Um, what? The names were right there! Plus I’m no biologist but I recognized two of the species listed!
As T said:
Why? I knew what the diagrams were showing but I looked the species up online and read about them anyway; if you want to know, do you expect someone else to do obvious homework for you?!?
Why is you being unclear someone else’s problem?
In your eyes, maybe.
But you wear rose coloured glasses.
It is by no means as clear cut or certain as you claim, and never can be.
omuter simulations? I have seen evolutionary simulations and they are so far fetches as to be laughable. Computer symulations prove nothing, just like you analogies.
But not biology.
You really do not get it. There is no comparison. The type of data is only matched because fossils are in rocks!
But then, principles are not your strong suit.
Stupid question. God did not pprovide anything. The evidence is wht it is. History.
Thesiitic Evolution does not change the data, it only changes the interprettion and methodology.
You jut have never met someone like me. All you undrstand is Biblical criticism, not Philosophical, or even iscientific criticism.
You aappear to think thqt science is bove criticism!
(And consider any science that is not yours to be fase)
Try again.
Richard
Wow . . . just wow.
You may want to run outside. I hear there are clouds that need to be yelled at.
Biology requires physics, both chemical and mechanical.
That you can pair the final sentence with the first two indicates a serious ignorance of geology.
Only true if God is not sovereign over the universe.
So you’re contradicting yourself! If your assertion just above is correct, then ToE has to be.
An impossible circumstance.
I understand both just fine – you just want to set your personal philosophy above anything else, biblical or scientific.
No, I think that science has to be discussed in scientific terms, not subjective feelings from outside science.
I rarely say anything about “my” science.
Science requires philosophy, but you do not see that/
Non sequitor. (We are not talking theology)
Ilikewise (But it does indicate how your mind works)
That you have never met anyone like me?
Clearly no
False
False
Sceience is not an island, nor a law unto itself
Proof you misunderstood.
You seem to think you “own” scientific truth (all of it)
Anyone who thinks differently is using
And you have repeatedly claime that YECs invent science.
Go right ahead then, I am not stopping you.
(I will allow that insult once, and only once)
You apear to have run out of valid arguments’to resort to such talk
When you can be civi get back to me
Richard
The moment you mention God and His action (or lack thereof) you are talking theology.
As in they make stuff up? and lie about science? Yes, they do, because they put subjective feelings above science.
God did not specifically bury and fossilise every skelton that has been found or is yet to be found.
God created, but He does not control the minutia, If he did there would be no doubts at all about ToE. (not that you seem to have any)
Oh dear, they do not subscribe to St Roymonds definitions of science and scietific view.
You talk like a dictator.
Richard
Really?
You’ve just admitted you don’t recognise well-known fossil names, and can’t be bothered to look them up. That your position is based on and maintained through deliberate ignorance.
You might think we have to convince you. But that’s not the case. Having you admit you know almost nothing and have no intention of remedying that works very well indeed.
I will wager that at least 90( of the world population could not identify those creatures.
You live in cloud cuckoo land.
Especiallyy as they did not prove what you were trying to prove.
Yes, really. WHy should I double check you are not inventing stuff up?
If the evidence given is not self explanatory then it fails. That is how this works.
Perhaps this qualifies as the proof of Christ’s death?
It is about the same quality as your illustarion, possibly clearer.
Richard
Because you’re an adult and not a lazy child?
By that criterion he should have included the complete contents of the Library of Congress related to the image, organized by comprehension level from kindergarten through post-doc level.
Far less clear – it doesn’t identify anything about the figure.
The thing is, mature adults will look into something that is posted for their information, not expect someone else to do everything for them. As I noted, I looked them all up and my level of involvement is less than yours!
Quote-mining negated:
But a lot of those 90% would look them up.
You didn’t.
To quote some-one: “You apear to have run out of valid arguments’to resort to such talk”
To see if the criticisms and refutations of your position are valid, and you should change your views.
Not doing so indicates a complete lack of interest in whether what you say is correct - which renders everything you write on any subject nugatory.
I am fed up with your rude and superior attitude.
Do not expect any replies. I may respond but I may well not.
Richard
The only rudeness in my post was where I was quoting you.
This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.
“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6
This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.
