- Feb 4, 2006
- 46,773
- 10,977
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Protestant
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
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.
You seem to not understand what a scientific theory is. If it contained magic it wouldnt be science.
So no, your statement is false.
I meant understand the process, not just the concept.
When such a 'theory' is so fantastic I call it magic.
Non sequitur, try again. It does not take a huge education to understand evolution. You could get a very good start by watching YouTube videos by people that do understand the theory.
The process is not that hard to understand either. If you want to know all of the details that will take some serious study. But one does not need to become an expert in evolution to know that all life is the product of evolution.
So the assumptions that I see in most articles about evolution really don't exist?
I've watched but it didn't help. They fail to explain how life began, or the incredible process that was waiting in the wings to transform the simplest life form into the complexity we see today. It's just too much.
You just admitted that you lost. You are trying to move the goalposts.
The theory of evolution explains how life got to its present state once life existed. And the explanation of how it happened is well explained. You seem to be not letting yourself learn. That is a common problem with most creationists. Most creationists won't even let themselves learn what evidence is.
Evolution must explain the origin of life, and then replicate it. Then I might take a closer look.
The relationship between 'life' and 'evolution' is that of a 'nut' and a 'bolt'. You can't just say they have nothing to do with each other. Together they make sense, separated they don't.
You aren't really in a position to know.
Nope, and you lost again. See previous post.
Yes, they work together. So what? You are only spewing nonsense now.
I meant understand the process by actually observing it, not just the concept.
What? You are not making any sense.I'm saying they must have a common origin. You don't make nuts without bolts. That's a vast difference right there. How to we bridge that?
If life didn't exist would there be 'natural selection' floating around somewhere anyway?
Did you observe Italian evolving from Latin?
How unfortunate that didn't happen on the timescale of a human lifetime. Clearly then, it cannot be known that it did happen.
I know why you don't believe it. You have told me in great detail.
What? You are not making any sense.
We don't believe it because:
1) there is no physical evidence
2) there is no need for the Noachian Flood story to be literal history (I am not speaking for SZ here but certainly as far as I can tell there's no need for it to be literal for the proper understanding of Christian Theology/Soteriology and as an atheist there is OBVIOUSLY no reason for it to be literal history. It is an extraneous "factor" that doesn't add explanatory value to the model).
Sorry, quoting from a prejudiced book does not support your claims.
Was the appearance of life and the law of natural selection a package deal, or were they, as you say, separate events/processes that later found each other?
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?