(November 30, 2010 at 11:18 pm)ziggystardust Wrote: This is why I don't bother to debate Creationists very much because of their sheer inability to accept their hypothesis has been repeatedly shown to be false. Not to mention their circular reasoning and whack the mole tactics, you wonder why Richard Dawkins won't you debate your kind.
Anyway it is inherent logic given the huge gap in time between Mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosomal Adam that other Homo Sapiens existed alongside them. Also I have a habit anyway of getting my information from scientific sources (science magazines and the odd peer-reviewed journal). I am not in the habit of asserting my hypothesizes as fact, unlike yourself.
Haha, yet you fail to be specific. Nicely done. I think the reason you don't debate Creationists is because you'd get your butt kicked. They don't allow you to just make assertions (like you did here) in debates.
You say you read Scientific sources, yet you have not cited one, and you say I just make things up, yet I cite more sources than anyone else on here. Classic!
Dawkins doesn't debate Creationists because he only won a debate against them by a couple votes at his own University (Many of his own students were in the crowd voting and he still eeked by). Ever since then he says he won't debate them because he doesn't want to give them any credit, yet he interviews televangelists on his television show in the UK? So that obviously is not the real reason, he is just scared that if he did the debate in front of a half way neutral audience he'd get spanked. We saw this when he debated John Lennox, I actually felt kinda bad for Dawkins he got embarrassed so badly.
Quote: People confuse lifeforms such as bacteria and amoebas as somehow simple, which is not really the case, since they have been evolving for billions of years. It is rather like the common fallacy that a Chimp is your grandfather, in fact they are cousins whom we shared an ancestor which looked more like a chimp than a human.
Huh? So you are agreeing with me? Amoebas in the fossil record are morphologically almost identical to amoebas today, so they have not been "evolving" much at all. A bacterium that was collected in the 19th century is still identifiable today, despite there being thousands of generations separating the two. So since amoebas that are supposedly nearly a billion years old also have over 3 billion bits of genetic information in their cells, where did all this information come from?
