Ignoring The Evidence : Why Are You Not An Evolutionist?

[Black Dog]

So if you think people believed the Earth was flat back when. Well I can't say what people thought. I was not there back then. However my grand kids say I am old as dirt. I know what God said.

Well that's a nice job of avoiding the issue, the old Ken Ham "Were you there?" defense. But by your own logic, nobody was there when God created everything, so you can have no idea if it happened that way or not. Hung on your own petard.

 

[Davian]

Your sig is another image. I suggest folks check out the post if they're interested in seeing a post of cartoons.

TWO CARTOONS?!?! IN A ROW!

I'll alert the media.

Of course I'm not going to answer, your question is off-topic. You could possibly explain how it's on-topic, but I doubt it.

It applies directly to your use of the phrase "scientific truth". Seriously, what have you got to loose? Are you afraid that it might reduce your credibility in this forum?

Answer the question: Are Newtonian physics a scientific truth?

 

[farout]

Well that's a nice job of avoiding the issue, the old Ken Ham "Were you there?" defense. But by your own logic, nobody was there when God created everything, so you can have no idea if it happened that way or not. Hung on your own petard.

Ok, its clear you have thought things through and we each have made our choice. I don't agree but I won't be disagreeable. better to leave in peace than belittle each persons choice. Peace in this holiday season to you.

 

[justlookinla]

TWO CARTOONS?!?! IN A ROW!

I'll alert the media.

Nah, no sense in doing that. Just note your method of discussion.

It applies directly to your use of the phrase "scientific truth". Seriously, what have you got to loose? Are you afraid that it might reduce your credibility in this forum?

Answer the question: Are Newtonian physics a scientific truth?

Anytime you wish to include it in a discussion of creation and/or evolution, I'll be glad to respond. Trying to go off-topic isn't going to work.

 

[Davian]

Nah, no sense in doing that. Just note your method of discussion.

This is actually directed at your method of discussion.

Anytime you wish to include it in a discussion of creation and/or evolution, I'll be glad to respond. Trying to go off-topic isn't going to work.

It is not off-topic. It applies directly to your use of the phrase "scientific truth". Are you uncomfortable discussing your word usage here?

Answer the question: Are Newtonian physics a scientific truth?

Are you unsure?

 

[justlookinla]

This is actually directed at your method of discussion.

I'm not the one attempting discussion by cartoon, you are.

It is not off-topic. It applies directly to your use of the phrase "scientific truth". Are you uncomfortable discussing your word usage here?

Answer the question: Are Newtonian physics a scientific truth?

Are you unsure?

Explain how it's related to the topic of the room, creation and evolution. Otherwise, I'm not going to participate in your off-topic effort.

 

[Davian]

I'm not the one attempting discussion by cartoon, you are.

Ah, yes, where I flooded the thread with... an image. I did not realize that it would be so traumatic for you.

Explain how it's related to the topic of the room, creation and evolution. Otherwise, I'm not going to participate in your off-topic effort.

I did explain: It applies directly to your use of the phrase "scientific truth". Are you uncomfortable discussing your word usage here?

Answer the question: Are Newtonian physics a scientific truth?

 

[justlookinla]

Ah, yes, where I flooded the thread with... an image. I did not realize that it would be so traumatic for you.

Cartoon discussion was your choice. My not responding in kind wasn't an indicator of trauma.

I did explain: It applies directly to your use of the phrase "scientific truth". Are you uncomfortable discussing your word usage here?

Answer the question: Are Newtonian physics a scientific truth?

My use of the phrase 'scientific truth' was in reference to the claims of Darwinist evolution. The 'how' of Darwinist evolution isn't based on scientific truth but on guesses and suppositions.

Now, explain how Newtonian physics are related to the topic of the forum, creation and evolution? Try to stay on-topic, please.

 

[Davian]

Cartoon discussion was your choice. My not responding in kind wasn't an indicator of trauma.

No, but your dramatic claim of that one image becoming a "walls of cartoons" had that appearance.

My use of the phrase 'scientific truth' was in reference to the claims of Darwinist evolution. The 'how' of Darwinist evolution isn't based on scientific truth but on guesses and suppositions.

Now, explain how Newtonian physics are related to the topic of the forum, creation and evolution? Try to stay on-topic, please.

I did explain: It applies directly to your use of the phrase "scientific truth". All you need to do is answer this question, if you can: Are Newtonian physics a scientific truth?

 

[Black Dog]

Ok, its clear you have thought things through and we each have made our choice. I don't agree but I won't be disagreeable. better to leave in peace than belittle each persons choice. Peace in this holiday season to you.

No worries, just try to avoid the illogical thinking, it's not good for you.

Happy holidays.

 

[Hoghead1]

I got to wondering, Justlookinla, what theory do you put I place of evolution. Where do you think humans came from? Evocation is out with you. I sense also creatio ex nihilo. So just what is your scientific explanation for where we came from ?

 

[Astrophile]

Hung on your own petard.

The phrase is actually 'hoist with your own petard'. It means literally, 'blown up by your own bomb'.

 

[Black Dog]

The phrase is actually 'hoist with your own petard'. It means literally, 'blown up by your own bomb'.

Doh! Thanks.

 

[Loudmouth]

The Bible does not agree with evolution. God used a literal six days. The bible has existed so much longer that this new religion of evolution.

Yet another creationist ready to fall on his sword in the name of battling against science. You turn religion into a term of derision in order to use it against your foes, even if it destroys your argument in the process. It is nothing but a tacit admission on your part that science is superior to religion.

Have you ever noticed that scientists never try to discredit creationism by calling it a science? Ever wonder why?

 

[justlookinla]

No, but your dramatic claim of that one image becoming a "walls of cartoons" had that appearance.

I was simply pointing out the obvious

I did explain: It applies directly to your use of the phrase "scientific truth".

My comment on 'scientific truth' was directly related to the guesses and suppositions of Darwinism. That's how one stays on topic in the forum.

All you need to do is answer this question, if you can: Are Newtonian physics a scientific truth?

All you need to do is explain how Newtonian physics are related to creation and evolution.

 

[justlookinla]

I got to wondering, Justlookinla, what theory do you put I place of evolution. Where do you think humans came from? Evocation is out with you. I sense also creatio ex nihilo. So just what is your scientific explanation for where we came from ?

Which view of evolution are you referencing? "Evolution" isn't a monolithic term and until you identify which form you're referencing I can't respond.

My faith-based belief is that humans came from the creator, God.

 

[Davian]

I was simply pointing out the obvious

What was obvious?

My comment on 'scientific truth' was directly related to the guesses and suppositions of Darwinism. That's how one stays on topic in the forum.

All you need to do is explain how Newtonian physics are related to creation and evolution.

This is not about how Newtonian physics are related to creation and evolution, but your use of the phrase "scientific truth". Do you get a bulk discount on red herrings?

I ask the question, to illustrate a point: Are Newtonian physics a scientific truth?

Even if you don't answer, the evasive circles you run in are fascinating to observe.

 

[justlookinla]

What was obvious?

Discussion by cartoon.

This is not about how Newtonian physics are related to creation and evolution,

Then move it to another section of forum. Stop attempting to introduce off-topic issues.

but your use of the phrase "scientific truth". Do you get a bulk discount on red herrings?

I've explained several times now (as in my last post) that I used the term 'scientific truth' in contrast with the guesses and suppositions of Darwinist evolution. Darwinist evolution discards scientific truth and embraces willy-nilly creation unsupported by the scientific method.

And that my friend is an example of how you stay on-topic.

I ask the question, to illustrate a point: Are Newtonian physics a scientific truth?

Even if you don't answer, the evasive circles you run in are fascinating to observe.

As soon as you somehow, someway, with your best effort actually introduce content in which Newtonian physics is related to creationism...or evolution (the topics of the forum), I'll be glad to discuss whatever it is you're wanting to discuss. Currently, nobody has a clue what you're trying to say.

 

[Black Dog]

Darwinist evolution discards scientific truth and embraces willy-nilly creation unsupported by the scientific method.

Now you're just making stuff up. Not that you weren't before, but the above really stands out.

 

[justlookinla]

Now you're just making stuff up. Not that you weren't before, but the above really stands out.

What part is made up?