The top wrong assumptions i've came across when debating theist about evolution

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Do you think it logical that God would set up all the excruciatingly precise engineering required to launch and support the first replicator-

then have no particular plan for the outcome to follow?

To be fair, He DID seem shocked that humans who were essentially "born yesterday" acted like impulsive idiots.

We must definitely be made in God's image:

Video summary:
1. Don't be dumb.
2. Hold my beer.

This is borne out in the lab, where bacteria, flies, or even in dog breeding- there are strict limitations to alterations in body plans, inherent in the DNA code.

I didn't realize the government had enough funding to run a lab for a billion or so years.

I've tried using the Grand Canyon -- if you had been boating on the Colorado River every year for many millions of years, one year following the next you probably wouldn't recognize a single difference, though they would be there. But when you started, there wasn't any evidence of a canyon, and now there is (as I understand) a pretty substantial gully.

Or what's happened to us: you don't notice the drip under the sink until the cabinet doors are soaked one day...

We didn't even distinguish creation scientists from any other scientists. It was widely accepted by the world's population as history and science.

And for a long time silliness like the four humours was a thing. Doesn't make it right.

I can't use we evolved from apes because apes aren't smart enough and they still act like apes.

The fact there are plenty of stupid people makes this a silly claim.

and still get people who keep believing ToE

Because they know the answers and you don't?

We have nothing to explain why human lives are getting shorter and not longer if it is survival of the fittest.

The fittest only means you lived long enough to reproduce. What you do afterwards is your business.

I've even asked myself why are there less white people now than before with evolution.

And I think we've just seen the REAL reason for creationism: let's pretend a dirt man was a white boy who remained genetically pure all his life like the rest of his *giggle* descendants *guffaws* because we all know *laughs* that *lol* humans are *hahahahaha* totally against "inappropriate" sex ... *dies*.

You can no longer disprove our beliefs then we can yours.

Your DNA test would not reveal you are made of dirt.

Perhaps in a sense they are all correct because they are just theories and different ways of explaining the otherside of the coin.

Since we can't prove evolution by waiting millions or billions of years, surely we can show within 6 days that creation as its understood by creationists is valid. Go ahead, we'll wait ....

Alternatively, make a claymation figure of a person and turn it into a human being with living cells. We'll wait ....

#6 How some creationist believe their opinion somehow rivals scientific evidence!

These are the same people who claim to know a living deity's mind by reading an ancient book instead of just asking Him....

god created nature and it's laws. but you don't think so. it's fine by me.

And yet you'd think that God is above these laws, yes?

1. Can't defeat an army with iron weapons.
2. Can't restore a victim of beheading.
3. Can't rescue a population without a silly disaster movie checklist.
4. Can supposedly use "laser-guided karma" to kill one sinner but also whines that entire populations must suffer from the stupidity of one or two people.
5. Even His son won't jump off a cliff like an idiot.
6. Hears His people dying of starvation and has magic food appearing powers, but ...?
7. Can make a paradise garden but can't restore deforested areas or whatever.
8. Has to make rules "for the culture and the time so they'll understand" instead of doing things the right way from the beginning.
9. Can't do anything against what the bible says (making the text the REAL power player here).

What did I skip?

 

[osgart]

To say life is chemical totally ignores the experience of being alive.
Again it's mind from mindlessness, reason from chaos . It's reducing life to a physicality. You can probe the physicality but you will never extract the experience of being alive from a chemical. You throw consciousness under the bus. And the soul you don't regard and yet is self evident that we are souls; heart, mind and will.
It's not just emotions caused by chemical reactions, I, you and everybody else have a heart of cares,loves, hates, and ambivalences.
There really is an I.

 

[syo]

And yet you'd think that God is above these laws, yes?

1. Can't defeat an army with iron weapons.
2. Can't restore a victim of beheading.
3. Can't rescue a population without a silly disaster movie checklist.
4. Can supposedly use "laser-guided karma" to kill one sinner but also whines that entire populations must suffer from the stupidity of one or two people.
5. Even His son won't jump off a cliff like an idiot.
6. Hears His people dying of starvation and has magic food appearing powers, but ...?
7. Can make a paradise garden but can't restore deforested areas or whatever.
8. Has to make rules "for the culture and the time so they'll understand" instead of doing things the right way from the beginning.
9. Can't do anything against what the bible says (making the text the REAL power player here).

What did I skip?

it's interesting you mention it. in orthodoxy they believe in a miraculous god that do whatever He wants.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

I didn't realize the government had enough funding to run a lab for a billion or so years.

They would if they didn't waste so much!

But we run into those limitations much much more quickly than that, is the point

 

[gnostic]

what, no blueprint?

Not even a rough sketch

Of course, there was a blueprint.

Here it is:

 

[osgart]

theists see themselves as deriving knowledge from their reasoning. they don't consider their stances as conjecture or speculation, but as evidential truth that god exists.

science to a theist only proves that they are in the right. science to them isn't the only form of knowledge, reasoning is also apart of knowledge.

they consider their reasoning as knowledge.