Dragan Glas
Well-Known Member
Greetings,
My problem with what your claiming in your posts is that you do not appear to be taking any of the scientific evidence seriously when it disagrees with your beliefs.
You claimed to like science in a earlier post yet dismiss it when it threatens your belief in your "gap" theory, the bible and - of course - God.
Earlier, you claimed that science proved the Genesis account - but noted science said that life came from water whereas the bible says it came from land. And then you said that the science proves the bible true. Despite my pointing out this contradiction, you ignored it.
If you did respect science the way you claimed, then you should have put aside the bible and gone with the science. Instead, you ignore what the science said.
This is where you are being intellectually dishonest - you are cherry-picking (hijacking) science when it supports your belief in the bible but ignoring it when it disagrees with it.
The evidence doesn't support it.
Kindest regards,
James
Thank you for the acknowledgement, abelcainsbrother. I trust that, although we disagree, it doesn't mean that we need dislike each other.abelcainsbrother said:Thanks for your response even if you disagree with me.I have to say Dragan Glas is knowledgeable when it comes to biblical themes but really all that is going on is a denial of the Gap theory even when I provide evidence and they don't.I actually like the challenge Dragan Glas gives me about the Gap theory and as I get stumped here or there I will learn from it and will find a way to explain it later.Also about a Nobel prize? I am just trying to make a point when I say that I really don't believe that a Nobel prize would be won proving the bible true as science is focused on naturalism to explain things and will not allow the bible in the door but the Gap theory can seriously challenge evolution like no other theory,etc out there that I know of because it uses a lot of the evidence evolution uses for evidence and since there is no way to demonstrate a dinosaur could evolve into a bird the Gap theory would be more believable to people when all they can do is declare it happened but can provide no real evidence.Collecemall said:I'm not real smart so forgive me if I'm way off base but if you have all the evidence you say and think a nobel prize can be won then why aren't you busy writing up that study yourself? If a Nobel Prize is just sitting there waiting to be picked up I'd be all up on that if I were as confident as you appear to be.
Although if anyone here deserves a prize I would like to nominate Dragan Glas for it. The amount of patience he seems to have goes above and beyond anything any mortal could expect. There are others here who are worthy of mention but my memory is limited and names are still new to me. So forgive me not naming everyone. Myself I'm really starting to feel some empathy for Cain in his wanting to slay Able and I'm just reading. So hats off to you guys who can keep your composure.
If nothing else this is entertaining. I think it's at least plausible to think that's what he's going for.
We can look at the evidence they use to prove evolution true finches,salamanders,viruses,bacteria,frogs,fruit flies,etc and in every case no evolution happens,yet somehow they imagine it did eventhough the evidence does not bear this out and this actually proves natural selection is bunk because even when life is able to survive hostile environments and adapts to survive,it still remains what it was before showing us that environmental pressures still does not cause life to evolve.
Again this is based on the evidence used as proof and evidence that life evolves when all it does is prove life does not evolve,it reveals that there are limits to life even if life is able to adapt to survive.
My problem with what your claiming in your posts is that you do not appear to be taking any of the scientific evidence seriously when it disagrees with your beliefs.
You claimed to like science in a earlier post yet dismiss it when it threatens your belief in your "gap" theory, the bible and - of course - God.
Earlier, you claimed that science proved the Genesis account - but noted science said that life came from water whereas the bible says it came from land. And then you said that the science proves the bible true. Despite my pointing out this contradiction, you ignored it.
If you did respect science the way you claimed, then you should have put aside the bible and gone with the science. Instead, you ignore what the science said.
This is where you are being intellectually dishonest - you are cherry-picking (hijacking) science when it supports your belief in the bible but ignoring it when it disagrees with it.
You don't "know" the Gap theory to be right - you believe it is.abelcainsbrother said:It would be up to you to provide evidence to back it up like I have the Gap theory. You are just not going to change your mind about evolution and I can't make you but I know the Gap theory is true and I have provided evidence but you keep denying it. I can say the fossils coal and oil are evidence for a former world that perished because it is the kind of evidence you would expect if it were true.You denying it doesn't make it untrue.Mugnuts wrote:
I have a hypothesis that miniature people called Cobblepoe's exist. They are nocturnal and cannot be seen, because they can turn invisible at will. The Cobblepoe's can sustain themselves by absorbing the sweat from worn shoes with their ears, and can live forever this way. Everyone in the world has shoes therefore there is evidence for my hypothesis. This is further backed up by evidence that my shoes, and everyone else's shoes are dry by morning.
The evidence doesn't support it.
Kindest regards,
James