The Believabliltiy of Evolution

[ppp]

I don't care.

I don't believe you.

 

[gnostic]

Science doesn't prove anything by definition, so why would I have to prove anything?

You have asked @Policy & @TagliatelliMonster to prove that humans are animals and humans are apes, and they have done so.

So I have asked you to prove God is the Creator who created Adam from dust...and you’ve refused.

How is that fair, Wildswanderer?

If you are going to ask someone to contribute, by answer your questions, then I have asked you to do the same but from your end. You did put God or the “Creator” into the spotlight by claiming that god created humans from the start, meaning (according to Genesis 2) Adam has no parents and therefore he would have no ancestors, but how would you prove what you’ve claim?

For instance, you wrote:

We were created as humans from the start, not from any other creature.

But “from the start”, according to Genesis 2, human (Adam) was lifeless “dust” first. How is that more believable than humans having ancestors?

So again, I would ask the following:

How can lifeless dust be transformed into a living adult human male? Can you prove this?​

 

[Wildswanderer]

I don't believe you.

You think I care about your opinion? Ok then, random internet person.

 

[Wildswanderer]

You have asked @Policy & @TagliatelliMonster to prove that humans are animals and humans are apes, and they have done so.

No they haven't.

 

[Wildswanderer]

How can lifeless dust be transformed into a living adult human male? Can you prove this?

By the word of an all powerful being.
I believe.
I don't need proof.
And the same is true of those who believe what they are taught about origins in school.

 

[gnostic]

By the word of an all powerful being.
I believe.
I don't need proof.
And the same is true of those who believe what they are taught about origins in school.

Then you only believe in superstitions - “superstitions” in the supernatural and magic, and in all powerful invisible being - which all don’t even exist.

And you have complaints with natural phenomena and natural processes which are the only things that exist in this reality.

Meaning, you don’t believe in nature and natural causes, you only believe in nonexistence supernatural.

That’s remarkable that you have this double-standard, where you’ve repeatedly claimed that “there are no facts” in science, but your belief in personal god which believe to be responsible for creation of life and man, require no facts whatsoever.

So we have to take your words for it that your personal beliefs are true, and that no evidence and no facts are required...that special pleading and circular reasoning, all rolled into one.

My advice to you, Wildswanderer, don’t demand for fact/evidence or proof from others, if you cannot and will not provide any yourself.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Then you only believe in superstitions - “superstitions” in the supernatural and magic, and in all powerful invisible being - which all don’t even exist.

And you have complaints with natural phenomena and natural processes which are the only things that exist in this reality.

No, that's totally wrong. I believe in natural processes, but they are created and maintained by a supernatural force. Get it right.
And since science cannot explain why something exists instead of nothing, it's as good as any explanation...in fact they have no explanation.

 

[ppp]

No, that's totally wrong. I believe in natural processes, but they are created and maintained by a supernatural force. Get it right.
And since science cannot explain why something exists instead of nothing, it's as good as any explanation...in fact they have no explanation.

At least cosmologists admit that they have no explanation. As opposed to simply pulling one out of their butt and declaring it to be true, or "as good as any explanation"

 

[gnostic]

No, that's totally wrong. I believe in natural processes, but they are created and maintained by a supernatural force. Get it right.
And since science cannot explain why something exists instead of nothing, it's as good as any explanation...in fact they have no explanation.

Excuse me, but the “natural processes” don’t require “supernatural forces”, because “natural forces” already exist, supernatural forces don’t exist.

And “natural forces” can be explained, predicted, observed, quantified, measured, tested, etc, hence natural forces are facts...something that you can’t do with the nonexistent and imaginary “supernatural forces”, hence magic, miracles and spiritual beings (eg gods, angels, demons, jinns, fairies) are not facts.

In modern physics, science recognize four fundamental forces, which “interact” with everything on Earth, in space and in this universe (hence, fundamental forces is also known as fundamental interactions, these are:

1. Strong Nuclear forces, which hold together all the protons (as well as neutrons) together within atom’ nucleus.
2. Weak Nuclear forces, which is the cause radioactive decay of atoms.
3. Electromagnetic forces, which affect electrons & are responsible for EM radiation, like light, radio waves, microwave, X-ray, infrared, ultraviolet, etc.
4. Gravitational forces, which affect space and time itself.

Each of these forces are detectable, therefore they can be measured, hence they are facts.

But everything about the supernatural, like creation of Adam, talking serpent or talking donkey, miracles performed by Jesus, plush the resurrection, all defied not only nature, but also the natural processes.

If you seriously believe that the supernatural is responsible for creating and maintaining nature and its natural processes, then you are living in the deluded fantasy of the Dark Ages.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

No, that's totally wrong. I believe in natural processes, but they are created and maintained by a supernatural force. Get it right.
And since science cannot explain why something exists instead of nothing, it's as good as any explanation...in fact they have no explanation.

What does "something exists instead of nothing" mean?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

You think I care about your opinion? Ok then, random internet person.

That sword has two edges.

 

[gnostic]

And the same is true of those who believe what they are taught about origins in school.

“Origins” to what exactly?

Origin of “first life”?

Origin of first life is still a working hypothesis, not a scientific theory, so I don’t think it would be included in any high school textbooks, nor would it taught at any high schools.

This hypothesis is called Abiogenesis.

Abiogenesis isn’t the same as Evolution. They are two completely different fields of studies, and only Evolution is currently taught in high school biology, not Abiogenesis. Even biology-related courses (“bachelor degree” level) at universities don’t teach Abiogenesis to biology students, because Abiogenesis isn’t ready to be taught.

What I mean by working hypothesis, is that Abiogenesis is still “under development” or “work in progress”, and the only people working on Abiogenesis, are research scientists who are currently trying to test this hypothesis.

And even if Abiogenesis becomes to university students as subjects, Abiogenesis, along with Paleontology, would be specialized field, that only few universities would teach. Most biology students don’t become paleontologists, because there are many other courses available to them.

So your talk about “origin” being taught in schools, are bit premature, when Abiogenesis haven’t YET been verified as “scientific theory”.

So stop making things up that’s not true.

 

[Wildswanderer]

At least cosmologists admit that they have no explanation. As opposed to simply pulling one out of their butt and declaring it to be true, or "as good as any explanation"

A designed universe demand a designer. We can learn a lot about what God is like from creation.

 

[Wildswanderer]

“Origins” to what exactly?

Origin of “first life”?

Origin of first life is still a working hypothesis, not a scientific theory, so I don’t think it would be included in any high school textbooks, nor would it taught at any high schools.

This hypothesis is called Abiogenesis.

Abiogenesis isn’t the same as Evolution. They are two completely different fields of studies, and only Evolution is currently taught in high school biology, not Abiogenesis. Even biology-related courses (“bachelor degree” level) at universities don’t teach Abiogenesis to biology students, because Abiogenesis isn’t ready to be taught.

What I mean by working hypothesis, is that Abiogenesis is still “under development” or “work in progress”, and the only people working on Abiogenesis, are research scientists who are currently trying to test this hypothesis.

And even if Abiogenesis becomes to university students as subjects, Abiogenesis, along with Paleontology, would be specialized field, that only few universities would teach. Most biology students don’t become paleontologists, because there are many other courses available to them.

So your talk about “origin” being taught in schools, are bit premature, when Abiogenesis haven’t YET been verified as “scientific theory”.

So stop making things up that’s not true.

I didn't. And you just confirmed what I said.

 

[Wildswanderer]

What does "something exists instead of nothing" mean?

I think it's pretty self-explanatory.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Excuse me, but the “natural processes” don’t require “supernatural forces”, because “natural forces” already exist, supernatural forces don’t exist.

Why do they exist?
And some of us have experienced the supernatural, so?

 

[ppp]

You think I care about your opinion? Ok then, random internet person.

About my opinion specifically? No. But I would think you would respond to anyone who flouted your opinion in the same way that you responded to me. So while you don't care about my opinion in particular, you do care about the subject and the position that you are pushing.

 

[ppp]

A designed universe demand a designer.

Thank you for the circular reasoning. Please come back when you can managed to ground your reasoning in reality rather than in your assumptions.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I think it's pretty self-explanatory.

You can think it, but that doesn't make it so. What do you mean by that phrase?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

A designed universe demand a designer. We can learn a lot about what God is like from creation.

Hunting predators that select the weaker prey animals. Diseases that attack any person good or bad. The miscarriage rate of 15% in humans.

What do these tell you?