Creationists, please provide evidence

[The_Evelyonian]

Why don't we all just accept that we were created and leave it at that?

There's no evidence to support that conclusion, for starters.

 

[Youtellme]

There's no evidence to support that conclusion, for starters.

Yes there is. You.

 

[The_Evelyonian]

Yes there is. You.

I am evidence that I exist, thats it. If you want to use my existence to prove creation then you need to do better than just bald assertion.

 

[Youtellme]

I am evidence that I exist, thats it. If you want to use my existence to prove creation then you need to do better than just bald assertion.

You are evidence of creation. Think about it. With your brain. The most complex thing in the known universe. (Which ought to give you a clue... )

 

[The_Evelyonian]

You are evidence of creation.

Repeating an assertion does not give it any more weight than it had before. Again, you need to do better.

For starters, how am I evidence of creation?

Think about it. With your brain. The most complex thing in the known universe. (Which ought to give you a clue... )

Complexity is in the eye of the beholder. Besides, using complexity as evidence of design runs into problems of its own.

 

[Youtellme]

Repeating an assertion does not give it any more weight than it had before. Again, you need to do better.

For starters, how am I evidence of creation?

I'd say that by looking at the human body with everything it does, how and when and what and to what level it does what it does; by taking everything that makes up the human body that to me it seems to be made for a purpose.

Complexity is in the eye of the beholder. Besides, using complexity as evidence of design runs into problems of its own.

Yes, let's not go down that road....

 

[The_Evelyonian]

I'd say that by looking at the human body with everything it does, how and when and what and to what level it does what it does; by taking everything that makes up the human body that to me it seems to be made for a purpose.

The problem with this argument is that it's entirely subjective. It's keyed to what you can imagine.

Another name for it is "the argument from incredulity". The short hand is thus:

"I can't imagine that the human body is not designed, therefore it is designed."

Simply because the body seems designed to you is not evidence that the body is actually designed.

 

[jarofthoughts]

I'd say that by looking at the human body with everything it does, how and when and what and to what level it does what it does; by taking everything that makes up the human body that to me it seems to be made for a purpose.

Also, every example put up by Creationists as being irreducibly complex has been refuted, explained and debunked.

We know how it evolved.

You've got no case.

 

[Youtellme]

Ok, so let's say creationists gave up their position and accepted evolution, where does that leave religion?

 

[strikeviperMKII]

What is the value in learning something that you've assumed.

How do you know that what you have assumed is correct.

By what measure would you measure this assumption for correctness.

-Q

Only by making the assumption do you figure out whether it is a valid assumption or not. Make no assumptions, learn nothing. The more assumptions you make, the more you'll learn.
Of course this is all dependent on the fact that you KNOW you're making an assumption. If you don't, you won't see any need to change what you think is 'fact', when in reality, it is only assumed to be 'fact'.

 

[strikeviperMKII]

Ok, so let's say creationists gave up their position and accepted evolution, where does that leave religion?

Religion is not based on the fact that God created everything, so it really doesn't change anything that life created itself. Of course many people don't agree with me on this, and have to accept the Bible word for word, so if you take that away, they have nothing.

 

[The_Evelyonian]

Ok, so let's say creationists gave up their position and accepted evolution, where does that leave religion?

Not very far from where it started.

Accepting evolution does not mean denying god. You can readily have both. Look up Theistic Evolution.

 

[Youtellme]

Not very far from where it started.

Accepting evolution does not mean denying god. You can readily have both. Look up Theistic Evolution.

Will do later. Is it the belief that he set the ball rolling?

 

[The_Evelyonian]

Will do later. Is it the belief that he set the ball rolling?

Yes. Theistic Evolution is the idea that god created the first lifeform(s) and some theistic evolutionists (not all) also believe that god can, and does, guide the process of evolution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution

 

[Youtellme]

Yes. Theistic Evolution is the idea that god created the first lifeform(s) and some theistic evolutionists (not all) also believe that god can, and does, guide the process of evolution.

Theistic evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ah...yes, I kind of think that sometimes too.

 

[jarofthoughts]

Ok, so let's say creationists gave up their position and accepted evolution, where does that leave religion?

Not my problem.
It's their dogma.
They can deal with it.

 

[Gunfingers]

Not my problem.
It's their dogma.
They can deal with it.

So close, let's try this again

It's not my problem
The dogma is up to them
They can deal with it

 

[jarofthoughts]

So close, let's try this again

It's not my problem
The dogma is up to them
They can deal with it

I'm confused. Are you correcting my grammar or my intended meaning?

 

[Danmac]

Go Texans!

We'll settle this on Monday night. GO COLTS!!!!!!

 

[Gunfingers]

I'm confused. Are you correcting my grammar or my intended meaning?

Neither, i made it a Haiku.