Fort Fun Indiana
Diamond Member
- Mar 10, 2017
- 96,163
- 71,663
You just said without regard to evolution....?Not so. Without regard to evolution, where did everything come from.
Maybe the universe was created. That doesn't conflict with evolution
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You just said without regard to evolution....?Not so. Without regard to evolution, where did everything come from.
This is where you go look up something for yourself.What is their shared evolutionary past?
Ok, so this is what you do?Selection.
No, you believe it is not only possible but absolutely certain that a sky daddy did it with magic.
What do you need, then?So we both agree it is possible. I just don't need magic.
Well, of course the most recent common ancestor had to be human.Because that is a measure of ...
...Listen up this time....
The MOST RECENT COMMON FEMALE
Yes, I literally just introduced to you the concept of the most recent common female ancestor and how she had to be a human.
Do you or you not understand why this is? Think on it.
(But technically, she was an ape, and so are you. So am i. But...baby steps)
Oooh . . .We know with certainty abiogenesis occurred. Life on the planet is proof of that.
It was either a naturally occurring process or It was a supernatural event…. or maybe space aliens.
Give us something to consider for life on the planet being a result of Lord Shiva. Shirley, you must have something to support the notion that, “the gawds did it”.,
Just selection and physical laws.What do you need, then?
You don't seem to get how this double edged sword works:Oooh . . .
Once you admit the possibility of the supernatural, it takes the wind out of your rhetorical twists and turns to explain life absent the supernatural doesn't it?
What physical laws? Just give the three most important.Just selection and physical laws.
Good thing that I haven't insisted on magic then.You don't seem to get how this double edged sword works:
Once YOU insist upon magic, you have disqualified yourself from any discussion of evidence. You have literally foregone the concept of evidence and have reduced yourself to nothing but a dimestore shaman making supernatural claims .
You can never claim to have evidence for your magical claims or against anything else.
That's what magic is.
All of them. A silly question on your part.What physical laws? Just give the three most important.
Oops, made the same mistake again. You believe in the fact of abiogenesis and have faith that it was a magic trick by a sky daddy.I think you are trying to slip this debate away from abiogenesis, which you announced that you have faith in, to evolution.
Oh yes you do. I am not playing this game with you.Good thing that I haven't insisted on magic then.
Oooh . . .
Once you admit the possibility of the supernatural, it takes the wind out of your rhetorical twists and turns to explain life absent the supernatural doesn't it?
I don't know anyone who has ''faith'' in science. Faith doesn’t claim evidence and it can not claim evidence. That's because faith is devoid of evidence. I don't need faith to reach conclusions. I can use supported data not reliant on magic and supernaturalismOr faith.![]()
Oh yes you do. I am not playing this game with you.
You think your magical beliefs are "special" and shouldn't go on the shelf with all other magical nonsense.
That is your handicap, not mine.
Ok, you "two." I don't know why you feel you need two accounts to repeat yourself(es) over and over, while never actually responding to what I actually said.Feel free to believe in magic and supernaturalism as an answer to anything. Would you care to offer a single event in human history that demonstrably establishes a supernatural (unnatural) event, one that can be directly attributed to any one of the gods?
Magic has nothing to do with supernaturalism so you're wrong again. Atheists are usually wrong. You haven't been paying attention as I provided 7 days of creation, the global flood, creation scientists being the best scientists in history, plate tectonics, fountains of the deep, and more.Feel free to believe in magic and supernaturalism as an answer to anything. Would you care to offer a single event in human history that demonstrably establishes a supernatural (unnatural) event, one that can be directly attributed to any one of the gods?
I don't see how that addresses any requirement for supernaturalism to be a part of the natural world.Ok, you "two." I don't know why you feel you need two accounts to repeat yourself(es) over and over, while never actually responding to what I actually said.
But I do know that you don't need me for that, since you make up your own "opposing" arguments to debate.
Have fun!
Billions have 'faith' in science, that science will save us. Billions also have faith in God, that God will save us. I have more faith in God than science.I don't know anyone who has ''faith'' in science. Faith doesn’t claim evidence and it can not claim evidence. That's because faith is devoid of evidence. I don't need faith to reach conclusions. I can use supported data not reliant on magic and supernaturalism
God does not need us, but we need Him and His salvation. The Bible tells us He is the origin of everything, but that we were sidetracked by Satan's tempting the first humans into sin. It changed the world and universe and thus we need His salvation. Just look at the atheists and unforgiven being sidetracked by evolution or evilution today.I don't see how that addresses any requirement for supernaturalism to be a part of the natural world.
I responded directly to what you said, as anyone can see for themselves. Your "poor me" act isn't going to fly.Ok, you "two." I don't know why you feel you need two accounts to repeat yourself(es) over and over, while never actually responding to what I actually said.
But I do know that you don't need me for that, since you make up your own "opposing" arguments to debate.
Have fun!
No. People TRUST science due to having mountains of good evidence that shows thry should. That is not faith. That is a safe bet. That is an evidence-based determination. IE, the opposite of faith.Billions have 'faith' in science, that science will save us. Billions also have faith in God, that God will save us. I have more faith in God than science.![]()