Evolution - Resource Thread

[neo-x]

That is fine Rick i have already told you i am not expecting anything from anyone, anymore. I am asking for no special treatment, post and do as you see fit.

No i don't think evolution can be proven wrong unless I see evidence.

Yes you can use evidence for design but how does that makes me calling evolution a fact, wrong, as you suggested, evades me.

And yes, may be not you but plenty of people do get science from pastors just look at ken ham. A lot of people don't understand evolution when they say man came from monkey. Its my observations and I have already apologized to you that it wasn't meant as personal.

Thank you for your time.

[neo-x]

Gman you asked for observable demonstrable proof, here is my question to you and anyone who is not an evolutionist and asking me for demonstrated proof.You show me observable proof of God, not an implication, not a thought, no belief and I will answer your question. Look into your own answer. Either God is a fact (and since according to you all facts must be observed and demonstrated, provable) and God has has proof, demonstrable, observable proof - which you must show me; or God is not a fact and we worship a lie, weak belief. Unless you find yourself with an honest answer that you can tell me without feeling that you are guilty of the same, don't ever say or hold again that God is a fact, just say god is a belief, we don't know for sure. Because you are not allowed to say that lest it falls upon double standards. So go ahead, show me first the evidence of the same caliber that you have required of me for God, that is only fair.

Again.. You are confused... I'll let you on a little secret. You will never find science devoid of someone's philosophy. Science MUST conflict with philosophy at some point. Not you, me or anyone else here will ever display our science devoid of our bias. Science is not in the business of ultimate explanations. That’s not what it does.. It works on specific things, it advances theories, but it never makes a claim about everything. Science does not exclude G-d. Neither does it include G-d. That is what people do.

So even if you claim that your science is purely scientific with no bias.. Prove it. Show it to us on paper.. That is what the claim here is. You say that macro evolution is a fact? Prove it.

While you are at that show us where consciousnesses came from. Show us how we know right from wrong and how your evolutionary belief constructed it..

I have to show you nothing special. I have posted all the papers first read those then we can talk. And while you are at it, you show me proof i asked for

[neo-x]

What pains me is that where I am willing to even have you guys delete this false, lie belief of mine, you are not willing to allow me some courtesy in return. Just look at Gman's post, he came out guns aimed and primed. Say, its a lie or else I will post more so that you really feel the pinch of it. That is how I saw that message and he is a mod!

Again.. Instead of having a panic attack show us your evidence that your evolutionary belief is a fact. You are the one claiming you have all the facts. Not me or anyone else here. The burden of proof is put forth on the person with the hypothesis. Where is the empirical evidence for your hypothesis?

Forgive my panic attack, and don't put words in my mouth. When you show me empirical evidence for your hypothesis I will be obliged to show you mine.

[neo-x]

Look guys, I am tired of quibbling over this, post what you think is good in your eyes.

[Gman]

I have to show you nothing special. I have posted all the papers first read those then we can talk. And while you are at it, you show me proof i asked for

Forgive my panic attack, and don't put words in my mouth. When you show me empirical evidence for your hypothesis I will be obliged to show you mine.

What is your problem? Didn't you understand what I said? There is no such thing as philosophy-free science. We ALL inject our philosophy into our science. Everyone does... Even if you claim you don't. I never claimed any empirical evidence for my science.... YOU DID. So answer our questions.

[neo-x]

I have to show you nothing special. I have posted all the papers first read those then we can talk. And while you are at it, you show me proof i asked for

Forgive my panic attack, and don't put words in my mouth. When you show me empirical evidence for your hypothesis I will be obliged to show you mine.

What is your problem? Didn't you understand what I said? There is no such thing as philosophy-free science. We ALL inject our philosophy into our science. Everyone does... Even if you claim you don't. I never claimed any empirical evidence for my science.... YOU DID. So answer our questions.

Sorry doesn't work that way. You answer my question I answer yours. And I have already posted all the evidence in this thread, you should read that, I am not concerned what you make of it.

And I hold you to your standard...do you hold that God is a fact? if you do, you have to show me empirical proof otherwise you shouldn't be asking me.

[Gman]

Sorry doesn't work that way. You answer my question I answer yours. And I have already posted all the evidence in this thread, you should read that, I am not concerned what you make of it.

And I hold you to your standard...do you hold that God is a fact? if you do, you have to show me empirical proof otherwise you shouldn't be asking me.

Again.. Your beliefs are nothing more than a pile of confusion. I never said that you can prove G-d scientifically as a fact. Again, I never did.. I never even said that ID was a fact. You are the one saying that evolution is a fact. You have said this numerous times. So again I ask you again to prove it.

Also why are you asking me that I believe that G-d is a fact? Even if I did hold that position, why would that bother you?

[neo-x]

Sorry doesn't work that way. You answer my question I answer yours. And I have already posted all the evidence in this thread, you should read that, I am not concerned what you make of it.

And I hold you to your standard...do you hold that God is a fact? if you do, you have to show me empirical proof otherwise you shouldn't be asking me.

Again.. Your beliefs are nothing more than a pile of confusion. I never said that you can prove G-d scientifically as a fact. Again, I never did.. I never even said that ID was a fact. You are the one saying that evolution is a fact. You have said this numerous times. So again I ask you again to prove it.

Also why are you asking me that I believe that G-d is a fact? Even if I did hold that position, why would that bother you?

Look Gman i have posted evidence in this thread. What more do you expect me to say? The evidence is there, just read it and if you don't want to read it then why ask me fo it? And your justification for thinking god is a fact, doesn't bother me, and what i hold true should not bother you. But it looks like it does and so I asked you for your justification. I hope you can see that you have your reasons i have mine. Let's end this quibble.

[Gman]

Look Gman i have posted evidence in this thread. What more do you expect me to say? The evidence is there, just read it and if you don't want to read it then why ask me fo it?

You have posted nothing more than dribble. It does not prove that macro evolution is a fact. I have asked you to post the factual proof for marco evolution and you have given nothing... It's because you have nothing more than your philosophical bias.

And your justification for thinking god is a fact, doesn't bother me, and what i hold true should not bother you. But it looks like it does and so I asked you for your justification. I hope you can see that you have your reasons i have mine. Let's end this quibble.

You said that your belief in evolution is true and then even challenged me to post my factual evidence for G-d. Which is very strange.. In other words, YOU (not me) have changed the topic to a philosophical theological position asking to reveal scientific proof for the existence of G-d. So now you have to back up your position. Show us the empirical evidence for your belief that evolution (specifically macro evolution) is a fact. You drew the line, not me...

I'm waiting... Your time is running out.

[neo-x]

Look Gman i have posted evidence in this thread. What more do you expect me to say? The evidence is there, just read it and if you don't want to read it then why ask me fo it?

You have posted nothing more than dribble. It does not prove that macro evolution is a fact. I have asked you to post the factual proof for marco evolution and you have given nothing... It's because you have nothing more than your philosophical bias.

And your justification for thinking god is a fact, doesn't bother me, and what i hold true should not bother you. But it looks like it does and so I asked you for your justification. I hope you can see that you have your reasons i have mine. Let's end this quibble.

You said that your belief in evolution is true and then even challenged me to post my factual evidence for G-d. Which is very strange.. In other words, YOU (not me) have changed the topic to a philosophical theological position asking to reveal scientific proof for the existence of G-d. So now you have to back up your position. Show us the empirical evidence for your belief that evolution (specifically macro evolution) is a fact. You drew the line, not me...

I'm waiting... Your time is running out.

I am not here to convince you that is not my job, try to understand this. What you call dribble, the scientific community call evidence. I stand by them.

Explain what do you mean by your time is running out? Because I don't like the intimidating tone buddy, say what you mean.

[Thadeyus]

.....Posted stuff....

Um....just a point, but don't you have to show how/where/why the links Neo-X posted are twaddle?

As opposed to you simply just saying that they are twaddle...?

Such as "I've read this link and it's plainly wrong at this point..." etc?

For example. I can't find any use of the term 'Macro-evolution" in any normal science literature. It seems to be something only in vogue on these boards. On a science forum etc the only term I've seen used is evolution, nothing else.

Just thinking/typing out loud, as it were.

Much cheers to all.

[neo-x]

.....Posted stuff....

Um....just a point, but don't you have to show how/where/why the links Neo-X posted are twaddle?

As opposed to you simply just saying that they are twaddle...?

Such as "I've read this link and it's plainly wrong at this point..." etc?

For example. I can't find any use of the term 'Macro-evolution" in any normal science literature. It seems to be something only in vogue on these boards. On a science forum etc the only term I've seen used is evolution, nothing else.

Just thinking/typing out loud, as it were.

Much cheers to all.

You are right but that's not what's being done here, not yet. I have been asking to be fair please show me why the evidence I posted is false. I'm not defending that, I am not going to do that Gman. You don't like it deal with it. I'm dealing with your disagreement perhaps you should do the same. Either show me why what I posted is wrong or don't object.

[Gman]

.....Posted stuff....

Um....just a point, but don't you have to show how/where/why the links Neo-X posted are twaddle?

As opposed to you simply just saying that they are twaddle...?

Such as "I've read this link and it's plainly wrong at this point..." etc?

For example. I can't find any use of the term 'Macro-evolution" in any normal science literature. It seems to be something only in vogue on these boards. On a science forum etc the only term I've seen used is evolution, nothing else.

Just thinking/typing out loud, as it were.

Much cheers to all.

You are right but that's not what's being done here, not yet. I have been asking to be fair please show me why the evidence I posted is false. I'm not defending that, I am not going to do that Gman. You don't like it deal with it. I'm dealing with your disagreement perhaps you should do the same. Either show me why what I posted is wrong or don't object.

LOL... You changed your topic from a "so called" discussion about science into discussion about G-d and now you want me to show me my factual evidence proving G-d? You just proved my point, that everyone injects their philosophical beliefs into their science. You just changed the discussion from a discussion about a science into a discussion about G-d. Not me or anyone else here.

And then you start posting links form http://www.talkorigins.org? So show us in your links some real transitional forms.. Or the creation of consciousnesses.

[neo-x]

No it was you actually who changed the topic to a discussion when it was a resource thread with links only.

[Gman]

No it was you actually who changed the topic to a discussion when it was a resource thread with links only.

No.. You asked me "do you hold that God is a fact? if you do, you have to show me empirical proof otherwise you shouldn't be asking me." You changed your "so called" science threads into a discussion about the existence G-d.

I'm moving this topic to the philosophy section..