Nothing changes in this forum.

[xianghua]

As with many other things in life, we think in terms of two opposing sets of facts or opinions when, in reality, the truth is most likely somewhere in the middle.

i think that there are only two possibilities: creation or evolution. and we have many evidence for creation or id:

(image form VCAC: Cellular Processes: Electron Transport Chain: Advanced Look: ATP Synthase

 

[bhsmte]

LOL

 

[DogmaHunter]

i think that there are only two possibilities: creation or evolution. and we have many evidence for creation or id:

(image form VCAC: Cellular Processes: Electron Transport Chain: Advanced Look: ATP Synthase

How is that evidence for creationism or id?

 

[Ophiolite]

That's all well and good, but would you like to back it all up with a rundown of your proof of evolution and an explanation on why it proves such, or do you just want to talk?

Bring it all together for us...or not.

Do you actually read anything anyone says to you? It would appear not. You have been told, with great clarity and precision that science does not deal with proof, so why are you asking for proof?

Now, I asked you some very straightforward question that you have declined to answer. I'll try again, expanding them for clarity:
1. Have you previously been provided with a summary explanation of the evidence for evolution on this forum? Yes, or no?
2. Have you failed to note the instances where others have been provided with a summary explanation of the evidence for evolution on this forum? Yes, or no?
3. Have you previously been provided with references to articles and books evolution on this forum? Yes, or no?
4. Have you failed to note the instances where others have been provided with references to articles and books on evolution on this forum? Yes, or no?
5. If you have not noticed this material before, do you wish me to provide it? Yes, or no?
6. If provided will you undertake to study it? Yes, or no?

I don't want to "only talk". I want you to give me an assurance that if I put in the effort you will match or exceed that effort. i.e If you get the summary and the references will you make a sincere effort to study and understand them?

 

[Skreeper]

i think that there are only two possibilities: creation or evolution. and we have many evidence for creation or id:

(image form VCAC: Cellular Processes: Electron Transport Chain: Advanced Look: ATP Synthase

You have a 105 page long thread where people explain to you your faulty logic and yet here you are continuing to post these already refuted arguments.

You are like the worst student ever.

 

[Albion]

i think that there are only two possibilities: creation or evolution.

I hear you, but consider--many people believe that God created all that exists, but he did not do it in six twenty-four hour days.

Are they creationists or not? The OP implied that they are not. Indeed, the OP called them evolutionists.

Do you think, upon reflection, that there might be something wrong with the idea that we're all either creationists or evolutionists, period?

 

[pitabread]

Happy Birthday!

Thank you!

Although I have a confession, it's not technically my birthday today. I use a fake b-day when registering for web sites. But I appreciate the sentiment.

 

[JackRT]

Do you actually read anything anyone says to you? It would appear not. You have been told, with great clarity and precision that science does not deal with proof, so why are you asking for proof?

As a retired scientist, whenever a skeptic demands "proof" of a theory, I am instantly aware that I am dealing with a scientific illiterate.

 

[bhsmte]

Thank you!

Although I have a confession, it's not technically my birthday today. I use a fake b-day when registering for web sites. But I appreciate the sentiment.

Well, it still comes once a year anyway.

 

[bhsmte]

You have a 105 page long thread where people explain to you your faulty logic and yet here you are continuing to post these already refuted arguments.

You are like the worst student ever.

The thing is, he really, really, really needs to believe what he states. Hence, his crude defense mechanisms.

 

[USincognito]

Right back at you dear brother! I find it almost impossible to believe you have not seen multiple explanations, in summary form, of the evidence for evolution and links to textbooks and other scholarly resources addressing the same in more detail. Are you genuinely asserting that you have not seen any of these things? If so, I shall be happy to provide them, if you assure me that you will make a sincere effort to study them.

I posted this thread last June. It's simply dishonesty on his part to say he hasn't been presented with evidence.
The evidence for evolution for Kenny'sID thread

 

[USincognito]

I hear you, but consider--many people believe that God created all that exists, but he did not do it in six twenty-four hour days.

Are they creationists or not? The OP implied that they are not. Indeed, the OP called them evolutionists.

Personally I consider nearly all religious folks to be small c creationists. When I'm talking about YECs I always capitalize my C in Creationists.

Do you think, upon reflection, that there might be something wrong with the idea that we're all either creationists or evolutionists, period?

No. For one reason because I'm not an "evolutionist" any more than I'm a plate tectonicist or a germ theory of diseasist.

 

[Speedwell]

I hear you, but consider--many people believe that God created all that exists, but he did not do it in six twenty-four hour days.

Are they creationists or not? The OP implied that they are not. Indeed, the OP called them evolutionists.

Do you think, upon reflection, that there might be something wrong with the idea that we're all either creationists or evolutionists, period?

As a general rule, the term "creationist" on this board refers to a biblical creationist. All the rest of us, atheists, Christians and other theists, are known as "evolutionists." The distinction is between those who think the sciences of our origin are wrong, or lies, and those of us who pretty much accept them as they are.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Do you actually read anything anyone says to you? It would appear not. You have been told, with great clarity and precision that science does not deal with proof, so why are you asking for proof?

Do you actually read all the posts where I explain how that is absolutely not true? What an arrogant comment you make. You act as if your word is to be taken as fact without question.

I'm asking for proof because I should expect it on any claim I disagree with. Just because you have this conveniently wrapped up as something people should believe without proof, doesn't mean that is correct and it's certainly not going to fly for many of us.

I don't want to "only talk".

Then stop stalling by asking me if I have this or that. Tell you what, assume whatever you like on the questions, assume I did something wrong or whatever nonsense you are trying to prove with the line of questioning, ok? Now that you've done that, did any of what you concluded from the answers given you, in any way give you reason at all not to answer my simple request?

Yours is a classic stall/find a way to blame the opposition for your lack of action.

Someone needs to get on the stick here before I get bored/feel I've wasted too much time, and withdraw the opportunity, an opportunity I would think you'd be chomping at the bit to take advantage of.

 

[Speedwell]

Do you actually read all the posts where I explain how that is absolutely not true? What an arrogant comment you make. You act as if your word is to be taken as fact without question.

If you asked for "confirming evidence" instead of "proof" then nobody would hassle you about it. Is that too hard?

 

[Kenny'sID]

If you asked for "confirming evidence" instead of "proof" then nobody would hassle you about it. Is that too hard?

No, not hard at all. it's just that's not what I want... I want you all to stop doing the dosy doe and prove it.

 

[Speedwell]

No, not hard at all. it's just that's not what I want... I want you all to stop doing the dosy doe and prove it.

Then you are out of luck. All science has is confirming evidence, not proof.

 

[rjs330]

Then you are out of luck. All science has is confirming evidence, not proof.

If you can't prove it, then all you have is evidence that you interpret. You see what is called evidence, which in reality is just facts and interpret those facts to mean evolution from a common ancestor is true. Its all assumption or interpretation. Fact: Chimps and Humans have very similar genetic make up. Interpretation: We came from a common ancestor

Fact: ERVs when inserted go to similar places in the bodies of chimps and humans
Interpretation: We came from a common ancestor

Fact: Peppered moths changed their colors
Interpretation: all things came from a common ancestor

Fact: The apple maggot fly may show speciation
Interpretation: all things came from a common ancestor

Yet there is no proof that it actually happened nor is there any testable verifiable observable proof that it occurred.

 

[Speedwell]

If you can't prove it, then all you have is evidence that you interpret. You see what is called evidence, which in reality is just facts and interpret those facts to mean evolution from a common ancestor is true. Its all assumption or interpretation. Fact: Chimps and Humans have very similar genetic make up. Interpretation: We came from a common ancestor

Fact: ERVs when inserted go to similar places in the bodies of chimps and humans
Interpretation: We came from a common ancestor

Fact: Peppered moths changed their colors
Interpretation: all things came from a common ancestor

Fact: The apple maggot fly may show speciation
Interpretation: all things came from a common ancestor

Yet there is no proof that it actually happened nor is there any testable verifiable observable proof that it occurred.

So what? It's still the most reasonable inference from that evidence and much much more. What evidence would make annother inference more reasonable?

 

[Skreeper]

No, not hard at all. it's just that's not what I want... I want you all to stop doing the dosy doe and prove it.

Then you'll never get what you want. You won't get proof for evolution, or germ theory, or that the earth is not flat, or gravity.

Unless you start educating yourself on why science does not deal with proof you can wallow in your ignorance I guess.