View Single Post
Old 01-02-2013, 01:36 PM   #1518
Fish Fish is offline
Missing Dick Curl
 
Fish's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2005
Casino cash: $8295
Quote:
Originally Posted by KILLER_CLOWN View Post
My belief doesn't make something fact no more than yours does. This is what makes evolution a religion. IMO is just that.
You are quite right about the first sentence. But not the second.

Evolution is not based on belief. It's based on repeatable observation. We can observe a species, and then observe them again at a later date in time, and note special changes. That one simple fact is what makes it different than a religious belief.

Let's use an example. Say I have a species of ants. I observe and record the ant physiology over 40 years of my life. At the end of my 40 years, I can compare my observations, and note the changes. I've had complete control of the ant environment for 40 years, to ensure there were no outside influences. I can offer evidence such as continuous video recording to prove that my ant experiment happened exactly according to my observations. I can hold up an ant from the end of the experiment, and compare it to ones preserved at the beginning of the experiment, to directly show physical changes. All of that is actual evidence I have that evolution occurred over the 40 years of the ant species.

Now let's attempt the same example with religious Creation. But where to start? We have no evidence of an experimenter. In the evolution example, we can show exactly who the experimenter was. We have proof the experimenter existed. But we cannot prove that a God existed. Huge difference. OK, moving on... Do we have proof the experiment happened? Nobody recorded the biblical creation, so no. Can we look at fossil records to show that the experiment happened? No, as fossil records actually show the opposite, indicating that the Earth is billions of years old instead. So where's the evidence? We can't seem to find any for the biblical creation. In our evolution experiment, we easily had lots of evidence to point to.

Comparing the two experiments, one provided a great deal of evidence. And one did not. One of the experiments is considered a belief. The other is a proven scientific theory.
__________________
Posts: 25,937
Fish is obviously part of the inner Circle.Fish is obviously part of the inner Circle.Fish is obviously part of the inner Circle.Fish is obviously part of the inner Circle.Fish is obviously part of the inner Circle.Fish is obviously part of the inner Circle.Fish is obviously part of the inner Circle.Fish is obviously part of the inner Circle.Fish is obviously part of the inner Circle.Fish is obviously part of the inner Circle.Fish is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote