The Believabliltiy of Evolution

[TagliatelliMonster]

Why do they exist?

They are inevitable.

And some of us have experienced the supernatural, so?

So you believe. Other people believe they have experienced alien abduction and anal probing aboard their flying saucer.

So what?
Do you believe all things people claim to have experienced?
Or just the things that fit your a priori faith based beliefs for which you have no evidence?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I mean there has to be a reason for the existence of the universe we live in.

Why?

There has to be a first cause

Why?

You can't have matter unless something existed before matter.

Ever heard of E = mc²?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

So the elements formed themselves? Already then! So you do believe in something from nothing after all.

Misrepresenting someone's statements and turning them into strawmen, is a dishonest and fallacious debate tactic.

 

[Wildswanderer]

This is just based on lot of wish-washy superstitions.

Creationists like to wish that something that cannot be explain, therefore “god did it” isn’t an explanation, but just wishful thinking, that have bunch load of fallacies, from circular reasoning, to argument from ignorance, etc, and overkill in confirmation bias.

Both creationism and Intelligent Design creationism cannot even offer testable for their religious belief, except to say god must have did this or did that.

The Intelligent Design adherents are still using the same outdated, backwards “God did it” adage, but now they used “Designer did it”.

It is outdated, illogical, unoriginal and untestable adage that have been overused unimaginative creationists.

This is why ID adherents often used Universe or life is too complex, so must be designed, therefore it must have Designer.

They think that all that they need to say, but those so-called (ID) experts from Discovery Institute, are not known for their logic, nor for their intellectual honesty, nor for their scientific literacy & competency, PERIOD.

Because of their lack of testable explanations/predictions, Intelligent Design should be renamed Unintelligent Chaos, because they offered no intelligence in their concept.

Lol, another person who has no answers bashing those who offer answers...

 

[Wildswanderer]

No.

Yes.

 

[ppp]

In other words you have no answers. You might as well have said so.

Not at all. I am saying that I made a full, frank, and cogent breakdown of the equivocation that is foundational to your two contradictory and irreconcilable notions of 'begin to exist'. Moreover when I pointed out that you were not engaging with the text of my posts, to which you were supposedly responding, you doubled down and try tried to pretend otherwise.

I asked you a question four or five posts ago
A question that you have done everything in your power to squirm away from responding, while trying to cover that fact by accusing me of your own deceptive practices.

I said to you...So, make a decision. Are you claiming that the universe was a rearrangement of existing material stuff (like a baby). Or did your god simply bring it into existence by his will?

Quit posturing at me. Quit making excuses. Quit trying to stick to your script. Either answer the substance of the question with honest and thoughtful consideration, or go find someone else to run your script on.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Why

Because it defies all logic if your answer to why the universe exists is: " just because it does." Which is the only answer science can give us.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Not at all. I am saying that I made a full, frank, and cogent breakdown of the equivocation that is foundational to your two contradictory and irreconcilable notions of 'begin to exist'. Moreover when I pointed out that you were not engaging with the text of my posts, to which you were supposedly responding, you doubled down and try tried to pretend otherwise.

I asked you a question four or five posts ago
A question that you have done everything in your power to squirm away from responding, while trying to cover that fact by accusing me of your own deceptive practices.

I said to you...So, make a decision. Are you claiming that the universe was a rearrangement of existing material stuff (like a baby). Or did your god simply bring it into existence by his will?

Quit posturing at me. Quit making excuses. Quit trying to stick to your script. Either answer the substance of the question with honest and thoughtful consideration, or go find someone else to run your script on.

Obviously it wasn't a re arrangement. "Creation"
Not " re creation" . Is that even a real question?

 

[ppp]

Lol, another person who has no answers bashing those who offer answers...

Your claims are not answers until you can demonstrate that you know and are capable of knowing the things you claim. In other words, you have to be able to demonstrate that your claims are not merely the product of your imagination
Or, more accurately, the imagination of whomever wrote your script.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Misrepresenting someone's statements and turning them into strawmen, is a dishonest and fallacious debate tactic.

I'm not being dishonest at all. He never answered the real question, just gave point A to point B theory.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Your claims are not answers until you can demonstrate that you know and are capable of knowing the things you claim. In other words, you have to be able to demonstrate that your claims are not merely the product of your imagination
Or, more accurately, the imagination of whomever wrote your script.

So...this is also true if anything scientists only speculate about but can not demonstrate... like what started everything.

 

[ppp]

Obviously it wasn't a re arrangement. "Creation"
Not " re creation" . Is that even a real question?

You are using pronouns without first identifying the nouns to which they refer. What does the first "it" refer to in your post? Baby or universe?

 

[Wildswanderer]

You are using pronouns without first identifying the nouns to which they refer. What does the first "it" refer to in your post? Baby or universe?

What are we talking about here? It's not babies. Sheesh.

 

[ppp]

So...this is also true if anything scientists only speculate about but can not demonstrate... like what started everything.

Scientists don't make claims about what started everything. Nor do they claim that everything was started. That is just a false claim made by creationist in order to have something to complain about.

The claims about origins of the universe is all you, bud. And you haven't got a leg to stand on.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Because it defies all logic if your answer to why the universe exists is: " just because it does."

I did not make that claim.

Instead, YOU made a claim. You claimed that there HAS TO BE a reason.
I asked you why.

Care to answer instead of changing the subject and trying to argue a strawman instead?

Which is the only answer science can give us.

Science doesn't even address the "why" question, because it is a LOADED question.
Science addresses the "how".

So I repeat: why MUST there be a "reason"?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I'm not being dishonest at all

You are.

@gnostic didn't say anything close to "the elements created themselves".
That was all you. You pretended that that was his position and then attacked that position, while he did not express such at all.

That's textbook strawman.

Be fair.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Science addresses the "how".

Where? Because they don't address this question at all.

 

[Wildswanderer]

You are.

@gnostic didn't say anything close to "the elements created themselves".
That was all you. You pretended that that was his position and then attacked that position, while he did not express such at all.

That's textbook strawman.

Be fair.

Like I said he just gave point A to point B theory. That's not what I asked.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Where? Because they don't address this question at all.

Every scientific theory addressing a certain phenomenon, is concerned with the "how" of that phenomenon.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Like I said he just gave point A to point B theory. That's not what I asked.

And that gives you to right to start engaging in dishonest strawmen?