@pb1022 saidI believe that you believe this.
You’d be surprised how many Christians are in the world. Far more Christians than atheists.
And you’d be surprised how many people, including many scientists, recognize the theory of evolution as the biggest scientific fraud of the 20th- and 21st centuries.
Folks in the 1800s can be forgiven for their ignorance in believing Darwin’s fairy tale.
But with revelations of how complex the cell and DNA are, that ignorance is no longer understandable.
@avalanchethecat
Actually everything is evidence for or against there isn’t a set of facts that only one side gets to use and the other doesn’t.
@kellyjay saidOh sure. Some evidence is more equal than other evidence though.
@avalanchethecat
Actually everything is evidence for or against there isn’t a set of facts that only one side gets to use and the other doesn’t.
@avalanchethecat saidNo, the evidence is equal across the board, some interpretations are stronger than others.
Oh sure. Some evidence is more equal than other evidence though.
1 edit
@kellyjay saidEr, no. For example, testimony of the defendant's drunken partner is not of equal value to video of the crime being committed.
No, the evidence is equal across the board, some interpretations are stronger than others.
@avalanchethecat saidAnd you’ve got neither testimony nor video evidence of macroevolution.
Er, no. For example, testimony of the defendant's drunken partner is not of equal value to video of the crime being committed.
Christians have testimony of eyewitnesses of the Resurrected Christ.
@kellyjay saidThere is a principle known as WoE or Weight of Evidence. It is a tool used in various fields to enable one to determine the relative value of different sorts of evidence.
No, the evidence is equal across the board, some interpretations are stronger than others.
@avalanchethecat saidAnd what evidence do you have of macroevolution?
There is a principle known as WoE or Weight of Evidence. It is a tool used in various fields to enable one to determine the relative value of different sorts of evidence.
Evolutionist: “The evidence is overwhelming. It’s everywhere!”
Me: “Can you cite any?”
Evolutionist: “Let’s talk about creationism.”
@avalanchethecat saidThat would be equally bad 😀
Er, no. For example, testimony of the defendant's drunken partner is not of equal value to video of the crime being committed.
@avalanchethecat saidHow many transitional fossils are there?
All of the fossils. All of them.
Darwin said the number would have to be “truly enormous” if his theory were true. Is it?
@avalanchethecat saidCute.
*yawn*
I hope if you learned anything from our conversation, it’s how important it is for you to think for yourself and not be closed-minded and dogmatic. And don’t rely on other people to do your thinking for you.
Take care and be well.
1 edit
@avalanchethecat saidI'm not arguing some weigh differently than others, only that what is weak is weak, strong is strong, it is what it is. A fossil doesn't change because a Thesistic Creationist is looking at it then turns into something else when an Atheistic evolutionist is looking at it. It is what it is, our interpretations may vary in strength, but that will not change the evidence from being what it is.
There is a principle known as WoE or Weight of Evidence. It is a tool used in various fields to enable one to determine the relative value of different sorts of evidence.
Here is something about evidence you may like/dislike (I tried to cover my bases) 🙂
@pb1022 saidNo, my main take-away from our 'conversation' is that religion can completely ruin a person's education.
Cute.
I hope if you learned anything from our conversation, it’s how important it is for you to think for yourself and not be closed-minded and dogmatic. And don’t rely on other people to do your thinking for you.
Take care and be well.