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.
Those instances are imaginary so everyone should reject them.That's like saying that no one rejects Christianity if they truly understand it because that would be irrational. Or better yet, that no one would reject ID if they really understood it because that would be completely irrational.
Oh they have, ask the most eminent pseudoscientist that ever lived: Dawkins! Apparently something that is not even a proper theory is a"s close to being a fact as is possible to get!" If that doesn't mean proven true what does?
its a fact you say that .. and thus ends the list of factsWhat a strange thing for you to say when you know nothing about evolution, I say that because if you knew about evolution you would not say it is not true, you may not like it but evolution BTW is a fact.
Am I right in thinking that if it doesn't happen instantly you feel justified in not believing it?None of those things establish the theory of evolution. A new species emerging is different, as a creationist would argue, from a whole new family of organisms emerging which are radically different. And yes, that would take many years to observe, it doesn't happen instantly, which is my point.
in your extreme biased opinion only .Correction. Men said both things....
.
No, but seeing something in a lab, over whatever timeframe, is more convincing then making educated guesses about fossil records and genome similarities from the distant past.Am I right in thinking that if it doesn't happen instantly you feel justified in not believing it?
Oh, in the lab...?
Do you mean like the Endogenous Retroviral evidence we can observe in the lab....?
Do you mean like the fusion that took place in human chromosome 2 that we can observe in the lab...?
Do you mean like the cases of new species having emerged, that we have observed, both in the field and in the lab....?
That kind of science......?
.
None of those things establish the theory of evolution.
A new species emerging is different, as a creationist would argue, from a whole new family of organisms emerging which are radically different.
And yes, that would take many years to observe, it doesn't happen instantly, which is my point.
You not accepting evolution means nothing but teaching children to reject evolution is unforgivable and should be considered to be abuse.its a fact you say that .. and thus ends the list of facts
Evidence that actually proves evolution I have not seen.They are all examples of something that you said doesn't exist....evidence we can observe in a lab. And there is more.
Well ultimately we don't know. We don't know what level of genus is appropriate, the fact remains however that these large changes are not being observed.Except that no two of you can agree on that. A creationist claims that new species cannot form. When it is demonstrated that they do, they change the requirement to the level of genus. Now, we see you demanding that "whole new families" should be observed appearing....!
Get your own house in order before you start questioning the genuine work being done in this field....!
Well yes that's my point. It's detective work, not lab science. It's investigating a crime scene, without any witnesses. Clearly this doesn't hold up to the same level of truth that observing something in a lab would.I am so glad that people like you aren't responsible for solving crime.....!
yes and desiring to murder me off the planet to silence me for it and make yourself happy , is of course in your mind "not " abusive at all .. -You not accepting evolution means nothing but teaching children to reject evolution is unforgivable and should be considered to be abuse.
Instead of facing the truth head on a Christians instinct is to lash out and yell.in your extreme biased opinion only .
in my extrem biased opinion atheists dont exist ..(& how did you get past my ignore list ?)back on it you go
Wrong. There is a difference between a "fact" and "proof".
You claim to have a scientific background. With such junior high school errors in understanding, I very much doubt it.....
.
Not at all, if you decide to believe something it's OK, why not allow children to enjoy the same freedom to choose for themselves as you had? of were you not given the choice?yes and desiring to murder me off the planet to silence me for it and make yourself happy , is of course in your mind "not " abusive at all .. -
What would you classify evolution as if not a theory? I was under the impression most if not all of the scientific community classified it as a theory.As a practicising scientist, I never cease to be appalled at the errors in both science and philosophy such as Dawkins make.
And I am poking fun at all those like him, who let their atheist faith, get in the way of science.
He describes evolution as a "theory" it is not.
He describes abiogenesis as a "hypothesis" it is not.
He makes Errors of simple scientific definition - and he uses the word proven , of things which are not even supportable statements, so direct your remarks to him not me.
what freedom do you speak of ? the freedom to be herded into groups called schools like cattle and TOLD what is fact regardless of whether it is or not then socially bullied into submission to it ..- noo thats ,. not abusive at all .. -in your eyesNot at all, if you decide to believe something it's OK, why not allow children to enjoy the same freedom to choose for themselves as you had? of were you not given the choice?
I was obviously right because it sounds as if you were not afforded the freedom to choose for yourself.what freedom do you speak of ? the freedom to be herded into groups called schools like cattle and TOLD what is fact regardless of whether it is or not then socially bullied into submission to it ..- noo thats ,. not abusive at all .. -in your eyes
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?