Zephan: What is Evidence?

Thread moved here from the The Great Debate forum.

[This post is by Zephan, and was moved here from Message 22 of the Could any creationist explain the DNA-differences from a sudden creation? thread. --Admin]I can accept that Admin.
However, for the record, it was I who asked the question of "what is evidence" first. I realize it was an extremely difficult question, which is why it was left largely unanswered. By failing to proffer an objective framework to analyze the alleged data and/or alleged facts, I clearly demonstrated that subjectivity reigns in interpreting the alleged "evidence" of evolution. That was really my only point to demonstrate. That I continue to receive insults on the matter (still no workable definition) further validates my point.Reasonable people understand the gross error of shifting the burden of proof, which is precisely what occured when the question was turned around on me by Mark24. Such a tactic concedes defeat and clearly demonstrates the lack of understanding of what evidence is, especially in light of the glaring fact that the word "evidence" is so generously, although erroneously, utilized in these discussions.Nevertheless, I am immune from the insults because I really do know something about real evidence. I am, in fact, an expert in evidence (and arguments from the evidence) as most lawyers who practice daily in a court of law should be. The feigned inquiry into what I personally thought of the definition of evidence was sadly misplaced since I said time and again evidence was objective, not subjective.Alternatively, I genuinely desired to know what you evolutionists thought evidence was since it is so freely associated with ToE here, notwithstanding, of course, my provocative debating style of requiring ToE to stand or fall on its own assertion of having tons of evidence in its favor and challenging the erroneous definitions. Quite simply, I believed it important for those utilizing the word to have a working knowledge of its meaning. I guess I was wrong to assume evidence was important to the logical foundations of evolution (abiogenesis) and evolution itself. Or maybe I was correct to assume that real evidence was unimportant to ToE.So be it.

[Redundant message deleted. --Admin][This message has been edited by Admin, 03-29-2003]

Hi Zephan, Rules 1 and 2 of the Forum Guidelines are intended to keep debate moving along productively:

1. Please stay on topic for a thread. Open a new thread for new topics.
   ​
2. Debate in good faith by addressing rebuttals through the introduction of new information or by providing additional argument. Do not merely keep repeating the same points without elaboration.

The topic of this thread is your definition of evidence, and though this thread now has more than 70 messages you have yet to offer one. You are under no requirement to do so, but if you have no intention of doing so then please stop posting messages to this thread. Activity on the thread will cease and in a week or so I'll close it.------------------
--EvC Forum Administrator

Let's say you're looking at the message you want to link to. The URL address of that message is in the "Address" window at the top of your browser. For instance, the URL address of your message looks like this: If the number at the end is missing or is for a different message then just change it.If you want your message to instead appear as Message 78 then enter this: ------------------
--EvC Forum Administrator

Hi Zephan,In Message 77 I requested that you address the topic of the thread or refrain from posting. Since you've decided to do neither, please accept an indefinite suspension of posting privileges. If at any time you can point to your productive participation in discussion at another board you may apply here for restoration of your posting privileges by email to Admin.------------------
--EvC Forum Administrator