onceforgivennowfree

[Gnug215]

Hi abelcainsbrother,

You've written quite a bit already, but I want to deal with just one point from you:

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.

Since WHEN is God the "default position"??

What on earth would possess you to make such an absolute statement??

Well, you are tremendously, horribly wrong.

The "default position" is nature.

You don't deny that nature exists, do you?

Ever since humans started to find natural answers to natural phenomena, such as what created thunder and lightning, there has never been ANY other answer than "nature".
We have NEVER seen ANY evidence of outside intervention. We only see nature doing its thing.

Given that ALL the phenomena we have explained have had natural explanations, it is clear that every unexplained phenomenon we will encounter will in all likelihood have a natural explanation - even the very origin of nature and our natural existence. We have never found any phenomenon that has a supernatural or divine explanation. We only have natural explanations, and then questions that haven't been answered yet.

It's a matter of track record, and the track record says: Nature!

Now, what you're saying is that, well, here's this thing called evolution, and that just seems too damn complex to have a natural explanation, and I don't really understand how that could arise by natural causes, so it must be... God!!

So, what you are proposing is that all this complexity we see, our entire complex, grand, natural existence, this is so complex that in order to explain it, you decide to insert God into the picture? A God that, by all accounts is also tremendously complex. A God that, if some accounts are to be believed, is so all-powerful, all-present, all-knowing, that we can't even begin to imagine him. A God that from the sounds of it seems even MORE complex than our entire natural existence. (And a God that in some cases also has an entire realm beyond this one. One that is infinite, where all the souls (another complex component) of dead people live, where everything is good, where Angels also reside, and who knows what else.)

So basically, your answer to complexity is... more complexity?

And you come in here telling us that this is the "default position"??

What is more, you are telling us this with such arrogance and condescension, insulting not just us, but also the entire scientific community, which is fulled with people who are more knowledgeable and intelligent than you and I combined when it comes to these subjects.

In conclusion: I categorically reject your utterly unfounded notion that God is the "default position".

You are quite simply wrong!

 

[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

Actually you don't know what I want to believe, at all. You have zero clue. Don't you think I would like to think that I could go on living with people I love in a different life after I die, that there was some kind of real justice of balance when bad people behave badly, so they didn't really get away with it?

I think most people would find information like that welcoming. But some of us are also realists, we understand that we can't get everything we want. We understand that the only real good reason to believe in something is when there is good evidence to support it.

Magic, real divine magic is totally lacking in evidential support. So I simply cannot commit myself to that belief, no matter how much I would want to believe in some beautil idea about afterlives and cosmic love. I'm an adult, I have stopped telling myself fairy-tales.

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.

Here I can only repeat myself: 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.

I do not see how you can even imagine how we could have this universe and life without a creator

Why are you telling me about a peculiar failing in your capacity to imagine how something would work? That is an appeal to ignorance fallacy.

you atleast need aliens,flying spaghetti monster,higher power,God,etc to have this universe and life.

No I don't, I don't need explanations for everything. I would LIKE explanations for everything, and I like thinking about "how could it be?". But when I don't have answers, I don't just invent shit and start believing it just because it feels good. I actually CAN live with not knowing what the answer is. I can live with doubt and unsolved mysteries. I don't feel the need to plug holes in my knowledge and understanding with gods and magic. There are simply things we don't know, we don't have to just make shit up to satfisfy our desires for answers. This is part of becoming an adult too. Grow up.

How you could imagine it could create itself naturally is as foreign to me as you probably feel about "God did it".

Again I can only repeat myself. A failure in your ability to comprehend or explain something is not an issue I have any responsibility towards.

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.

What? Are you telling me god is the source of gravity? Great, show me that evidence.

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.

No but it does make you look bad, not me. I'm not the one engaging in trivially fallacious thinking while simultaneously failing to properly operate simple internet software. But hey, you seem to be improving in the latter regard, good for you. Maybe you can learn to think without committing streams of fallacies too.

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.

No, merely impatient with your constant misapprehensions and unsubstantiated assertions.

 

[Rumraket]

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.

What science fiction am I pushing as truth? Show me.

And the demonstrations that god's magical spells can create universes, stars, planets and living organisms. When will this take place?

 

[Dragan Glas]

Greetings,

Abelcainsbrother, I see you haven't attempted to prove "God did it".

Creationists tend to believe that "it's all relative" in science.

Do you accept there are absolute answers in science?

Kindest regards,

James

 

[MarsCydonia]

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

I am not getting angry, I am simply stating an observable fact: you said you would provide evidence and then you refuse to do it, that makes you a liar.

I am telling the truth when it comes to evolution. You say you are telling the truth when in comes to creationism. However, our truths are in opposition so how do we determine which one of us is actually saying something true? We do so by demonstrating it. I can demonstrate what I have been saying is true. You say that you are telling the truth and that you evidence for it but you have not demonstrated it and further said that you would not demonstrate it. Why are you hiding if what you say is true?

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.

Then provide evidence for the designer. Provide evidence that it is designed. It is when one thing to assert something, it is another entirely to demonstrate it.

It is up to sciece to demonstrate that life can evolve like a dinosaur become a bird.

And science did demonstrate it, you simply choose to ignore that this demonstration exists. You however, have not demonstrated anything about anything.

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

And what point was that?

 

[abelcainsbrother]

Hi abelcainsbrother,

You've written quite a bit already, but I want to deal with just one point from you:

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.

Since WHEN is God the "default position"??

What on earth would possess you to make such an absolute statement??

Well, you are tremendously, horribly wrong.

The "default position" is nature.

You don't deny that nature exists, do you?

Ever since humans started to find natural answers to natural phenomena, such as what created thunder and lightning, there has never been ANY other answer than "nature".
We have NEVER seen ANY evidence of outside intervention. We only see nature doing its thing.

Given that ALL the phenomena we have explained have had natural explanations, it is clear that every unexplained phenomenon we will encounter will in all likelihood have a natural explanation - even the very origin of nature and our natural existence. We have never found any phenomenon that has a supernatural or divine explanation. We only have natural explanations, and then questions that haven't been answered yet.

It's a matter of track record, and the track record says: Nature!

Now, what you're saying is that, well, here's this thing called evolution, and that just seems too damn complex to have a natural explanation, and I don't really understand how that could arise by natural causes, so it must be... God!!

So, what you are proposing is that all this complexity we see, our entire complex, grand, natural existence, this is so complex that in order to explain it, you decide to insert God into the picture? A God that, by all accounts is also tremendously complex. A God that, if some accounts are to be believed, is so all-powerful, all-present, all-knowing, that we can't even begin to imagine him. A God that from the sounds of it seems even MORE complex than our entire natural existence. (And a God that in some cases also has an entire realm beyond this one. One that is infinite, where all the souls (another complex component) of dead people live, where everything is good, where Angels also reside, and who knows what else.)

So basically, your answer to complexity is... more complexity?

And you come in here telling us that this is the "default position"??

What is more, you are telling us this with such arrogance and condescension, insulting not just us, but also the entire scientific community, which is fulled with people who are more knowledgeable and intelligent than you and I combined when it comes to these subjects.

In conclusion: I categorically reject your utterly unfounded notion that God is the "default position".

You are quite simply wrong!

There is propaganda in our society to try to get us to think like you do "nature did it" instead of "God did it" the problem is that it is promoted as scientific truth eventhough it cannot be demonstrated and it is designed to intentionally get people to reject God and to follow science fiction.Alot of people have fallen for it but the fact remains that God is still the default position because this is being promoted as truth when it is not.

Scientists can hypothesize any way they choose to but what they can't or shouldn't do is promote something that will never be proven and has not been demonstrated.It should anger you if you value the truth,whether you believe in God or not because nobody wants to be played a fool.It seems to me you think that because it rains and storms nature can produce life but this is not the case.

What is ignorant is to claim "nature did it" when you don't have all of the information or knowledge and to kick the can down the road hoping that science will one day validate your "nature did it" belief,this is just not the case.Nobody on the "God did it" side has to do anything when science fiction is being promoted as scientific truth because most people think rationally and realize that in our world things like universes and life are not created by nature,they are designed and the matter is formed into parts by a creator to build and create things.

 

[abelcainsbrother]

Greetings,

Abelcainsbrother, I see you haven't attempted to prove "God did it".

There is no need to now because I'm just dealing with opinions.

Creationists tend to believe that "it's all relative" in science.

Well I don't. I go on evidence to the best of my ability.

Do you accept there are absolute answers in science?

I actually do think there are established facts in science but evolution is not one of them,yet it is propped up even above real proven science.Like gravity I believe it is a scientific fact. I can pick up a rock and drop it and actually see evidence for it eventhough I can't see gravity,yet we must be told life evolves yet there is no evidence that has demonstrated it and we do not see it happen out in the real world around us.As a matter of fact we really see the opposite.

Kindest regards,

James

 

[Dragan Glas]

Greetings,

Greetings,

Abelcainsbrother, I see you haven't attempted to prove "God did it".

There is no need to now because I'm just dealing with opinions.

Would you not equate your own belief with an opinion?

Creationists tend to believe that "it's all relative" in science.

Well I don't. I go on evidence to the best of my ability.

That's a start at least.

The question is: what do you accept as evidence?

What evidence would lead you to accept evolution as an observed fact?

What evidence would lead you to accept evolution as an historical fact?

Do you accept there are absolute answers in science?

I actually do think there are established facts in science but evolution is not one of them,yet it is propped up even above real proven science.Like gravity I believe it is a scientific fact. I can pick up a rock and drop it and actually see evidence for it eventhough I can't see gravity,yet we must be told life evolves yet there is no evidence that has demonstrated it and we do not see it happen out in the real world around us.

From an earlier reply, where you mentioned wolves and dogs, do you only accept, what creationists call, "micro-" - rather than "macro-" - evolution?

In other words, "kinds"? - whatever that may mean to you, as different creationists appear to disagree on what exactly that is.

As a matter of fact we really see the opposite.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "the opposite".

Could you explain that, please?

Kindest regards,

James

 

[Dragan Glas]

Greetings,

There is propaganda in our society to try to get us to think like you do "nature did it" instead of "God did it" the problem is that it is promoted as scientific truth even though it cannot be demonstrated and it is designed to intentionally get people to reject God and to follow science fiction. A lot of people have fallen for it but the fact remains that God is still the default position because this is being promoted as truth when it is not.

The fact is that religious texts and dogma are the propaganda - not science.

The former are based on nothing more that argument from ignorance, in that they attempt to explain life, the universe and everything with a simple explanation that doesn't require thinking - and certainly not questioning of those who set themselves up as authoritarian intermediaries between this or that presupposed god or gods and the believer(s).

Scientists can hypothesize any way they choose to but what they can't or shouldn't do is promote something that will never be proven and has not been demonstrated.It should anger you if you value the truth,whether you believe in God or not because nobody wants to be played a fool.It seems to me you think that because it rains and storms nature can produce life but this is not the case.

Scientists can hypothesise within certain limits based on the pre-existing evidence - they cannot simply come up with a explanation first and then try and fit the evidence to support it.

As I said before, the chemistry of life - biochemistry - is a sub-set of chemistry. As such, there is no reason why life cannot come about through mere chemical reactions. All one needs is the right circumstances: sufficient time for the right chemical elements in proportion, in the right conditions, to form certain molecules (the simplest being one atom of carbon and one atom of hydrogen to form CH, the simplest hydrocarbon bond and the simplest organic chemical compound), where these molecules then combine to form replicators (RNA, for example), which then leads to DNA and - eventually - "the first cell". Evolution is already at work on the replicators before DNA or the first cell comes into existence. Once cells come into being, predation leads to multi-celled organisms evolving at the simplest level.

The above has all been shown to be possible through observation (in "the wild" and the lab) and experiment - links to various scientific papers are scattered throughout various threads in this forum. If you want me to go and hunt them for you, I will.

What is ignorant is to claim "nature did it" when you don't have all of the information or knowledge and to kick the can down the road hoping that science will one day validate your "nature did it" belief,this is just not the case.Nobody on the "God did it" side has to do anything when science fiction is being promoted as scientific truth because most people think rationally and realize that in our world things like universes and life are not created by nature,they are designed and the matter is formed into parts by a creator to build and create things.

They are Nature - just different forms of it.

Creationists tend to trot out the Second Law of Thermodynamics as evidence that things can't come about naturally - completely missing the contradiction in this statement.

What they fail to realise is that the First Law states that energy can neither be created or destroyed, only transformed from one form to another.

This means that Nature - in some shape or form - has always existed.

The Big Bang wasn't the beginning of "everything".

Kindest regards,

James

 

[scalyblue]

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.

Let's go with God Did it as a default position and see the result of that line of thinking, shall we?

Agostino Bassi witnesses the french silk industry collapse because of a silkworm disease. He says "God must have done this. The lord giveth, the lord taketh away" Then he prays to his lord and savior for the silkworm disease to be eradicated. As a result, the germ theory of medicine was never developed. Now think of every single person you know and love in your life, and flip a coin. Heads, they're dead. Tails, they are disfigured, scarred, or sickened for life.

Charles-Augustin de Coulomb observes that electrically charged balls repel each other when charged with the same polarity, and attract each other when using opposing polarities. He says "God must have done this," and prays to his lord and savior for maintaining the mysteries of the universe. Light up your candles and throw away your computers, boys. We have no more theory of electromagnetism.

Meanwhile, Antoine Lavoisier notices that burning phosphorous increases its weight. He says "God's work is amazing, that he would defy logic for this" and then prays to his lord and savior for more enlightenment about what is going on. I hope you like horses, because now we lost the oxygen theory of combustion.

In essence, "Abelcainsbrother," you are walking a path that is smoothed out by a PLETHORA of benefits from MANY, MANY, MANY great people before you for whom "God did it" was an inadequate answer.

How dare you be HEALTHY, using an AMAZING DEVICE such as a computer to access an AMAZING RESOURCE, this great internet containing the summation of human knowledge, essentially resting on the laurels of all human achievement, to sit there and preach that the very fundimental core of these achievements should be discarded and subverted because you are too dim and unwilling to understand it.

 

[Prolescum]

Haha! Oh wow.

This thread is another clusterfuck. Pah, let's run with it.

There is propaganda in our society

There certainly is, governments use it, religions use it, corporations use it. The key is to get rid of your TV, read lots of books, only frequent local businesses, use Open Source software, and vote regularly.

to try to get us to think like you do "nature did it" instead of "God did it"

So you're positing a conspiracy theory, eh? I love those.

the problem is that it is promoted as scientific truth eventhough it cannot be demonstrated

I particularly love it when conspiracy theorists make these bold statements that they never, ever back up. Like "all scientists are part of a cabal of pagan, Moloch-worshiping atheist druids intent upon killing Christians/libertarians/heterosexual white men via the mainstream media, eugenics and Admiralty law." It's fucking risible.

and it is designed to intentionally get people to reject God

One doesn't require even a basic understanding of science to reject gods, simple philosophy can do that.

and to follow science fiction.

Hollywood has a lot to answer for, doesn't it? I mean, they're all like "check out my silencer, it makes my gun quieter."

Alot of people have fallen for it but the fact remains that God is still the default position because this is being promoted as truth when it is not.

:lol:

God existing is no more the default position than porridge is a mammal.

Scientists can hypothesize any way they choose to but what they can't or shouldn't do is promote something that will never be proven and has not been demonstrated.

Perhaps it hasn't been demonstrated to you in a manner you can understand, it does not hold that it (evolution, presumably) hasn't been demonstrated when it clearly has. Why would creationists dispute literature that doesn't exist?

It should anger you if you value the truth,whether you believe in God or not because nobody wants to be played a fool.

What should anger me? That some bloke on the internet with clearly no background in a subject is incredulous about it?

You know what perplexes me the most? That creationists exist at all.

It seems to me you think that because it rains and storms nature can produce life but this is not the case.

No, experiments conducted methodically and continuously over 150 years makes me think nature can produce life. Millennia of religious dogma has produced exactly fuck-all in this regard.

It's worth noting here that most Christians accept evolution; it's only the fringe loons who deal with double-think on a daily basis that believe the literal truth of Genesis. Fucking Genesis! :lol:

What is ignorant is to claim "nature did it" when you don't have all of the information

No one claims to have all the knowledge, except fictional deities.

or knowledge and to kick the can down the road hoping that science will one day validate your "nature did it" belief

The belief that "nature did it", grammar notwithstanding, has a solid basis. Ancient woo has no validation at all.

this is just not the case.

While I agree that we'll likely never have all the information in the universe, what would you suggest we replace the scientific method with? How about the Enuma Elish? That's older and better than the Bible. Seriously, Gilgamesh is way funnier than Jesus and his not-at-all-merry men.

Nobody on the "God did it" side has to do anything when science fiction is being promoted as scientific truth because most people think rationally and realize that in our world things like universes and life are not created by nature,they are designed and the matter is formed into parts by a creator to build and create things.

:lol:

Classic. I love how your opinion becomes the opinion of "most people". So, any chance of verifying your risible assertions?
I'll be honest, I don't hold out much hope.

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

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.

You did not answer my question, thus I will just repeat it.

he_who_is_nobody[/url]"]

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?

Furthermore, you claimed birds are very different from dinosaurs. If that is the case, than please demonstrate it by answering my question. If you are correct, this should be an easy question to answer.

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

Again, you did not answer my question. Is this how it will be with you?

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

I guess you are correct. However, what were those points again? I do remember you saying that you were going to demonstrate that a god(s) exist. That would be more appropriate at this thread and not here. Beyond that, the only point I have seen you make is that you are grossly ignorant of science and how it works.

Yes I am a Christian but I'm not a young earth creationist, I'm an old earth Gap theory creationist.

Yet dandan, creationist, and Onceforgivennowfree still want us to believe that creationism is a united front and we silly evolutionists should just know what they mean when they state things like "prove evolution". We silly evolutionists should not have to take time to actually find out what exactly they are denying, we should just know it. We should not have to ask questions and if we dare ask questions, or dare to define terms, we will be accused of playing word games. [sarcasm]Everyone already knows what a creationist means when they question evolution.[/sarcasm] How many times on this thread alone, does that idea have to be proven wrong?

There is propaganda in our society to try to get us to think like you do "nature did it" instead of "God did it" the problem is that it is promoted as scientific truth eventhough it cannot be demonstrated and it is designed to intentionally get people to reject God and to follow science fiction.Alot of people have fallen for it but the fact remains that God is still the default position because this is being promoted as truth when it is not.

(Prolescum beat me to this. )

 

[Master_Ghost_Knight]

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.

Quick question, What is a fully functional life form? And what do you mean by forming by itself?

 

[abelcainsbrother]

Everyone of you who accept evolution believe that dinosaurs evolved into birds and yet the only thing you have for evidence is your interpretation of the fossils looked at from an evolution point of view.Yet you believe that life evolves but have NEVER seen it demonstrated by any scientist.Yet you give evolution a pass,believing in something you have not seen and cannot be demonstrated.

Scientists try to demonstrate it with Bacteria and yet the bacteria remains bacteria,but they make up an excuse that evolution happened so long ago that we can't observe it and you people give them a pass instead of demanding that they demonstrate it if evolution is so predictable like we are told.

Yet when it comes to God who you can't see you demand proof and set the bar much much higher than for evolution and are totally blind to your own faith that you cannot see or observe.And when we point this out to you,you get angry.

You are not very different at all than somebody who puts their faith in God who they can't see,yet deny your faith. The fact is evolution cannot be demonstrated because it happened so long ago,making it impossible to observe,thus making evolution one big scientific conspiracy theory backed by money and time devoted to it.

It is time to get real and stop trying to prove young earth creationism wrong and come up with a new theory to replace evolution and it is coming as new science comes out,but evolutionists are desperate to keep it going and because Neanderthal and human DNA do not match,showing that we humans did not descend from primates,and that humans are unique and also that humans came about much earlier than evolutionists have believed,they make up a complete new theory about Mitochondrial Eve to keep evolution going.

Not one of you can demonstrate one kind of life evolving into another kind of life like a dinosaur to a bird yet you still believe it by faith. Therefore I do not have to prove God created it at all.

 

[MarsCydonia]

abelcainsbrother has demonstrated that s/he is a liar and little to nothing else.

He claimed he would offer evidence for creationism then when the time came, he says he would not. He has completely ignored the points raised by other members, we repeatedly stated that we can demonstrate evolution and he simply, voluntarily blinds himself to the possibility of learning. His comments are equivalent of shutting one's eyes, putting one's fingers and their ears and claiming loudly that since you cannot see or hear any opposition, you must be right.

As such, every comment he made served no purpose other than to pollute this discussion. I suggest that until that he shows the decency and honesty becoming of the Christian he claims to be, until he actually makes a point and demonstrate it, we simply ignore him.

 

[Prolescum]

Everyone of you who accept evolution believe that dinosaurs evolved into birds and yet the only thing you have for evidence is your interpretation of the fossils looked at from an evolution point of view.Yet you believe that life evolves but have NEVER seen it demonstrated by any scientist.Yet you give evolution a pass,believing in something you have not seen and cannot be demonstrated.

Scientists try to demonstrate it with Bacteria and yet the bacteria remains bacteria,but they make up an excuse that evolution happened so long ago that we can't observe it and you people give them a pass instead of demanding that they demonstrate it if evolution is so predictable like we are told.

Yet when it comes to God who you can't see you demand proof and set the bar much much higher than for evolution and are totally blind to your own faith that you cannot see or observe.And when we point this out to you,you get angry.

You are not very different at all than somebody who puts their faith in God who they can't see,yet deny your faith. The fact is evolution cannot be demonstrated because it happened so long ago,making it impossible to observe,thus making evolution one big scientific conspiracy theory backed by money and time devoted to it.

It is time to get real and stop trying to prove young earth creationism wrong and come up with a new theory to replace evolution and it is coming as new science comes out,but evolutionists are desperate to keep it going and because Neanderthal and human DNA do not match,showing that we humans did not descend from primates,and that humans are unique and also that humans came about much earlier than evolutionists have believed,they make up a complete new theory about Mitochondrial Eve to keep evolution going.

Not one of you can demonstrate one kind of life evolving into another kind of life like a dinosaur to a bird yet you still believe it by faith. Therefore I do not have to prove God created it at all.

Seeing as you're not actually responding to anyone, might as well write any old gibberish...

I'm your only friend,I'm not your only friend,But I'm a little glowing friend,But really I'm not actually your friend.

But I am

Blue canary in the outlet by the light switch,Who watches over you, Make a little birdhouse in your soul. Not to put too fine a point on it, Say I'm the only bee in your bonnet,Make a little birdhouse in your soul.I have a secret to tell,From my electrical well,It's a simple message and I'm leaving out the whistles and bells,So the room must listen to me,Filibuster vigilantly, My name is blue canary one note* spelled l-i-t-e. My story's infinite, Like the Longines Symphonette it doesn't rest Blue canary in the outlet by the light switchWho watches over you, Make a little birdhouse in your soul. Not to put too fine a point on it,Say I'm the only bee in your bonnet.Make a little birdhouse in your soul I'm your only friend I'm not your only friend But I'm a little glowing friend But really I'm not actually your friend.

But I am

There's a picture opposite me,Of my primitive ancestry,Which stood on rocky shores and kept the beaches shipwreck free. Though I respect that a lot, I'd be fired if that were my job, After killing Jason off and countless screaming Argonauts.
Bluebird of friendliness. Like guardian angels its always near Blue canary in the outlet by the light switch, Who watches over you
Make a little birdhouse in your soul Not to put too fine a point on it, Say I'm the only bee in your bonnet,Make a little birdhouse in your soul (and while you're at it Keep the nightlight on inside the Birdhouse in your soul)

Not to put too fine a point on it, Say I'm the only bee in your bonnet,Make a little birdhouse in your soul
Blue canary in the outlet by the light switch (and while you're at it)Who watches over you (keep the nightlight on inside the) Make a little birdhouse in your soul (birdhouse in your soul)!

 

[Rumraket]

Everyone of you who accept evolution believe that dinosaurs evolved into birds and yet the only thing you have for evidence is your interpretation

False. The theory of evolution is not an interpretation of data, it is the simplest known model with predictive explanatory power that fully acounts for all of the known data and has survived all attempts at falsification.

of the fossils looked at from an evolution point of view.

False. We have genetic, biogeographic and physiological evidence too.

Yet you believe that life evolves but have NEVER seen it demonstrated by any scientist.

False. That life is evolving is a directly observed fact. It is simply not subject to rational doubt. Whatever you may think life evolves into, for the better or worse, life simply evolves and adapts, because life changes over time due to the accumulation of mutations.

Yet you give evolution a pass,believing in something you have not seen and cannot be demonstrated.

False for reasons just explained.

Scientists try to demonstrate it with Bacteria and yet the bacteria remains bacteria,

What the hell else should they become? All life is cellular life, what the fuck would you expect it to evolve into? Bacteria are just another form of cells, an extremely diverse group, possibly THE most extremely diversive kingdom on the tree of life, at least from a biochemical perspective and from the range of environments to which bacteria have adapted.

Those bacteria evolve into very different bacteria, adapted to different environments, capable of surviving under conditions their ancestors could not. That is evolution.

Your statement is similar to watching land mammals evolving into whales over 10 million years and then declaring "Yeah, but they're still just animals!".

but they make up an excuse that evolution happened so long ago

False, noone says evolution happened so long ago we can't observe it as an excuse. It is true that evolution ALSO took place in the past, and the process that took place in the past gave rise to the circumstances of the here and now. But evolution STILL happens. In the here and now.

that we can't observe it

False. We CAN observe it and we do. We observe the evolutionary process in action. We observe behavioral, genetic, morphological and physiological change happening. We therefore observe evolution.

and you people give them a pass instead of demanding that they demonstrate it if evolution is so predictable like we are told.

False. Noone is being given any pass. We demand evidence to substantiate evolution, we GET that evidence.

Yet when it comes to God who you can't see

If you can't see god, how do you know he's really there? Can you weigh him? Then show me where to put my scale. Can you hear him? Then tell me where to put my microphone.

Oh wait, you're telling me god is ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE to detect. You will pardon me for being entirely rational in my skepticism, then, when you claim something exists it is literally impossible for me to verify. I simply cannot have rational justification for accepting your claim on your mere say so when there is no way to verify it.

you demand proof and set the bar much much higher than for evolution

No I don't. The TINIEST demonstration of divine supernatural magic would convince me. God doesn't have to produce entire universes, stars, planets or elephants. The TINIEST thing will convince me. If you can make god supernaturally create a single graind of sand, and show that god really was responsible for it, I would instantly start believing in god.

This is an ABSURDLY low standard for evidence for me to commit myself to, considering the extraordinarity of the god-claim. God is claimed to be omnipotent, to be able to do ANYTHING. And yet here I am saying that something as tiny and mundane as the creation of a single grain of sand would convince me that god exists.

If anything, I have INVERTED my standard of evidence and set the bar much LOWER for the god claim, than I do for evolution.

Literally EVERYTHING you said in your post is false. False as in the opposite of what is factually, verifiably true. You should therefore change your opinion on every statement you have made, but I won't be holding my breath for that. I also don't expect you to produce that ULTRA fucking TINY demonstration of supernatural divine magic I asked for: The divine creation of a single grain of sand.

Not even complex life, or bacteria, or stars or planets or all the rest am I asking to be demonstrated. Just a single grain of sand created with magic by god. Such a tiny thing, and you got nothing. You can show me nothing at all. You believe blindly and fallaciously for no good reason in the total absense of any demonstrations or any evidence. You don't even have tiny demonstrations of god's power, all you have are faith statements that god did this and god did that.

In contrast, we CAN actually show organisms evolve. They might not be evolving in the way you like or you want to see, but the evolve nevertheless.

But you, you have NOTHING in comparison. If your god really does exist he must think really lowly of you to send you in here with nothing at all.

 

[abelcainsbrother]

abelcainsbrother has demonstrated that s/he is a liar and little to nothing else.

He claimed he would offer evidence for creationism then when the time came, he says he would not. He has completely ignored the points raised by other members, we repeatedly stated that we can demonstrate evolution and he simply, voluntarily blinds himself to the possibility of learning. His comments are equivalent of shutting one's eyes, putting one's fingers and their ears and claiming loudly that since you cannot see or hear any opposition, you must be right.

As such, every comment he made served no purpose other than to pollute this discussion. I suggest that until that he shows the decency and honesty becoming of the Christian he claims to be, until he actually makes a point and demonstrate it, we simply ignore him.

Wrong! Do you know what bearing false witness means? I said I could give more evidence that God created it than somebody pushing science fiction that "nature did it"can,and I can but I see no need to do that now because I made my point.Also I do not debate one sided where only I provide evidence.

 

[Isotelus]

Everyone of you who accept evolution believe that dinosaurs evolved into birds and yet the only thing you have for evidence is your interpretation of the fossils looked at from an evolution point of view.

Third time's a charm?

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?<i></i>

Taking physical and anatomical traits, plugging them into a matrix, and running tests to assess similar characters and place them in groups isn't simply interpretation of the fossils.

I am also curious as to what, besides evolution, leads you to state that birds and dinosaurs are totally different. Are you basing this on appearance? Skeletal structure? Lack/presence of feathers?

 

[Darkprophet232]

I am also curious as to what, besides evolution, leads you to state that birds and dinosaurs are totally different. Are you basing this on appearance? Skeletal structure? Lack/presence of feathers?

I'm pretty sure he believes that fossils are just a trick played on us by Satan.