Ignoring The Evidence : Why Are You Not An Evolutionist?

[justlookinla]

Sorry, but all I can respond with is my understanding of evolution since you keep using an undefined phrase. Since it is undefined I do not know how to react to it, all that I can do is to try to correct some of your grosser errors.

You responded with a (worthless) link to my request for evidence, based on the scientific method, for the 'how' of Darwinist evolution.

This is not an explanation of what you mean. I can show you "what" happened. Who we are related to. What the rough path is. I don't understand your "how". All of my "whats" are supported by scientific eivdence.

You understood my 'how' enough to respond to it earlier. There is no evidence, based on the scientific method, for how humanity, as well as all life, was produced from an alleged single life form of long ago. You don't have it, nobody has it. It's nothing more than a faith-based view.

No, that is merely because you can't define what you mean by how your are using "how".

Of course I have. I've given it to you again in this post.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You responded with a (worthless) link to my request for evidence, based on the scientific method, for the 'how' of Darwinist evolution.

Wrong, it was a very useful link. It has shown that you do not understand the scientific method once again. And you still have not defined your nonsense phrase.

You understood my 'how' enough to respond to it earlier. There is no evidence, based on the scientific method, for how humanity, as well as all life, was produced from an alleged single life form of long ago. You don't have it, nobody has it. It's nothing more than a faith-based view.

I will explain again, I was only supporting my earlier claim. Now it seems that you are contradicting yourself since I can't both provide evidence for you mysterious "how" and not provide it at the same time. Are you sure that you are feeling well?

Of course I have. I've given it to you again in this post.

Nope, you have merely repeated it. Make a clear concise explanation of your phrase please.

 

[justlookinla]

Wrong, it was a very useful link. It has shown that you do not understand the scientific method once again. And you still have not defined your nonsense phrase.

It shows that you were giving a link which didn't offer evidence for the 'how' after all. Neither will any others you give.

I will explain again, I was only supporting my earlier claim. Now it seems that you are contradicting yourself since I can't both provide evidence for you mysterious "how" and not provide it at the same time. Are you sure that you are feeling well?

So far, you've not provided evidence for the 'how'......and will not. You tried to offer a link which wasn't evidence and was quickly exposed for your failure.

Nope, you have merely repeated it. Make a clear concise explanation of your phrase please.

I've given it again in the my post you just responded to. Simply scroll up and find.....

"There is no evidence, based on the scientific method, for how humanity, as well as all life, was produced from an alleged single life form of long ago. You don't have it, nobody has it. It's nothing more than a faith-based view."

I'm trying to help you if you'll simply let me.

 

[TLK Valentine]

It's a problem when one is led to believe that the 'how' of Darwinist evolution is based on the scientific method, when it's not. Why would one behave in such a misleading manner?



It's not based on the scientific method.

Your opinions are noted.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It shows that you were giving a link which didn't offer evidence for the 'how' after all. Neither will any others you give.



So far, you've not provided evidence for the 'how'......and will not. You tried to offer a link which wasn't evidence and was quickly exposed for your failure.



I've given it again in the my post you just responded to. Simply scroll up and find.....

"There is no evidence, based on the scientific method, for how humanity, as well as all life, was produced from an alleged single life form of long ago. You don't have it, nobody has it. It's nothing more than a faith-based view."

I'm trying to help you if you'll simply let me.

justlookinla, I am trying to help you since you don't understand why your side lost over a hundred years ago. The acceptance of evolution is so huge in the world of science that one could say that all "real scientists" accept it. Truly only a small handful of jokers and losers oppose it.

And I can't help you with your "how" nonsense until you define it.

 

[Davian]

The point is, scientific 'truths' may, or may not, be true.

You are still not clear. Are Newtonian physics a scientific truth?

 

[Doveaman]

Why would evolution need to explain the origin of the human spirit?

Because the human spirit is what makes us human. Our very life, consciousness and intelligence are all spiritual, and not just physical.

The life of a computer is not animated by its hardware; it is animated by its electricity.

The life of a human is not animated by its body; it is animated by its spirit.

*The body without the spirit is dead.* -- (James 2:26).

 

[Loudmouth]

Because the human spirit is what makes us human.

Where is the scientific evidence for this claim?

 

[Doveaman]

Where is the scientific evidence for this claim?

It is not a scientific claim. It is a theistic claim. And it is my answer to the OP.

Not all answers about reality are found in science. Scientists are not gods.

You reject my claim because it is purely theistic, and I reject your claim because it is purely scientific.

At least my claim takes into account the whole nature of man as a spirit and body, and not just a body.

 

[Loudmouth]

It is not a scientific claim.

Then there is nothing that the scientific theory of evolution needs to explain.

 

[justlookinla]

Your opinions are noted.

It's a fact, not an opinion.

 

[justlookinla]

You are still not clear. Are Newtonian physics a scientific truth?

This portion of the forum is for discussion of creationism and evolution.

 

[justlookinla]

justlookinla, I am trying to help you since you don't understand why your side lost over a hundred years ago. The acceptance of evolution is so huge in the world of science that one could say that all "real scientists" accept it. Truly only a small handful of jokers and losers oppose it.

And I can't help you with your "how" nonsense until you define it.

You responded to the 'how' request with a (worthless) link. Apparently you understood it then..

But, in the spirit of helping you understand the 'how'.....Not a single bit of evidence, based on the scientific method, has been given by you or anyone else to support the view that only naturalistic mechanisms produced humanity, as well as all life, from an alleged single life form of long ago.

 

[TLK Valentine]

It's a fact, not an opinion.

Believe as you wish.

 

[Davian]

This portion of the forum is for discussion of creationism and evolution.

There is a point to make. You are still not clear. Are Newtonian physics a scientific truth?

 

[PsychoSarah]

Bottom line, conclusions are offered based on flawed evidence. You can't be sure about the conclusion. It's a best guess which is subjective.

Even if it were subjective, it is still more trustworthy than a book that contradicts itself, and has content that is demonstrably inaccurate.

 

[justlookinla]

There is a point to make. You are still not clear. Are Newtonian physics a scientific truth?

This section of the forum isn't about Newtonian physics. If you have a point to make, make it.

 

[justlookinla]

Even if it were subjective, it is still more trustworthy than a book that contradicts itself, and has content that is demonstrably inaccurate.

If you wish to discuss the accuracy of the bible, there's a section on the forum for that.

 

[Davian]

This section of the forum isn't about Newtonian physics.

Of course it is.

If you have a point to make, make it.

Answer the question. You are still not clear. Are Newtonian physics a scientific truth?

 

[justlookinla]

Of course it is.

How?

Answer the question. You are still not clear. Are Newtonian physics a scientific truth?

Do you have a question related to creationism or evolution?