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.
Am I the only one who understands that you shouldn't rub salt in a wound?Am I the only one who understands that I'm taking your points with a grain of salt?
This is what happens when we compare oranges to transistors.Religion is faith and ToE is science. Each belongs to totally different fields.Creationists who deny science are basically confusing two totally dissimilar things.
I believe creationists feel threatened by science simply because science is not a spiritual thing and it is something that is "visible". I often wonder if their faith is so weak as to feel threatened by the physical world to the point where they deny it and conjure up all sorts of excuses in order to "fit" their faith into an empirical "box". __________________
Are you sure you understand this?Urine is much better field dressing due to high urea levels.
Creationists deny that Science can spell out events in the past that can't be recreated except in the imagination.
Science agrees that such fiction writing is not science.
Do you really think if you continue to repeat this nonsense here, that you will convince anyone that you are right?
Now support it.....Science can spell out events in the past that can't be recreated except in the imagination.
Your claim is that
Now support it.
Creationists deny that Science can spell out events in the past that can't be recreated except in the imagination.
You are correct.
I'll start quoting others then:
Scientists accept that the observations and the results of science must be "objective." That is they must be repeatable, testable and confirm-able by other scientists, even (and especially) skeptical ones.
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/pseudo/scipseud.htm
The defining characteristic of science is the concept of the testable hypothesis. A testable hypothesis must make predictions that can be validated by independent observers. By "testable", we mean the predictions must include examples of what is likely be observed if the hypothesis is true and of what is unlikely to be observed if the hypothesis is true.
Urine is much better field dressing due to some urea levels.
Why don't you?Why don't you support your ridiculous statement?
No they don't.Do you know what formed Craters of the Moon in Idaho?
Do you know when the biggest marine reptiles lived on the earth?
Do you know what caused the huge crater on the surface of Saturn's moon Mimas?
So you know why the genetic sequence of human DNA is more similar to chimpanzee DNA than any other species?
Scientists do.
As you like to say, they infer (guess, assume, speculate, estimate, approximate, etc) based on the evidence.
Yes but what happens when the Boss forgets to check and sign it? What happens when the secretary has made mistakes, and why would the boss even need a secretary when all he had to do was will the letter into existence like the 10 commandmentsWow -- I would think Mr. Literature Professor here would understand the art of amanuensis better than most here.
Am I the only one that understands that when a secretary types a letter that was dictated to her, the letter goes out as being from the boss, not the secretary?
Yes but what happens when the Boss forgets to check and sign it? What happens when the secretary has made mistakes, and why would the boss even need a secretary when all he had to do was will the letter into existence like the 10 commandments
When debating a creationist one has to use analogies that he can identify with! You missed my point!What ten commandments? The only ones that were ever seen by anyone other than Moses were remakes by Moses after the originals were supposedly smashed in a violent rage by Moses when he came down from that mountain to find everyone worshipping that calf. Or something like that.
Turkana Boy
So no then. OK. As far as the transition business that is 100% in your head. Still doing the Quixote thing I see...An anatomically modern human? No. Transitional between modern humans and basal apes? Yes.
Shouldn't an evolutionary transition between modern humans and our common ancestor with apes have a mixture of basal ape and modern human features?
Or should they, as Astridhere keeps alluding to, be identical to modern humans?
Do you really think that the theory of evolution has a chimp-like species giving birth to a whole generation that is identical to modern humans? Do you?
No I admit you have no way. I do.Read slower. He didn't say that the writers weren't inspired by some ghost. He merely said that the writers were humans and wrote the Bible using physical methods and tools.
But at least you've admitted that we've no way of verifying that indeed the Bible was inspired by any deity.
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?