Question for the theist

[John V]

Actually, I'm pretty sure that's what you accused your opponent of thinking, and he just didn't pick you up on your wording.

Here's what was said: "fossils and genetics all lead to the same thing, its there, the evidence is there but why do you deny it?" I've cleaned up the terminology but have not distorted his position.

Of course, he can speak for himself and, given that I disagree with the point you're attempting to disprove too, I don't see much point in bringing that up to me.

Given that you disagree with the point I'm attempting to disprove...why are you butting in? This seems to be a blatant admission that you're throwing in red herrings.

Yes, I get it, most scientists believe in evolution. If some of us want to discuss specific claims within evolution, what's that to you? I have not claimed that this specific issue invalidates all of evolution.

[Esquilax]

Given that you disagree with the point I'm attempting to disprove...why are you butting in? This seems to be a blatant admission that you're throwing in red herrings.

I have a problem with people trying to poke holes in existing science, as though that validates some other thing. A more direct route through this conversation would've just been to provide evidence for your initial claim.

Yes, I get it, most scientists believe in evolution. If some of us want to discuss specific claims within evolution, what's that to you? I have not claimed that this specific issue invalidates all of evolution.

That's what I'm saying: instead of discussing evolution, you're just sat here providing problems with it, which is counter-productive given that you did have a claim, in the beginning.

[John V]

I have a problem with people trying to poke holes in existing science, as though that validates some other thing.

I didn't claim that the error in his position validates some other thing. You're reading that into my posts.

A more direct route through this conversation would've just been to provide evidence for your initial claim.

That's what I'm saying: instead of discussing evolution, you're just sat here providing problems with it, which is counter-productive given that you did have a claim, in the beginning.

My initial claim in the beginning was:
Most creationist models include some evolution.

Do you really dispute this, or are you referring to something else?

[Rampant.A.I.]

[xr34p3rx]

why don't we do this. alpha male. you claimed that everything is designed but rephrased it. provide evidence that the world
is designed. you haven't proven anything but try to disprove our evidence that we have actually provided. so provide something. it's really a waste of time debating someone who doesn't stand by and defend their views without even trying to provide some evidence.

[John V]

why don't we do this. alpha male. you claimed that everything is designed but rephrased it. provide evidence that the world
is designed. you haven't proven anything but try to disprove our evidence that we have actually provided. so provide something. it's really a waste of time debating someone who doesn't stand by and defend their views without even trying to provide some evidence.

You asked for an alternative explanation and I gave a possibility. I don't consider ID or creationism to be provable. If you don't like the focus to be on your own claims, then go ahead and stop debating. Won't bother me at all.

[xr34p3rx]

why don't we do this. alpha male. you claimed that everything is designed but rephrased it. provide evidence that the world
is designed. you haven't proven anything but try to disprove our evidence that we have actually provided. so provide something. it's really a waste of time debating someone who doesn't stand by and defend their views without even trying to provide some evidence.

You asked for an alternative explanation and I gave a possibility. I don't consider ID or creationism to be provable. If you don't like the focus to be on your own claims, then go ahead and stop debating. Won't bother me at all.

i never asked for an alternative nor a possibility, my post was:

How do you account for the different races in humanity if your god created only 1 pair of humans in the beginning? wouldnt that require some evolution even if you dont agree with the theory completely?

saying god made it that way doesnt count, that is an assertion and you have to back it up anyway.

however you said:

Things that are designed and have similar appearance and functions will have similar blueprints.

you claimed that design took place, you havent mentioned anything regarding your claim after countless times i have asked you to do so. Along with not providing any argument other than wanting our evidence and you just sit back and deny all of it without making a constructive argument. And as i told you before, it seems like you dont have any argument, you are just another smug believer who thinks you have it right and your opinion is more important and more reliable than real evidence on the subject. You deny because our evidence doesnt match with what you think is evidence? When... WHEN did you ever explained what you find as evidence? you never defined what you believe is evidence. Youre just like ray comfort.

Show me design. until you do so, i wont bother replying...

[Rampant.A.I.]

[xr34p3rx]

You asked for an alternative explanation and I gave a possibility. I don't consider ID or creationism to be provable. If you don't like the focus to be on your own claims, then go ahead and stop debating. Won't bother me at all.

So you actually offered nothing as an alternative.

he claimed design if you look at my last post, but i guess you can say he only offers his infailable opinion... which he cant and doesnt bother to support

[John V]