There is no such "historical bottleneck", sorry for your luck. Nor was there ever an Ark, nor was there ever a flood. Reality is a harsh mistress, has a habit of winnowing away the campfire stories.

(March 23, 2012 at 5:54 pm)Logic Wrote:

(March 20, 2012 at 12:44 am)Drich Wrote: Why do Atheist believe evolution cancels out creationism?

Because an omniscient and omnipotent deity would have to be an absolute moron to create a diverse set of species that eat each other and ultimately become extinct; creationism is beyond preposterous.

Why?

Mostly due to a complete and utter lack of evidence combined with an invocation of magic.

(March 23, 2012 at 6:26 pm)Rhythm Wrote: There is no such "historical bottleneck", sorry for your luck. Nor was there ever an Ark, nor was there ever a flood. Reality is a harsh mistress, has a habit of winnowing away the campfire stories.

Your participation in this line of thought presupposes that it does. If you are willing to concede the idea God created Adam and Eve apart from the rest of the planet, and suppose that their genetic markers would some how magically be any different than Monkey Man. Then by all accounts you have accepted the genesis record of creation at least for the sake of this argument. Of which the story of Noah is apart. thus creating the historical bottle neck that eliminates Monkey man.

No, it doesn't. Control the flow of conversation and thought someplace where it's welcomed, like a church. I've conceded no such thing, I simply told you where you might look to find the evidence (if you were interested, which you clearly aren't). If I did concede this point (which I won't) you'd still have to sell me on your magical flood as it's own miraculous little happening. Baby steps.

Or

You could blather on about what people did or didn't do in your imaginary world (which is remarkably similar to your usual posting habits and irony is never lost on me.)

-Motherfucker think's he's a Jedi...."This is the point you conceded".. -

(March 23, 2012 at 6:38 pm)Drich Wrote: Your participation in this line of thought presupposes that it does. If you are willing to concede the idea God created Adam and Eve apart from the rest of the planet, and suppose that their genetic markers would some how magically be any different than Monkey Man. Then by all accounts you have accepted the genesis record of creation at least for the sake of this argument. Of which the story of Noah is apart. thus creating the historical bottle neck that eliminates Monkey man.

Wait wtf are you talking about?

No adam and eve didn't exist. I have no idea where you come up with bullshit from. 'Monkey man' has been proven to exist. There is a evolutionary fossil record for humans to our ape like ancestors and beyond. So in the logic you just used it blows the bottle up and makes the bible redundant oh dear.

(March 23, 2012 at 6:29 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Mostly due to a complete and utter lack of evidence combined with an invocation of magic.

Perhaps if just one of you who cry for evidence could possibly provide a description of what the evidence you seem to all be looking looked like then maybe one of us could provide it for you.

This is like those of you who cry for evidence and do not know what you are crying for:
(you)
Oh, if I had "It" my life would be better, "It" could help me get a job. "It could help me get married. "It" would help me get ahead in Life!!

(Us)
Can we help you find "IT?"
Is this it?

(You)
no

(Us)
Is this it?

(You)
no

(Us)
Is this it?

(You)
no
(and it went on like this for the last few hundred years)

(Me)
Well what is it?

(ALL OF You)
...........

Understand I will not help you look for "it" until one of you comes up with some Idea of what "it" is!!! I will not help you chase your tales. I am here to provide clarity and answer questions. To do that I must have a complete understanding of what you are asking. If you can not provide this to me then i can not provide what you pretend to seek.

Do your own work. You aren't the first person to complain about evidence, or retreat to the "but what is evidence anyway" line of bullshit when asked to present it. You won't be the last.

(You know what really grinds my gears, that you ask this garbage as a response to my explaining to you exactly what would constitute evidence of your theory.)

Maybe you've heard of something called the scientific method? That'd be a good start.

(March 23, 2012 at 6:53 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Do your own work. You aren't the first person to complain about evidence, or retreat to the "but what is evidence anyway" line of bullshit when asked to present it. You won't be the last.

What is there to be done?

I have found my evidence. You are the ones looking but do not know what you are looking for. How can anyone know what it is you need if you do not know yourself?

---

(March 23, 2012 at 6:59 pm)tobie Wrote: Maybe you've heard of something called the scientific method? That'd be a good start.

Indeed a very good start. Now tell me how it would apply to this understanding of Genesis and Evolution.