Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Science has found no such animal.
Police don't always discover a murder weapon but can still find the guilty person and put together a completely accurate report on what happened and successfully prosecute.
As I posted in another thread: Before people knew about gravity did they float of into space? Even when they knew, but lacked the sufficient scientific means to test and truly understand it did they float of into space?
No to both. The scientific evidence supporting the evolution of man is far from anecdotal. It is far from circumstantial. That we don't have a "missing link" as people such as yourself harp on about is far from crippling. The leaps and jumps the theory has made in the relatively short time that it has existed is astounding. It has yet to take a step, or be disproved. The world is a big place, if such a fossil exists it will take time to find.
But even if we don't find it, all the other evidence fits in fully with the theory. The fossil record, genetics, the age of the world and mankind - evidence. As always provide your evidence.
Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Police don't always discover a murder weapon but can still find the guilty person and put together a completely accurate report on what happened and successfully prosecute.As I posted in another thread: Before people knew about gravity did they float of into space? Even when they knew, but lacked the sufficient scientific means to test and truly understand it did they float of into space?
No to both. The scientific evidence supporting the evolution of man is far from anecdotal. It is far from circumstantial. That we don't have a "missing link" as people such as yourself harp on about is far from crippling. The leaps and jumps the theory has made in the relatively short time that it has existed is astounding. It has yet to take a step, or be disproved. The world is a big place, if such a fossil exists it will take time to find.
But even if we don't find it, all the other evidence fits in fully with the theory. The fossil record, genetics, the age of the world and mankind - evidence. As always provide your evidence.
I haven't harped on any missing link. Did you read the articles that I posted today in the Creation vs. Evolution thread? I didn't think so.
Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Police don't always discover a murder weapon but can still find the guilty person and put together a completely accurate report on what happened and successfully prosecute.As I posted in another thread: Before people knew about gravity did they float of into space? Even when they knew, but lacked the sufficient scientific means to test and truly understand it did they float of into space?
No to both. The scientific evidence supporting the evolution of man is far from anecdotal. It is far from circumstantial. That we don't have a "missing link" as people such as yourself harp on about is far from crippling. The leaps and jumps the theory has made in the relatively short time that it has existed is astounding. It has yet to take a step, or be disproved. The world is a big place, if such a fossil exists it will take time to find.
But even if we don't find it, all the other evidence fits in fully with the theory. The fossil record, genetics, the age of the world and mankind - evidence. As always provide your evidence.
And yet scientists have no idea how old something is. They do tests on it to discover their "age" but to be just they have no clue whether or not that age is even correct.
It seems the more scientists who study astronomy tend to believe in God more because the universe is in such a perfect order that they believe that it couldn't have happened by accident. The earth (for example) is at the perfect location to have life. Any closer we would burn up; any further we would freeze. It is also the perfect size. Any bigger we would be like Mars, any smaller we would be more like Venus.
Originally posted by ESB -1138
And yet scientists have no idea how old something is. They do tests on it to discover their "age" but to be just they have no clue whether or not that age is even correct.It seems the more scientists who study astronomy tend to believe in God more because the universe is in such a perfect order that they believe that it couldn't have happened by accident. The earth (for example) is at the perfect location to have life. Any closer we would burn up; any further we would freeze. It is also the perfect size. Any bigger we would be like Mars, any smaller we would be more like Venus.
Not even I could put that better. In a nutshell.
💃
clap
Originally posted by ESB -1138
And yet scientists have no idea how old something is. They do tests on it to discover their "age" but to be just they have no clue whether or not that age is even correct.
Woeful ignorance of scientific process. You are mistaking doubt and the need for verify through numerous tests with never actually knowing.
Relative and Absolute means of dating exist in a variety of forms, intended to be used in certain situations. It is quite possible for there to be contaminants and the like that lead to uncertain or erroneous readings, but that is hardly the end.
The many techniques can often produce a date that has a very high percentage of being correct. Scientists do know how old things are. Scientists can know how old things are. To claim it as a total that a small number of inconclusive or simply wrong answers invalidates all the rest doesn't work.
Out of interest, how old does the Bible say the Earth is?
It seems the more scientists who study astronomy tend to believe in God more because the universe is in such a perfect order that they believe that it couldn't have happened by accident. The earth (for example) is at the perfect location to have life. Any closer we would burn up; any further we would freeze. It is also the perfect size. Any bigger we would be like Mars, any smaller we would be more like Venus.
I haven't seen any evidence that huge numbers of scientists believe in God simply because of the mathematically low probability of the universe existing as it does. In fact I know at least one Astronomy student who asks:
"God? If he is capable of creating perfectly why waste his time with all the rest of the universe? Why not a single sun and earth? Millions of stars, millions of planets - places where things aren't perfect for life, and where they might be - the good chance there are aliens. Why did "God" make so much if only the earth mattered? What does the rest do? According to the Bible nothing. But it is up there, going through natural processes. Stars being born and dying naturally with no sign of a God behind it. Planets forming and being destroyed with no God in site. We can say how our sun formed and why the planets are where they are and do what they do. No sign of God in any of it."
Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Woeful ignorance of scientific process. You are mistaking doubt and the need for verify through numerous tests with never actually knowing.Relative and Absolute means of dating exist in a variety of forms, intended to be used in certain situations. It is quite possible for there to be contaminants and the like that lead to uncertain or erroneous readings, but that is hardly the end.
The many techniques can often produce a date that has a very high percentage of being correct. Scientists do know how old things are. Scientists can know how old things are. To claim it as a total that a small number of inconclusive or simply wrong answers invalidates all the rest doesn't work.
Out of interest, how old does the Bible say the Earth is?
I haven't seen any evidence that huge numbers of scientists believe in God simply because of the mathematically low probability of the universe existing as it does. In fact I know at least one Astronomy student who asks:
"God? If he is capable of creating perfectly why waste his time with all the rest of the universe? Why not a single sun and earth? Millions of stars, millions of planets - places where things aren't perfect for life, and where they might be - the good chance there are aliens. Why did "God" make so much if only the earth mattered? What does the rest do? According to the Bible nothing. But it is up there, going through natural processes. Stars being born and dying naturally with no sign of a God behind it. Planets forming and being destroyed with no God in site. We can say how our sun formed and why the planets are where they are and do what they do. No sign of God in any of it."
So God has spell everything out for you and your astronomy crony, divulge His mysteries to you two for you to believe? Friend, God said that the secret things belong to Him. God does not tell us everything (He doesn't have to) in the Bible. God only reveals to us the things that He wants us to know. The rest we will find out in Heaven.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
So God has spell everything out for you and your astronomy crony, divulge His mysteries to you two for you to believe? Friend, God said that the secret things belong to Him. God does not tell us everything (He doesn't have to) in the Bible. God only reveals to us the things that He wants us to know. The rest we will find out in Heaven.
Ah, the classic "God works in mysterious ways" - so that is basically the veto to everything, and there is everything, that doesn't point to God?
And you were missing the point I feel. The whole "The Universe is so perfect for us to exist, it could only have been God's work"
God created the sun? So why are suns still ebing born, has God put on an automated creation process?
God created the Earth? What about all the other planets out there, being born and dying naturally? The mass of elements that exist are not native to earth. And there were planets and stars around long before the earth, and will be long after. Our sun is average.
And there are so many. Probability of things get better when there is such a large number. Astronomers can worlds with no life because of many reasons. But they are also finding ones that look like there could be chances.