onceforgivennowfree

[MarsCydonia]

Yes you have faith that dinosaurs evolved into birds saying we have very good reason to believe they did,this is a faith statement but I want to see it demonstrated that it can happen. Demonstrate it,would'nt you like to see it demonstrated?Should'nt scientists by now have demonstrated it if it is true?Do you just believe what they say?There are other explanations based on the evidence,it in noway proves dinosaurs evolved into birds unless you look at the evidence like that.But it cannot be demonstrated and is believed by faith and assumptions.

We can demonstrate it. Equovication of faith never makes a good argument. We have seen new species emerge, we understand how they emerge and we can test the relation of new species, that we can observe, from old through DNA and phylogenetics. That is in no way faith.

What you are saying is that we cannot apply what we see today because it happened in the past. That would be analogous to saying that although we can test gravity today and demonstrate that people on cannot fly on their own, it is faith to infer that people could not fly in the past.

However that is exactly the difference between science and creationism. Science says that we have good reason to infer that people could not fly in the past while creationism would say that science has faith people could not fly in the past and that since science cannot demonstrate people couldnt fly in the past, they could have. One is reasonable, the other is not.

Do you believe everything you read?Where is the evidence and why can't they demonstrate it?I want to see a demonstration and if their books were true they could demonstrate it but they haven't.They are interesting theory books that have not and cannot be demonstrated,it is science fiction.

But again, they can demonstrate it. Simply because you reject the evidence for a preferred magical and unreasonable explanation does not mean they cannot demonstrate it, it is simply means that you are closed to the possiblity of being convinced.

It is not as simple as that,you can believe it all you want to but let's see a demonstration of fully functional living life without them touching the matter at all.Man cannot create something and then deny a creator is needed when he created it.And alot of times what man is able to produce is a weaker version of the original like dogs but we take care of them to compensate.Science is far from being able to demonstrate it,so there is no reason to think God is not needed.You are being tricked by science fiction and choosing to believe it by faith.

This does not follow logically. Men can create something, a beach, then reasonable men can certainly explain that a beach can arise by entirely naturalistic means without a creator. There is no reason that a god was needed until you can demonstrate evidence for that god and for why a god would be required.

Yes there is a need for a creator as none of what you think can happen can be demonstrated by any scientist.

That is a fallacy known as an argument from personal incredulity. You do not believe it could happen by naturalistic means so by default a god is required? Why a god? Why not gods? Why not another magical origin?

If evolution is a faith, is not just as equally valid as creationism? Are you simply picking creationism as your preferred magical explanation with no more good reason than those who pick evolution?

However, as we repeatedly explained, we do have good reasons to accept evolution: we have evidence, we have explanatory power, we have predictive abilities. Creationism offers none of these.

We do not have to demonstrate "God did it" at all like you think all we've got to do is let you get up in front of a group of people and state that it can all happen without God,you'll be made to look silly with no way to demonstrate it,people will think you are crazy thinking such non-sense. God is the default position until it can be demonstrated otherwise, and it can't,and is a pipe dream that atheists will never see demonstrated.You are being played by science fiction and fail to see it.

How is god the default positition? Which god? Why not another magical means? No, in science, the null hypothesis is the default position. If you believe everything until they are demonstrated to not be true, then you are force to believe contradictory claims until they are proven not true. Subscribing to every god should thus be your default position, as should believing in aliens, leprechauns, invisible pink unicorns, etc. However, it is clear that it is not what you do, you subscribe to a preferred magical

So no, the reasonable position is the null hypothesis: do not believe until you have evidence to believe and so, as Dragan Glas stated, you have to proved the existence of your god.

I have no reason to reject God or the bible,they are much much easier to believe than what you do.

I have no good reason to believe he exists. "Easier to believe" should be that which require easy evidence and an extraordinary claim like god exists and created everything requires extraordinary evidence.

If you want, there's another discussion concerning the existence of god, feel free to present your evidence there. Or because you believe in one particular god over all the others, feel free to present the evidence disproving every other gods.

 

[abelcainsbrother]

I'll deal with the rest of your reply later, for now I want to address this:

We do not have to demonstrate "God did it" at all like you think all we've got to do is let you get up in front of a group of people and state that it can all happen without God,you'll be made to look silly with no way to demonstrate it,people will think you are crazy thinking such non-sense. God is the default position until it can be demonstrated otherwise, and it can't,and is a pipe dream that atheists will never see demonstrated.You are being played by science fiction and fail to see it.

If someone makes a claim, the onus is on them to prove it.

You're making a claim throughout your reply that "God did it" - prove it.

I can give more proof than you can for God creating it than you can give to show it can happen on its own without God.You prove God is not needed like you believe.Demonstrate matter coming together on its own and forming itself into fully functional living life if you think God is not needed.You have faith God is not needed so demonstrate it to us how fully functional living life life can be produced by nature and the laws in the universe or how else you might think it can happen without the need for a creator.I know you can't and believe it by faith.




[

quote]I have no reason to reject God or the bible,they are much much easier to believe than what you do.

This is an argument from incredulity.

[/quote]

Just because you find it unbelievable doesn't mean it isn't true.

Same to you.

 

[Rumraket]

I can give more proof than you can for God creating it than you can give to show it can happen on its own without God.

Then do it.

Demonstrate instantaneous divine creation of any single thing. The tiniest thing will do. Make god create a grain of sand with his magic.

 

[abelcainsbrother]

I can give more proof than you can for God creating it than you can give to show it can happen on its own without God.

Then do it.

Demonstrate instantaneous divine creation of any single thing. The tiniest thing will do. Make god create a grain of sand with his magic.

You demonstrate it happening naturally fully functional living life. Go ahead and stop stalling with your science fiction.After I show that you cannot demonstrate it then I will provide evidence for God creating it.And we will see who has the most evidence to back up their faith. Go ahead with your science fiction demonstrate matter coming together on its own and forming itself into fully functional living life,without touching or tinkering with the matter at all.

 

[Rumraket]

Then do it.

Demonstrate instantaneous divine creation of any single thing. The tiniest thing will do. Make god create a grain of sand with his magic.

You demonstrate it happening naturally fully functional living life.

We don't know how life originated and we don't claim to know. We don't assume anything or believe anything, we just simply admit that we don't know how life originated.

Go ahead and stop stalling with your science fiction.

What fiction? I just told you I don't believe we know how life originated and we don't claim to.

After I show that you cannot demonstrate it then I will provide evidence for God creating it.

Ok you win, I can't create life.

Now make god create life with his magic. I expect to see a big international announcement on the news soon. How long should I wait?

I expect to see something more than "I don't know either". You said you had superior evidence. Show me.

 

[Rumraket]

Is the magic coming along well? Did you record god divinely create something? A cat? A mouse? A beetle? Tiny ant? Dust mite? A single fucking bacterium?

Where's the magic?

 

[MarsCydonia]

I can give more proof than you can for God creating it than you can give to show it can happen on its own without God.

You said you had superior evidence. Show me..

I suggest we move this line of discussion to the "Gilbo - Does God Exist?" thread as the origin of life is quite another subject than how the biodiversity of life came to be, the original subject of this discussion, and OnceForgivenNowFree and Baggi have already enough bad excuses to avoid addressing the topic.

 

[Rumraket]

Agreed.

 

[abelcainsbrother]

Demonstrate instantaneous divine creation of any single thing. The tiniest thing will do. Make god create a grain of sand with his magic.

You demonstrate it happening naturally fully functional living life.[/quote]
We don't know how life originated and we don't claim to know. We don't assume anything or believe anything, we just simply admit that we don't know how life originated. [/quote]

Go ahead and stop stalling with your science fiction.

What fiction? I just told you I don't believe we know how life originated and we don't claim to.

After I show that you cannot demonstrate it then I will provide evidence for God creating it.

Ok you win, I can't create life.

Now make god create life with his magic. I expect to see a big international announcement on the news soon. How long should I wait?

I expect to see something more than "I don't know either". You said you had superior evidence. Show me.

[/quote][/quote][/quote]
You just implied you did.You see there is no reason to reject "God did it" based on what science says.Be careful implying it can happen without God because you're only going to make yourself look bad,not us who believe "God did it". We don't have to prove "God did it" like I said earlier because we'll just expose the science fiction out in the world and it will hurt the credibility of whoever is pushing science fiction as truth.I just said I have more evidence that God created but there is no need to present it right now. I've made my point.

 

[MarsCydonia]

After I show that you cannot demonstrate it then I will provide evidence for God creating it.

.I just said I have more evidence that God created but there is no need to present it right now. I've made my point.

So you are a liar.

And I won't even dismantle the rest of what you wrote as you completely ignored my first reply (conveniently ignoring what is inconvenient as creationists do). I just wanted to point out that you said you would provide evidence then said you would not:

You are a liar.

 

[abelcainsbrother]

After I show that you cannot demonstrate it then I will provide evidence for God creating it.

.I just said I have more evidence that God created but there is no need to present it right now. I've made my point.

So you are a liar.

And I won't even dismantle the rest of what you wrote as you completely ignored my first reply (conveniently ignoring what is inconvenient as creationists do). I just wanted to point out that you said you would provide evidence then said you would not:

You are a liar.

Sorry but your post above was just preaching to the choir.I did not ignore you but was responding to other people at the time.You were just declaring evolution true above which is a lot like a preacher declaring the bible true.Also I didn't lie.I did not say I could prove God exists,I said I could give more evidence that God created it than the science fiction some people believe and I can.

 

[MarsCydonia]

Sorry but your post above was just preaching to the choir.I did not ignore you but was responding to other people at the time.You were just declaring evolution true above which is a lot like a preacher declaring the bible true.

Yet you just ignored my again because you did not address a single of the points I raised. No, I did not do anything like a preacher and I explained exactly why. You are equivocating again. You cannot even demonstrate what you claim, just assert it, declaring it to be true, like a preacher.

Also I didn't lie.I did not say I could prove God exists,I said I could give more evidence that God created it than the science fiction some people believe and I can.

You just won't do it after you said you would. That makes you a liar.

 

[Darkprophet232]

Now that we've established abelcainsbrother is both a liar and has no intention of having a discussion, may I recommend we all ignore him? Putting him on your foes list would really helps out if you have the urge to call him on his bullshit.

 

[abelcainsbrother]

The truth I speak hurts you people.Instead of actually realizing that I'm telling the truth,it gets you angry.If you know about evolution nothing I have said is untruthful.Evolution is believed by faith and assumptions and no matter how much you believe dinosaurs evolved into birds,none of the evidence confirms it can even happen,they expect you to assume it will lead to life evolving but there is no way to know for sure it will based on the evidence presented.It is not my fault evolution goes back so far but it makes evolution a faith based belief.There are plenty of other areas of science where the evidence backs up the hypotheisis but not with evolution.You must assume that because certain life can adapt you must assume it will lead to life evolving.

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

God is the default position until it can be demonstrated...

:facepalm:

No, a god(s) is not the default.

Birds are totally different than dinosaurs yet you claim dinosaurs evolved into birds.I want to see a demonstration like you teach.

Which belongs to a bird, and which belongs to a dinosaur and why?

...demonstrate...

The truth I speak hurts you people.Instead of actually realizing that I'm telling the truth,it gets you angry.

How old are you?

However, I do agree that all this irrelevance created by abelcainsbrother should be moved to another thread. MarsCydonia suggested this thread, and I agree.

 

[Isotelus]

Birds are totally different than dinosaurs yet you claim dinosaurs evolved into birds. I want to see a demonstration like you teach.

Thought I would repeat this in case it wasn't clear enough.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2011.02349.x/pdf

This is a paper by Dr. Phil Senter that uses "taxon correlation", a model that measures the morphological resemblance between taxa. This is a method developed by creationists to arrange animals into groups of created kinds; aka baraminology.

The paper used this creationist model to demonstrate that birds group with dinosaurs. How do you account for this?


Edit: just saw hwin's post above. My apologies for posting here rather than the other thread, if that is indeed where it's going to move.

 

[abelcainsbrother]

God is the default position until it can be demonstrated...

:facepalm:

No, a god(s) is not the default.

Birds are totally different than dinosaurs yet you claim dinosaurs evolved into birds.I want to see a demonstration like you teach.

[quote

]Which belongs to a bird, and which belongs to a dinosaur and why?[/quote

]

"]...demonstrate...[/quote

]

You are looking at the fossils from an evolution perspective but what they tell us is a designer uses the same bone structures to create his creatures.We see this similarity looking at the different skeletons and it is evidence for a designer like a trade mark.It does not in no way prove dinosaurs evolved into birds.It is up to sciece to demonstrate that life can evolve like a dinosaur become a bird.

The truth I speak hurts you people.Instead of actually realizing that I'm telling the truth,it gets you angry.

How old are you?

I'm old enough to know evolution is believed by faith.


However, I do agree that all this irrelevance created by abelcainsbrother should be moved to another thread. MarsCydonia suggested this thread, and I agree.

Why? I contributed my views about this debate and was questioned about my views and I made my point.

 

[Rumraket]

You just implied you did.You see there is no reason to reject "God did it" based on what science says.

I agree, that's why I don't reject "god did it" based on what science says.

I reject "god did it" because of it's total lack of evidential justification. You religionists have had 5000 fucking years to come up with something substantive, something concrete and demonstrable. But you have nothing. Squat, zero, zilch.

The density of evidence in favor of god's supernatural magic operating in the world, is found somewhere between philosophical non-being and intergalactic super-void vacuum.

Be careful implying it can happen without God because you're only going to make yourself look bad

So far, everything we have seen happening has evidently happened without requiring god to make it so. When I receive my mail, it's not god delivering it, it's the mail man. When I get milk and bread in the supermarket, it isn't god making it, it's farmers and factories. When I throw a rock up into the air and it comes down again, it's gravity doing it, zero evidence of god.

5000 years and still you have nothing.

,not us who believe "God did it".

You who believe "god did it" already look bad, apparently almost none of you have sufficient critical faculties to figure out how to operate the fucking quote function of the forum without creating an unreadable mess.

Seriously, what is it with religious nut-bags and forum quote functions? Do they live in caves? Get out of the fucking bronze-age.

We don't have to prove "God did it"

Yes you do. Get to work.

If I'm required to "prove" evolution and the origin of life through natural means, then you are required to prove instantaneous magical creation with divine magic. Otherwise you are guilty of having a double standard where you submit yourself to less strict rules than people you disagree with. Even within your own religious faith(I'm assuming you're a christian), this would mean you're guilty of the sin of hypocrisy. You should take your own faith more seriously and remove the beam from your eye instead of focusing on the speck in mine.

like I said earlier because we'll just expose the science fiction out in the world and it will hurt the credibility of whoever is pushing science fiction as truth.

You're welcome to do that. So far all you have are contra-factual blind assertions. No exposure of "science fiction" and zero actual demonstration of magic from you have been forthcoming.

I just said I have more evidence that God created but there is no need to present it right now. I've made my point.

Let me translate that into slightly different but more accurate words:
"Bla bla bla you have to prove everything to my personal satisfaction at an unreasonably high standard, while I have to do absolutely nothing, mostly because I've become aware that nothing is what I have."

 

[abelcainsbrother]

Rumraket,

I agree, that's why I don't reject "god did it" based on what science says.

I reject "god did it" because of it's total lack of evidential justification. You religionists have had 5000 fucking years to come up with something substantive, something concrete and demonstrable. But you have nothing. Squat, zero, zilch.

The density of evidence in favor of god's supernatural magic operating in the world, is found somewhere between philosophical non-being and intergalactic super-void vacuum.

Well you were the one implying it not me.I know you don't want to believe God created it but at the same time we cannot go around implying science gives us a reason to reject "God did it" without real science behind it.I do not see how you can even imagine how we could have this universe and life without a creator,you atleast need aliens,flying spaghetti monster,higher power,God,etc to have this universe and life.How you could imagine it could create itself naturally is as foreign to me as you probably feel about "God did it".

So far, everything we have seen happening has evidently happened without requiring god to make it so. When I receive my mail, it's not god delivering it, it's the mail man. When I get milk and bread in the supermarket, it isn't god making it, it's farmers and factories. When I throw a rock up into the air and it comes down again, it's gravity doing it, zero evidence of god.

5000 years and still you have nothing.

You going about life has nothing to do with it. Yes we actually have solid evidence we can observe when it comes to gravity.

You who believe "god did it" already look bad, apparently almost none of you have sufficient critical faculties to figure out how to operate the fucking quote function of the forum without creating an unreadable mess.

Seriously, what is it with religious nut-bags and forum quote functions? Do they live in caves? Get out of the fucking bronze-age.

I admit I'm having trouble posting but it doesn't make me wrong.

Let me translate that into slightly different but more accurate words:
"Bla bla bla you have to prove everything to my personal satisfaction at an unreasonably high standard, while I have to do absolutely nothing, mostly because I've become aware that nothing is what I have."

You are getting angry.

 

[abelcainsbrother]

Yes you do. Get to work.

If I'm required to "prove" evolution and the origin of life through natural means, then you are required to prove instantaneous magical creation with divine magic. Otherwise you are guilty of having a double standard where you submit yourself to less strict rules than people you disagree with. Even within your own religious faith(I'm assuming you're a christian), this would mean you're guilty of the sin of hypocrisy. You should take your own faith more seriously and remove the beam from your eye instead of focusing on the speck in mine.

Not if you are pushing science fiction as truth.The people who do it will just make theirself look bad because they won't be able to demonstrate it and then people will realize it and their credibility will be shot.Yes I am a Christian but I'm not a young earth creationist, I'm an old earth Gap theory creationist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tO1GEG4HeRI For you.