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.
I just think CREATION is so anathema to evolutionists, they can't stomach the idea of having to vote in favor of it.The most probable reason is that the poll is so poorly constructed, being ambiguous, restricted in choice, strongly biased and generally inept, that many members simply ignore it.
Yes it is. See above.
Note: italicised words in square brackets are added by me to clarify what AV's posts were responding to.
And that "new explanation" would be what exactly?If a scientific theory is debunked / disproven.
You take the existing evidence & new evidence that disproved the old theory and come up with a new explanation that fits all Evidence.
You don't half talk nonsense some of the time! The poll offers a false dichotomy. The alternative to a failed theory of evolution is not creation. Well, it is one alternative, but it is not the one that would logically occur to a former evolutionist. And having just spent some time thinking about it, I can't come up with any sensible reason why it would.I just think CREATION is so anathema to evolutionists, they can't stomach the idea of voting in favor of it.
See! Another silly post. The new explanation would arise out of the situation where evolution had been falsified. In the absence of such an event it is impractical to come up with such an alternative and fatuous of you to ask for one.And that "new explanation" would be what exactly?
Thanks for the QED.You don't half talk nonsense some of the time! The poll offers a false dichotomy. The alternative to a failed theory of evolution is not creation. Well, it is one alternative, but it is not the one that would logically occur to a former evolutionist. And having just spent some time thinking about it, I can't come up with any sensible reason why it would.
So nothing in the poll choices (like, you know, OTHER) that strikes your fancy?See! Another silly post. The new explanation would arise out of the situation where evolution had been falsified. In the absence of such an event it is impractical to come up with such an alternative and fatuous of you to ask for one.
What part of my post did you Not understand?And that "new explanation" would be what exactly?
I got it quite well.What part of my post did you Not understand?
I got it quite well.
But suppose I posted the following poll:
Hypothetical: 1 + 1 = ?
Assuming 2 is not the correct answer, what would your answer be?
Wouldn't it be disrespectful for people to lecture me on how 1 + 1 should equal 2?
- 11
- n
- 42
- other
I'm not looking for a lecture, I'm looking for votes.
I voted Other. But when the Miscellaneous (Other) Category generates more responses than many of the primary categories then you know it was a badly designed poll. If you cannot see that, I cannot help you.So nothing in the poll choices (like, you know, OTHER) that strikes your fancy?
I just think CREATION is so anathema to evolutionists, they can't stomach the idea of having to vote in favor of it.
Fine. I got it. Gottservant (and I) would like to know if you think that "existing evidence" will be CREATION, or something else.If a scientific theory is debunked / disproven.
You take the existing evidence & new evidence that disproved the old theory and come up with a new explanation that fits all Evidence.
I think this thread ... and the poll specifically ... is good evidence otherwise.And you would be wrong.
I think this thread ... and the poll specifically ... is good evidence otherwise.
Fine. I got it. Gottservant (and I) would like to know if you think that "existing evidence" will be CREATION, or something else.
I realize you don't know what that "existing evidence" is, but I'm curious to see if the theory of life's origin has a backup or not.
I'm going to disagree.I voted Other. But when the Miscellaneous (Other) Category generates more responses than many of the primary categories then you know it was a badly designed poll. If you cannot see that, I cannot help you.
That's nice.Fine. I got it. Gottservant (and I) would like to know if you think that "existing evidence" will be CREATION, or something else.
Until the new evidence is provided, the current theory stands.I realize you don't know what that "existing evidence" is, but I'm curious to see if the theory of life's origin has a backup or not.
Which doesn't surprise me.And I think that you are completely wrong in that regard.
But will that evidence lead to CREATION?CREATION is the claim not the evidence.
Which doesn't surprise me.
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?