Argument #1: Transitional Fossils

[SteelCurtain]

When we say evolution "does" something, Rev, we are speaking colloquially. We mean the processes by which evolution operates in a population. Evolution didn't 'decide' anything. A mutation happened that caused an organism to replicate in an odd way, and then there was a multicellular organism that was better in the environment than the unicellular one. There is actually great evidence that this happened multiple times, and there is actually a fantastic study showing the origin of multicellularity in a common green algae Volvox. So, no, evolution has no reason or will or any kind of consciousness. We tend to anthropomorphize things, and scientists do it with evolution a lot. It is nothing more that colloquial.

Do you care to respond to this?

This is good to hear, Rev. I couldn't care less that you believe in God, that is to say I don't care to try and change it. That's great for you---it works for you---and that's all well and good. Seriously. But you have come on here and seriously misrepresented demonstrable facts. The very least that could come from this is maybe that you approach these issues with an open mind, instead of a made up one. I can think of a thousand things that would prove to me that scientists were wrong about evolution. If the evidence were to come in, I'd jump off the ship as fast as any other person here. It's hard to have an intelligent conversation with someone who is of the opinion that he can't be wrong.

Are you telling me that if God could be proved you would be more than happy to believe in Him? Or, if evidence showed evolution is wrong that you would change your original beliefs?

Absolutely. If there was overwhelming evidence for God, I would accept it. Just as if there was a theory proposed to replace evolution that more accurately reflected the preponderance of evidence, was falsifiable, was able to be used to predict future phenomena, and better explained what is visible in the natural world, I would accept that as well. Can you say the same?

Do you just not care to respond with something coherent? You literally just parroted back to me what I already stated. Taking that stance you are eschewing all science, Rev. It does not matter what the evidence says, it doesn't matter what you experience, it does not matter what reality dictates, it is wrong if it contradicts the Bible? You really are taking that stance?

What you call evidence might not be considered that at all amongst others who debate this issue. However, your comrades would agree with you wholeheartedly. Ciao.

What? Can you clarify this? What exactly would my comrades agree with?