Ignoring The Evidence : Why Are You Not An Evolutionist?

[Davian]

Germ theory, atomic theory, and semiconductor theory produce tangible results that affect our everyday lives. Evolution theory does not.

Even it that were true, how would that falsify the science? Is semiconductor theory false to those that do not use electronics?

It's nothing more than an imaginary idea.

No reason to take you seriously when you cherry-pick the evidence.

 

[TLK Valentine]

One day you will need to explain the methodology by which you delineate these two.

I wouldn't hold my breath.

 

[Smidlee]

I'm not an evolutionist because I see more evidence against evolution than for it as well it's a product of human reasoning which some tries to use to explain human reasoning. It's like a dog chasing it's own tail. Evolution is also based on the religious idea , the principle of continuity, which I don't believe is truth.
(I not referring to just "change over time" or living systems using "trial and error" to find a solution.)

 

[MissRowy]

MOD HAT ON
THIS THREAD HAS UNDERGONE A CLEAN UP
PLEASE REFRAIN FROM FLAMING OR GOADING
REFRAIN FROM DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOUR
ABIDE BY THE SITE WIDE RULES
HAVE FUN
MOD HAT OFF​

 

[Doveaman]

Keep in mind that's a matter of faith.

Faith is based on evidence, the evidence that God reveals. It's not God's fault if you don't recognize the evidence. That's your fault.

 

[Doveaman]

I don't need people to take me seriously.

Okay, so I won't.

That's why the Bible contains mythology.

That's the agnostic interpretation of the Bible. If you don't believe in God, it makes sense that you wouldn't believe the Bible either.

The trick is separating the history from the myth...

The only person you are tricking is yourself.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

The whole thing is too wondrous to have simply evolved.

The 'Argument from Incredulity' - how refreshing; nice to see the old favourites still in use

 

[Doveaman]

It reads like a claim, not credible history.

It reads like a claim about credible history.

Credible history, would pass the historical method test, much of the bible doesn't even come close.

What method is that, evolution theory?

I agree the Bible doesn't come close to that method.

 

[Doveaman]

One day you will need to explain the methodology by which you delineate these two.

One day I will, God willing.

 

[durangodawood]

Faith is based on evidence, the evidence that God reveals. It's not God's fault if you don't recognize the evidence. That's your fault.

Really???
I thought faith was that step you take when you venture beyond the evidence.
If faith is all about evidence, then you may as well just stick with scientific inquiry.

 

[Doveaman]

Even it that were true, how would that falsify the science?

If evolution theory has no tangible effects on our lives, how can it be considered a science?

It's just an imaginary idea.

Is semiconductor theory false to those that do not use electronics?

By the same token, biblical history is not false just because you don’t use the Bible.

No reason to take you seriously when you cherry-pick the evidence.

Plagiarism.

 

[Davian]

One day I will, God willing.

When you are able, do so.

 

[Doveaman]

Really???
I thought faith was that step you take when you venture beyond the evidence.

You were wrong.

If faith is all about evidence, then you may as well just stick with scientific inquiry.

Those who have faith in God don't have to inquire about the evidence. The evidence is presented to us by God himself. You just need to recognize it.

"For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities - His eternal power and divine nature - have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse." -- (Rom 1:20).

 

[Davian]

If evolution theory has no tangible effects on our lives, how can it be considered a science?

From where do you get that notion of how to qualify something as science?

It's just an imaginary idea.

Sure, scientific theories are human constructs. Can you scientifically falsify it?

By the same token, biblical history is not false just because you don’t use the Bible.

So evolutionary theory could be true, even though you do think you use it?

Plagiarism.

If-the-shoe-fits-ism.

 

[lesliedellow]

But I do agree that neither of the two has anything to do with Christianity or the Bible.

Would you care to define Christianity? since you seem to be quite clear that B B Warfield (for one) wasn't a Christian.

 

[durangodawood]

You were wrong.

So, what is faith?

 

[Davian]

Faith is based on evidence, the evidence that God reveals. It's not God's fault if you don't recognize the evidence. That's your fault.

How do believers get to become believers before they get this evidence that is revealed once they believe?

 

[lupusFati]

There's so much controversy and misinformation about evolution, as well as a lack of a solid definition (that I can find), that I'm left wondering whether I should believe in it or not. I find myself apathetic to it, really.

I guess I'm not sure what to believe about it. Or how to go about using the word, even.
I keep thinking "Even if I understood evolution, how on earth could I ever explain it to someone without being demonized for it?" That's part of the issue, to me.

Not to mention I get so caught up in my daily life that I hardly think about things like this.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Okay, so I won't.

Did you ever? Tell the truth...

That's the agnostic interpretation of the Bible. If you don't believe in God, it makes sense that you wouldn't believe the Bible either.

An agnostic holding an agnostic interpretation of the Bible? SHOCKING!

And who says I don't believe it? Oh, right -- you.

I simply don't believe all of it.

The only person you are tricking is yourself.

Except I'm not trying to trick anybody... did you think I was?

 

[bhsmte]

It reads like a claim about credible history.
What method is that, evolution theory?

I agree the Bible doesn't come close to that method.

Evolution and the historical method, are not the same.