I notice that the evolution crowd always goes batshit early in the arguments... they start up with the namecalling and accusations and prejudicial statements. To me they are the lamest bunch around really. Their teachers milk pitchered this stuff into them and they got nice smiles and good grades for regurgitating it back on test day... nobody ever taught them how to question anything and they probably see people that can actually think a bit beyond the box as a threat, maybe coming between them and their "favoured teacher's pet" status... They never can admit that their world view is speculative.
Evolution debunked in 1 paragraph.
- Thread starter peilthetraveler
- Start date
You can't prove with 100% certainty he exists. We can't prove with 100% that he doesn't. Therefore both world views are speculative.
Sometimes while I'm sleeping yes. As an aside years ago I also learned to breath through my ears. Women seem to enjoy it.
That's all well and good but I don't see how it makes an unproven theory a proven fact.
Now you're just making more stupid assertions, I am and always have been the first to admit I'm not a trained scientist. Although I do find science fascinating. But I don't see how that obligates me to believe the latest scientific theory as if it were fact just because it's en vogue at the moment.
And I think your statement about this being the view of ALL scientists in the field is a reach at best. Again you're simply embracing any and all you agree with and summarily dismissing any and all you disagree with. That's not science or objectivity.
Total BS. What "entire body of science" have I ever questioned? Let's see links to specific quotes.
What I've questioned are speculations... which any educated, thinking person would but which you don't because you're too much of an ignoramus to recognize them for what they are. You swallow whatever you're fed by your science "gods" with about as much thought as a fish swallowing a baited hook.
What I've questioned are speculations... which any educated, thinking person would but which you don't because you're too much of an ignoramus to recognize them for what they are. You swallow whatever you're fed by your science "gods" with about as much thought as a fish swallowing a baited hook.
Posters like Gabfly are on a political level. In politics bad philosophical arguments are allowed, if not the norm. So there are a long list of bad philosophical arguments that are interesting reading, currently the Gab is appealing to the majority of scientists opinions [and he doesn't even have a way to prove what the majority of them think, not really]. Personal attacks are the normal thing for politically oriented degaters and those are considered an admission of defeat in Philosophical circles...
Speaking of Philosophers, aren't they just brilliant? They will tell you that they, in all their wisdom, have learned that the proof that God exists is impossible. But in our Bibles there is a passage written by a Prophet. Prophets are people that speak for God, they say what God wants them to say when He wants it said... So God has the prophet write it down that He will prove he exists and is talking to the prophet by predicting the future. He does so, in a shorter term fashion and then proceeds to give longer term ones, arguably all of which have come to pass or are coming to pass even in this current age...
There is more proof that God exists and created things than all the proof for evolution!
I don't consider my position to be at all speculative, I do consider the evolutionary origins arguments to be highly speculative to the point of laughter! Many have said that it takes more faith to believe in evolution theory than it does to believe the Bible!!
Speaking of Philosophers, aren't they just brilliant? They will tell you that they, in all their wisdom, have learned that the proof that God exists is impossible. But in our Bibles there is a passage written by a Prophet. Prophets are people that speak for God, they say what God wants them to say when He wants it said... So God has the prophet write it down that He will prove he exists and is talking to the prophet by predicting the future. He does so, in a shorter term fashion and then proceeds to give longer term ones, arguably all of which have come to pass or are coming to pass even in this current age...
There is more proof that God exists and created things than all the proof for evolution!
I don't consider my position to be at all speculative, I do consider the evolutionary origins arguments to be highly speculative to the point of laughter! Many have said that it takes more faith to believe in evolution theory than it does to believe the Bible!!
Again, this is really all I'm saying.
Let me summarize what some would have me believe without question.
In the beginning there was nothing.
Then magically and spontaneously a tiny speck of something appeared out of this nothingness.
Then quiet by chance this speck somehow magically and for reasons unknown or explained grows exponentially in size to become trillions upon trillion of tons of space dust including at least 118 different chemical elements.
fast forward a few billion years and life suddenly and spontaneously evolves from this space dust and rocks.
these simple organisms, over billions more years, then evolve into more complex organisms, dinosaurs the size of mobile homes morph into small birds, yada yada yada and so on and so forth until we get to where we are today.
Now some or maybe even all of this might very well be true. But with the exception of the adaptations/evolution of micro organisms since the invention of the microscope how much of this has been observed first hand? Of course there is evidence, but scientists routinely disagree on how to interpret evidence in other fields all the time. How do we know with absolute certainty that all the available evidence is being correctly interpreted? And then what about all the evidence as yet to even be discovered? How could/will this change conventional wisdom in the future?
What if the universe hasn't always been expanding? What if it
expands and contracts in cycles and we've only been observing the heavens long enough to see part of an expansion phase. What would this scenario do to the big bang theory?
What if the certain elements don't decay at a steady and constant rate like we think they do? I mean who exactly was around recording the decay of carbon 14 5,730 years ago? If we were to discover this is wrong how would that effect some of the dating estimates?
It wasn't that long ago scientists in the field collectively agreed that neanderthals probably could not speak. Then they found evidence that they probably could. They were wrong as they've been wrong before. Unless something has actually been observed and or can be proved conclusively. I'll reserve my right to be somewhat skeptical of some of the more far fetched "science", at least until it's proven fact.
You miss the point entirely. You do realize he wrote The God Delusion, don't you? When he says what he does, it is in the spirit of not being able to prove a negative, in much the same way you can't rule out the possibility of unicorns or flying spaghetti monsters. But that's not where the evidence leads...Quote from Trader666:
Yet Dawkins admits in the video that he can't rule out the existence of God entirely. That must kill you
I've read the man's books, moron. All you have is quote-mining.