Subject:
|
Re: Support for Creationism (was Re: Macro-Evolution - "Impossible!")
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 25 Jan 2001 22:22:41 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2116 times
|
| |
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
>
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tim Culberson writes:
>
> > What I am trying to say is that those who claim that the Creationist
> > theory is impossible based on current scientific evidence are wrong.
>
> If this is all you want, no problem. I concede that the creationist beliefs
> (as they relate to macroevolution) are not impossible. They are highly
> unlikely, unverifiable, and unsupported by the available observations, but I
> concede that it is possible that a malicious god could have set things up
> (faked the data) to make macroevolution seem likely while actually having
> done things completely differently.
And I have repeatedly asked you to provide an example showing their
unlikeliness and telling me at least one or two available observations
that don't support it. (Notice that I left out "Unverifiable" since the
claims of Evolution are also unverifiable)
> It is no less absurd than using a single lottery ticket as your entire means
> of retirement planning, and perhaps a bit more, since the probability is lower,
I feel like a broken record, but you continue to insist that the
probability of Evolution is low, but you refuse to support that claim
with an evidence that shows its low probability.
> We have. You (and your pet Dr. Dino) haven't grokked what science is, what
> an observation is, what a fact is, what a theory is, so you're not
> understanding it. That's your fault, not ours.
Unless I missed a message somewhere along the line (very likely), I have
yet to see you present a scientific evidence that shows the Creation
theory absurd. Please re-state the evidence that you presented.
> The fossil record, my friend, the fossil record. Unless you posit that god
> laid that record down to make scientists look foolish. That, I suppose, is
> consistent with the rest of the sophistry that fundamentalists employ. But
> then, fundamentalists, including you, are not critical thinkers so what do
> you expect?
Just in case you don't read any of the three or four other posts I just
finished, please see:
"What does the fossil record teach us about Evolution?"
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c006.html
--
-TiM
NB, CA
http://echofx.itgo.com
t_c_c@yahoo.com
3ch0fx
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
78 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
