Autodidact
Intentionally Blank
What? Bereanz said something that's not true! I'm shocked, I tell you, simply shocked.
Oh wait, Bereanz is a creationist. Never mind.
-
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!
Creationists, please provide evidence
- Thread starter evolved yet?
- Start date
What? Bereanz said something that's not true! I'm shocked, I tell you, simply shocked.
Oh wait, Bereanz is a creationist. Never mind.
HAHA! Well, I was trying to give him the benefit of the doubt.
The_Evelyonian
Old-School Member
I wouldn't bother at this point.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
Oh. It's a poe.
The_Evelyonian
Old-School Member
A rat's teeth never stop growing.
Dirty Penguin
Master Of Ceremony
It's due to the fact that they immediately went on the attack of evolution which prompted those in the position to know to correct their mis-understandings. So far newhope101 has tried to use (mtEve and Y Adam) as "proof" of creation and both (newhope101 and Bereanz) have asserted their god created the earth per the wording in their bible. Basically we're no closer to "creationist" evidence than we were when the thread started. Not holding my breath though.....
Autodidact
Intentionally Blank
Well, for the millionth time, if you can't state what your hypothesis is, you can't begin to determine what might or might not be evidence for it. I don't think any of our friends have stated a hypothesis yet (at 166) pages so we are no closer in our challenging hunt for evidence.
The_Evelyonian
Old-School Member
Because a lot of creationists labor under the misconception that if evolution is disproved, creationism wins by default.
Last edited:
I think clear parameters need to be set. That if evolution is brought up, by a creationist, while they're trying to provide evidence for creation, then they've lost the debate. It would certainly shorten up any thread on the subject.
A hypothesis and a theory is no more a fact than a conspiracy is theory. Ive said that before I know.
And to the newset clubman on this board that I've seen, yeah the one dressed as a clown. We're brought up to believe were monkeys mate (in school), off course it's common knowledege. It hasn't been common knowlegde "that we arent evolved form apes" for 100 years. You might think there is safety in numbers, but you'd be quite wrong. There's five million hairy mammoths in a popsical to prove that!
When you can't beat him call him Poe, which by definition would make me one of you in a clown suit. What a joke!PS: your honour as anonymous atom is un- shakeable.
Last edited:
The_Evelyonian
Old-School Member
Well, when I started my own 'post evidence for creationism' thread one of my stipulations was that posting negative evidence for evolution did not qualify as evidence for creationism. Even with that laid out, one or two still tried.
http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...ism/95456-creationists-heres-your-chance.html
Autodidact
Intentionally Blank
What makes debating creationists so tedious is the need to teach them basic concepts before you can start, coupled with their resistance to learning them.
[wiki]
Evolution is a theory, like gravity, germs and heliocentrism. That means it's an explanation of an entire class of phenomena that has been as well-supported as anything gets in science. It is, in short, the highest level of scientific knowledge.
Since you've already told us that you don't care whether we believe anything you say, Bereanz, the fact that you've said something, obviously, means nothing to us. If you want to contribute to the discussion, you will need to support every assertion with a credible cite. Otherwise we will merely disregard it, because you have sacrificed your credibility here.
Can anyone here provide an English translation of this paragraph? Thanks.And to the newset clubman on this board that I've seen, yeah the one dressed as a clown. Were brought up to believe were monkeys mate (in school), off course it's common knowledege. It hasn't been common knowlegde "that we arent evolved form apes" for 100 years. You might think there is safety in numbers, but you'd be quite wrong. There's five million hairy mammoths in popsical to prove that!
On another thread I saw in here had you all whinning about no creationist joining the thread, and you treated that as proof that you where all right. Again, the absence of fact seems to be accepted as truth among you.
The_Evelyonian
Old-School Member
By this statement alone you've demonstrated that you don't understand what a scientific theory is. Theories, in science, do not become facts. Theories explain facts.
Theory: (a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena) "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses"; "true in fact and theory"
Source
The_Evelyonian
Old-School Member
Well, when we ask for evidence and none is provided, what does that tell you?
Last edited:
dallas1125
Covert Operative
Isnt that the idea? How can you believe something if there is no fact for it?
Do you believe in fairies, or werewolves? No, cause there are no facts that they exist.