- Dec 31, 2016
- 7,221
- 3,311
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
We both know the difference in faith and science. But, I see faith as very real, whether you can put a finger on it or not.
Upvote
0
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.
We both know the difference in faith and science. But, I see faith as very real, whether you can put a finger on it or not.Your comments read otherwise.
And secondly: scientific speculation, which is essentially another form of hypothesis, is based on information draw from the facts that we have. Facts based on the real world. Faith does nothing of the sort.
We both know the difference in faith and science. But, I see faith as very real, whether you can put a finger on it or not.
Sure, but the question is did this scenario take place the way you think, and if so... what caused such a profound and un-natural change to occur? We're talking about a lot more than rabbits moving around here.I proposed they lived in both environments AND the intermediate.
They are an example of exactly what I described: a forest dwelling primate, that can and does venture into the savanna.
In addition modern chimps aren't the only apes, nor are they the ancestors of modern humans.
Are you ready to concede that animals can and do change environments?
Sure, but the question is did this scenario take place the way you think, and if so... what caused such a profound and un-natural change to occur? We're talking about a lot more than rabbits moving around here.
Now that's science's problem, isn't it?But unfortunately, faith can't be used in science since faith is untestable, unevidenced, unprovable and unfalsifiable.
Now that's science's problem, isn't it?
Why not, from a faih perspective I'm not anti-science. I'm just questioning.Not at all really. Science is science and religion is religion. Two very different and separate things. That's why you can't bring religion into science and expect to be treated like an equal. Apples and oranges.
What makes you think that the change was unnatural? You appear to have a strange belief of what happened. It is more likely that the tropical forest "left" our ancestors rather than the other way around. Have you not thought of that? Climates can change over the millennia. Even in the farily recent past the Sahara was much smaller. There could have been other causes as well. Your inability to understand something does not refute it. It does not even make it "unnatural". Your argument amounts to:Sure, but the question is did this scenario take place the way you think, and if so... what caused such a profound and un-natural change to occur? We're talking about a lot more than rabbits moving around here.
Why not, from a faih perspective I'm not anti-science. I'm just questioning.
When one rejects science just because one does not understand it one is anti-science.Why not, from a faih perspective I'm not anti-science. I'm just questioning.
Like I said I'm just questioning, others can decide for themselves.What makes you think that the change was unnatural? You appear to have a strange belief of what happened. It is more likely that the tropical forest "left" our ancestors rather than the other way around. Have you not thought of that? Climates can change over the millennia. Even in the farily recent past the Sahara was much smaller. There could have been other causes as well. Your inability to understand something does not refute it. It does not even make it "unnatural". Your argument amounts to:
"I do not understand, therefore science is wrong".
That should not convince anyone.
No, my comment was referring to you only repeating what you've read without thinking yourself.Your comments like "macroevolution regurgitation" say otherwise.
What makes you think I reject all science?When one rejects science just because one does not understand it one is anti-science.
No, my comment was referring to you only repeating what you've read without thinking yourself.
Sure, but the question is did this scenario take place the way you think, and if so... what caused such a profound and un-natural change to occur? We're talking about a lot more than rabbits moving around here.
No, you are only demonstrating ignorance and refusing to learn from your errors.Like I said I'm just questioning, others can decide for themselves.
Your posts here. Refusing to learn when people have tried to help you time and time again.What makes you think I reject all science?
If it looks like a crow and flies like a crow... it's probably a crow.How do you know that I'm not thinking for myself when I make comments that you don't agree with?
*gasp of shock* Are you a mind reader?
No. No you're not.
If it looks like a crow and flies like a crow... it's probably a crow.
I believe evolution happens, just not to the extent you do.That same comment applies much more to your comments then mine. Especially since it's clear that you hold evolutionary science with such disdain as you do.
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?