So you believe in evolution..

[Darwinian]

I should give up people.. This is a bit like arguing with a stubborn child about the existence of Santa

You never even began. You brought up two unconvincing cases of vestigial organs..you could try engaging the original post. Not one person has constructed a valid argument supporting macro evolution

We have constructed many valid points but you are too deluded and stubbornly sticking to your primitive ideology to see them.

The problem here is that you are a deluded, close minded theist who thinks he has got one over on us atheists whereas we are open minded, knowledgeable atheists who know we have got several over on you.

Or, There's none so blind as those who will not see.

[Darwinning]

You brought up two unconvincing cases of vestigial organs.

Two 'unconvincing' pieces of evidence being more than zero, my friend.

Not one person has constructed a valid argument supporting macro evolution.

Have you even read this?

[power]

You were asked about "The Greatest Show on Earth" power, you closed minded fool not the "God Delusion"

Did you notice "and similar then?"..doesn't look like it.

I'm sorry WTF??

So you haven't read "The Greatest Show on Earth"? A book specifically written for cretinists as to WHY evolution is true and has nothing to do with any deity. Written by an evolutionary biologist; not some scientist looking for work after the genome project had finished

I was unaware dawkins went back to writing about science. No, I haven't read it. Your disdain for scientists who believe in God is startling though..because nearly half of biologists believe in a personal God who answers prayers.

[Darwinning]

Let me ask you a question..have you ever read the bible?

I have. I thought the movie was better. Still not very convincing, though. And I prefer bedtime stories with a happy ending.

[Napoléon]

because nearly half of biologists believe in a personal God who answers prayers.

BULLSHEEEYYYYTTEEEE.

Source please.

[The Grand Nudger]

What is it now, seven pages in? I haven't seen a competent criticism of natural selection thusfar. Such criticisms do exist, you're simply unaware of them. What I have seen is a great deal of bitching and moaning about science, presumably because someone tried to tell you that there was no Santa Clause, and you just weren't ready to give him up. When the last YEC draws their final breath the case for god will become immediately less ignorant by simple virtue of you people's absence.

Do your god a favor and stop making a complete joke of him. Try to imagine a bigger god, capable of establishing forces which you do not personally understand in service of a larger plan that you are incapable of comprehending. If you wish to insist that your god is small and unable to accomplish such things, and that he must somehow conform to the opinions that you have manufactured in place of reality, then so be it. You have a tiny god, not worthy of worship. Let other christians witness to people such as ourselves. You're embarrassing your own faith.

As far as your alternative, such as it is... You would seem to be implying that god used some sort of magic spell to create all life here. What a wonderfully vague explanation. So I have to ask, that magic spell could have been anything yes? You aren't willing to propose the particulars of the incantation used? That miracle could have been anything....except natural selection? I have to be honest here, were I a christian (or any faith really), I'd be scrambling to claim natural selection for the home team. Flat out bending over backwards. That would afford my faith so much more credibility than any faith that relies on magic to explain all that we see around us. To put it another way, if god created all of this, he must have a huge hard on for natural laws. For natural causes and effects. We see it everywhere we care to look. It's obviously his thing. Your desire to invoke magic over nature would seem to be an act of desperation, meant only to prop up a tired fairy tale that was offered as an explanation by men who had nothing to offer. It doesn't seem to have anything to do with god, or what could be said about god (if he existed) by simply studying his supposed creation. You seem to be denying your own god credit for what would be a much greater feat than any "abra-cadabra" moment in life's early history. Why not propose a god who knew just how to get the ball rolling, billions of years prior (and with full knowledge of every minute possibility), to cause things to end up exactly where he wanted? Is this god too great to be yours? Too powerful, too incomprehensible? Would you prefer that we dumb god down and make him a little more recognizable, more human? Are you seriously comfortable in proposing a god that, like us, when faced with what would seem to be impossible or improbable, would be forced to resort to magic? Fairly certain that an omnipotent being would have more options available to it than we have available to us.

As far as what any given biologist believes...who gives a shit? Obviously you don't, since biologists depend upon ToE by NS for the very foundation of their field, and you don't give that any weight. Why should we care what they believe any more than you do? They have exactly the same evidence for god as you, which is exactly none. You should probably stop telling us that "smart people believe" and just show us why they believe. You haven't done so yet, I don't think you're capable of doing so. Unless something huge has happened in the world there is no such evidence, there has never been such evidence, and there is no way (given the claims made and their unchanging nature) that there will ever be such evidence.

[Blam!]

The assumption of Earth being 2000-years-old is based on the bible. What says you about global flooding like one mentioned in the time of Noah, power?

The assumption is around 6000 years, actually. I believe it could be older than that, but probably around that range. I do believe there was a global flood, yes. There seems to be a global concensus on it, actually, when you consider the number of flood legends from the different cultures, and the facts they agree upon:

http://www.nwcreation.net/noahlegends.html

Global consensus? More like the agreement of religious nuts on the world. The link you posted - is creationism biased website.

[Darwinning]

because nearly half of biologists believe in a personal God who answers prayers.

[citation needed]

[Darwinian]

because nearly half of biologists believe in a personal God who answers prayers.

A survey of the American National Academy of Sciences showed that 7% of the members believed in god. A similar and much more recent survey of Fellows of the Royal Society, which is the British equivalent, gave a figure of 5%. I'd expect it to be lower in the UK as the UK is much less religious than the USA in any case.

[KichigaiNeko]

You were asked about "The Greatest Show on Earth" power, you closed minded fool not the "God Delusion"

Did you notice "and similar then?"..doesn't look like it.

I'm sorry WTF??

So you haven't read "The Greatest Show on Earth"? A book specifically written for cretinists as to WHY evolution is true and has nothing to do with any deity. Written by an evolutionary biologist; not some scientist looking for work after the genome project had finished

I was unaware dawkins went back to writing about science. No, I haven't read it. Your disdain for scientists who believe in God is startling though..because nearly half of biologists believe in a personal God who answers prayers.

Yep you are an embarrassment to your religion and your god power. The only power you have is ignorance and the 2000 children's stories you've read and not understood.

My disdain for anyone who believes in a skydaddy is even more comprehending and does not stop at scientists. Collins is proof that one can do the work like any other slave and can mouth the required bullshit when the grants are due to come out. What is startling is YOU are gullible enough believe him.