Taxes

Originally posted by sonship

"One of your statements in your post seems ..."

Everything beyond this point was warped anti-theist nonsense.

I would seem then that you have condemned your own words as nonsense.I have found that using scientific evidence in the face of religious belief is usually pointless.In this case I have used your own statement and placed it into a whole world context,this it appears you do not wish to discuss in a rational manner but dismiss with words such as "warped or nonsense".It seems that religion enables one to ignore selected scientific evidence and inconvenient dialogue.This is very effective way of defending a position,and says a lot about the religious view point.

Originally posted by OdBod
I would seem then that you have condemned your own words as nonsense.I have found that using scientific evidence in the face of religious belief is usually pointless.In this case I have used your own statement and placed it into a whole world context,this it appears you do not wish to discuss in a rational manner but dismiss with words such as "warped or nonse s is very effective way of defending a position,and says a lot about the religious view point.

ignored selected scientific evidence, for example?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
ignored selected scientific evidence, for example?

Evolutionary evidence.

Originally posted by OdBod
Evolutionary evidence.

what evolutionary evidence? can you cite a single observable example of evolution in action? other tries have been the peppered moth and various bacteria.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
what evolutionary evidence? can you cite a single observable example of evolution in action? other tries have been the peppered moth and various bacteria.

The distribution and type of fossilised life forms.

Originally posted by OdBod
The distribution and type of fossilised life forms.

this data is open to interpretation and the theist can easily cite that it points to creation, just as easily as the materialist can cite it as a validation for his hypothesis.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
this data is open to interpretation and the theist can easily cite that it points to creation, just as easily as the materialist can cite it as a validation for his hypothesis.

What is the theistic explanation for there being no fossils of any contemporary mammalian species ever having been found in rock strata which contain dinosaur fossils?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
this data is open to interpretation and the theist can easily cite that it points to creation, just as easily as the materialist can cite it as a validation for his hypothesis.

I agree, everything is open to interpretation,and that the validity of an interpretation is determined by probability.With reference to the fossil record how would the theist interpret it?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
this data is open to interpretation and the theist can easily cite that it points to creation, just as easily as the materialist can cite it as a validation for his hypothesis.

The data is NOT open for interpretation and only an idiot can claim that it points to creation...


Believing in creationism is as stupid as believing in a flat earth.

And just as supported by the evidence.

Drug resistance in bacteria to antibiotics is an example of evolution.

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
What is the theistic explanation for there being no fossils of any contemporary mammalian species ever having been found in rock strata which contain dinosaur fossils?

don't know without researching it.

Originally posted by googlefudge
The data is NOT open for interpretation and only an idiot can claim that it points to creation...


Believing in creationism is as stupid as believing in a flat earth.

And just as supported by the evidence.

Drug resistance in bacteria to antibiotics is an example of evolution.

yawn.

Originally posted by OdBod
I agree, everything is open to interpretation,and that the validity of an interpretation is determined by probability.With reference to the fossil record how would the theist interpret it?

It can be interpreted to support creationism, the fact that vertebrates appear without precedent, that there is an explosion of life at the beginning of the Cambrian period, etc etc.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
It can be interpreted to support creationism, the fact that vertebrates appear without precedent, that there is an explosion of life at the beginning of the Cambrian period, etc etc.

Wrong and wrong.... No facts here.

Originally posted by googlefudge
The data is NOT open for interpretation and only an idiot can claim that it points to creation...


Believing in creationism is as stupid as believing in a flat earth.

And just as supported by the evidence.

Drug resistance in bacteria to antibiotics is an example of evolution.

no drug resistance is an example of adaptation, not transmutation.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yawn.

Come on Robbie you did ask for an example of evolution in action!