Why Christians Attack Evolution
March 18, 2014 at 9:22 pm
(This post was last modified: March 18, 2014 at 9:25 pm by Rampant.A.I..)
(March 18, 2014 at 9:00 pm)discipulus Wrote:(March 18, 2014 at 8:47 pm)Rahul Wrote: Holy fucking shit. If I have to explain this one more fucking time I'm going to have a fucking stroke.
It's a fucking SCIENTIFIC THEORY. Not the type of "theory" that people use in normal day to day casual conversation.
A scientific theory is a collection of proven facts that attempt to accurately explain how something works or why something happens.
The theory of evolution, now pay really close attention here, is a collection of facts that form a framework for the explanation for HOW evolution works.
Evolution is a fact. The theory just tries to explain how it works NOT if it's true or not.
Evolution. Fact.
Theory of Evolution. Explanation of that fact.
I agree that things evolve i.e change and adapt over time. We observe that no doubt.
But the atheist who is a proponent of the theory of evolution by natural selection is a person of great faith! He does not simply say that things change or adapt over time, but rather that homo sapiens owe their existence to a series of natural processes acting on matter originating from some primordial soup which somehow happened to come into existence in the midst of a chaotic, mindless, unguided, unplanned, cosmos.
The proponent of said theory asks me to believe something that is so improbable ......
Well just read:
This idea that evolution could have occurred without an intelligent Designer is so improbable as to be fantastic. This has been demonstrated by Barrow and Tipler in their book The Anthropic Cosmological Principle. In this book, they list ten steps in the course of human evolution, each of which is so improbable that before it would have occurred the sun would have ceased to be a main sequence star and would have burned up the earth. They estimate the odds of the evolution of the human genome by chance to be on the order of 4-360 (110,000), a number which is so huge that to call it astronomical would be a wild understatement. In other words, if evolution did occur, it would have been a miracle, so that evolution is actually evidence for the existence of God! And here the Christian can be much more open to where the evidence leads. He could say, "Well, God could have used evolution; He could have used special creation. I'm open to the evidence." But, you see, for the naturalist evolution is the only game in town! No matter how fantastic the odds, no matter how improbable the evidence, he's stuck with it because he hasn't got an intelligent Designer. So it seems to me that the Christian can be far more objective on this point. (Portion of a debate transcript, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, United States – 1998 - Dr. William Lane Craig)
Don't take this the wrong way, I'm honestly curious:
Do you have some sort of learning disorder that prevents you from retaining new information?
It's already been explained to you multiple times why you've mischaracterized what evolution states, and why empirically testable theories repeatedly verified by observation do not require "faith".
You seem to have extreme difficulty grasping basic principles of science, such as the difference between an hypothesis and a theory, what empirically verifiable means, and even the concept of testability.
If it's not a learning disability, it seems you're simply so dishonest you ignore reasonable and well supported objections, and repeat your original claim back like a parrot.
That's referred to as intellectual dishonesty, and frowned upon greatly in all academic areas.
