Why Does Evolutionary Science Only Believe In Things In Which There Is No Evidence?

[alang1216]

OK,,,but thats not proof for billions of yrs

and you left out a lot of specifics like where it left those sediments,,,and how water deposited it 25 miles above water level
sorry but you got nothing but speculation based on flawed assumptions

Billions or millions, does it matter? It is certainly not thousands of years. The vast majority of sediments are first deposited below sea level or just above. No sediments are deposited miles above water level. Sedimentary rocks found on the tops of mountains were deposited below sea level or just above and elevated by plate tectonics. The Himalayas are being raised by the crash of India into Asia. We can see how fast that is happening.

 

[alang1216]

sorry but you got nothing but speculation based on flawed assumptions

There is evidence for everything I've said. Calling them flawed assumptions shows you are just retreating into your ignorance of science.

 

[progressive hunter]

OK,,,but thats not proof for billions of yrs

and you left out a lot of specifics like where it left those sediments,,,and how water deposited it 25 miles above water level
sorry but you got nothing but speculation based on flawed assumptions

Billions or millions, does it matter? It is certainly not thousands of years. The vast majority of sediments are first deposited below sea level or just above. No sediments are deposited miles above water level. Sedimentary rocks found on the tops of mountains were deposited below sea level or just above and elevated by plate tectonics. The Himalayas are being raised by the crash of India into Asia. We can see how fast that is happening.

you can only see whats happening today,,,and not in history especially millions or billions of yrs ago

 

[progressive hunter]

sorry but you got nothing but speculation based on flawed assumptions

There is evidence for everything I've said. Calling them flawed assumptions shows you are just retreating into your ignorance of science.

then why do you keep that evidence a secret???


and what science???
that first requires observation,,,and to date not a single person has observed what happened yrs ago whether that be thousand millions or billions

 

[alang1216]

you can only see whats happening today,,,and not in history especially millions or billions of yrs ago

Thinking that what happened in the past is different from what is happening today in the absence of evidence is a flawed assumption.

 

[progressive hunter]

a

you can only see whats happening today,,,and not in history especially millions or billions of yrs ago

Thinking that what happened in the past is different from what is happening today in the absence of evidence is a flawed assumption.

only if I claim a specific thing happened,,,which I didnt

evos are the only ones claiming fact without proof

 

[alang1216]

Thinking that what happened in the past is different from what is happening today in the absence of evidence is a flawed assumption.

only if I claim a specific thing happened,,,which I didnt

evos are the only ones claiming fact without proof

Not correct. Claiming something didn't happen when the evidence says it did is a flawed assumption. I could say that it didn't ever hail in the past. Flawed assumption.

 

[progressive hunter]

Thinking that what happened in the past is different from what is happening today in the absence of evidence is a flawed assumption.

only if I claim a specific thing happened,,,which I didnt

evos are the only ones claiming fact without proof

Not correct. Claiming something didn't happen when the evidence says it did is a flawed assumption. I could say that it didn't ever hail in the past. Flawed assumption.

again why are you keeping the evidence a secret,,,,

 

[alang1216]

again why are you keeping the evidence a secret,,,,

Hardly a secret. I'm sure even non-geologist know it. Basically processes we see today are the same processes that have shaped the earth.

u·ni·form·i·tar·i·an·ism
/ˌyo͞onəˌfôrməˈterēənizəm/
noun
GEOLOGY

1. the theory that changes in the earth's crust during geological history have resulted from the action of continuous and uniform processes.

 

[progressive hunter]

again why are you keeping the evidence a secret,,,,

Hardly a secret. I'm sure even non-geologist know it. Basically processes we see today are the same processes that have shaped the earth.

u·ni·form·i·tar·i·an·ism
/ˌyo͞onəˌfôrməˈterēənizəm/
noun
GEOLOGY

1. the theory that changes in the earth's crust during geological history have resulted from the action of continuous and uniform processes.

thats not scientific because no one has EVER observed it,,,in other words its make believe,,,

and still a theory without proof

 

[deanrd]

the procces on a small scale is just take a handful of dirt/minerals and put it in a bottle of water and shake it,,,as for how long that depends on the contents of the the minerals

Does that process end in the creation of a layer of sediments or a layer of rock? Hint not a rock, you can shake it up again. So what is the next step to creating a layer of sedimentary rock?

time and pressure,,,

That's how diamonds are made.

 

[progressive hunter]

the procces on a small scale is just take a handful of dirt/minerals and put it in a bottle of water and shake it,,,as for how long that depends on the contents of the the minerals

Does that process end in the creation of a layer of sediments or a layer of rock? Hint not a rock, you can shake it up again. So what is the next step to creating a layer of sedimentary rock?

time and pressure,,,

That's how diamonds are made.[/QUOTE

except the ones made in hours in a lab,,,,

 

[deanrd]

again why are you keeping the evidence a secret,,,,

Hardly a secret. I'm sure even non-geologist know it. Basically processes we see today are the same processes that have shaped the earth.

u·ni·form·i·tar·i·an·ism
/ˌyo͞onəˌfôrməˈterēənizəm/
noun
GEOLOGY

1. the theory that changes in the earth's crust during geological history have resulted from the action of continuous and uniform processes.

thats not scientific because no one has EVER observed it,,,in other words its make believe,,,

and still a theory without proof

 

[alang1216]

thats not scientific because no one has EVER observed it,,,in other words its make believe,,,

and still a theory without proof

So unless you see something with your own eyes you don't believe it? Do you believe in atoms or gravity or God?

 

[progressive hunter]

thats not scientific because no one has EVER observed it,,,in other words its make believe,,,

and still a theory without proof

So unless you see something with your own eyes you don't believe it? Do you believe in atoms or gravity or God?

sorry jr atoms and gravity are real and we see can see them everyday,,,where as god is based on faith because there is no proof,,,,just like evolution,,,

 

[alang1216]

thats not scientific because no one has EVER observed it,,,in other words its make believe,,,

and still a theory without proof

So unless you see something with your own eyes you don't believe it? Do you believe in atoms or gravity or God?

sorry jr atoms and gravity are real and we see can see them everyday,,,where as god is based on faith because there is no proof,,,,just like evolution,,,

You've seen an atom? You're eyes are better than mine, what do they look like? What does gravity look like? They truth is you've never seen either, no one has.

You only see the results of gravity, you can't see it, you don't even know what it is or how it works. Do you think gravity was different in the past than it is today? Why? You've never seen an atom why do you believe in them?

Evolution is no different. If you look at the fossil record you can see the results of evolution. If you find a fossil that is not found in rock layers either above or below, that is evidence for evolution and against a single act of creation.

 

[progressive hunter]

thats not scientific because no one has EVER observed it,,,in other words its make believe,,,

and still a theory without proof

So unless you see something with your own eyes you don't believe it? Do you believe in atoms or gravity or God?

sorry jr atoms and gravity are real and we see can see them everyday,,,where as god is based on faith because there is no proof,,,,just like evolution,,,

You've seen an atom? You're eyes are better than mine, what do they look like? What does gravity look like? They truth is you've never seen either, no one has.

You only see the results of gravity, you can't see it, you don't even know what it is or how it works. Do you think gravity was different in the past than it is today? Why? You've never seen an atom why do you believe in them?

Evolution is no different. If you look at the fossil record you can see the results of evolution. If you find a fossil that is not found in rock layers either above or below, that is evidence for evolution and against a single act of creation.

the fossil record is complete bullshit,,,all it shows is something died,,,it doesnt say it gave birth to anything let alone to anything other than its own kind or that life formed from non living matter,,,,

and how do they tell the age of fossils???

that would bring us back to rock layers and their age,,,

back to the circular reasoning problem,,,


you are more than free to worship the religion of your choice but dont push it on me as fact or expect me to pay to have it taught as fact with my taxs

 

[alang1216]

the fossil record is complete bullshit,,,all it shows is something died,,,it doesnt say it gave birth to anything let alone to anything other than its own kind or that life formed from non living matter,,,,

and how do they tell the age of fossils???

that would bring us back to rock layers and their age,,,

back to the circular reasoning problem,,,


you are more than free to worship the religion of your choice but dont push it on me as fact or expect me to pay to have it taught as fact with my taxs

The fossil record has been studied by smart and educated people for centuries. It is incredibly arrogant to dismiss them just because you don't like their findings. Again you're not thinking you're just reacting to inconvenient facts.

Here's a common example from the fossil record. A rock layer contains a unique species of clam, species A. The rock layers above and below contain other species of clam but not species A. The rock layer below the species A layer must be older than species A layer since it was already there when species A lived and died. The rock layer above species A layer must be younger than species A layer since species A already lived and died when the layer above was formed. Absolute age of the species A layer doesn't matter, only that it is younger than layers below it and older than layers above it. Evolution has an explanation, what is your alternative explanation?

 

[progressive hunter]

the fossil record is complete bullshit,,,all it shows is something died,,,it doesnt say it gave birth to anything let alone to anything other than its own kind or that life formed from non living matter,,,,

and how do they tell the age of fossils???

that would bring us back to rock layers and their age,,,

back to the circular reasoning problem,,,


you are more than free to worship the religion of your choice but dont push it on me as fact or expect me to pay to have it taught as fact with my taxs

The fossil record has been studied by smart and educated people for centuries. It is incredibly arrogant to dismiss them just because you don't like their findings. Again you're not thinking you're just reacting to inconvenient facts.

Here's a common example from the fossil record. A rock layer contains a unique species of clam, species A. The rock layers above and below contain other species of clam but not species A. The rock layer below the species A layer must be older than species A layer since it was already there when species A lived and died. The rock layer above species A layer must be younger than species A layer since species A already lived and died when the layer above was formed. Absolute age of the species A layer doesn't matter, only that it is younger than layers below it and older than layers above it. Evolution has an explanation, what is your alternative explanation?

you just showed that its all speculation based on made up assumptions,,,
what if we found fossilized clams on a top layer???or on top of a mountain,,,

even if all that is true it in no way shows clams gave birth to anything but a clam


the assumption is that the layers happened over millions of yrs when its far more likely they happened much faster as seen in a large scale hydro event,,,

one of the things I find hard to believe in the millions of yrs theory is that they are saying only one mineral was blowing around creating the layer and then the next set of millions of yrs a totally different one was doing it,,,and where did they come from???

but in a hydro event it makes perfect sense how it happened,,,also we can see it happen all the time on a smaller scale with local floods

 

[Hollie]

thats not scientific because no one has EVER observed it,,,in other words its make believe,,,

and still a theory without proof

So unless you see something with your own eyes you don't believe it? Do you believe in atoms or gravity or God?

sorry jr atoms and gravity are real and we see can see them everyday,,,where as god is based on faith because there is no proof,,,,just like evolution,,,

There is proof of evolution. You haven’t emerged from your coma, right?