Defending the Christian Worlview, Creationism, and Intelligent Design
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
Defending the Christian Worlview, Creationism, and Intelligent Design

This is my personal virtual library, where i collect information, which leads in my view to the Christian faith, creationism, and Intelligent Design as the best explanation of the origin of the physical Universe, life, and biodiversity


You are not connected. Please login or register

Defending the Christian Worlview, Creationism, and Intelligent Design » Theory of evolution » Usual superficial argumentations to promote evolution

Usual superficial argumentations to promote evolution

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Otangelo


Admin
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/01/peer-reviewed_p055221.html

We've encountered and addressed this type of unsophisticated argument for Darwinian evolution many times before. You can't just vaguely appeal to vast and unending amounts of time (and other probabilistic resources) and assume that Darwinian evolution can produce anything "no matter how complex." Rather, you have to demonstrate that sufficient probabilistic resources exist to produce the feature.

"What is education" when it produces individuals who swear that evolution is true or that those who oppose it don't understand the process.

The so called evolutionary argument is more a matter of assaulting the intelligence of those who oppose it with a range of observations that evolutionists really have no answer for. We have to be ignorant and unaware of what we're doing or talking about addressing the issues in its claim. So, lets say you run this string for some time, where various well stated issues are raised, what can the evolutionists do to contribute the talk? Nothing to effectively challenge what's noted. They'll have to resort to aberrant verbal tactics to try to eliminate or otherwise compromise the talk; with nothing comparable to argue their points. To argue that forever is long enough for the complexity of life to reveal itself is an untenable argument. The numbers are off any scale we can relate to as possible to explain what we see of life. Notwithstanding, you have beings in here who go as far to say it's all accounted for already, as if they know something nobody else does.

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com

Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum