I get where you are coming from, I do. That thought and opinion are relative. I argue this myself all the time. My go-to example is the common house-fly. We humans think that human life is precious, however the house-fly would much rather encounter a dead human body than a live one. The fly's perspective is that he/she doesn't care, at all, about human life. The fly cares whether or not something is a prospective meal, and a warm, moist, nutritious place to lay eggs. Beyond this, it does not concern itself of the current or former welfare of the corpse lying before it.
But NONE of what you said gets at the true base that I argue we have ALL adopted, and that cannot rationally be denied. My stance is simply to call for more of the same, and deeper adherence to it. And that position is "adhere to the evidence" And by evidence, I am not talking about your intuition, your feelings, or your hopes and dreams - those are not the kinds of "evidence" to which I am referring. And this is exactly where I can definitively say that YOU have gone off the rails. All this talk between us, and NOT ONCE have you provided any useful evidence. Not once. And the huge error in judgment here is that YOU THINK YOU HAVE. That's the sad state of affairs we are looking at here. Somehow your mind has become completely warped as to what stands for evidence.
And the reason I state that we are all adherents to the "religion of evidence" is that we use it in proper ways CONSTANTLY, every day of our lives. Take learning to walk for example. When learning to walk, balance ends up being pretty key to properly mastering maintenance of the human gait. Having only two proper legs, humans must walk upright, and our walk ends up being (as some others have put it) more of a constant, graceful falling. Your mind helps you in this endeavor automatically, but basically what is going on is that the feedback of your senses is the "evidence" that your mind uses to determine what works and what doesn't. If you over-compensate for gravity pulling you in one direction or another, your mind takes note. Too much force from one foot, not enough from the other... try it a bit differently next time. And so, based on the evidence of your progressively more successful, intended stride, you learn to walk on two legs as well as you are able, or well enough that your walk is acceptable to you. Every minute movement you make with ANY amount of confidence can only be made at all deftly because you have EVIDENCE that what you are doing, the acts you are taking, the thoughts you are having, etc. works in the way you expect it to. You can move your arm to touch your nose, with your eyes closed, because you have previous evidence of the placement of your nose, you have prior evidence that your arms will obey your commands/thoughts and you have evidence that the precise length of your arms will line up to place your finger upon your nose at a very exacting set of coordinates in relative space. ALL OF THAT activity is BASED ON EVIDENCE. And that is what I propose that we adhere to. We strive to stick to the evidence, and strive to investigate and find the evidence when we have none for a proposition. And if, time after time after time we cannot find proper, compelling evidence for our proposition, then we admit that the proposition is not worth keeping in a "top of mind" space. We admit that we should not be trying to talk others into believing our proposition. We reserve our proposition for the only space in which it is even remotely warranted: OPINION.
Thank you for your kindness, frankness, and many writing for me
I appreciate you and your generosity (I read it well)
It is nice to discover the facts to support our ideas, my friend
But we cannot falsification facts in the name of science
There are metaphysical things we can not explain science, including the first creation
The atheist wants harmony with their material foundations in the interpretation of the universe and life
They were forced to say in metaphysics
Unfortunately the atheist only crosses the gate of the flag falsification
How do I reconcile myth (Superstition) with its psoriasis and that it is unintended and between faith in the Creator?
Adherents of the myth (Superstition) of evolution and atheists rely heavily on terminology manipulation
Regarding the beginning of creation, the science answers, apologize because it is not our specialty
Because science is the field of work to monitor the tangible things and their impact in the world of witness that we live
While how the first composition of objects is metaphysical does not fall under the sense of observation or experimentation
The existence of the difference between the two worlds, the world of the unseen (metaphysical) and the world of witness , a fact indicated by the sources of knowledge, including science, where it says that there must be a previous existence of matter, energy and laws studied by science
Matter, energy and laws are meanings and inanimate objects that do not create, master or create
How to find the first of living things, is beyond the norms of the basics of life, it is precedent
It precedes the reproductive processes of male and female beings as the chain of couples must form a beginning far from reproduction
This is governed by the mind and how to find this beginning is from the unseen world (metaphysical)
We can deduce, through contemplation of fossils and distributed across layers and similarities between organisms and geographically distributed and genetic material about how the first creation was an independent creation or of common origins
The answer may be reached in more than one way
If two objects resemble, they can reasonably be independent creation similar or that one of them came out of the other and there is no way to limit the possibilities to one of them through science
One of the basics of experimental science is that if I enter the laboratory and follow specific steps and produce a chemical compound, the shortest thing I can say is that these steps lead to this compound
If I know that there is more than one way to produce this chemical and then I see the same compound in the hands of others, I can not judge that it produced the same steps, but may have been produced by other interactions
This is a scientific principle and applicable and the subject of agreement even if any researcher discuss the scientific results of any experiment on the same basis of the first, rejection of his research and conclusions
So how it is the first metaphysical creation of various beings, which is not determined by options
The result is that there is a Creator of absolute power and will, and that his actions are not subject to material laws
How do we know if the Creator brought out objects of common origin or created them independently
How do we know the answer to this metaphysical question?
Objects appeared in many forms and complex from ancient time and it help you when you see that it is not above the ground or under it, nor in the present or the past the impact of randomness or blindness or confusion and unsuccessful attempts to produce objects
The trap that atheists try to follow is the adaptation of verses of religions to fit the myths (Superstition) of false science, because this is an appropriate behavior for certainty.
What if the theory of evolution proves true in the future?
This question violates the most basic axioms of the philosophy of science
Because science will not come to you in the present or in the future evidence of something outside the scope of his research, as well as to bring evidence of the myth (Superstition) that opposes all generators of knowledge that science says
and this is video
please select english subtitle for any suitable language
with respect
