The Definition for the Theory of Evolution

Personally (and in the laughable sense), I like what molbiogirl had to say: Oooooh... so intimidating!Don't you just love the terminally erudite?As though all of the external facts in the world can show purpose or meaning without invoking a philsophical bias.You nailed it Vashgun. Just because science doesn't understand, doesn't mean their philsophical bias is accurate. That is known as theory, not emperical evidence.you may find this discussion interesting: http://EvC Forum: God caused or uncaused? -->EvC Forum: God caused or uncaused?

Anglagard: Is that so?So before he has even fully communicated his position, you already know that it is wrong?Do I detect an obvious, blatent, and overtly maniacal hint of bias?

Dr. A: Hey... that's a good line Dr. A!But I don't believe the lines at the bar. They're funny, but not real enough...By the way, the foundations of biology are philsophical. And the external world only confirms that philosophy is valid. It cannot speak on it's own. It has to match the pattern...So, even if he does bring the stone down and it crushes you (when you could have cast yourself upon it and willingly been broken); you will be oblivious, because you are not thinking at his level.You will simply be tormented forever by your lack of understanding and demise. It will never make sense to you, because you will not let it make sense. It would cost you your most treasured posession; your sin.

Dr. A: Exactly what I said in the other thread...That as far as we know, our logical inferences are valid when the two (internal coherence + external coherence + their matched agreement = emperical). Any belief to the contrary is strictly unemperical.Edited by Rob, : No reason given.

Dr. A: Exactly the opposite...

Pints and popcorn?You really must work on your diet laddy...Dr A writes: They often prove that our philsophical constructs are invalid. Where are you coming from?http://EvC Forum: God caused or uncaused? -->EvC Forum: God caused or uncaused?