RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 4, 2019 at 9:31 pm
(This post was last modified: August 4, 2019 at 9:33 pm by Anomalocaris.)
(August 4, 2019 at 9:26 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:(August 4, 2019 at 9:15 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: Well, sure it does, implicitly. “If the eye couldn’t have evolved, Therefore Jesus”, right? I mean, if you’re a Christian then that is your argument. It kind of has to be, or else you aren’t a Christian, lol. And I’m pointing out that your argument from ignorance is fallacious. Do you not believe that god created everything? You can’t expect atheists to explain the evolution of the eye to you down to the finest detail, while not proffering any sort of mechanism for your own hypothesis. Remember, lying for Jesus is still lying.
Christianity is more in conflict with origins than it is with whatever happens after. Evolution falls in the safe zone, which as a mechanism it doesn't say anything about origins. But to be fair, if a conflict does exist, then I'm sure most Christians would say "God did it, therefore it couldn't have evolved" not "It couldn't have evolved, therefore God did it."
I'm not sure why a new hypothesis needs to be offered in order to point out that the existing one is flawed? Can you expound on that further?
In other words, amongst even the minimally educated and intelligent, Christianity has been forced to its last redoubt, but as with anything that survives first, last, and every step in the middle by fraud it is still talking as brave, grand, and condescending as ever.
