The difference is not in the science itself. It's in how it got here. We recognize the COMPLEX FUNCTIONAL DESIGN couldn't have happened by random trial & error. It has to have occurred by an INTELLIGENT DESIGNER! Just like everything else in life that is & has FUNCTIONAL DESIGN ALWAYS requires a INTELLIGENT DESIGNER!
Let's amend this slightly. Does complex functionality require a designer? Do you see the difference? In your version, the design is assumed. In this, it is not.
And what we propose is *exactly* that complex functionality does NOT require a designer. Reproduction, mutation, and selection will, almost inevitably produce high levels of complexity in functioning systems (unless it leads to extinction, which happens also).
This position is supported by many different lines of evidence which we can discuss if you are willing. But first acknowledge that we are talking about complex functionality, NOT complex functional design.
That's the only difference in the actual science per se. We take the science where it actually leads.. We don't take people like as I said earlier I think Mary S something that first discover fossils of dinosaurs with soft tissue & blood proving youngness. Then she gets hammered by the SCIENCE ESTABLISHMENT to recant & not go where the science leads but toe the party line.
And, has been pointed out, this is a false description of what happened. OF COURSE she was expected to adhere to strict standards when making such a claim. OF COURSE people were going to question her methods and evidence. That is how science is DONE.
But, after the analysis was completed, her position was accepted.
That's why many evolutionist have become creationist or signed that scientist dissent list. When their research was getting young earth results & THE ESTABLISHMENT threatens them & pulls grants to get them back in line. To them honesty in science was worth more than being bought off. Sadly many have succumbed to that pressure & been bought off.
And, has been pointed out to you many times, this list is NOT what it is claimed to be. It asserts a position of 'skepticism', which is, again, a basic tenant of doing science. OF COURSE scientists should be skeptical of *any* scientific description. That is the *job* of the scientists: to test the ideas in as many ways as possible, to try to extract any flaws that exist.
That's not science. That biased Agenda run amok. You're so biased & naive you refuse the see the truth for what it is. That's truly sad. I've told you how they work, what their own words admit to. But you won't see it for yourself.
No. That is a misinterpretation of the evidence based on *your agenda*.
Then have the audacity to ask for the scientific reasons for young earth I've already given. But you won't read them.
Sure we will. But remember that you are far from the first person to present these arguments. Most of them have been around for decades and were known to be flawed even then. At this point, you have given nothing new--only rehashes of old arguments that have been shown wrong many times.
So sad how you've been so brainwashed. That's exactly how the prof describes how he teaches evolution to this college students. He admits to teaching it by using propaganda, filtering information, using brainwashing techniques etc.
And again, you read with your bias and agenda. Yes, in the case of an *introductory* course, it is impossible to go over all the reasons for all the conclusions. This is as true of physics and biology as it is of mathematics. But, when you get to later, more detailed classes, those details are presented and discussed. You have been told this, but ignored it. And *that* is because of your agenda.
Yet even from their own mouths you stay brainwashed. That's how sad it truly is for you. Worse you actually think creationist don't teach or understand real science. When not only do we. We take it where it leads. We don't force it into a certain belief & discard anything else. Then force others to toe the line.
Yes, I think that creationists don't' teach or understand real science. That is quite evidence from what they write. Except, of course, those few that *do* understand and then lie about the real science.
We just recognize the logic & common sense that it all had to come about by a INTELLIGENT DESIGNER like everything else in past present & future proves.
Please get your head out of the sand!
The irony here is amazing. You are the one that has refused to listen to the flaws we have given in your position. We have answered every question you have presented (and you have presented none that are new). And you have refused to learn anything about what the real science actually says.
So who has the agenda and is brainwashed?
