Coffee House Musings on Creationist Topic Proposals

Thank you for admitting that your quasi-religious beliefs are based on faith and not on facts.

You can't prove that ToE describes the process that produced the changes evident in the fossil record, therefore you can't claim to know how evolution works.

Prove it. You can't. All you can do it is recite Darwinist folklore and mindlessly claim it's factual.

I'm not arguing that there is a lack of evidence for evolution - I'm arguing that it's impossible to know what caused it.The article you linked doesn't explain what caused the evolution of the middle-ear ... because no one knows.Your article is just one more example of not knowing how evolution works.

Dr. Bechly doesn't deny that evolution has happened ... he argues that ToE can't account for what is observed.

Prove that he's wrong.

You don't seem to understand my argument. I'm not arguing that ToE is inadequate and I'm not trying to persuade anyone that it is.My argument is that no one can prove that ToE (or any other theory) describes the process that shaped the fossil record, therefore no one can claim to know how evolution works.Even if ToE is an accurate description of the process that shaped the history of life on earth, no one will ever know, because no one can prove that it is.Darwinists (like those on this site, for example) claim to know how evolution works, but they can't prove it, so it seems to me that they're seriously delusional or seriously brain-washed ... or worse. No kidding? Bechly and Behe are not going to persuade all those rusted-on atheist biologists out there. On the contrary, all those rusted-on atheist biologists out there will be hostile to any suggestion of intelligent design in nature."The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” (Psalms 14:1)

Edited by Dredge, .

Edited by Dredge, .

Edited by Dredge, .

Edited by Dredge, .

Edited by Dredge, .

Edited by Dredge, .

Edited by Dredge, .

Edited by Dredge, .

Fine. If science can't prove that ToE describes the process responsible for producing the fossil record, then science can't claim to know how evolution works.

If science can't prove that ToE describes the process responsible for producing the fossil record, then science can't claim to know how evolution works. Irrelevant to my argument. "Nearly 95% of the biologists in the National Academy of Sciences describe themselves as atheists or agnostics, a far higher percentage than in any other scientific discipline." (Larry Witham,
Where Darwin Meets the Bible (2002), pp. 271-273) Translation:"the idea that there is intelligent design in nature" = "the stream of lies and bullshit coming from the intelligent design movement"

Please stop repeating this stupid falsehood. You're making a fool of yourself. It's embarrassing to watch.

Edited by Dredge, .

In that case, if science can't prove that ToE describes the process responsible for producing the fossil record, then science can't claim to know how evolution works.

That is a grossly unfair and offensive comment. I said I have an IQ of 9 and that therefore I qualify as an idiot ... an idiot is not "mindless". That is an excellent question and I thank you for it.I will answer it by saying that sometimes even an idiot gets it right. As a matter of fact, all of my opinions and insights expressed on this site have been right.

What? I was referring to Bechly's argument, not mine.

Firstly, too late ... it's pretty safe to assume that someone with an IQ of 9 is already stupid.Secondly, you don't want to talk about proof because you know full well that you can't prove that ToE describes the process that shaped the history of life on earth. Your mind doesn't want to venture outside it's safe and warm little bubble of Darwinist belief.

Edited by Dredge, .

All you can know from fossils is that "evolution" happened. The fossils don't let you know HOW "evolution" happened. Grow up.