Your first argument makes no sense unless you are arguing against someone claiming that a human being created all matter and the universe, which no one is.
What kind of natural laws are you referencing here?
I know that biblical creation is s religious belief. I've admitted that on many occasions. I have a religion, yes . But, so do Darwinian evolutionists whether they admit it or not.
__________________ Paleontologists have tried to turn Archaeopteryx into an earth bound feathered dinosaur. But it is not. It is a bird, a perching bird. And no amount of 'paleobabble' is going to change that.-- Alan Feduccia-a world authority on birds, quoted in "Archaeopteryx:Early Bird Catches a Can of Worms," Science 1994, p.764-765
I brought it up to point out how it is so complex that it couldn't possibly have come about thru pure chance. There had to be an intelligence to it.
All of them. All of the order and natural and scientific laws in the universe. There is much more logical that an intelligence created the laws and order than to believe they all came about by chance.
__________________ Paleontologists have tried to turn Archaeopteryx into an earth bound feathered dinosaur. But it is not. It is a bird, a perching bird. And no amount of 'paleobabble' is going to change that.-- Alan Feduccia-a world authority on birds, quoted in "Archaeopteryx:Early Bird Catches a Can of Worms," Science 1994, p.764-765
...and you believe what you believe no need to get all pissy pants about it. See, two can play that game.
You are guilty of doing exactly what you accuse me of doing, hypocrite. You must be a leftist, they love to project.
__________________ Paleontologists have tried to turn Archaeopteryx into an earth bound feathered dinosaur. But it is not. It is a bird, a perching bird. And no amount of 'paleobabble' is going to change that.-- Alan Feduccia-a world authority on birds, quoted in "Archaeopteryx:Early Bird Catches a Can of Worms," Science 1994, p.764-765
If they believe even though it hasn't been completely accepted then yes, I guess it is somewhat religious without any rituals or tenets.
That's great thing about science though, they aren't telling you it is irrefutable fact. It's a theory. One that does hold weight. Not counting it as science is biased especially when Biblical creation is no more fact based.
I personally do not believe in any God that has been introduced, but I can't diprove it either. I wouldn't say you are a moron because you believe it either.
Ok so you’re just interpreting the evidence differently to support your predetermined beliefs. This is not scientific. Science starts from nothing and works from there to get to the position that has the most evidence to support it. IDs work backwards, starting from their religious belief and trying to find evidence to support that. Hence, not science. The Big Bang is supported by scientists not because they want it or need to to be true but because through their testing it is what is the most likely to have occurred. They have no vested interest in it being true. If another theory is posited that had more evidence then the Big Bang theory would be abandoned for the new one. The same is not true with your religious beliefs.
Not at all. I didn't call you an idiot for believing in god nor did I tout evolution/big bang as the clear and only explanation. All I did was call out your bias.
Also, I think I was centered more as a libertarian last time I took one of the quizzes.
__________________
Last edited by socool8520 on Aug 2nd, 2020 at 08:30 PM
Science is things that can be observed and tested. The only part of Darwinism that holds any weight whatsoever in actual science is microevolution thru natural selection which isn't really evolutionary at all, tbh, as no new information is gained. I merely call it microevolution because that is what evolutionists call those small changes. I don't actually agree with the term.
The Big Bang is also just as unprovable as Darwinian evolution is and every bit as stupid. Sorry, but I will never call those things science because there is no actual proof for them.
__________________ Paleontologists have tried to turn Archaeopteryx into an earth bound feathered dinosaur. But it is not. It is a bird, a perching bird. And no amount of 'paleobabble' is going to change that.-- Alan Feduccia-a world authority on birds, quoted in "Archaeopteryx:Early Bird Catches a Can of Worms," Science 1994, p.764-765
Nor did I call you an idiot for believing in Big Bang or Darwinian evolution.
Good for you. That's much better than being a leftist.
__________________ Paleontologists have tried to turn Archaeopteryx into an earth bound feathered dinosaur. But it is not. It is a bird, a perching bird. And no amount of 'paleobabble' is going to change that.-- Alan Feduccia-a world authority on birds, quoted in "Archaeopteryx:Early Bird Catches a Can of Worms," Science 1994, p.764-765
__________________ Paleontologists have tried to turn Archaeopteryx into an earth bound feathered dinosaur. But it is not. It is a bird, a perching bird. And no amount of 'paleobabble' is going to change that.-- Alan Feduccia-a world authority on birds, quoted in "Archaeopteryx:Early Bird Catches a Can of Worms," Science 1994, p.764-765
Their scientific theories whether you lend them credence or not. Some amount of math, evidence from fossils, simulations, etc. went into the theories. They didn't just say, :we evolved from an amoeba, no explanation needed" or "There was and explosion, no explanation needed".
But you did speak as if biblical creation is the only way things could have unfolded while attacking other's viewpoints. That was the bias/arrogance I was talking about. You were even warned about it.
They are called theories, yes. But I don't agree that they are theories because an actual theory has strong evidence to support it. At best. they are just hypothesis. I still think of them as more of a non-theistic religion though.
__________________ Paleontologists have tried to turn Archaeopteryx into an earth bound feathered dinosaur. But it is not. It is a bird, a perching bird. And no amount of 'paleobabble' is going to change that.-- Alan Feduccia-a world authority on birds, quoted in "Archaeopteryx:Early Bird Catches a Can of Worms," Science 1994, p.764-765
Maybe I'm remembering it wrong but I'm pretty sure that all I said was that creation is more logical to me than the big bang and Darwinism.
__________________ Paleontologists have tried to turn Archaeopteryx into an earth bound feathered dinosaur. But it is not. It is a bird, a perching bird. And no amount of 'paleobabble' is going to change that.-- Alan Feduccia-a world authority on birds, quoted in "Archaeopteryx:Early Bird Catches a Can of Worms," Science 1994, p.764-765
KMC Community Forums
Aug 2nd, 2020 08:11 PM
