You will own nothing

[Right Divider]

If that's what you gleaned from AO's thread then you really weren't paying attention to it.

I simply read HER DEFINITION of science.

Science itself is entirely neutral on the topic of evolution. It didn't come about by atheistic philosophy by way of. The theory became established because of the abundance of evidence that supports it, regardless of how much that may irk you.

And there is an abundance of evidence that refutes it, regardless of how much that may irk you.

Alate showed that there isn't any need for cognitive dissonance with accepting such and having faith while simultaneously explaining in painstaking detail as to how young earth creationism doesn't hold up to scientific scrutiny. She's not a deist and neither am I.

Then perhaps, for the FIRST time, you'd like to bring up a SPECIFIC claim of evidence that supports ONLY your goo to you evolution and not the creationist view. [Instead of your vague claims that "she schooled us", pick a SPECIFIC post and/or a SPECIFIC claims and we can discuss it].

There's nothing 'childish' about anything I'm posting to you here but if snark is your 'go to' then hey, have at it as you will.

 

[Arthur Brain]

I simply read HER DEFINITION of science.

An there is an abundance of evidence that refutes it, regardless of how much that may irk you.

Then perhaps, for the FIRST time, you'd like to bring up a SPECIFIC claim of evidence that supports ONLY your goo to you evolution and not the creationist view. [Instead of your vague claims that "she schooled us", pick a SPECIFIC post and/or a SPECIFIC claims and we can discuss it].

In essence and in context she's correct, not that that equates to 'materialism' as you erroneously conflate it as being. Science is not concerned with the 'supernatural' by way of unless you want to count paranormal science...

No, there isn't, there simply isn't. If there was, then I'd have no issue with the ToE being discarded and given the boot and anything else that legitimately undoes said theories that go against the earth and the universe as young as you believe it to be. Ultimately, that doesn't really matter to me but legitimacy does.

I've linked you to the thread and there's a plethora therein that annihilates the YEC position. Either read through it as I did last night or don't.

Smiley's? Oh, okay then.

 

[marke]

If that's what you gleaned from AO's thread then you really weren't paying attention to it. Science itself is entirely neutral on the topic of evolution. It didn't come about by atheistic philosophy by way of. The theory became established because of the abundance of evidence that supports it, regardless of how much that may irk you. Alate showed that there isn't any need for cognitive dissonance with accepting such and having faith while simultaneously explaining in painstaking detail as to how young earth creationism doesn't hold up to scientific scrutiny. She's not a deist and neither am I.

There's nothing 'childish' about anything I'm posting to you here but if snark is your 'go to' then hey, have at it as you will.

Science is not neutral on science that proves the genetic code is not subject to random alterations by unknown, unobserved, uneducated, brainless, and unproven supernatural entities like 'natural selection.'

 

[marke]

In essence and in context she's correct, not that that equates to 'materialism' as you erroneously conflate it as being. Science is not concerned with the 'supernatural' by way of unless you want to count paranormal science...

No, there isn't, there simply isn't. If there was, then I'd have no issue with the ToE being discarded and given the boot and anything else that legitimately had the earth and the universe as young as you believe it to be. Ultimately, that doesn't really matter to me but legitimacy does.

I've linked you to the thread and there's a plethora therein that annihilates the YEC position. Either read through it as I did last night or don't.

Smiley's? Oh, okay then.

Darwin was wiser than his millions of deluded followers in the fact that he understood that the lack of transitional fossils is a serious problem for believers in the mythological evolution of species.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Science is not neutral on science that proves the genetic code is not subject to random alterations by unknown, unobserved, uneducated, brainless, and unproven supernatural entities like 'natural selection.'

That was inadvertently funny, will give you that...

 

[Right Divider]

In essence and in context she's correct,

No, she's not.

not that that equates to 'materialism' as you erroneously conflate it as being.

She defined "science" as only applying to the "natural world". You can try to spin that into any "context" that you like, but you've just doing your usual dodging.
Science does not and cannot exist in only the "natural world".

Science is not concerned with the 'supernatural' by way of unless you want to count paranormal science...

Science is concerned with anything and everything. To attempt to exclude certain aspects of the human experience is wrong-headed. Much of science is immaterial. All of the LOGIC associated with the execution of science is immaterial. All of the MATH associated with the execution of science is immaterial. Your Creator is immaterial.

No, there isn't, there simply isn't.

Because you say so? You've proven yourself completely inept, so I'll stick to reality.

If there was, then I'd have no issue with the ToE being discarded and given the boot and anything else that legitimately undoes said theories that go against the earth and the universe as young as you believe it to be. Ultimately, that doesn't really matter to me but legitimacy does.

You are married to your belief system. You claim that about others, but it's true about you.
You cannot see past anything but "evolution".

I've linked you to the thread and there's a plethora therein that annihilates the YEC position. Either read through it as I did last night or don't.

Stop shot-gunning and PICK SOMETHING.
I have been reading through it and it's still the same old of fantasy.
https://theologyonline.com/threads/the-miracle-of-evolution-is-a-myth-part-1.56731/

Smiley's? Oh, okay then.

 

[Arthur Brain]

No, she's not.

She defined "science" as only applying to the "natural world". You can try to spin that into any "context" that you like, but you've just doing your usual dodging.
Science does not and cannot exist in only the "natural world".

Science is concerned with anything and everything. To attempt to exclude certain aspects of the human experience is wrong-headed. Much of science is immaterial. All of the LOGIC associated with the execution of science is immaterial. All of the MATH associated with the execution of science is immaterial. Your Creator is immaterial.

Because you say so? You've proven yourself completely inept, so I'll stick to reality.

You are married to your belief system. You claim that about others, but it's true about you.
You cannot see past anything but "evolution".

Stop shot-gunning and PICK SOMETHING.
I have been reading through it and it's still the same old of fantasy.
https://theologyonline.com/threads/the-miracle-of-evolution-is-a-myth-part-1.56731/

Heck, maybe this example will make more sense to you, maybe not but I'll try it anyway.

A friend of mine has schizophrenia. Decades and longer ago he would probably be described as being 'possessed by demons' but thankfully, with the advent and progression of science in the medical field, it's now established as a genuine condition, one that can be treated with medication that alleviates the symptoms. Those symptoms cannot be 'seen' as such. The hallucinations, both visible and audible can't be 'seen or heard' by any physical means as they don't actually exist outside of the condition but they're still there and 'real' for the sufferer. They're effectively "immaterial" as they can't be observed but the knowledge of how brain chemistry works in an enlightened age has provided a cure, of sorts at least for now.

Not interested in 'picking something'. The thread itself with AO's posts alone are enough, for anyone honest enough to question their own 'belief system'. Projecting doesn't help you on the score. But hey, you keep on with the smiley's as you will.

 

[Right Divider]

Heck, maybe this example will make more sense to you, maybe not but I'll try it anyway.

A friend of mine has schizophrenia. Decades and longer ago he would probably be described as being 'possessed by demons' but thankfully, with the advent and progression of science in the medical field, it's now established as a genuine condition, one that can be treated with medication that alleviates the symptoms. Those symptoms cannot be 'seen' as such. The hallucinations, both visible and audible can't be 'seen or heard' by any physical means as they don't actually exist outside of the condition but they're still there and 'real' for the sufferer. They're effectively "immaterial" as they can't be observed but the knowledge of how brain chemistry works in an enlightened age has provided a cure, of sorts at least for now.

I totally enjoy your complete naiveté when it comes to discussing this.
I guess that you think that air, electricity, magnets, etc. etc. etc. are all immaterial too... since you cannot see them.

Not interested in 'picking something'. The thread itself with AO's posts alone are enough, for anyone honest enough to question their own 'belief system'.

Nothing she says in the thread supports goo to you evolution. So you can continue to hid, but it's not much a discussion when you run for the hills.
So, AGAIN, pick a topic where you think she "schools" someone and let's talk about it.

Projecting doesn't help you on the score. But hey, you keep on with the smiley's as you will.

Your arguments ->

 

[Arthur Brain]

I totally enjoy your complete naiveté when it comes to discussing this.
I guess that you think that air, electricity, magnets, etc. etc. etc. are all immaterial too... since you cannot see them.

Nothing she says in the thread supports goo to you evolution. So you can continue to hid, but it's not much a discussion when you run for the hills.
So, AGAIN, pick a topic where you think she "schools" someone and let's talk about it.

Your arguments ->

I used an example that was in keeping with part of your own argument. My mistake in thinking that you might have had the maturity to address the essence of it. Ho hum. Not only that, the effects of magnets and electricity can be observed outside of the 'visible' anyway. The same with all manner of else..

Your second paragraph is an insult to syntax as well as wilful dishonesty given how Alate went into complete detail and how such needn't be a barrier to faith.

Your third...eh...kinda befitting your juvenile approach really.

 

[Right Divider]

I used an example that was in keeping with part of your own argument.

Please be more specific. Because your example had nothing to do with the immaterial.

My mistake in thinking that you might have had the maturity to address the essence of it.

False accusation... again.

Ho hum. Not only that, the effects of magnets and electricity can be observed outside of the 'visible' anyway. The same with all manner of else..

I agree. Brainwaves are the same way. Again, nothing to do with the immaterial.

Your second paragraph is an insult to syntax as well as wilful dishonesty given how Alate went into complete detail and how such needn't be a barrier to faith.

I've never said that believing evolution was a "barrier to faith", so again you make false accusations.
Evolution has made many people lose their faith, if they ever really had it to begin with.

Your third...eh...kinda befitting your juvenile approach really.

It's appropriate for the "level of discussion" of the topic that you've engaged in.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Please be more specific. Because your example had nothing to do with the immaterial.

False accusation... again.

I agree. Brainwaves are the same way. Again, nothing to do with the immaterial.

I've never said that believing evolution was a "barrier to faith", so again you make false accusations.
Evolution has made many people lose their faith, if they ever really had it to begin with.

It's appropriate for the "level of discussion" of the topic that you've engaged in.

Um, no. Your 'dung' smiley reflected only poorly on you. Completely immature and you should and can do better. Your statement that evolution has made many people lose their faith or if they had any to begin with really needs to be quantified, else it's just a soundbite. Alate is an example of someone who threw off the shackles of of fundamentalism and showed that there wasn't a disconnect with science and belief. Not only that, she exemplified a maturity amidst a whole load of snark in the process. I'll freely admit that I've behaved immaturely on here but I'm not interested in carrying that on. Once again, what does it ultimately matter RD?

 

[Right Divider]

Um, no. Your 'dung' smiley reflected only poorly on you.

Says the "brain" that cannot think.

Completely immature and you should and can do better.

I'm not the tiniest bit phased by your critique of me and my actions.

Your statement that evolution has made many people lose their faith or if they had any to begin with really needs to be quantified, else it's just a soundbite.

A sound bite, like 99% of what you post about "goo to you" evolution.

Alate is an example of someone who threw off the shackles of of fundamentalism and showed that there wasn't a disconnect with science and belief.

I too "threw off the shackles of of fundamentalism" when I learned the truth about "goo to you evolution".

Not only that, she exemplified a maturity amidst a whole load of snark in the process.

She's wrong and therefore "maturity" is irrelevant.

I'll freely admit that I've behaved immaturely on here but I'm not interested in carrying that on.

That's big of you and truly mean that.

Once again, what does it ultimately matter RD?

Truth matters AB... TRUTH MATTERS!

 

[Arthur Brain]

Says the "brain" that cannot think.

I'm not the tiniest bit phased by your critique of me and my actions.

A sound bite, like 99% of what you post about "goo to you" evolution.

I too "threw off the shackles of of fundamentalism" when I learned the truth about "goo to you evolution".

She's wrong and therefore "maturity" is irrelevant.

That's big of you and truly mean that.

Truth matters AB... TRUTH MATTERS!

She isn't wrong and this was exemplified with her painstaking and patient detail in both threads as linked to.

The phrase 'goo to you' is just what, exactly? It certainly doesn't encapsulate evolution. Some puerile soundbite is all.

Truth matters for sure, but then nobody's arguing against that anyway.

 

[Right Divider]

She isn't wrong and this was exemplified with her painstaking and patient detail in both threads as linked to.

Her claim that the biblical kind is the same as a species is completely incorrect. You should already know that, but you're fully committed to whatever she says.

The phrase 'goo to you' is just what, exactly? It certainly doesn't encapsulate evolution. Some puerile soundbite is all.

It is a apt description of the idea all life is descended from the simplest possible life form that itself came to life from basic chemicals.

Truth matters for sure, but then nobody's arguing against that anyway.

You argue against the truth at every turn when you support GTY evolution.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Her claim that the biblical kind is the same as a species is completely incorrect. You should already know that, but you're fully committed to whatever she says.

It is a apt description of the idea all life is descended from the simplest possible life form that itself came to life from basic chemicals.

You argue against the truth at every turn when you support GTY evolution.

Nope. I'm not committed to anything that anyone says but you carry on with that as you will if you like. She makes absolute sense and I'm not gonna decry that where it comes to the topic.

It's not an apt description at all but you carry on with it.

Yawn in regards to the latter.

 

[marke]

That was inadvertently funny, will give you that...

How could DNA from plants be altered to evolve into animal life, or how could unknown DNA be an ancestor to both plants and animals like deluded Darwininists think?

 

[ok doser]

How could DNA from plants be altered to evolve into animal life, or how could unknown DNA be an ancestor to both plants and animals like deluded Darwininists think?

Billions of years and "natural selection"

 

[Arthur Brain]

How could DNA from plants be altered to evolve into animal life, or how could unknown DNA be an ancestor to both plants and animals like deluded Darwininists think?

You don't seem to have any idea of what scientists actually think but just post bizarre and uninformed diatribes regardless.

 

[TomO]

Billions of years and "natural selection"

"Feed me Seymore!"

 

[marke]

Billions of years and "natural selection"

The smartest evolutionists have said that given enough time the impossible becomes possible. That is the best argument in favor of the miracle of evolution I have ever heard, even if the argument is science fiction.