(March 27, 2017 at 2:30 pm)residentatheist Wrote: I guess you missed the evidence I pointed out for the first one: Look how long our planet was here before we evolved into what we are today. Billions of years. (If this isn't evidence of rarity what is?)
That is reasoning, not evidence itself. It relies on too small a sample-size. Finally, it ignores the random nature of mutations. Even if reasoning were indeed evidence, this line of reasoning still would be very unconvincing.
(March 27, 2017 at 2:30 pm)residentatheist Wrote: As for the second it is a bit more complicated: Just because you don't understand the evidence doesn't mean it is lacking.
If it's anything like the "evidence" you presented to quash the first objection, it's no wonder you preferred going with a personal attack rather than simply presenting it.