subjective science

Originally posted by @kellyjay
I'm sure they do, and if they didn't they wouldn't be called facts or evidence.

I saw the cynic in you a long time ago. Cynicism is a kind of hard-shelled skepticism. I expect you will be a success story eventually.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
I'm sure they do, and if they didn't they wouldn't be called facts or evidence.

Are you aware of any evidence not consistent with the notion that life on Earth evolved from simple lifeforms?

Originally posted by @kazetnagorra
Are you aware of any evidence not consistent with the notion that life on Earth evolved from simple lifeforms?

Are you aware of any evidence not consistent with the notion that God created fully functional life forms that have since diversified?

Originally posted by @apathist
Yes, but the theory does not claim nor require that all organisms evolved from a single cell. I am sure that the precursors to life as we know it were popping up all over the place as environment and situation permitted. The 'single cell' you think of wasn't a cell and there were trillions of them, most dying but they kept happening again anyway. We're tal ...[text shortened]... f a piece of sludge from a particular tide-pool as being the start of all life here is nonsense.

So what evidence do you have to suggest that life can just randomly pop out of a chemical soup without intelligent intervention?

Originally posted by @black-beetle
Mistakes are mistakes, and mistakes happen. This is the reason why this purported species was retracted 5-6 years after the publication of the original article. I will not hold my breath though waiting for the "scientific" creationism proponents to correct themselves😵

If building an entire ape man around the tooth of an extinct pig was passed off as science and remained under the radar for so long, how much other 'evidence' could have been fabricated by those so desperate to have their theory accepted?

Originally posted by @kazetnagorra
Are you aware of any evidence not consistent with the notion that life on Earth evolved from simple lifeforms?

Can you tell me what was needed, the qualities of each requirement, the state each needed to be in, what had to be avoided during this time? Can you describe the necessary environment, what made it good, what could have made it bad?

It is difficult to dispute a process that can not be described. So when statements about evidence, without a clear process in play, for all we know the so called evidence may not have anything to do wirh anything we should care about. Yet so called evidence strengthens the case anyway.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Are you aware of any evidence not consistent with the notion that God created fully functional life forms that have since diversified?

Yes, the historical record shows that most lifeforms around today weren't around for most of Earth's history, and instead the earliest lifeforms were simple ones.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
Can you tell me what was needed, the qualities of each requirement, the state each needed to be in, what had to be avoided during this time? Can you describe the necessary environment, what made it good, what could have made it bad?

It is difficult to dispute a process that can not be described. So when statements about evidence, without a clear process ...[text shortened]... ng to do wirh anything we should care about. Yet so called evidence strengthens the case anyway.

Are you aware of any evidence not consistent with the notion that life on Earth evolved from simple lifeforms?

Possible answers:

A. Yes, I am. The evidence is [...].
B. No, I am not aware of such evidence.

Originally posted by @kazetnagorra
Yes, the historical record shows that most lifeforms around today weren't around for most of Earth's history, and instead the earliest lifeforms were simple ones.

You mean 'historical records' that are based upon unprovable assumption upon unprovable assumption. Sure.

Originally posted by @kazetnagorra
Are you aware of any evidence not consistent with the notion that life on Earth evolved from simple lifeforms?

Possible answers:

A. Yes, I am. The evidence is [...].
B. No, I am not aware of such evidence.

Are you aware of any evidence consistent with the notion that life could arise out of non-life without intelligent intervention?

Possible answers:

A. Yes, I am. The evidence is [...].
B. No, I am not aware of such evidence.

Originally posted by @kazetnagorra
Are you aware of any evidence not consistent with the notion that life on Earth evolved from simple lifeforms?

Possible answers:

A. Yes, I am. The evidence is [...].
B. No, I am not aware of such evidence.

I cannot disprove what you can not tell me. Without some concrete fact any argument will support your beliefs, I could knock down one only to have you move on to something else.

At least with God and scripture I cannot hide behind the vagueness of undefined maybe/could've/possibly thisness in some part of a theory that can be changed a dime.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
I cannot disprove what you can not tell me. Without some concrete fact any argument will support your beliefs, I could knock down one only to have you move on to something else.

At least with God and scripture I cannot hide behind the vagueness of undefined maybe/could've/possibly thisness in some part of a theory that can be changed a dime.

On certain topics, I find scripture extremely vague.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
On certain topics, I find scripture extremely vague.

Such as?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Such as?

Genetics,...evolution,.......morality.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
I cannot disprove what you can not tell me. Without some concrete fact any argument will support your beliefs, I could knock down one only to have you move on to something else.

At least with God and scripture I cannot hide behind the vagueness of undefined maybe/could've/possibly thisness in some part of a theory that can be changed a dime.

Does that fall under answer A or answer B?