Battleground God

[Tiberius]

Would you use the same criteria to judge what is a good wine versus what is a good airplane? Of course not. Your standards may not be 'higher' for one than the other, but they would be different.

Naturally they would be different; but that wasn't the point was it. The point was, standards for proof (not the methods for proving) should be the same for everything, otherwise you are biased towards a particular view.

Evolution is not an 'absolute'.

It is in terms of the question "Is Evolution the process by which life evolved?", or "Does evolution exist / occur?". Both are yes or no questions; both must have absolute values since they cannot be a "yes" and a "no" at the same time.

Evolution is not a simple case of 'either it is or it isn't', it is much more complex than that and thus can accept the situation that we are still working to understand the finer details and may not yet have a proper understanding or even knowledge of some of the ways evolution can work. It is a complex study. Sharks have existed alongside other species relatively unchanged for eons while other species are unrecognizable from their ancestors in less than a year. The overview of the process is factual, the how and whys of the individual details require further study simply because we do not yet possess a way of getting all the data, let alone of turning that data into information.

You are going far too deep into the intricate nature of evolution; that wasn't the point of the test at all. It doesn't matter that things evolved differently, if they evolved at all, then evolution is correct. If they didn't evolve, evolution is not correct. It is most definitively a "yes or no" question.

This can be boiled down to so many things:

Either I'm sat at my computer or I'm not.
Either I went to work today or I didn't.
Either abiogenesis happened or it didn't.
etc, etc.

Again, we aren't asking about the complexities involved. We don't care when I sat at my computer, or in which chair I sat, or whether I walked to work or took the bus. It doesn't change the fact of the event either happening or not happening.

God on the other hand, is simple. It is an absolute. There are no 'degrees'. Either god exists, or god does not exist.

And evolution either happens or doesn't.

At the end of the day though, there is no proof of evolution, and anyone who says there is should go take a philosophy course on "knowledge" and "proof". All the evidence in the world couldn't prove evolution is what happened, because we are all subjective minds; we cannot trust with 100% confidence that what we see and evaluate is true.

To use a well known example, let us suppose that the universe came into existence last Thursday, but with everything in place, all the planets, atoms, beliefs, memories, etc as if it had been around for 13.7 billion years. From an internal perspective (i.e. from the perspective we have of our own universe), everything seems to have been around for 13.7 billion years, yet this is not the case, and there is no way for us to know any different unless we were omniscient, or external to the universe at the point of its creation.