• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Detecting Design in Biology Using the Scientific Method

I'm just giving the same answer you gave about the Darwin scammers and abiogenesis.

Not at all. Evolutionary scientists ADMIT that there are still questions to be answered and “working on it” is how science is done, but they have EVIDENCE for their theories and they don’t just state them and claim that’s the end of it, like ID supporters do. I have repeatedly asked you to “go into the weeds” a bit about so-called ID theory, but you absolutely refuse to discuss it in any depth at all, such as to show who or what the “intelligent designer” is, and immediately pivot to evolution denial. Dozens, probably hundreds, of peer reviews papers are written each year regarding evolution. That’s how science is done, telling about research. On the other hand, there is ZERO research into ID. There is the watchmaker analogy, AND THAT’S IT!
So I’ll try again. Who or what is the “intelligent designer”?
 
Not at all. Evolutionary scientists ADMIT that there are still questions to be answered and “working on it” is how science is done, but they have EVIDENCE for their theories and they don’t just state them and claim that’s the end of it, like ID supporters do. I have repeatedly asked you to “go into the weeds” a bit about so-called ID theory, but you absolutely refuse to discuss it in any depth at all, such as to show who or what the “intelligent designer” is, and immediately pivot to evolution denial. Dozens, probably hundreds, of peer reviews papers are written each year regarding evolution. That’s how science is done, telling about research. On the other hand, there is ZERO research into ID. There is the watchmaker analogy, AND THAT’S IT!
So I’ll try again. Who or what is the “intelligent designer”?
What experiments have shown evidence that life was generated sponteneously from non-living matter?
 
What experiments have shown evidence that life was generated sponteneously from non-living matter?

Do you want to talk about evolution, per se, of do you want to talk about the beginning of life on this planet? You keep changing the goalposts instead of answering MY questions. Why do YOU always get to ask the questions instead of answering mine?
 
Do you want to talk about evolution, per se, of do you want to talk about the beginning of life on this planet? You keep changing the goalposts instead of answering MY questions. Why do YOU always get to ask the questions instead of answering mine?
Evolution could not have started "per se" without life beginning somehow.

Not to mention the devolopment of sexual selection from asexually reproducing species.

How'd that happen?
 
Back
Top Bottom