proving evolution as just a "theory"

[bhsmte]

Dude! You still haven't addressed my repeated posts of evidence regarding Natural Selection! Why don't you start there?

proving evolution as just a "theory"

Good luck!

 

[bhsmte]

Anyone who presents opinions as evidence is either dishonest or ignorant of science. It is telling that all of you evos, complain about what I say, but are not willing to take 5 minuets to cut and paste the evidence from a link you use.

Congrats on this level of irony.

 

[Bugeyedcreepy]

Bugey,

Don't you have a presupposition that plant, animal and human life developed by survival of the fittest? That is, don't you have an evolutionary premise to describe the origin of the earth and the universe? Do you presume macroevolution?

I don't presume anything. I accept the Theory of Evolution as the best explanation of the biodiversity of life on this planet, sure - but that's because of the evidence in support of it, not because I presupposed it then looked for reasons to support it afterwards... there's a reason Evolution is taught in science classes almost universally all over the world.

As for faith/belief of atheism, it entails some of these dimensions articulated in:

• 'One Atheist's Creed';
• See the infidel's website for The Atheist's Creed, where somw or the presuppositions are:

Critique arguments for God's existence;

The problem of evil;

Morality and religion;

Miracles;

The motivations of belief, etc

I don't accept this. I've never read this book and reading the synopsis, it's clear it's a collection of writings, thoughts, ideas and arguments that non-believers have posited throughout the ages, but there's nothing in this that required atheists 'believe' or 'accept' these points, positions or arguments to be true in order to be atheists. If anything, it might be a primer for someone who doesn't understand atheism (or has recently become one/considered becoming one) to grasp the basics, or to understand the history of atheists before they were considered such a thing, but it's not doctrine or required belief and you're mistaken for thinking it is.

I could discuss other presuppositional beliefs such as

• the nature of God/gods/no god;
  
• You believe in a material universe that conforms to naturalistic laws and principles;
• This life is the only life we will ever have;
• the power of science and reason and rationality for understanding that overcomes superstition of religion;
• etc.

Do you have any of these presuppositional beliefs?

Oz

Well, not sure I would call it 'presuppositional belief' - after all, does a newborn baby presuppose it can't talk or is that just the way it is? Anyhoo, let me address what I can:

• I have no idea of the nature of God(s) and have a myriad of different characteristics explained to me, none of which there seems to be evidence for - but I'm always open to it.
• All the working models we have (as in collective human knowledge) are based on the natural laws and principles and is therefore meaningful in that we get results that are useful and technology that works because of it. This applies across all sciences and human endeavours of a scientific nature.
• I have no idea what comes after this life although all the evidence we have indicates that we cease to exist once we undergo brain death. Everything we know about consciousness and mind seems to be intrinsically tied to the physical brain. Things that affect our brain directly affect our mind. We also have no examples of disembodied minds, or spirits (...whatever they are). Of course, would love to know about it if you have anything...
• Critical thinking and rational discourse is something I've found to be invaluable in creating working models of the reality I experience. I don't disparage peoples personal beliefs, unless I believe it to lead to irrational decisions that could be detrimental to the person carrying the belief, or the people in their care or that they're responsible for. Anti-vaxxers who have children are prime examples...

 

[Jimmy D]

Dude! You still haven't addressed my repeated posts of evidence regarding Natural Selection! Why don't you start there?

proving evolution as just a "theory"

Good luck! He won't accept "links".... or "pictures" or "words" for that matter.

 

[Bugeyedcreepy]

Good luck! He won't accept "links".... or "pictures" or "words" for that matter.

...or "reason", or "logic", or "sense"... or even "reality" it seems.... etc.

 

[AV1611VET]

God is the beginning and the end, he is all powerful and does not leave anything to chance, and nowhere in the Bible does it say that He did. The Bible clearly outlines how he created Adam and Eve, and it is never written that they were the result of the evolution of primitive creatures. The Bible is the official Word of God without any errors, and it was written by man through God.

Hi, consol! Welcome back!

 

[AV1611VET]

Too bad reality has billions of years of history that tells a very accurate and telling story of its entire existence... I have to go with reality, because this is where we are.

Did you go with reality with Thalidomide? Pluto? L'Aquila? Three Mile Island? Chernobyl? the Hindenburg? Apollo I? the Twin Towers? the Titanic? Vioxx? lead paint? mustard gas? asbestos in the ceiling? Agent Orange? LSD? marijuana? eugenics? Y2K? Hale-Bopp? Harmonic Convergence? overpopulation? murder of unborn? and AIDS?

Just to name a few?

 

[AV1611VET]

...then how on earth would you ever know it happened if there's no way to verify it?

It's called FAITH.

Hebrews 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

 

[AV1611VET]

No, I'm not aware of your 'Apple Challenge'.

I consider it my single greatest single post here ever.

My Apple Challenge

My magnum opus, given to me from God as I contemplated how to counter cosmic evolution.

So the things created in Gen 1 are not evidence of what God created???

I don't like using them as such, since they are now so marred by entropy.

Adam & Eve are not evidence of God's creation???

Actually they are, but I prefer not to go that route for obvious reasons.

However, your 'Embedded Age Creationist theory is designed to come to a conclusion that the earth is rather young, like 4,000 year? Is that correct?

No, it is not.

 

[OzSpen]

I don't presume anything. I accept the Theory of Evolution as the best explanation of the biodiversity of life on this planet, sure - but that's because of the evidence in support of it, not because I presupposed it then looked for reasons to support it afterwards... there's a reason Evolution is taught in science classes almost universally all over the world.

Bugey,

This is where you are trying to kid me that you 'don't presume anything', but still 'accept the theory of evolution'.

What is a theory? It is "a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, especially one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained.‘Darwin's theory of evolution" (Oxford dictionaries online 2017. s v theory). So a theory is a supposition, not a proof with evidence. Therefore, you do have a presupposition that the theory of evolution is true 'as the best explanation of the biodiversity of life on this planet'. It has not been proven. If it had been, it would not be called a 'theory'.

A theory can't be 'the best explanation' until it is tested and the evidence is found to support it. The testing of it also needs the ability to falsify it.

Your analogy about the new born baby doesn't hold water.

Yes, there is a reason why evolution is taught nearly universally in the classroom. It's the promotion of dogma without evidence for macroevolution. It comes with lots of fancy dresses to try to 'prove' evolution but it is really bluff, but the younger youth don't get what you are trying to do in the classroom. It also means the God factor of the Creator God is denied and can't be brought into the classroom.

I have no idea of the nature of God(s) and have a myriad of different characteristics explained to me, none of which there seems to be evidence for - but I'm always open to it.

You do, but you won't accept it. God doesn't believe in atheists. This is what he thinks about the evidence of His existence that you reject. I didn't invent this. It is God's estimate of your ability or inability to see God's attributes in creation and what causes your blindness to them. With this evidence, you are 'without excuse' before God:

18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities – his eternal power and divine nature – have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshipped and served created things rather than the Creator – who is for ever praised. Amen.

26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

28 Furthermore, just as they did not think it worth while to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. 32 Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practise them (Romans 1:18-32 NIV, emphasis added).
​

You have the evidence of God's existence and his eternal power and divine nature right before you every day you live, but you you turn God away. Why? Take a read of verse 18.

That's what all secularists, humanists, agnostics and atheists do, including yourself.

I'm sorry I can't respond to all you said. It's bedtime for me, 11.35pm, Monday night.

If you are 'always open' to the evidence, read that section of Romans 1 again and again and get the understanding of why God does not believe in atheists and that they will be 'without excuse' when they face God in judgment. His existence is screaming at us all in creation.

Bugey, your presuppositions are too embedded to allow you - at the moment - to consider God's view of the evidence for himself and the creation of the universe.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

It's called FAITH.

Hebrews 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

However, it is not a leap of faith. It is:

 

[AV1611VET]

No mention was made that it was 'considered improper Netiquette'. From where did you get that information?

Actually, I don't consider it improper either.

But for some reason, most others do.

I've been reported several times for it.

Why? I don't know. I just chalk it up to [mild] persecution of the saints.

 

[AV1611VET]

However, it is not a leap of faith. It is:

Oz, I'm going to be straightforward with you, because I believe you're being straightforward with me.

You want to discuss creationism with me?

I'll mop the floor up with you.

Creationism is my forte, and in a proper discussion of it, I will ... under no circumstances ... allow the conversation to stray outside of Genesis 1.

When it comes to creationism, I eat scientists for breakfast.

So if you're up to it, let's dance.

But prepare to get educated.

 

[Bugeyedcreepy]

Did you go with reality with Thalidomide? Pluto? L'Aquila? Three Mile Island? Chernobyl? the Hindenburg? Apollo I? the Twin Towers? the Titanic? Vioxx? lead paint? mustard gas? asbestos in the ceiling? Agent Orange? LSD? marijuana? eugenics? Y2K? Hale-Bopp? Harmonic Convergence? overpopulation? murder of unborn? and AIDS?

Just to name a few?

? have you had too much to drink already??

It's called FAITH.

Hebrews 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

Why would you use faith for anything? It's the least reliable way to come to the truth about something there is. I can believe anything on faith, I can believe that Amon-Ra carts the Sun across the sky on faith, I can believe there's a refrigerator sized diamond buried in my back yard on faith, I can literally believe anything on faith and exclude it from reason like you do, but I care too much about myself and the people around me to do that. I see no difference between a Jew, Christian and Muslim who all hold their beliefs on faith.

"Faith does not give you the answers, it just stops you asking the questions." - Frater Ravus​

"'I refuse to prove that I exist,' says God, 'for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing.'" - Douglas Adams​

 

[AV1611VET]

Why would you use faith for anything?

Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

 

[OzSpen]

• I have no idea what comes after this life although all the evidence we have indicates that we cease to exist onc
  

  Oz, I'm going to be straightforward with you, because I believe you're being straightforward with me.
  
  You want to discuss creationism with me?
  
  I'll mop the floor up with you.
  
  Creationism is my forte, and in a proper discussion of it, I will ... under no circumstances ... allow the conversation to stray outside of Genesis 1.
  
  When it comes to creationism, I eat scientists for breakfast.
  
  So if you're up to it, let's dance.
  
  But prepare to get educated.

  Oz, I'm going to be straightforward with you, because I believe you're being straightforward with me.
  
  You want to discuss creationism with me?
  
  I'll mop the floor up with you.
  
  Creationism is my forte, and in a proper discussion of it, I will ... under no circumstances ... allow the conversation to stray outside of Genesis 1.
  
  When it comes to creationism, I eat scientists for breakfast.
  
  So if you're up to it, let's dance.
  
  But prepare to get educated.

  
  e we undergo brain death. Everything we know about consciousness and mind seems to be intrinsically tied to the physical brain. Things that affect our brain directly affect our mind. We also have no examples of disembodied minds, or spirits (...whatever they are). Of course, would love to know about it if you have anything...
• Critical thinking and rational discourse is something I've found to be invaluable in creating working models of the reality I experience. I don't disparage peoples personal beliefs, unless I believe it to lead to irrational decisions that could be detrimental to the person carrying the belief, or the people in their care or that they're responsible for. Anti-vaxxers who have children are prime examples...

So far in this thread, I haven't seen you 'eat scientists for breakfast'. Try your approach with the atheists who are on this thread. You'll have grist for your mill there.

 

[bhsmte]

However, it is not a leap of faith. It is:

Which facts are you referring to?

 

[doubtingmerle]

Right, and when they prove something is more than an opinion, they provide the evidence to support what they say.

...in journals, not in 50 word quotes.

 

[OzSpen]

• I have no idea what comes after this life although all the evidence we have indicates that we cease to exist once we undergo brain death. Everything we know about consciousness and mind seems to be intrinsically tied to the physical brain.

Bugey,

Do you see what happens when you chuck out a large piece of the evidence? You have censored this evidence that definitely provides evidence of what comes after death - destiny for unbelievers and believers in Christ:

• 'Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment' (Heb 9:27 NIV);
• 'and the dust returns to the ground it came from, and the spirit returns to God who gave it.' (Eccl 12:7 NIV);
• Where did the thief go when death came by crucifixion besides Jesus on the cross? 'Jesus answered him, "Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise' (Luke 23:43 NIV).
• What happens to the unbelieving who are damned? Jesus could not have been plainer: '‘Then they [unrighteous] will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life' (Matt 25:46 NIV).

Where will you be one minute after your last breath? You can know?

See my article, Is hell fair?

Oz

 

[TLK Valentine]

Did you go with reality with Thalidomide? Pluto? L'Aquila? Three Mile Island? Chernobyl? the Hindenburg? Apollo I? the Twin Towers? the Titanic? Vioxx? lead paint? mustard gas? asbestos in the ceiling? Agent Orange? LSD? marijuana? eugenics? Y2K? Hale-Bopp? Harmonic Convergence? overpopulation? murder of unborn? and AIDS?

Just to name a few?

Indeed -- the reality is that humans are fallible in all things.

And since you and I are both humans, what does that make us?