Those are conclusions drawn from evidence, not assumptions.
1 Like
You still are not able to change your mindset.
@Henry_Dalcke needs to support his claim. The burden of proof lies with the person making the claim.
1 Like
Here is the evidence and conclusions that follow from that evidence:
Then how comes that we accept an explanation as long as it’s not refuted??
We accept an explanation when it has evidence to back it. You need to supply evidence for your claims.
2 Likes
I’m an agnostic. Atheism nor theism drive my interpretations.
I’ve presented the evidence supporting my model several times over. I’ve even mentioned it in my paper. Either you are blind or not willing to accept its argumentative weight! Fascinating.
I figured that, of course.
Anyway, guys.
Let my points sink in for a while. I’m tired of repeating myself again and again.
Good night. (23:00 over here.)
Atheism NOR* Theism
You’re interpreting the data from the standpoint of naturalistic, materialistic evolutionism. That’s your presupposition. Your transcendental background is scientifically irrelevant to the topic.
It’s either long gradual unguided processes or special creation and a global flood catastrophe which are to be tested.
So cool how you can read my mind. I couldn’t care less if evolutionary theory or something like progressive creationism was true.
I see a lot of bare assertions, but no evidence. You claim that there are variation ranges, but offer no evidence for them. You don’t have an explanation as to why your proposed process would necessarily produce a nested hierarchy.
And have I said I accept evolution? I’ve been attacking your philosophy not your science.
You admitted to be an agnostic atheist. If you don’t believe in a creator, you have to have another explanation for how you came into existence than creation, right? What’s the alternative? Evolution, of course. No need to read your mind. Deductive logic. 
I wanted to quickly post something for you. Maybe it’s clarifying a couple of things a bit better.:
How do Paradigms Explain the Creation & Evolution Debate? - Dr. Paul Nelson - YouTube
Perhaps you should ask your parents how you came into existence.
2 Likes
I did no such thing. It was a typo where I said not theism. I’m agnostic with slight theistic leanings. I’m an agnostic who very much wants theism to be true. Because I believe if it were, the world would be a better place, I might get to see loved ones again in an afterlife, and perhaps my battle with cancer would be easier because I would have a God there to help me. Care to try again?
Well, i beg you pardon, then.
What hinders you to become a Christian?
It’s somehow ironic that you refer me to an eyewitness for how I came into existence while at the same time you are not willing to be referred to an even more objective eyewitness: God.