1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Creationists: A Very Simple Question

Discussion in 'Evolution Vs. Creationism' started by Skwim, Mar 26, 2019.

  1. Deeje

    Deeje Avid Bible Student
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    8,822
    Ratings:
    +4,498
    Religion:
    Christian JW
    Wow! I could say the same about all the evolutionists here....big on denial but short on actual evidence.
    The same applies with the fact that none of you can provide any real back-up for what you assert took place all those millions of years ago....but I understand why you need to hang onto it.

    I believe that you will be forced to let it go some day.....I am a patient person.
     
  2. Wild Fox

    Wild Fox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,079
    Ratings:
    +638
    Religion:
    nature
    Evolution is rich on evidence. Reaching back in time is of course difficult since it can tested the way we test things in current time and yet the evidence in the geologic record filled with fossil evidence is supported by geologic theory (geologic science) including the science that supports how we date things from the past and it provides unquestionable evidence even if it is not 100% perfect. There is no other explanation available to explain the geologic record and the fossils and of course you must know that even though you chose to ignore that. The genetic comparisons between current organisms representing organisms of the past shows supportive evidence of the process of evolution, and comparative anatomy and embryology only further supports evolution theory. The only theory with actual evidence to explain all. Ecological studies provide another layer of evidence especially when observations over time have collaborated with changes in variation. The mechanism for evolution is well understood and documented and supported so well with genetic mechanisms. So exactly where can you claim evolution is short on actual evidence. Just because you are not aware of the evidence does not mean it is not their.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  3. Deeje

    Deeje Avid Bible Student
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    8,822
    Ratings:
    +4,498
    Religion:
    Christian JW
    It is rich on assumption.....suggestion.....and assertions....but it lacks actual evidence that life began as a simple cell and over time gradually morphed into all life that has ever lived on this planet. You see what I see but you do not have the eyes of faith required to see life creation for the miracles that they are. Life is no accident.

    Not remotely close to even 50% perfect. No one was there millions of years ago to document a thing except the Creator...but you don't believe him. The one who created what science studies, and you leave him out of his own equation. :facepalm:

    Of course there is another explanation available, but you don't want to know about it because you might have to alter your position on the likelihood of all of this being the product of blind chance and fortunate mutations.

    The geologic record confirms what the Bible teaches as long as you aren't a YEC. (which I am not)
    The fossil record is a joke because these fossils can't speak without science's hand operating them as puppets. Interpretation is all that separates truth from fiction.

    Science has become a 'religion', blindly followed by those who want to appear to be intelligent, but are themselves deluded IMO.

    Science can explain it all...it just can't provide any substantive evidence that what they believe is true.
    Similarity does not prove relationship. "Looks like" isn't "same as".

    I am well aware of what the evidence "suggests".....I am also well aware that suggestions are not facts.....and never will be until proven otherwise. The mechanism for adaptation may be "understood" but it is not proof that adaptation can go above species level. It is assumed to be able to do so. They cannot prove that it ever has.

    If you have the evidence, then let's see it.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    21,628
    Ratings:
    +11,887
    Religion:
    Atheist
    I wish that someone would tell Deeje that excessive breaking up of a post is not only rude, but when one has to interrupt concepts it indicates an inability to respond in context. If taking things out of context is a valid debating technique then Christians should not believe in God since the Bible itself says "There is no God" at least twelve times. Context is important in an argument. Quoting out of context is done when one cannot handle the argument as a whole.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
  5. Dan From Smithville

    Dan From Smithville Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2017
    Messages:
    3,136
    Ratings:
    +2,194
    Religion:
    Methodist
    Denial, projection, self-deception, the glorification of ignorance over knowledge. You have it all and cling to it tenaciously.

    I see no facts from you. Only the same baseless, emotional assertions and ad hom that is the escape route of every creationist.

    I doubt you will give up ignorance, but you will be left behind. Unfortunate, but people that want to remain ignorant will do so.

    Evolution has more evidence than any other concept in science. It is backed up. Your denial does not change that.
     
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  6. Dan From Smithville

    Dan From Smithville Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2017
    Messages:
    3,136
    Ratings:
    +2,194
    Religion:
    Methodist
    I assumed that is why he does that. Another escape route from the truth.
     
  7. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    21,628
    Ratings:
    +11,887
    Religion:
    Atheist
    She, Deeje is female, otherwise correct.
     
  8. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    1,066
    Ratings:
    +741
    Religion:
    Atheist
    [​IMG]
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Dan From Smithville

    Dan From Smithville Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2017
    Messages:
    3,136
    Ratings:
    +2,194
    Religion:
    Methodist
    There is no concept of provable or unprovable science. Small wonder you are so confused and do not understand.

    Yes. Let the personal attacks begin, since you have nothing to defend your science denial.

    So, no real objection to science based on evidence or theory then. But do continue attacking my beliefs. Perhaps you can explain how it is really you that is being persecuted here.

    Sure. Since there is no demand, nor evidence that scripture is inerrant and infallible and claiming it is would be deifying it into a false idol, reasonable and rational Christians understand that and do not do it. Methodist recognize the gifts they were given, including their intellect and do not deny them or glorify ignorance in their place. I could not imagine a sect that would sell out God's gift of the mind so easily. Well, I do not have to imagine it apparently.

    You say you understand it is empty, but provide not one bit of substance to show this. Ever. Never. Just more emotional false words of denial. Oh yeah and some videos that people have to wade through and hopefully figure out what your objections might be from those.

    The Bible is not an instruction manual. It does not say it is anywhere. It does present a prohibition against false idols that would include making the Bible one. It also includes prohibitions on lying as well. You should check that out.

    The fact remains that all the evidence is on the side of science. It is creationists that continually fail to be able to provide any evidence in support of their claims. All the misquoted scripture in the world will not change that.

    So, still no real objections. Just more claims that you cannot support. Wild claims that are not even remotely part of science or claimed by science. Still nothing. I am shocked.

    Except that it has been established by testing the evidence. Funny you must have missed those videos. Home schooled huh. The thing is, we have more than two witnesses that these things happened. The evidence just keeps piling up.

    I have heard of it. My sister is a lawyer. Throwing in another unsupported accusation is not evidence against science, but it is evidence that you still have nothing and must rely on a form of character assassination in your attack on science.

    When you read about families in biological classification, you think that means a mommie and daddie and a little baby? Astounding! You may want to consult some experts on this condition and a few taxonomists too.

    More claims. Is there going to be any science or evidence in your denial of science and the evidence?

    Sure. Deny science with belief. That always works. Never. What you or I believe cannot be shown and has never been useful in refuting what can be shown. That I believe something is evidence only that I believe it. I thought you would believe that false witness included yourself as one of the possible victims. I suppose not, eh.

    Science does not tell anyone they cannot have personal beliefs. It does not and cannot refute the existence of God. People are still free to choose to believe. I believe and I know science and the evidence. I know of no commandment that tells me to deny what I can see and tell others to deny it too.

    So false dichotomies and more false accusations instead of evidence, theory or logic. Nothing new here and nothing that refutes science and demonstrates your views.

    I do not need to. I agree that with the current classification, you would too if you understood it and the fact that it does not say what you claim it does. You probably have never noticed the hierarchy in classifications or what that means. You should be more than capable of finding the evidence supports their ancestry, if you could get passed your denial. Look at all the off point videos you can so readily call on as an example of your searching abilities. Your claim. Your burden of proof. Take some responsibility.

    You are the one asserting that they have been cats and dogs since creation, you provide the explanations for why looking back there is a point where we do not find cats and dogs among the evidence. Not going to do that though. That would require more than just emotional appeals, attacks and other logical fallacies.

    Some surely are, but mostly just ignorant and in denial. Being informed is a superior position. Do you deny that? Being in denial is a weaker position. Do you deny that? Not being able to provide a cogent argument with theory, evidence and reason is a weaker position. Do you deny that? In the manufactured denial of science who has the argument that is without theory, evidence, reason or any ability to demonstrate their position? Who has to rely on emotional appeals, logical fallacies and personal attack, without which, they have nothing? Which group makes assertions of all sorts, and often wild and off point assertions at that, without anything to support those assertions? Those would be the people in the inferior position. You know the answer. You are just in denial.[/QUOTE]
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Dan From Smithville

    Dan From Smithville Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2017
    Messages:
    3,136
    Ratings:
    +2,194
    Religion:
    Methodist
    So you say, but continually fail to support your emotional belief with anything remotely close to evidence. All you can do is write page after page of your baseless denial. Can you produce anything that really supports your claims? Something besides hours long videos. Can you handle your burden of proof? So far, it does not look good for you. On that basis, you have done nothing.

    Your belief is noted. It means nothing in support of your claims, but it is noted. So no real objections then. Also noted.



    No. I am not. Thank you for caring though. I appreciate it. I am not denying the evidence. I am not denying what I can see with my own eyes. The same things that you can see with your own eyes, but keep saying is not there.

    I am a Christian. I would be one even without the Bible. I do not deify the Bible and make a false idol of it as some do. The Bible does not tell me to lie to myself. It does not tell me to get others to lie to themselves. The creation story in Genesis does not have to be true in order for the message to exist and have meaning. It does not fit what people can see with their own eyes, yet so many live in denial of what they can see. It is sad really, to take the intellectual gift of God and squander it, but so many do.

    I accept your claim that you are a Christian and am not attacking your personal belief. I do not have to resort to such low tactics. I have evidence on my side. I have directed my address to the nature and basis of your claims. Those, so far, have been wanting.

    It took not only millions, but billions of years. Creation as described in the Bible, does not fit with the evidence and science recognizes that. Anyone saying different must be doing so for a reason, and since they refuse to see the evidence or even acknowledge that evidence, one can only come to the conclusion that they are lying to themselves and then following that up by lying to others.



    So your entire presence here of hand waving in support of claims never happened? It is not a wave of the hand. If you claim that origins and the theory of evolution are dependent, then demonstrate it. Show us all where the theory of evolution states that a specific origin of life is required. Show us. You cannot. All you can do is make false accusations. If life were determined to be from a supernatural cause, the questions of life would still remain, but it is nice that you give such interesting credit to science when you normally are denying it.



    Why would you say that. You believe you know where it came from and have no questions. Your statement makes no sense and does not fit what you claim.

    Science has not answered it. That is not evidence that it cannot. At one time, every question that science has answered was unanswered. By your logic, we should not have computers. Not very good logic.

    I have not derided belief. I have addressed your claims. Is your argument going to include any real substance? I guess not considering we are near the end, but I hold out hope.

    No. My hope at some switch to substance over baseless assertions and smear campaigns is dashed.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  11. Dan From Smithville

    Dan From Smithville Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2017
    Messages:
    3,136
    Ratings:
    +2,194
    Religion:
    Methodist
    It is hard to tell and I often forget to look to see if people have included a gender reference.

    Ignorance is not a gender specific issue though is it.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Dan From Smithville

    Dan From Smithville Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2017
    Messages:
    3,136
    Ratings:
    +2,194
    Religion:
    Methodist
    You do say that about people that accept and understand science. The difference is that you have never backed up your claims. You see how that works?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Hockeycowboy

    Hockeycowboy Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2015
    Messages:
    4,423
    Ratings:
    +2,568
    Religion:
    Christian
    Here are 2 videos that give answers to your OP questions, comparing micro evo to macro evo.



     
    #93 Hockeycowboy, Apr 1, 2019
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2019
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    21,628
    Ratings:
    +11,887
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Frank Turek?? Are you kidding me? And a possibly real biologist that makes claims that he cannot support. You don't know how to use videos properly. Videos can be used to instruct a well known fact. When you are trying to refute well accepted sciencescience, you need articles from a well respected peer reviewed professional journal to do that. And if you had vetted Douglas Axe you would have seen that he works for the well known, and proven to be dishonest, Discovery Institute. That makes anything he says highly suspect and not a reliable source on his word alone.
     
  15. SkepticThinker

    SkepticThinker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2013
    Messages:
    8,199
    Ratings:
    +3,369
    I see a lot of (repeated) assertions, but still no evidence for your beliefs.

    Making up your own definitions isn't helping you.
     
    #95 SkepticThinker, Apr 1, 2019
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2019
    • Like Like x 1
  16. SkepticThinker

    SkepticThinker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2013
    Messages:
    8,199
    Ratings:
    +3,369
    You've already demonstrated the "microevolution of dogs" in your post #20.

    Did you not realize that?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. SkepticThinker

    SkepticThinker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2013
    Messages:
    8,199
    Ratings:
    +3,369
    Which would not work, if evolution were not a fact.

    Case closed. ;)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. SkepticThinker

    SkepticThinker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2013
    Messages:
    8,199
    Ratings:
    +3,369
    Umm, referring to your argument as "bullpoop" is not a personal attack. Unless you yourself are an argument.
    Criticizing arguments is what debate is all about.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. SkepticThinker

    SkepticThinker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2013
    Messages:
    8,199
    Ratings:
    +3,369
    False.


    Conjecture.


    Conjecture.

    Conjecture and straw man argumentation.
    False.

    False.
    False.

    False. Mountains of evidence demonstrate otherwise.

    Conjecture.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  20. ecco

    ecco Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2016
    Messages:
    5,708
    Ratings:
    +2,921
    Religion:
    atheist
    Like the snow job about the End of Times that JW leaders preached and so many JWs believed? That kind of snow job?
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
Loading...