Re: RTB: Serious Problems with Evolution
Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2016 6:11 pm
hughfarey wrote:Eh? Occam's Razor is not a philosophy that says less evidence is better than more.abelcainsbrother wrote:Based on Occam's razor I have given more evidence than you have.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.I cannot change your mindI have not ignored your evidence. I have studied it carefully and explained why I don't accept it.you can ignore the evidence I've given for what I believeI have not done what, exactly? This makes no sense at all.which you have not done yetWrong again. You haven't read my earlier post at all, have you?you still choose to look at the evidence in the earth from an evolution viewpointYes, I have, in some detail, in a post of a few hours ago. Why are you pretending I haven't?when you nor any scientist has ever given evidence that demonstrates life evolves.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.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.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.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.I have done. I reviewed your evidence carefully, but found it not only unconvincing, but factually false and logically inconsistent.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.This is just silly. Dinosaurs and woolly mammoths were not contemporaneous, and there is abundant evidence to demonstrate that.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.You really have no idea what evolution is about, do you? Living creatures are almost invariably fully formed.The fossils don't help evolution anyway because all fossils found only show fully formed creatures that once lived and diedYes, they do, often.and none show any transition or anything that would lead anybody to believe the life was evolvingOh, 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.you're adding evolution imagination into the fossil evidence.
I have responded to you and the points you've made. I explained what I agree with and what I don't agree with but it is not me sticking my finger in my ears,it is you. All you have done is explained some of the reasons you accept evolution,but unlike I,you offer no evidence. I give evidence for what I believe and have given you evidence when you've asked for it,but you don't instead you just find reasons to explain the evidence I give away,while you just explain what you believe about evolution but do not offer evidence. I think that you know you must assume and speculate that little changes lead to big changes just like Charles Darwin did,but offer no evidence to back it up,you just choose to accept it anyway regardless of evidence. You act like I have no right to tell scientists how long they can have to demonstrate life evolves after 150 years of trying to and failing,yet continuing to push evolution as true science,when it is'nt as I have pointed out. If you choose to accept something regardless of the evidence then evidence won't be as important to you,but evidence is important to me.