Christians, Prove Your God Is Good

[Esquilax]

The burden of proof belongs to you, you say you do not have to disprove something you do not believe exist, but you will dodge the same responsibility you place upon me. Double standards do not fly with me, so get busy showing me the geologic column exist the same world wide and that no fossils are found out of place or stop your whining.

Positive claims entail the burden of proof, and "the geologic column does not exist," is a positive claim. Are you seriously telling me you've been here for as long as you have and you don't understand such a basic concept of argumentation?

It's your belief and the responsibility falls upon you to prove what you say, by the way that is quite common knowledge, to those who search.

My responsibility is to demonstrate evolution, not to prove your claims about fossils and layers wrong. Come on, man; what's with this desperate scrabbling?

I do not see why those sediments couldn't of occurred either before or after the flood. I'm not familiar with that particular place, what I do know about floods of great enormity they do not lay down equal layers of sediment and the strip other areas clean so there is little to no sediment.

The layers in question go back too far, with uninterrupted periods that preclude flood conditions, to allow for a flood with humans involved.

This better for you, the fossil record doesn't even suggest evolution.

Yes, it does.

If you put together all my statements you would notice that I deny each of your points, seems to me I was taking in all you presented. Evolution has never and never will be proven, why do you wish to go against many of the leading evolutionary scientist that have stated it's not be proven. They're part of your bunch why do you not know this.

Probably because you're pulling it out of your ass? If you have the quotes I'll happily look at them, but what you can't do is make these assertions and then get all evasive when you're asked to point me in the right direction. It makes it seem as though you're hiding something.

Far more than any 200, I don't even know where you got that number.

The TalkOrigins index; can you point me to a source you're using for the number?

It's like this, you call fossils in the wrong layers for evolutionary science insignificant, does that mean you are fine with dismissing things that do not add up to keep alive this delusional fantasy. When fossils that are millions of years different from the other fossils and locked into the same so called geologic strata insignificant, I mean really, whats up with that.

I'm not dismissing anything, there was a quite obvious explanation contained within the link I provided. But my larger point was that the number of fossils out of order are dwarfed by the number of fossils in order: if you're going to use the former as evidence, I'm equally allowed to use the latter. You're ignoring this point because your own argument is much stronger evidence for my position than it is for yours, unless you're special pleading.

Are you just dismissing all the other fossils?

Surely you can do better than this, and as I said above 200 isn't even close.

Well shit, point me in the right direction then. Don't just make assertions and then blame everyone else for not having exactly the same information you have.

There is no proof, how many times am I going to have to say this. Natural selection is not evolution and has never been shown to lead to a change from one animal to another.

You assert there is no proof, but your baseless dismissals aren't an argument. If we're going to do that, I could just say evolution is a fact and that's that; it's childish.

As to your other sentence, you don't get to redefine what evolution is and then say that because your strawman isn't real, actual evolution isn't real. Here is what evolution actually is.

I did not say it was a conspiracy against me, I said it was the only way evolutionary science could keep evolution alive after Christian scientist pinned down evolutionary scientist on macro evolution.

And do you understand that both of those points- the species one and the macro-evolution one- are factually incorrect due to the timing? The former predates evolution entirely, and the latter was a distinction that gradually fell out of favor and does not describe what you claim it describes?

That was called sub-species, if I'm not mistaken.

You are.

Evolution was being presented before then and so were long ages and yes my answer was to evolution, you made that very clear.

So, you're saying that evolutionary theory existed before evolutionary theory was proposed?

I used species in my reply for your benefit, and they are still frogs, they will always be frogs. They will not evolve into another kind of animal. For evolution to be realistic some animals will have to become totally different ones, that has never been demonstrated, proven or otherwise.

Look, you can either discuss what evolution actually is, or you can make up your fantasies about it, but you can't expect me to go along with the latter, if that's what you want to do.

If evolution was real why do we still have the so called living fossils and all other life forms have evolved into different animals, heck they haven't even changed.

Ah, now this is an interesting question, and living fossils are rad. However, you're still a little wrong here: living fossils do change, it's just that their basic morphology has not needed to change for an extended period of time, either due to a lack of predation or an ideal environment, that sort of thing. Nothing exists that would naturally select for a different morphology, and so in essence they remain the same. This process is called evolutionary stasis, but if you say they haven't changed at all, you're overstressing your case.

I'm keeping track, and I've yet to see the first bit of proof from you that evolution has ever occurred, not natural selection, a change of one animal into a totally different one.

Again, I'm not required to prove the wrong definition of evolution. I'm required to prove the right definition of evolution, and I did that in my first post.