(April 8, 2016 at 11:00 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote:(April 8, 2016 at 9:30 pm)AAA Wrote: It is unreasonable to require extremely rigorous evidence for something that is so difficult to test.
LOL. Except in the case for abiogenesis, right? Because in THAT case you won't be satisfied until a protocell forms before your very eyes. Wow. Thank you for exposing your hypocritical approach to determining whether or not things are true. I didn't even have to do any of the work this time.
Do you see the difference though? I have required rigorous evidence to demonstrate whether or not a designer exists. After I have concluded yes, then I don't require the rigorous evidence for the identity (although maybe you're right and I should).
An analogy with abiogenesis would then be if we somehow used rigorous evidence to conclude that it did happen (analogous to me concluding designer above), then we would not require extreme evidence for how it happened (analogous to determining the identity). This seems to actually be what most scientists have done. Do you see the analogy I was trying to make?
