Originally posted by FMF
What is your reliable way of testing your own belief that the stuff [that is purportedly flying in the face of what Dawkins believes] is "strong contradictory evidence"?
I've brought up two examples of this at these boards... twice. And both times the response was the same. One was dismissed as irrelevant and other got no response at all....
Nitrate levels left behind by the first living organisms (dismissed as irrelevant) and what the fossil record reveals about the Cambrian explosion (no response).
An abiogenesis event would have left behind high levels of nitrates, and it would have been the 'smoking gun' evidence irrefutably proving abiogenesis. But apparently when they didn't find these expected high concentrations of nitrates it was no longer regarded as evidence... because there was no evidence for them to regard. It doesn't matter though, because both times I've brought this up it was pointed out evolution has nothing to say about how life began, it's only a study of what happened after it began... or after it got here from somewhere else, like on a meteorite. Or when aliens visited and forgot to clean up after themselves. Or maybe it popped in from another dimension like a multiverse, or something like that.... It MUST have come from somewhere, it couldn't have just magically appeared out of thin air!
But the most revealing response I got was when I talked about the Cambrian explosion. Both times the response was zero. I can't comment on a response when there is no response, so apparently Dawkin was right... ignoring strong contradictory evidence can work to sustain a persistent belief.