Argument #1: Transitional Fossils

[Duke Guilmon]

So? Quote mining Darwin doesn't disprove his theory. Darwin was agnostic.

And we know how the eye evolved.

Trying to use the "complicated eye" fallacy has been debunked thoroughly.

I guess you guys were smarted then him since he just was an agnostic.

---

So? Quote mining Darwin doesn't disprove his theory. Darwin was agnostic.

And we know how the eye evolved.

Trying to use the "complicated eye" fallacy has been debunked thoroughly.

In your mind things have been debunked.

---

Without recourse to faith or special ways of knowing, how does one detect the supernatural as it's happening?

Have you ever watched the movie, "Ghost Busters?"
"

---

I find myself perplexed that a biblical creationist, particularly a YEC, would use a lack of transitional forms as an argument FOR their side.

In the Noah and the big boat model of reality, the diversity of non-interbreeding populations we see around us demands a period of hyper speciation some time in the last 4k years. Otherwise Noah couldn't have taken 'kinds' rather than species onto the ark and would have run out of room. This geographic radiation and speciation would have happened during a period when people, writing and carbon dating existed. Strangely, nobody noted the sudden diversification of terrestrial life or that somehow the process stopped.

In fact, we found one of the folks of that approximate age. Otzi the ice man

Transitional examples or evidence of sudden appearance of all the currently existing species should be easy to find.

Revelation777, where are your transitional forms? Any idea why the superfast, spontaneous changes stopped?

a poodle and a chawawah

---

No, it's knowledge. Knowledge changes.

And just because a contradictory book says there's a god doesn't mean there is on.

No supernatural events have been witnessed by enough people to be convincing or tested.

That is what you have been fed, it is a book filled with contradictions. Apologists have answered every supposed contradiction.

Then maybe there was never ever any supernatural events.

---

That's because to say so in Victorian England had consequences. Or he believed in God. Either one, makes not one bit of difference to his theory.

And seriously, if you are going to copy and paste from an article, at least give the article credit. That is called plagiarism. And it's against the rules here. And it is even more evidence that you are a person who will lie to further his personal ideology.

If I indeed do that it was not intentional and a misstep. I apologize. I am trying to get through these posts and I cant catch up.

---

Good for you. Now tell me why, in Odin's name, we should believe in your god just because you're convinced it exists?

Because it is better to believe now then when it is too late and you have to give an account to Him.

---

Disney has a Land and a World, it doesn't mean that Mickey Mouse really exists, or that you'll find the little mermaid under the sea.

I call them conmen because their business is built on the back of falsehoods and deliberately deceptive practices. For starters, and I can't stress this enough, their website advertises that they will completely disregard all alternative views and will twist things to fit the one they've chosen; that doesn't sound like an objective scientific source to me, which is what they play themselves off as. Not to mention each and every one of their findings is completely, demonstrably false according to science, and you would know that if you went anywhere else to educate yourself, and yet they host those claims there up until the point that the general public finds them so ridiculous that it's embarrassing for them to keep espousing them.

That is the behavior of conmen, not a group that's interested in the truth, no matter what it happens to be.

You might be judging them harshly because you don't like their message.

Have to go to bed but this is a warning expect me to give you evidence and detailed explanation on evolution.