It's Always Sunny - evolution versus Christianity

[Huggy Bear]

Um, no obfuscation necessary.  You are attempting to describe a well established scientific theory as merely a 'belief, speculation, and/or opinion,' and therefore not trustworthy.  I am correcting you.

 

Look, if a scientific theory is not a fact (defined by your own source) then it is opinion, that's all there is to it. You made it very clear that theories can change, Facts however do not.

And it is my informed opinion that you don't have a coherent grasp on the scientific method.  You understand that a hypothesis and a scientific theory are two different things, yes?

Seriously? Weren't you the one claiming life had been created in a lab, and even linked to sources YOU thought backed up that claim? Anyone with half a brain knew that was a bogus claim seeing how that would have been the biggest achievement in the history on mankind, yet you want to talk about my level of understanding...

oook

And since you ignored me, I'll ask again:  as a person who is so committed to the truth, how do you justify declaring the writings of a two thousand-year-old book "truth"?  Just...because it says so?

If you understood the Bible, you couldn't see it as anything other than the truth. Bid not Jesus say that the scriptures (speaking of the old testament) testify of him? The whole bible is about Jesus Christ.

What if I told you the Jesus Christ was depicted right there in the garden of Eden.

Of course you can, when you afford yourself the privilege of cherry-picking which scientific evidence you accept and which you reject based on personal preference and comfort level.

Please.

All I did was show that the bible and evolution don't contradict insomuch as animals do evolve, I just don't believe we all evolved from an amoeba.

Oh, for Christ's sake, Huggy.  Where to begin?  First of all, the video doesn't explain what type of fertility issue the woman suffered from, so we are missing crucial information right from the beginning.  Many, many, women who suffer from infertility problems go on to bear children.  Just like many people who have been given terminal cancer diagnoses go spontaneously into remission against all odds.  Rare, medical phenomena occur all the time.  My question to you is: where is the line of demarcation between rare medical occurrences and divine intervention, and how did you establish such criteria?  And remember, if you are asserting something is a 'miracle' that burden of proof is yours.   Of course, all of this ignores the fact that testimonials are one of the lowest quality, and least reliable forms of scientific evidence.  People lie.

So you completely gloss over the fact that there was an audio recording 1958 (which was not part of the TV program but was added later) that corroborates that she was telling the truth? Also a man (William Branham) who never seen her before being able to tell her where she was from and what her trouble was.

The reason he did that wasn't to show off, it was to get the people to believe in God, since healing is based on faith.

Your own article states that theories ARE NOT facts, which was my original point.

Lol, yes you are correct that they are two different things.  You just don't seem to understand what those differences are.

"A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment."  Got it?

Now you're fully embracing that scientific theories are not facts? So why couldn't you agree on that 4 pages ago, sheesh.

Right, and your point was that the bible figured it out before Einstein did.  My point is that Einstein figured out a whole hell of lot more than simply 'time is relative,' so why isn't the theory of special relativity outlined in detail in your book?  I'll answer that.  Because the bible is not actually predicting anything.  Someone came across one vague quote that could be interpreted as 'time is relative,' already having that very specific idea in their mind to start with.   Nothing supernatural about that.

It's not an interpretation, that's exactly what the bible states, that time is relative.

God Is a God of order, not chaos, there is a reason for how things work, relativity existed long before it was ever defined. Radio waves existed long before there was a radio. Aerodynamics existed long before there were aeronautical engineers.

got it?

I'm welcome for what exactly? For you posting a website that was at the center of the same debate a year ago?

For providing you with a reputable, scientifically accurate source of information.  You should try using it some time.

A reputable, scientifically accurate source of information you say?
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/welcome.html

Visitors to the archive should be aware that essays and FAQs appearing in the archive have generally not undergone a rigorous peer review procedure by scientific experts. Rather, they have been commented on and critiqued by the readership of the talk.origins newsgroup. While many of the participants in talk.origins are well regarded scientists, this informal procedure is not as demanding as the process a scientist goes through to publish a paper in a scientific journal. It is important to keep this fact in mind when reading the contents of this archive. Because most of the essays have not undergone rigorous peer review, some of them may contain errors or misstatements of fact. Any errors you identify should be reported to the authors or to the editor. The archive also maintains a contact page.

If this is acceptable to you, I don't want to hear complaints of any sources I link not being peer reviewed.