Battleground God

[Shell B]

Let me try a different explanation. I am going to make two statements and assert they are both true. I would like you to tell me how you would like me to prove both statements to you.

Statement 1 -
I like Chinese food

Statement 2 -
I have six fingers on my right hand

That is not an explanation; it is a question.

Allow me to explain differently. Logic and proof are simple concepts. Proving anything should require the use of both logic and proof. Therefore, proving the existence of god and proving the existence of evolution would take essentially the same ingredients. Of course, the approach is different, but that is all. Your argument was that evolution is complicated and therefore should be proved differently than the existence of god because the existence (or nonexistence) of god is an absolute. Both are absolutes. They do or do not exist or occur. The fact that the existence of one or both is complicated does not change anything.

This test isn't about the process of proving something. In other words, it isn't about how you go about proving one or the other. Essentially, it is about what proof you require for yourself. According to the test, you require something different for evolution than you would for god, which is illogical.

Whether or not we understand exactly how evolution works doesn't negate the fact that it is working, and has worked, and will still continue to work. There hasn't been a single case of new information that didn't fit beautifully with evolution.

That's neither here nor there.