Creation vs. Evolution

[njmorrell]

This is one of the wackiest threads I have ever seen. There is zero evidence for creation and tons and tons of evidence for evolution. Try and understand the difference between a hypothesis (not proven but likely) and scientific theory (De facto proof).

 

[Notso_Ken]

I find this very curious......


B) Evolution is fact not theory.

I'm sorry, but evolution doesn't even fit the scientific definition of "theory", therefore it is at best a hypothesis. The "theory" of evolution does NOT suggest a way to test the theory. Therefore, it is NOT a theory. To be a theory, it must suggest a way to test and prove or disprove it. Evolution does not do that,therefore calling it a theory is a fraud.

 

[agilis]

From the King James version of the Old Testament, Exodus 22:

(God instructing the Hebrews in the fine art of sacrificing) "The first born of thy sons shalt thou give unto me"
To be fair, doves and sheep eventually became an acceptable substitute for little boys. These days, contributing to the building fund seems to suffice.

(God prescribing the penalty for being nasty to strangers) " My wrath shall wax hot, and I will kill you with the sword, and your wives (note plural) shall be widows, and your children fatherless."

Here's one that should put the fear of god into a lot of Scubaboard members:
"Whosoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death"
It doesn't matter that you were drunk and that the bar was about to close.

And, of course, the ever popular "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live"

The Word of the Lord.

 

[Soggy]

I'm sorry, but evolution doesn't even fit the scientific definition of "theory", therefore it is at best a hypothesis. The "theory" of evolution does NOT suggest a way to test the theory. Therefore, it is NOT a theory. To be a theory, it must suggest a way to test and prove or disprove it. Evolution does not do that,therefore calling it a theory is a fraud.

LOL...Ignorance is bliss, I guess.

How can I explain this...hmm...let me see.

"You're wrong."

 

[Thalassamania]

LOL...Ignorance is bliss, I guess.

How can I explain this...hmm...let me see.

"You're wrong."

I think you explained as well as it need be explained at this stage. It is amazing how every now again someone discovers the thread, dispairs at reading it, but just can't contain themselves, eh Soggy?

 

[Robert Phillips]

I think you explained as well as it need be explained at this stage. It is amazing how every now again someone discovers the thread,[sic] dispairs at reading it, but just can't contain themselves, eh Soggy?

And now we have come full circle.
Let us start the thread from anew...


njmorrell, kudos for you if you read the whole thread, but was obviously unnecessary to come to your conclusion (though it is obvious you did not as what you have said has been said ad nauseum.) Regardless, you have seen the mentality of the believer who has posted after you and it is rather obvious they did not read the whole thread either. Though it probably matters not, as they have already made up their mind the side of the fence they are on and like to see what happens when they pummel a horse after it has already expired!

 

[dlndavid]

I know what side of the fence I would like to fall.

 

[dlndavid]

'What the hell is that on her D-ring? Is that a chicken?' MHK

maybe it was Moonie?

 

[Robert Phillips]

I know what side of the fence I would like to fall.

That would be the 'right side' but that would be referred to as the wrong, or incorrect side. Even a gentle shove would not sway that!

 

[lamont]

I can't believe this thread is still going...