A scientific dissent from Darwinism

Evolution is a FACT

God is a theory

Just to clue you knuckleheads in Neither is a Fact. Evolution is the THEORY of evolution and God is part of a belief system -
Hmm, no , evolution is a fact. It is as well known a fact as the fact that the Earth revolves about the Sun.

A scientific theory is a well documented explanation of facts. The facts of evolution come from observational archeological evidence of ancient processes, ... imperfections in organisms recording historical common descent, and from sudden and radical transitions in the fossil record as well as subtle ones. Theories of evolution provide a provisional explanation for these facts - a Hypothesis - Evolution as a whole is a theory. Evolution dealing with the homo genus / anthropomorphic is still seeking the missing link - I think they have been here all along in our gene pool - we call them libtards but that;s another story altogether . Now stfu and don't make bitch smack the piss out of you :>
Paleontological. There will always be 'missing links'. Just how far down the variations do you want to go? We have enough fossils and DNA evidence to pretty well establish the Homo line, as well as our relationship to the other great apes.
 
..it doesn't give a shit ....


I didn't say shit in your glass I said piss in it .... the fact that you don't unsderstand the diff. between a fact and theory is irrelevant ... Why little man do you think they call it The Theory of Evolution ? not the FACT of evolution ... but the Theory. Ya See ? Now that I've enlightened you a tad your glass is no longer half empty - it's half full which is quite fiting for a half wit
You are the one that does not understand what 'theory' means in science. And you are seeking, in your profound ignorance, to denigrate others. You have succeeded in showing that you know nothing of science.
 
You want God to be proven by science.
Uh...what? No I don't....

And I think you basically agree with me (though your semantics are clumsy at best):

God cannot be "proven" either way, because magic cannot be proven or disproven. If no determinism, then no evidence is possible.

So keep your magical nonsense out of discussions of evidence based thought. They simply do not overlap at all. Believe whatever you want...but unless you mold those beliefs to accommodate the evidence, then your beliefs are simply wrong.

In this case, it's easy: just point at evolution and think, "God did that!". And there you have it ..conflict resolved...

And, like Michio Kaku, look at the universe and declare, "that was designed".
And, as much as I like and respect Kaku, that is still an opinion, not a product of evidence or observation.
 
science doesn't deal in "proof"
Science doesn't deal in proof ??!!! Really :1041: Hello - what hole did you crawl out of ?

A scientific law can is usually boiled down to a mathematical equation, such as E = mc²; it's a specific statement based on empirical data, and its truth is generally confined to a certain set of conditions.

A scientific theory seeks to synthesize a body of observations of relative phenomena and seeks to prove a law - unproven it remains a theory no matter how much you hold your breath or stomp your feet.


These are all Scientific Laws

Newton's Laws of Motion
The Laws of Physics
Hubble's Law of Cosmic Expansion
Kepler's Laws of Planetary Motion
Universal Law of Gravitation


These are all Scientific Theories

Big Bang Theory
Theory of General Relativity
Theory of Evolution


I have a scientific THEORY of my own - it states that you are blithering idiot - I doubt that you can prove me wrong but lets have a go at it - shall we ?
Scientific facts and 'Laws' support Theories, not the other way around. A theory is a broad over arching explanation for a natural process. It contains facts, evidence, and observation. It can be falsified, but never proven.
 
You want God to be proven by science.
Uh...what? No I don't....

And I think you basically agree with me (though your semantics are clumsy at best):

God cannot be "proven" either way, because magic cannot be proven or disproven. If no determinism, then no evidence is possible.

So keep your magical nonsense out of discussions of evidence based thought. They simply do not overlap at all. Believe whatever you want...but unless you mold those beliefs to accommodate the evidence, then your beliefs are simply wrong.

In this case, it's easy: just point at evolution and think, "God did that!". And there you have it ..conflict resolved...

And, like Michio Kaku, look at the universe and declare, "that was designed".

If coming to that conclusion helps you, by all means.
 
science doesn't deal in "proof"
Science doesn't deal in proof ??!!! Really :1041: Hello - what hole did you crawl out of ?

A scientific law can is usually boiled down to a mathematical equation, such as E = mc²; it's a specific statement based on empirical data, and its truth is generally confined to a certain set of conditions.

A scientific theory seeks to synthesize a body of observations of relative phenomena and seeks to prove a law - unproven it remains a theory no matter how much you hold your breath or stomp your feet.


These are all Scientific Laws

Newton's Laws of Motion
The Laws of Physics
Hubble's Law of Cosmic Expansion
Kepler's Laws of Planetary Motion
Universal Law of Gravitation


These are all Scientific Theories

Big Bang Theory
Theory of General Relativity
Theory of Evolution


I have a scientific THEORY of my own - it states that you are blithering idiot - I doubt that you can prove me wrong but lets have a go at it - shall we ?
Scientific facts and 'Laws' support Theories, not the other way around. A theory is a broad over arching explanation for a natural process. It contains facts, evidence, and observation. It can be falsified, but never proven.


:113:
 
I've said from the beginning that science cannot prove God exists. It's inadequate to do so.
Science can't prove god, of course.
You can't prove god/gods, of course.

But the actual problem you evade is.... YOU can't point to any solid evidence of god/godS, while there is overwhelming evidence of many types for Evolution.

ooops
`

Except that I haven't commented on evolution. That was you.
 
You want God to be proven by science. Science demands repeatability. God is sovereign, which means He can choose how, when and where He acts. Correct so far?
There's NO god in evidence here/anywhere, and you haven't shown any Genepis boy.

Evolution, OTOH, has overwhelming evidence.
`

I've said from the beginning that science cannot prove God exists. It's inadequate to do so.
Science addresses the natural, not the super natural.

Yes, it addresses what we can observe in a roasted fashion.
 
You want God to be proven by science.
Uh...what? No I don't....

And I think you basically agree with me (though your semantics are clumsy at best):

God cannot be "proven" either way, because magic cannot be proven or disproven. If no determinism, then no evidence is possible.

So keep your magical nonsense out of discussions of evidence based thought. They simply do not overlap at all. Believe whatever you want...but unless you mold those beliefs to accommodate the evidence, then your beliefs are simply wrong.

In this case, it's easy: just point at evolution and think, "God did that!". And there you have it ..conflict resolved...

And, like Michio Kaku, look at the universe and declare, "that was designed".
And, as much as I like and respect Kaku, that is still an opinion, not a product of evidence or observation.

Actually, it IS the result of his observations. It's his opinion informed by a lifetime of observations.
 
You want God to be proven by science.
Uh...what? No I don't....

And I think you basically agree with me (though your semantics are clumsy at best):

God cannot be "proven" either way, because magic cannot be proven or disproven. If no determinism, then no evidence is possible.

So keep your magical nonsense out of discussions of evidence based thought. They simply do not overlap at all. Believe whatever you want...but unless you mold those beliefs to accommodate the evidence, then your beliefs are simply wrong.

In this case, it's easy: just point at evolution and think, "God did that!". And there you have it ..conflict resolved...

And, like Michio Kaku, look at the universe and declare, "that was designed".

If coming to that conclusion helps you, by all means.

The more we find out, the more evident design becomes.
 
Except that I haven't commented on evolution. That was you.
But you did comment on god/dog.
Most of your post was on that fantasy, as was most of my reply.

So AGAIN, you not only have no proof, you have No Evidence for it/him/they.

IOW, Dishonest evasive reply... and your usual one-line/nonconversant whiff.

And if you "Haven't commented on Evolution", your posts are OFF TOPIC
OOOPS.
`
 
Except that I haven't commented on evolution. That was you.
But you did comment on god/dog.
Most of your post was on that fantasy, as was most of my reply.

So AGAIN, you not only have no proof, you have No Evidence for it/him/they.

IOW, Dishonest evasive reply... and your usual one-line/nonconversant whiff.

And if you "Haven't commented on Evolution", your posts are OFF TOPIC
OOOPS.
`

Why do you keep demanding proof when I've told you science is inadequate to prove His existence? And if God is off topic, why are you commenting?
 
You want God to be proven by science.
Uh...what? No I don't....

And I think you basically agree with me (though your semantics are clumsy at best):

God cannot be "proven" either way, because magic cannot be proven or disproven. If no determinism, then no evidence is possible.

So keep your magical nonsense out of discussions of evidence based thought. They simply do not overlap at all. Believe whatever you want...but unless you mold those beliefs to accommodate the evidence, then your beliefs are simply wrong.

In this case, it's easy: just point at evolution and think, "God did that!". And there you have it ..conflict resolved...

And, like Michio Kaku, look at the universe and declare, "that was designed".

If coming to that conclusion helps you, by all means.

The more we find out, the more evident design becomes.

No. The more we find out, the more questions are raised.

If not knowing the answers make you uncomfortable, then it becomes easier to believe that everything was "designed".
 
You want God to be proven by science.
Uh...what? No I don't....

And I think you basically agree with me (though your semantics are clumsy at best):

God cannot be "proven" either way, because magic cannot be proven or disproven. If no determinism, then no evidence is possible.

So keep your magical nonsense out of discussions of evidence based thought. They simply do not overlap at all. Believe whatever you want...but unless you mold those beliefs to accommodate the evidence, then your beliefs are simply wrong.

In this case, it's easy: just point at evolution and think, "God did that!". And there you have it ..conflict resolved...

And, like Michio Kaku, look at the universe and declare, "that was designed".

If coming to that conclusion helps you, by all means.

The more we find out, the more evident design becomes.

No. The more we find out, the more questions are raised.

If not knowing the answers make you uncomfortable, then it becomes easier to believe that everything was "designed".

It sounds like you're saying the more we find out, the more we have to stretch to ignore the design. I love running into these questions. I don't love just saying, "oh well, I'm sure it just randomly happened".
 

Why do you keep demanding proof
when I've told you science is inadequate to prove His existence? And if God is off topic, why are you commenting?
Amazing.
Supposedly more moral godists like You LIE and deceive in every post.

I never ask for "proof". I, in fact, dissed that standard (for 10 pages now) as it doesn't exist in science.

I asked/continually have asked, for mere EVIDENCE you MORON.
Got it?
You have NONE.

Now post ON TOPIC or leave ahole.
You goofily admitted you haven't even mentioned evolution.
`
 
Last edited:
IOW, your faith is absolute and dogmatic.
That's nice. I repeat:

There is no way to tell if it is true or not, it yields exactly NO useful predictions, and it is not necessary to explain anything, and it actually explains exactly nothing.
 

Forum List

Back
Top