RE: DNA Proves Existence of a Designer
November 17, 2018 at 11:19 am
(This post was last modified: November 17, 2018 at 11:21 am by Anomalocaris.)
(November 17, 2018 at 11:04 am)Everena Wrote:(November 17, 2018 at 10:35 am)Anomalocaris Wrote: I really am. And precisely because I am so much smarter than you are and so much better than you at hitting the truth (not in anyway is that even an remotely exceptional attainment by the way), it is rather conceited and overreaching for the likes of you to attempt to call my shots. Wouldn’t you say?
Still waiting to find out what you are claiming that I don't understand. And you are definitely not smarter than anyone.
Oh, I am definitely smarter than you by far. Whether I am smarter than any other particular individual besides you, that’s much harder to say.
The result is if you apply the method of fact finding that has proven repeatedly to work to the question, then such entity as you might envision as god is overwhelmingly unlikely to have existed.
(November 17, 2018 at 11:16 am)Everena Wrote:(November 17, 2018 at 11:05 am)Mathilda Wrote: Wrong. Not only do you not understand evolution but you do not understand how science works.
Our understanding has become more refined over time. For example we now know that there is both good and bad cholesterol. We know that there are different types of fats. Some we need (Omega 3 and omega 6). Some we should minimise (saturated fats). And some we need but get too much of in the western diet (e.g. Omega 6).
Scientists don't talk with one voice as a collective. Science is self correcting and that requires dissenting voices. Eventually this leads to refined theories that can't be dissented against because there is too much evidence for it, such as with the theory of evolution.
Are you claiming they weren't telling everyone to lower their overall cholesterol in the 80s and 90s? And this was all over the world for decades due to science being absolutely sure it was fact. What we know now, is NOT what we knew then. The scientist who published the first huge world wide study purposely left out huge amounts of information to prove his hypothesis. The other scientists took his word for it and just made a quick buck by saying they had the same results. And people's lives were at stake. And guess how much they cared? You can read about this on the web. And you think I should just blindly trust the "experts"? Well I don't and you shouldn't either but it's your life.
Well, you blindly trust experts. The only problem is the expert you trust, namely you, is dilutional.
