Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 81 (9005 total)
28 online now:
PaulK, Tangle (2 members, 26 visitors)
Newest Member: kanthesh
Post Volume: Total: 881,189 Year: 12,937/23,288 Month: 662/1,527 Week: 101/240 Day: 0/29 Hour: 0/0

Announcements: Topic abandonment warning (read and/or suffer the consequences)


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Can you disprove this secular argument against evolution?
Larni
Member
Posts: 3998
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 85 of 293 (803977)
04-06-2017 8:06 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by forexhr
04-06-2017 5:17 AM


Hi Fox, this is an interesting discussion!

If you're correct it would mean that evilution is in fact wrong and that some supreme being is providing the necessary direction for life to be the way it is.

If what you say is true it will be a great day for people of faith (specifically fundamentalist Christians, I imagine) as it would prove, if proof be need be that the God of the Bible(KJV1611) is in fact the Creator of All things.


The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53

The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286

Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134


This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by forexhr, posted 04-06-2017 5:17 AM forexhr has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by forexhr, posted 04-06-2017 9:11 AM Larni has responded

  
Larni
Member
Posts: 3998
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


(1)
Message 121 of 293 (804137)
04-07-2017 10:28 AM
Reply to: Message 89 by forexhr
04-06-2017 9:11 AM


I see, my mistake entirely.

You're an idiot.


The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53

The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286

Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134


This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by forexhr, posted 04-06-2017 9:11 AM forexhr has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by forexhr, posted 04-07-2017 10:59 AM Larni has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020