6days, you're the ONLY one of us who relies on straw men to make an "argument". I don't like being accused of something I haven't and don't do.
You "provided" a quote out-of-context to make it appear it said something it didn't and I corrected you on it. Pull the other one 6days... pull the other one.
Huh? Perhaps you need to go back a few posts and refresh your memory of who posted the link about the evolution of eyes, YOU brought it up (post #124); I made the mistake of playing along with your red herring.
Yeah, and what fisherman or astronomer wouldn't want that kind of vision?
Your religious beliefs are boring. "Goddidit!!!", and "Falldidit!!!", are placeholders for anything a creationist can't lie about.
If "in the beginning my-preferred-personally-constructed-deity created (X, Y, Z)", doesn't mean "Goddidit!!!" please explain what it DOES mean.
I'm going to go out on a limb here, and make a really bold statement.
Yeah, that's pretty much all creationists do... make "bold" statements.
YES! God Did It (tm). He did it (created), the Fall corrupted it (sin entered the world, and death came by sin), the Flood destroyed it (wiped out all but one family with a bunch of animals on a boat), He reconciled it (Jesus died on the cross to save mankind), and He will reward it (with life or death), but until then we have to deal with it (the effects of such a Flood event, such as hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, floods (though not on the same scale), tsunamis, volcanoes, meteorites, etc.), but that doesn't preclude studying it, learning about it, or making observations about it.
Your religious beliefs are boring. "Goddidit!!!", and "Falldidit!!!", are placeholders for anything a creationist can't lie about or make up stories about.
Evolutionists have no (yes, I repeat, ABSOLUTELY NO) secular theory, no, not even a hypothesis, of ORIGINS. Every theory they have starts with something already in existence.
- the origin of species for Darwin begins with species already in existence
- the origin of stars begins with the explosion of existing stars and with protostars
- the origin of genes that code for new proteins begins with modifying existing genes
- the origin of species by neo-Darwinism begins with existing complex reproducing life
- the origin of life on earth is increasingly seen as seeded from already existing alien life
- the origin of the universe is increasingly explained by appeals to the pre-existing multiverse.
We can debate what happened after the origin of anything all day long for forever, but unless there is a discussion on origins, there will never be any progress made.
The biggest problem creationists have is their inability to say 3.5 little words, "I don't know".
"I don't know" is the very beginning of science.
There once was a time when the source of thunder and lightning (to name but two) was unknown. Instead of saying, "I don't know, but I sure would like to find out", their answer was, "Goddidit!!!"
As with thunder and lightning the present understanding of "origins" (as outlined by JR above) is, "I don't know, but I sure would like to find out".
Instead, creationists would rather shortcut the discovery process and proclaim, "Goddidit!!!"
Anything creationists can't understand they declare it to be too complex to have occurred naturally, so the only POSSIBLE explanation MUST be, "Goddidit!!!"
As our knowledge advanced we discovered the "origin" of thunder, lightning, and countless other natural processes once relegated to, "Goddidit!!!"
As human knowledge increases the "gaps" left for, "Goddidit!!!", to occupy become smaller and smaller.
I am confident that someday human understanding will be able to answer JR's "origin" questions and, "Goddidit!!!" will be cast into the trash never again to be used to in place of, "I don't know (but I sure would like to find out)".
Hey, 6days,
If "in the beginning my-preferred-personally-constructed-deity created (X, Y, Z)", doesn't mean "Goddidit!!!" please explain what it DOES mean.
