Nevermind, I found it. This stupid thing tells me that someone replied to my post just because I posted something in reply to someone else in the spring. So here I am looking for my original post. ..... I do have some advice that some might find useful. Learn the definitions of hypothesis, theory, and law with regards to the scientific disciplines. I cannot make predictions based on past events and the assumption of God. Test that prediction and get a positive answer. I can however look at birds and essentially guess they have "dino" DNA and test that. These people did that and got a positive result. This by itself is not enough. However, the preponderance of multiple positives that track back to several different points along the development of birds, looking at many varied measurable qualities in addition to DNA, do produce a strong theory. As the film points out these datum actually support several theories upon which other
"educated guesses" can be made and tested. Eventually theories die and new ones replace them. For those who would inject God into the conversation I would simply ask that they try to follow that model and see where they end up.   See 14 other replies

Does anybody know the original post that started this thread.   See 14 other replies

Your views seem to be that of an excusivist, although as an American you have a right to your views, it its sad to see people who are against social diversity which was one of the things that makes this such a great country to live in.   See 3 other replies

Yes; calling people names with whom you disagree is very intellectual.   See 3 other replies

this is a stupid statement. First off an argument against or for something should never be evidence for anything. Evidence is evidence not opinion of persons. Secondly to say that this is evidence against evolution is absurd as i stated but further one can reply (1) that there is less evidence against evolution than there is against creationism and (2) at least there is evidence in favor of evolution. What i mean in the latter is show me your evidence of creation and if the Bible is the best you can do you should see your fallacy in many ways. You are referring to a 1700-1400 year old book (new testament and its not two thousand yrs. thats when Jesus died he didn't write the bible that Cardinal put together the gospels hundreds of years after Jesus died) so it's outdated as a factual document, and you have a bias in that case towards a western christian God. All it shows is that you believe what the Bible says but i doubt you believe what is said in the Koran ( Q'ran , Kuran, however you like to spell it) about the beginning of everything. And to say that the bible is the truth is already ridiculous just run tests and look at the facts. They show that some of those big stories in the Bible that try and explain how and why things are ( the Great Flood and Noah's Ark, creation in seven days, women made from man, world being only 5000 yrs. old, etc...) are just purely false.   See 14 other replies

yes it is a dumb idea. God has nothing to do with us. You mean to tell me that out of all the things God can do, he decided to do this create a universe and create one life-filled planet (Earth) in one solar system in one galaxy and he watches us and loves us more than anything. Tell me this whats the point of all the other stuff? Meaning; the other galaxies and other solar systems and other planets. They there for show or what? Did God need to create all that stuff or did he just want to?   See 14 other replies