The Case for Theism

[genkaus]

Hypothetically or theoretically anything is possible.

No its not. The illogical and irrational are still excluded from hypothetical and theoretical consideration.

So if you want a hypothetical answer to a hypothetical question I will concede that hypothetically its concievable there could be a set of circumstances in which neither design or happenstance is the case.

And since your premises of design and happenstance also fall under hypotheticals, they would fall in the same category as those set of circumstances. You seem to be getting it finally.

Will you agree that by that absurd standard, no dichotomy is true?

No. As I said, if alternate options presented to a dichotomy are illogical then the dichotomy would be true.

The fact remains though that for all practical purposes in the real world (not the imaginary hypothetical one) the dichotomy holds true.

As has been demonstrated multiple times - no, it doesn't.

What have you really gained by dragging out this conversation just so you can say hypthetically the dichotomy isn't true?

Given that your dichotomy itself is hypothetical, it can now be established as a false dichotomy. Not that it wasn't before.

The case I am making is inferential.

And your inference is incorrect due to your premise being incorrect.

As far as I'm concerned evolution is a fact...its Darwinism I am skeptical of.

Then your skepticism is about half a century out of date.