Evolution or not?

[watsup]

Quote Originally Posted by Sherlock Holmes:
“Don't start trying to defend evolution now, Valery is absolutely justified in saying what he said, any honest person who's looked carefully into this will agree, its a sham, BS.

Most advocates for evolution that I've run into, know absolutely nothing about the many huge problems faced by the "theory" they always dwell on the stuff that reinforces their beliefs, they place a huge amount of trust too in authority.”



Yes, it is correct that we place a huge amount of trust in modern day science and its peer review methods because it allows any theory developed by any scientist to be examined by other scientists in a worldwide basis as to its accuracy. What else could you possibly ask for in terms of trying to find the facts of the natural world.
And you are welcome to delve into the “huge problems” that you claim in the well-developed SCIENTIFIC FACT of evolution as supported by in-depth theory based on a multitude of geologic and other evidence.
Come to think of it, this probably should be a thread of itself, and I will make it so.

 

[Dragonfly]

Don't start trying to defend evolution now, Valery is absolutely justified in saying what he said, any honest person who's looked carefully into this will agree, its a sham, BS.

Evolution is a sham? It's BS?

Most advocates for evolution that I've run into, know absolutely nothing about the many huge problems faced by the "theory" they always dwell on the stuff that reinforces their beliefs, they place a huge amount of trust too in authority.

How's this edit read to you?

Most advocates for creation that I've run into, know absolutely nothing about the many huge problems faced by the "theory" they always dwell on the stuff that reinforces their beliefs, they place a huge amount of trust too in authority.

Holds water too doesn't it?

 

[watsup]

Evolutionary claims are littered with beliefs and assumptions, this is hardly a controversial thing to say, I'd expect a self described scholar to be aware of this.

For example it is believed that the fossil record is "gappy" because fossilization is rare, this is a belief (not unreasonable) because there's no evidence that the gaps are not due to some other cause.

It's also believed that sexual reproducing organisms "evolved" from asexually reproducing organisms, no evidence or testable theory here, just a belief, faith.

You are making an awful lot of absolute statements, but not providing any back up for them. What causes the gaps if not the rarity of fossilization, and where did sexual reproducing organisms come from, in your estimation? And the fossil record is indeed evidence.

 

[watsup]

So you don't believe them?

You can't prove that the fossil record is "gappy" because conditions for fossilization are rare, especially when we are told they must be rare because the record is very "gappy"!

So the gaps prove the rarity and the rarity is proved by there being gaps - FFS!

Not true. Scientists have studied the conditions under which fossils can be preserved, and that is what has shown why they are so rare.

 

[rickc]

Quote Originally Posted by Sherlock Holmes:
“Don't start trying to defend evolution now, Valery is absolutely justified in saying what he said, any honest person who's looked carefully into this will agree, its a sham, BS.

Most advocates for evolution that I've run into, know absolutely nothing about the many huge problems faced by the "theory" they always dwell on the stuff that reinforces their beliefs, they place a huge amount of trust too in authority.”



Yes, it is correct that we place a huge amount of trust in modern day science and its peer review methods because it allows any theory developed by any scientist to be examined by other scientists in a worldwide basis as to its accuracy. What else could you possibly ask for in terms of trying to find the facts of the natural world.
And you are welcome to delve into the “huge problems” that you claim in the well-developed SCIENTIFIC FACT of evolution as supported by in-depth theory based on a multitude of geologic and other evidence.
Come to think of it, this probably should be a thread of itself, and I will make it so.

Oh my God

Back to the."Scopes Monkey Trials"

Religion dumbs down people.worse than Faux News

 

[watsup]

Oh my God

Back to the."Scopes Monkey Trials"

Religion dumbs down people.worse than Faux News

It's circular with Faux News and the fundies.

 

[Daisy]

Quote Originally Posted by Sherlock Holmes:
“Don't start trying to defend evolution now, Valery is absolutely justified in saying what he said, any honest person who's looked carefully into this will agree, its a sham, BS.

Most advocates for evolution that I've run into, know absolutely nothing about the many huge problems faced by the "theory" they always dwell on the stuff that reinforces their beliefs, they place a huge amount of trust too in authority.”



Yes, it is correct that we place a huge amount of trust in modern day science and its peer review methods because it allows any theory developed by any scientist to be examined by other scientists in a worldwide basis as to its accuracy. What else could you possibly ask for in terms of trying to find the facts of the natural world.
And you are welcome to delve into the “huge problems” that you claim in the well-developed SCIENTIFIC FACT of evolution as supported by in-depth theory based on a multitude of geologic and other evidence.
Come to think of it, this probably should be a thread of itself, and I will make it so.

You have your faith and I have mine...in Jehovah God...glad to see you admit science requires. trust/faith...

 

[iguanaman]

You have your faith and I have mine...in Jehovah God...glad to see you admit science requires. trust/faith...

I suggest you take your Bible as an allegory, not real events. That is what the enlightened do. It is pointless to pit science against an ancient compendium of folk tales and and other stories stolen from earlier religions. Just stick to God creating the "big bang" and leave the rest to science.

The Catholic Church no longer teaches creationism — the belief that God created the world in six days as described in the Bible — and says that the account in the book of Genesis is an allegory for the way God created the world.

God was behind Big Bang, universe no accident: Pope - Reuters

 

[watsup]

Like I said I am not inclined to believe claims that are not supported by credible evidence, as soon as one holds up evolutionary claims to the same standards of evidence we expect in other arenas, the crack begin to appear.

The fossil record is one of the most oft mentioned "proofs" of evolution, yet incredibly it is highly discontinuous the very opposite of what Darwin expected we'd find.

The discontinuity is "explained" by claiming that fossilization is rare and require conditions to be just right and so on.

Then when asked to show that the process really is rare, the discontinuous nature of the record is held up as evidence for this supposed rarity.

What if fossilization was not rare? then the discontinuities would have to be due to something else and would undermine claims that the fossil record "supports evolution".

I'll tell you I'm quite confident that I do really know what I'm talking about but if it makes you feel better to think otherwise then go ahead.

How on Earth would we know what you are talking about since you have not made any POSITIVE claims in regard to how you think that life has come to its present form on this particular planet. Until you do, we are trying to debate with a ghost, and that never works.

Just so you know, negating the solid science of evolution in no way supports any claims that you might make in regards to how life has come to its present form. You have to provide a claim and show evidence that it is correct. Can you do that?

 

[watsup]

You have your faith and I have mine...in Jehovah God...glad to see you admit science requires. trust/faith...

You are once again misrepresenting what I said. It's too bad that you have to constantly strawman my statements to make them say what you want them to say rather than what I actually said. No wonder people consider you so terrible at debate.

 

[watsup]

I suggest you take your Bible as an allegory, not real events. That is what the enlightened do. It is pointless to pit science against an ancient compendium of folk tales and and other stories stolen from earlier religions. Just stick to God creating the "big bang" and leave the rest to science.



God was behind Big Bang, universe no accident: Pope - Reuters

Unfortunately, the Pope is not infallible with respect to science.

 

[Daisy]

I suggest you take your Bible as an allegory, not real events. That is what the enlightened do. It is pointless to pit science against an ancient compendium of folk tales and and other stories stolen from earlier religions. Just stick to God creating the "big bang" and leave the rest to science.



God was behind Big Bang, universe no accident: Pope - Reuters

Really? So, how did Jesus view the creation account? You can find the answer in Matthew 19:4-6...what about Luke’s Gospel account which traces Jesus’ genealogy all the way back to Adam...Luke 3:23-38...if the root-stock of this family tree were mythological, how firm would that have made Jesus’ claim that he was the Messiah, born in the line of David?...Matthew 1:1...Luke said that he had “traced all things from the start with accuracy" so clearly, he believed the creation account in Genesis.​..Luke 1:3...to undermine belief in the creation account in Genesis is to undermine the very foundations of the Christian faith...evolutionary theory and the teachings of Christ are incompatible...

 

[Daisy]

You are once again misrepresenting what I said. It's too bad that you have to constantly strawman my statements to make them say what you want them to say rather than what I actually said. No wonder people consider you so terrible at debate.

I referred to you own word...trust...trust requires faith...

 

[watsup]

Really? So, how did Jesus view the creation account? You can find the answer in Matthew 19:4-6...what about Luke’s Gospel account which traces Jesus’ genealogy all the way back to Adam...Luke 3:23-38...if the root-stock of this family tree were mythological, how firm would that have made Jesus’ claim that he was the Messiah, born in the line of David?...Matthew 1:1...Luke said that he had “traced all things from the start with accuracy" so clearly, he believed the creation account in Genesis.​..Luke 1:3...to undermine belief in the creation account in Genesis is to undermine the very foundations of the Christian faith...evolutionary theory and the teachings of Christ are incompatible...

That's not what the Pope says, and he is the direct descendant of Peter, whom Jesus appointed as "the rock" upon which the Church would be built.

 

[Daisy]

That's not what the Pope says, and he is the direct descendant of Peter, whom Jesus appointed as "the rock" upon which the Church would be built.

I don't follow heretics...

 

[watsup]

I referred to you own word...trust...trust requires faith...

Not true. Not in science. Only in "faith". Once gain you are trying to conflate different definitions of the same word together, which is dishonest to do.

 

[watsup]

I don't follow heretics...

Peter was appointed by Jesus as "the rock". That is in the Bible. And the heritage of those words have been handed down through the millennia to the Pope of the Roman Catholic Church.

 

[RAMOSS]

You have your faith and I have mine...in Jehovah God...glad to see you admit science requires. trust/faith...

There is a huge difference between faith a religious book is right, and trust in modern science due to the fact it produces objective and tangible results that can be replicated. So, what you did is 1) Commit a straw man because you misrepresented his position and 2) Used the logical fallacy of equivocation for faith.

 

[iguanaman]

Really? So, how did Jesus view the creation account? You can find the answer in Matthew 19:4-6...what about Luke’s Gospel account which traces Jesus’ genealogy all the way back to Adam...Luke 3:23-38...if the root-stock of this family tree were mythological, how firm would that have made Jesus’ claim that he was the Messiah, born in the line of David?...Matthew 1:1...Luke said that he had “traced all things from the start with accuracy" so clearly, he believed the creation account in Genesis.​..Luke 1:3...to undermine belief in the creation account in Genesis is to undermine the very foundations of the Christian faith...evolutionary theory and the teachings of Christ are incompatible...

Come on. I gave you an "out" that lets you join the 21st century and you want to make it harder for yourself? If it is good enough for the Pope it should be for you too. But you are right. Science has totally proved that the creation myth is just that. There is no arguing with DNA. We evolved on Earth from other similar mammals and we are related to all the creatures on Earth too. Why is that so distressing to you?

 

[Daisy]

Not true. Not in science. Only in "faith". Once gain you are trying to conflate different definitions of the same word together, which is dishonest to do.

You are the one being dishonest, as usual...:roll:

trust
firm belief in the reliability, truth, ability, or strength of someone or something.

trust definition - Google Search

 

[Daisy]

Peter was appointed by Jesus as "the rock". That is in the Bible. And the heritage of those words have been handed down through the millennia to the Pope of the Roman Catholic Church.

No, he was not...Jesus himself is the rock the Christian congregation is built on, no one else...1 Peter 2:4-8; 1 Corinthians 3:11; 10:4...

 

[watsup]

You are the one being dishonest, as usual...:roll:


trust definition - Google Search

You said that trust required faith. Nowhere in the definition that you offered does it use the word "faith". Psychological projection as regards the word "dishonest".

 

[Daisy]

Come on. I gave you an "out" that lets you join the 21st century and you want to make it harder for yourself? If it is good enough for the Pope it should be for you too. But you are right. Science has totally proved that the creation myth is just that. There is no arguing with DNA. We evolved on Earth from other similar mammals and we are related to all the creatures on Earth too. Why is that so distressing to you?

You wasted your time...

 

[Daisy]

You said that trust required faith. Nowhere in the definition that you offered does it use the word "faith". Psychological projection as regards the word "dishonest".

:roll:

 

[watsup]

You wasted your time...

We pretty much all waste our time trying to talk reason and logic to Elvira. She prefers "faith", whatever that is.