Is Evolution a science or a faith?

[Esquilax]

Very interestng, there is no foundation yet there is a big theory with so may intricate details. More interestengly everyone seems to be happy with this theory without even knowing this theory at its root level.

Are you even listening? Evolution has nothing to do with the formation of life. That's a separate theory called abiogenesis, and your desperate insistence that the two are one and the same is just making you look foolish. Evolution is an aspect of population genetics, and it acts upon genes exclusively; given this, it only begins to work when there actually are genes, meaning that it only starts working once we already have life with genetic codes.

If you want to doubt abiogenesis go right ahead, but don't pretend it's something it's not.

I am pleased to see the writing above because it contains the word god. The concept of God is naturaly embossed over our conscious. You can take it serious or not but you can negate it only by denying your own conscious person.

That's not true: the Piraha tribe is an isolated human population without a concept of god at all. Are you saying that they're lying, when they say that?

I agree that gravity doesn’t give an explanation about the birth of the first cell. But the trouble here is that no one is believing that gravity has produced life. All what you are saying is evolution and natural selection responsible for the life on earth. Therefore, your example does not fit in here.

Except that nobody is saying that evolution produced life either. We attribute the current diversity of life to evolution because it's observable, but evolution by natural selection can only act upon life that already exists, it doesn't create life from non life. That's why what you're saying is so nonsensical, you're literally talking about a completely different thing.

Abiogenesis and evolution are not separate things, they are deeply interconnected with each other.

I don't care that you think that; what you think is meaningless here. The two are definitionally different.

Tell me if there was no first cell then would evolution (in which you believe) ever happened and do you think you and me were corresponding with each other here?

If there was no initial life form, there would be no evolution. It's that simple. Evolution requires two things: a self replicating life form, and an environment to act upon it. Without those, no evolution.

Further, what makes you believe that life started from the first living cell. Maybe life has started in absolutely different way.

I don't believe anything about how life started, because there's not enough information to make a judgment about it. I'm comfortable suspending my belief until the evidence comes in: why aren't you?

As far I know an axiom is a statement or proposition that is regarded as being established, accepted, or self-evidently true. You are saying that these are basal assumption made in order to actually function. In other words axiom is an idea that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof.

Uh, we have plenty of evidence that the universe will remain intelligible? It has, every day of my life, without exception. That's evidence. As to my other axioms, well, employing them in my day to day life has provided results consistent with my expectations for if those axioms were true... that's evidence too. I know why you're so excited to drag us down to your level, but it's not going to work. Unfortunately for you, I can just point to my continued survival on the planet as evidence that my axiomatic beliefs are working just fine at their intended purpose.

The important point to which I am trying to draw your attention to is how that statement, proposition, or basal assumption first appeared in your mind. I think it is not comming in form of dream, hallucination, vision, revelation, etc. It is obviously initiated after you have observed something that clicks some idea in you. You can developed that idea only if you have faith in what you have observed.

Yes, I've already called you on your dishonest equivocation between reasonable expectations of a coherent world, reverified every day by the fact that the world is coherent, and capital F Faith in god. You don't need to repeat the same fallacy.

I have already given many logical evidences for the existence of God. They are looking towards for your second glance.

All you've done is present a series of known falsehoods and then dismissed or ignored everyone who has called you on them. I'm still waiting on you to acknowledge and admit that you quote mined Darwin in your other thread, something you haven't even appeared to look at yet.

Perhaps it is you who have closed eyes on obvious facts that I have presented in my post and in the responses.

You still don't know what evolution is. If you disagree, then please define evolution for us.

I neither support Ben nor Dawkins. However, I have heard dawkins lying deliberately and purposefully. I do not trust in anything what Dawkins said. For me he is the king of hypocrite. Only follow few of his interviews and you will see how cunning he is in manipulating his words.

Do you have evidence of any of this?

More importantly, will you even acknowledge that when you said Dawkins believed in space aliens seeding life on earth, you were wrong?