abelcainsbrother wrote:Based on Occam's razor I have given more evidence than you have.
Eh? Occam's Razor is not a philosophy that says less evidence is better than more.
I cannot change your mind
I'm afraid that's probably true, not because you have no convincing evidence and not because of my obduracy, but because you have no idea how to express yourself coherently.
you can ignore the evidence I've given for what I believe
I have not ignored your evidence. I have studied it carefully and explained why I don't accept it.
which you have not done yet
I have not done what, exactly? This makes no sense at all.
you still choose to look at the evidence in the earth from an evolution viewpoint
Wrong again. You haven't read my earlier post at all, have you?
when you nor any scientist has ever given evidence that demonstrates life evolves.
Yes, I have, in some detail, in a post of a few hours ago. Why are you pretending I haven't?
My evidence for the former world is simple,it is the fossils that show the different kind of life that lived in it until it perished.
I have reviewed your evidence, above, and explained why I find it wanting. If there is something about my explanation you disagree with, please point it out.
Since you have no evidence that even comes close to demonstrating life evolves you should not continue to look at the fossil evidence from that perspective, yet you choose to,which I can do nothing about.
This is culpably false. I explained at length why the evidence I presented persuaded me of the truth of evolution. If you want to do something about it, take it in small quotes, as I am doing with this post of yours, and say where you think I am wrong.
Instead of looking at the fossils as if life evolves for which there is no evidence to show it does,just look at the evidence from a lost world perspective instead.
I have done. I reviewed your evidence carefully, but found it not only unconvincing, but factually false and logically inconsistent.
See the life that lived in the former world,it's really easy to do. It had dinosaurs,hominids,trilobites,wooly mammoths,giant deer,sabre tooth cats,etc that lived in the former world.
This is just silly. Dinosaurs and woolly mammoths were not contemporaneous, and there is abundant evidence to demonstrate that.
The fossils don't help evolution anyway because all fossils found only show fully formed creatures that once lived and died
You really have no idea what evolution is about, do you? Living creatures are almost invariably fully formed.
and none show any transition or anything that would lead anybody to believe the life was evolving
Yes, they do, often.
you're adding evolution imagination into the fossil evidence.
Oh, dear me, abelcainsbrother, back to the same old tub-thumping, as if you haven't actually read any of my previous posts. Why not try to move on? If you disagree with any of the points I have made, quote them and explain why. Don't just revert to this fingers-in-ears "La-La-La-I can't hear you" sort of response. That seriously weakens any credibility you may have.