There is not just one sturgeon "standing alone". You miss the point of the analogy if you stick on the number of coins. Besides, the shape of the sturgeon is like that of fossil sturgeons, but are they the same species? My gut feeling is that an ancient sturgeon, and the modern sturgeon, while closely resembling each other, would be unable to produce offspring.
Evolutionists slip up...AGAIN.
- Thread starter peilthetraveler
- Start date
There is not just one sturgeon "standing alone". You miss the point of the analogy if you stick on the number of coins. Besides, the shape of the sturgeon is like that of fossil sturgeons, but are they the same species? My gut feeling is that an ancient sturgeon, and the modern sturgeon, while closely resembling each other, would be unable to produce offspring.
No, not curve fitting, been there, done that, bought the tee shirt in the trading realm already... I'm pointing out that there is so much evidence that does not fit the world view of the "scientific" community that it makes them look ludicrous. They own the venue for the argument and are considered the experts so they get to say what is real and what is not. They can choose their battles and not deal with real, honest, objections to their belief system... they will, in fact, say things like "we've dealt with that" when in fact they have never, ever, provided a satisfactory argument at all...
I didn't say I was supporting any particular world view, I'm just saying that all the "scientific" world view that we are indoctrinated into nowadays is a big joke...
I put "Science" in quotes because it is a world view and it's not really scientific that much. It has the trappings of science, that's as close as it comes to being real science.. Nobody has created a universe, and had their methods peer reviewed. Nobody observed the origin of the Universe. Lacking either of those two things it's all speculation. So we examine the speculation to find the underpinning assumptions and wow, we find that the Geologic Column was invented by some joker nearly 200 years ago and it's "calibrated by the strata".. and on further inspection we find that the Strata is "calibrated by the Geologic Column"... then we really dig and find that radiologic readings are tossed out if they don't agree with that calibration. But calibration is defined as "comparison to a known standard".. there is no calibration at all, "scientists" take two speculations and compare them to validate the two. That would be a good speculative endeavor but the simple fact is, when the two don't match up, they ignore it or make further speculation about why... and then they absolutely throw tantrums when I simply tell them to stop telling me they are Science and I'm not....
Suppose those 1000s people flipped those coins and nobody got tails. They did it again and again 100 times and not once did anyone get tails. Can we suspect the coin is flawed then?
In that case the coins are different coins from what is assumed in the analogy I gave. The coins you mention are probably heads on both sides.
It's funny, your deity, your designer, is assumed to be so incredibly powerful, and yet you cannot accept that maybe He created the laws of physics in the first place, and set in motion a dance between chance and those laws that He knew would give rise to man. Nope, for you, all creation had to have been made by nothing more than the wave of His hand.
Man is metaphysical and proud. He has gone so far as to think that the idealistic creations of his mind, which correspond to his feelings, also represent reality.
They do not.
They do not.