Irony of the evolutionary belief

[YoursTrue]

Which is why the Bible is the wrong place to look for understanding as it only presents the limited knowledge of those who wrote it.

You couldn't possibly read or understand everything written about evolution. What was true yesterday may not be true today. Or at all. And you don't (want to) get the point --

 

[YoursTrue]

Enough of the pigeon chess.

Oh? Now you're calling what science says about the universe coming from -- nothing -- or a singularity -- or that no one really knows what gravity is, pigeon chess. Thank you You can't take the mess of the theory of evolution in many regards, that's what I think about your description.

 

[YoursTrue]

Sorry, but that does not logically follow.

OK, let's pare this down a little. Do you believe the universe came about because of gravity?

 

[YoursTrue]

That is true. But that does not mean that we cannot understand its role in starting the universe.

(amazing--frankly--is your reaction) So do you currently understand how the universe started? Or do you want to subterfuge?

 

[Pogo]

You need to reread his post.

I don't know that that will help, words apparently mean different things to him than to us.

 

[Subduction Zone]

OK, let's pare this down a little. Do you believe the universe came about because of gravity?

I can only go by what the experts say. I cannot prove anything either way. The sciences, and especially physics, have a very good track record when it comes to being right.

 

[Subduction Zone]

(amazing--frankly--is your reaction) So do you currently understand how the universe started? Or do you want to subterfuge?

Nope, I keep telling you that I do not. And you clearly do not understand to an even greater degree.

 

[Pogo]

OK, let's pare this down a little. Do you believe the universe came about because of gravity?

Fine Tuna

 

[YoursTrue]

Fine Tuna

oh well, at this point I won't ask you to explain, but thanks anyway.

 

[YoursTrue]

Nope, I keep telling you that I do not. And you clearly do not understand to an even greater degree.

thanks, you made me laugh when you said that you think I do not understand it to an even greater degree than you. haha, thanks. I needed that...

 

[YoursTrue]

I can only go by what the experts say. I cannot prove anything either way. The sciences, and especially physics, have a very good track record when it comes to being right.

about the origin of the universe? or the definition of gravity? (I'll get back to that later...)

 

[Subduction Zone]

thanks, you made me laugh when you said that you think I do not understand it to an even greater degree than you. haha, thanks. I needed that...

It is true though. There are different degrees of being wrong. You tend to be quite a bit more wrong than almost everyone that you debate with. Don't worry, if you at least try to learn that percentage will go down.

 

[YoursTrue]

It is true though. There are different degrees of being wrong. You tend to be quite a bit more wrong than almost everyone that you debate with. Don't worry, if you at least try to learn that percentage will go down.

lol, thank you.

 

[YoursTrue]

It is true though. There are different degrees of being wrong. You tend to be quite a bit more wrong than almost everyone that you debate with. Don't worry, if you at least try to learn that percentage will go down.

Except nobody really answers except to tell me I'm an idiot (not those exact words, of course), prejudiced, mind-controlled, lol, but I don't get any "real" answers. And then we'd have to go back to sediment, perhaps apelike skulls and what the definition of gravity is. OK? P.S. I don't know if species other than salmon swim upstream to lay their eggs, I'm learning that soil is absolutely necessary for life, dirt and soil are not exactly the same, see, I'm learning...I'll bet that soil came before humans --

 

[F1fan]

Again, the HOW is not essential to determine design,

Sure it is, because you need to distinguish mere order (that looks like design) versus deliberate design.

an observation (direct or indirect) of a Dyson sphere would be evidence for design, even if we don’t know how the object was made.

Or any man made thing. But that is irrelevant. You are calling natural order as designed. Where is your evidence of deliberate design and not just seeing order?

That is circular reasoning……………

No, demanding evidence for a claim is not circular reasoning at all.

.you are basically saying that you won’t accept any argument in favor of the existence of a designer…………if I don’t first show that the designer exists.

Correct, because how else can you distinguish design from order? You're claiming design, where's the evidence?

This is obviously fallacious

No, your baseless claims are.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Except nobody really answers except to tell me I'm an idiot (not those exact words, of course), prejudiced, mind-controlled, lol, but I don't get any "real" answers. And then we'd have to go back to sediment, perhaps apelike skulls and what the definition of gravity is. OK? P.S. I don't know if species other than salmon swim upstream to lay their eggs, I'm learning that soil is absolutely necessary for life, dirt and soil are not exactly the same, see, I'm learning...I'll bet that soil came before humans --

You are not an idiot, but you are wrong far too often because you refuse to learn from your errors. You will not even acknowledge them.

 

[Mock Turtle]

I have thousands of experts on my side, who have thoroughly refuted and exposed the TOE and many other pseudo science theories.

I studied this topic, but the professor couldn't get past first base with me, I simply asked him if he expected me o accept that "everything came from nothing". He couldn't give me a straight answer, but he scrambled to try and explain that some unknown force caused the big bang and evolution to occur. I told him my intelligence was insulted and I left the class.

If the professor was teaching the ToE then it was not his job to say anything about the origin of life - because we still don't have answers as to this - yet. You didn't understand this - what does this say about you?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

It wasn't a case of me refusing to listen to the professor. It was rather a case of not subjecting myself to have my intelligence raped. I do listen if someone has something sensible to share with me, but I refuse to subject myself to mental abuse.

QED

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

The following is your thread presence - nothing but insult, bravado, bluster, and bullying. There is zero substance or argument:

You're obviously clueless about what you believe in. You have blindly placed your faith in a theory you know nothing about. I shouldn't have to teach you about your false religion, if you don't know what a transitional fossil is then I give up. You're beyond reason, and that proves how powerful deception is

You can't keep ducking and weaving and sidestepping my charges. Your strawman theory hinges on the pathetic crocoduck and you don't like it because the great man Ray Comfort put you to shame

How pathetic to see you scrambling around trying to find a defense for the indefensible. Just admit it, evolution is the biggest scam of the millennium, don't be ashamed millions have fallen for the scam

You don't like being exposed, do you?. A wise man embraces correction but a fool abhors it

Are you serious, you don't really expect me to fall for that old junk wisdom that teaches "follow the crowd, as they know the truth". I'm not sure who persuaded you to believe that trash, but I can tell you that following the crowd only shows you're not using your own brain. Quite sad really

Bravo, Bravo, great defense of a ridiculous theory. When someone exposes it, just claim they don't know enough about it, whilst refusing to defend the charges. I can't think of anything more pathetic, congrats

You're right I haven't wasted my time going over all the fake theories, that the crowd follows as they are lost and we know lost people follow anything the crowd does. When you don't know the truth, you will fall for any fake theory to give you a sense of security and belonging.

I have thousands of experts on my side, who have thoroughly refuted and exposed the TOE and many other pseudo science theories.

I studied this topic, but the professor couldn't get past first base with me, I simply asked him if he expected me o accept that "everything came from nothing". He couldn't give me a straight answer, but he scrambled to try and explain that some unknown force caused the big bang and evolution to occur. I told him my intelligence was insulted and I left the class.

The problem with pseudo science is, it doesn't allow critical thinking. It simply relies on everyone taking the kool aid and not disrupting the class with difficult questions. You know, it's the old "don't let the truth get in the way of a good story"

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I guess I am going to trust @Subduction Zone on this one.

Can you please explain to him that the predictions don´t have to follow logically from the model?

Dear lord.................................................

Yes leroy, predictions have to follow logically from the model. That's in fact what makes them predictions from the model.