued that the likelihood of falsifying or finding a better explanation for any one of them alone seems extremely remote.

To falsify or find better explanations for all would take a miracle - go for it!

 

[Kenny'sID]

It's quite revealing the disconnect in how he thinks science works that Kenny'sID's example reveals, isn't it?

lol

Yet no details at all proving me wrong. I'm getting the idea that your knowledge of how science works is not exactly up to snuff...actually, same for both of you.

Answer me this, is the so-called fact an animal has evolved, considered an event?

I'd ask for the short answer but I find those that try to talk around the truth to be worthwhile as well, so that's fine but please, no more excuses not to reply.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Why? That line of argument is never going to work.

It works perfectly, it's your line of argument in that science proves nothing that is amiss.

 

[Speedwell]

lol

Yet no details at all proving me wrong. I'm getting the idea that your knowledge of how science works is not exactly up to snuff...actually, same for both of you.

Answer me this, is the so-called fact an animal has evolved, considered an event?

I'd ask for the short answer but I find those that try to talk around the truth to be worthwhile as well, so that's fine but please, no more excuses not to reply.

"An" animal? It's certainly a fact that speciation has been observed.

 

[inquiring mind]

I wouldn't say it's the same level of evidence, but at best it's evidence creation happened, but not how it happened. I look to what the world shows of gods creation, rather them sticking to my own flawed interpetation of the bible. I know I could be wrong about the bible, so I stick with what the science shows.

And, you're never wrong in your interpretation, or in someone else's interpretation, of what the science shows??? Just asking...

 

[Kenny'sID]

"An" animal? It's certainly a fact that speciation has been observed.

Is it an even or not?

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Staff Edit
The evidence of what believers say is God's creation contradicts a literal 6 day creation... As has been discussed many times in these forums, that leaves two possibilities, either the 6 day creation was not intended literally, or the 6 day creation involved a creating a universe that appears ancient, complete with a full historical record of things that never happened...

 

[Speedwell]

Is it an even to or not?

Even to what? Do you mean is speciation an event?

 

[Kenny'sID]

Even to what? Do you mean is speciation an event?

Stop it.

The question was clear. Pretty safe to assume you know your reasoning for saying my Twin Towers analogy didn't work was absolutely bogus.

Amazing how non answers/the fear of answering tells it all.

 

[Speedwell]

Stop it.

The question was clear. Pretty safe to assume you know your reasoning for saying my Twin Towers analogy didn't work was absolutely bogus.

Amazing how non answers/the fear of answering tells it all.

Speciation is an event. Are you satisfied now? Is that clear enough for you or shall I repeat it again? Maybe a bigger type face will help?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

well yeah you did, since not everyone believes Christianity but we both think it's true, it must therefore be false by the logic given.

What logic?

You did notice the "If" didn't you?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

db

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I wouldn't say it's the same level of evidence, but at best it's evidence creation happened, but not how it happened. I look to what the world shows of gods creation, rather them sticking to my own flawed interpetation of the bible. I know I could be wrong about the bible, so I stick with what the science shows.

My deductive reasoning and critical thinking conclude that creation, as described in Genesis, is true.

 

[loveofourlord]

And, you're never wrong in your interpretation, or in someone else's interpretation, of what the science shows??? Just asking...

thats what I rely on the experts for, there is no way to be sure if one interpetation of the bible is correct one way or another, but we can with science and reality.

 

[klutedavid]

In science, random merely means unpredictable.

"Predicable by no known algorithm" The Mathematics of Physics and Modern Engineering, Sokolnikov and Redheffer.

There is nothing in the scientific use of the term "random" which makes any statement about cause or purpose, one way or the other.

I will ask you a question.

If we are on board a cruise ship in the middle of the Pacific ocean and you toss two sealed bottles overboard. Then we track the movement of these two bottles over time. We will find that, over time, the two bottles will eventually have two seemingly unpredictable paths. They will be very far apart and influenced by very different wind and current patterns.

Are the two paths that these two bottles travel unpredictable paths?

 

[loveofourlord]

What logic?

You did notice the "If" didn't you?

how does if change it? Are you saying, "If Christianity is true everyone would believe." doesn't apply? Your logic fails.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

how does if change it? Are you saying, "If Christianity is true everyone would believe." doesn't apply? Your logic fails.

One can be a practicing Christian by keeping the law of Christ. How does one practice evolution...grow another leg?

 

[Speedwell]

I will ask you a question.

If we are on board a cruise ship in the middle of the Pacific ocean and you toss two sealed bottles overboard. Then we track the movement of these two bottles over time. We will find that, over time, the two bottles will eventually have two seemingly unpredictable paths. They will be very far apart and influenced by very different wind and current patterns.

Are the two paths that these two bottles travel unpredictable paths?

Yes.

 

[Speedwell]

One can be a practicing Christian by keeping the law of Christ. How does one practice evolution...grow another leg?

Impossible, according to the theory of evolution.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Staff EditNo, you can't do that in science; All that's necessary is to show beyond reasonable doubt (science has quantifiable levels of confidence for the evidence in such situations) either that every independent line of evidence is flawed or that you have a better explanation for them (by roughly the criteria I gave previously).

Staff Edit
You can reject anything on any grounds you like, but the question was, "What level of expertise on the subject of evolutionary biology qualifies a person to reject it?"

I answered as if it was a serious question - or was it just a rhetorical complaint?