Willowtree's Scientific Evidence against Evolution

If the Book of Esther does not mention God, yet tells a tale of random and chance and fluke events that twist and turn, then why can't the evidence for the Theory of Evolution tell such a story? It does not preclude God's existence. What you perceive as random and chance and fluke events that twist and turn may still be attributed to the hand of God.And if you can read the Book of Esther for the value of its message, AND NOT ITS LITERAL OMISSION OF GOD, then why can't you read the Book of Genesis for its message without a literal fundamentalist spin? That message is still: GOD IS IN CONTROL!Peace be with you, brother Christian!

Concerning the quote you cut and pasted, then concerning your coments about this quote : Where did I mention christianity ? You assumed christianity, thanks for the accuracy.

I believe you miss-read what I said.I'm not inferring you mentioned Christianity; I'm using it as an example as to why we can't automatically assume something is wrong on the basis of how many people believe in it or for how long.My example is meant to show that one could not simply say that because billions and billions of people for thousands and thousands of years believe something doesn't mean they are right. As my example showed we could not say, for instance, Christianity is wrong because billions and billions of people for thousands and thousands of years didn't believe it. In the same way we can not say that evolution is wrong simply because billions and billions of people didn't believe it for thousands and thousands of years.If you don't like this example I provided another one as well when I used the belief of the earth being flat and the sun moving. As new instruments are invented and new discoveries made the ideas of the past are sometimes shown to be wrong no matter how many people believed it or for how long.I hope this clears up any confusion you have with my comments.G'luck

*Bump*Still curious about how Theistic Evolutionists effect Willowtrees arguments.

You need to define TE and then I will answer you.Thank you, in advance for whatever time and effort you put into this reply.

I'm going to take the liberty to barge in here and post one moderately general definition of Theistic Evolutionism:

quote:

---

The theistic evolutionist believes organic evolution was simply "the way God did it" as He brought the Universe and its contents into existence. And although there are almost as many varieties of theistic evolution as there are people who espouse it, a few characteristics are common to all. For example, the theistic evolutionist believes in: (a) an old Earth; (b) wholly natural processes responsible for life as we see it, once the initial matter was brought into existence by God, and; (c) a figurative (non-literal) interpretation of the Genesis account of creation.

---

This was taken from ForbiddenI might also add the personal note that it would be a small matter for God to guide the process of evolution, either through initial parameters or historical intervention, towards the development of mankind in general.

Well, I would a define a TE as someone who accepts evolution to be true and still believes in a god, Christian or otherwise. Also they believe that god guided Evolution or set Evolution in motion. There might be a more descriptive definition but I think this will suffice for this debate.[This message has been edited by Rand Al'Thor, 02-25-2004]

As this topic is winding it's way towards the 300 message shutdown point, I try to divert the theistic evolution discussion to the "Theistic Evolution" topic.I'll make no further comment here, but may at the above cited.Minnemooseus (in the semi-admin mode)[This message has been edited by minnemooseus, 02-26-2004]

I have long foresaken any hope that willowtree will ever provide any of his supposed scientific evidence against evolution. I am happy for the thread to close and initiate a new thread if willowtree makes such assertions in the future.

300 pages of evolution debate and I have contributed 19 posts (only 1 with any length) 18 of them one liners of denial.While my intended opponent has posted 34 replies and he didn't even enter the debate until the 59th page. And a significant amount of these posts were of notable length.Who am I ?Answer : I am the Kendemeyer of evolution.My name is WjAnd regardless of the actual truth I just deny , deny , deny and before you know it 300 pages have come and gone and I didn't say a damn thing.

And your definition of information is...?

I'm cold and usually sweat. People like me on hot days. I come in many flavors. What am I?ICECREAM!

And hasn't yet addressed the subject of the debate ... "Willowtree's Scientific Evidence against Evolution".

It's standard procedure to close any topic that reaches 300 messages.This seems to be a good time to do the closure.Adminnemooseus

---

Comments on moderation procedures? - Go to
Change in Moderation?
or
too fast closure of threads