Why you should think that the Natural-Evolution of species is true

[Bradskii]

Yes to both!

Your profile is hidden, so it must be satire!

 

[laylow]

There is a point to be made in there somewhere. Or maybe it was satire.

Even ramble sometimes achieves something resembling coherence…but on the other hand in this case YMMV.

 

[edwest]

Hear, hear!

 

[Bradskii]

Vonsalza:

Plenty of theist evolutionists are happy to say that God designed evolution to work in a way that didn’t require His continual intervention and then sent the “ball” rolling.

Did God know what Adam would look like?

I’ve seen this question well into double figures and still don’t know why it’s being asked. So to find out, I’ll answer it: Yes.

Over to you .

 

[laylow]

Last reply then it goes private as it violates the topic - the intervention is at death. I conveniently don’t have to prove that. I can’t without dying, in which case I can’t come back to show you.

Fair enough, although from my knowledge that was outside of the definition. I appreciate the clarification.

 

[buffalo]

Remember you said that ID has a scientific hat and a philosophical hat? Thus confirming that they are one and the same? Remember Dover.

Ah, we’ll always have Dover. They wore grey and you wore blue…

Thank you. Evo only has a philosophical hat.

 

[Bradskii]

Vonsalza:

Devout IDers here just need to understand an attack on ID isn’t an attack on the concept of God.

The motive depends on who is doing the attacking.

I’m an atheist. Use me as an example and tell me why I’m shooting fish…sorry, ‘attacking ID’

 

[Vonsalza]

Vonsalza:

Last reply then it goes private as it violates the topic - the intervention is at death. I conveniently don’t have to prove that. I can’t without dying, in which case I can’t come back to show you.

Fair enough, although from my knowledge that was outside of the definition. I appreciate the clarification.

If you want to call me a orthopractic Christian deist, I won’t fight it too hard.

Ok. That’s it. I’m back to topic. Swear it.

 

[buffalo]

I’ve seen this question well into double figures and still don’t know why it’s being asked. So to find out, I’ll answer it: Yes.

Over to you .

Did Adam look as God planned?

 

[Bradskii]

Bradskii:

Remember you said that ID has a scientific hat and a philosophical hat? Thus confirming that they are one and the same? Remember Dover.

Ah, we’ll always have Dover. They wore grey and you wore blue…

Thank you. Evo only has a philosophical hat.

Straw man. Evolution doesn’t deny God.

 

[buffalo]

Evolution doesn’t deny God.

Yet it will not let the divine foot in the door…

 

[Vonsalza]

Bradskii:

Evolution doesn’t deny God.

Yet it will not let the divine foot in the door…

God is just a non-issue to evolution. It’s unrelated.

Evolution fails to consider God just like it fails to consider the merits of democracy.

It’s a different topic.

To the learned, “category error”.

 

[edwest]

That is true. It’s only use is as a worldview.

 

[Bradskii]

Bradskii:

I’ve seen this question well into double figures and still don’t know why it’s being asked. So to find out, I’ll answer it: Yes.

Over to you .

Did Adam look as God planned?

I’ll bite. Yes…(with a heads up here - I don’t believe in either of them). But hey, let’s see where this goes!

 

[Bradskii]

Bradskii:

Evolution doesn’t deny God.

Yet it will not let the divine foot in the door…

Straw man. It doesn’t exclude God in any way.

 

[Techno2000]

Plenty of theist evolutionists are happy to say that God designed evolution to work in a way that didn’t require His continual intervention and then sent the “ball” rolling.

Too bad the fossil record doesn’t show that.

 

[Vonsalza]

That is true. It’s only use is as a worldview.

You’ve swapped your horse and cart.

Worldviews don’t go into evolution. Evolution is used to craft your personal worldview.

 

[rossum]

Have you missed or are simply ignoring the cell directed mutation papers I cited.

Have you realised that your sources were lying to you? There is observable, repeatable and predictable evidence for evolution.

 

[buffalo]

God is just a non-issue to evolution. It’s unrelated.

Evolution fails to consider God just like it fails to consider the merits of democracy.

It’s a different topic.

To the learned, “category error”.

BS - scientists who adhere to evolutionism are atheists. They claim it was because of evolution.

 

[buffalo]

Have you realised that your sources were lying to you? There is observable, repeatable and predictable evidence for evolution.

Nope…