[QUOTE]You can say Creation is religion if you want to that is your opionion and I will not argue with that... As I have said before Creation is not Science niether is the Theory of evolution. The essence of the scientific method is measurement, observation and repeatability. Neither Creation nor Evolution are scientific in this sense. Neither one can be tested, for the simple reason that we cannot repeat history. The origin of the universe, life and mankind all took place in the past and cannot be studied or repeated in the laboratory. No one, in all human history has ever observed macro evolution taking place anywhere not even in the fossil record.Quote:
Originally Posted by asking
Therefore belief in the theory of evolution is thus exactly parallel to belief in special creation.. both are concepts which believers "know" to be true but neither, up to the present, has been capable of conclusive irrefutable proof.
So if you say Creation is religion then I will also say Macro Evolution is religion since there is no known scientific basis MACRO evolution.
I find it irrational that all the Darwinists like yourself continue to claim Macro evolution is a fact and yet all of you have failed to provide the irrefutable evidence for it. All the so called evidence you have given me supports MICRO evolution. Yes a dog and wolg share a common ancestor (micro) but I am yet to see evidence to the leap of faith made by darwinists that the dog and the wolf also share a common ancestor with carots, bees, palm trees etc.Quote:
I have no problem with your viewing your belief in creationism as separate from your personal religious beliefs, but I think a lot of the confusion may arise from people assuming that your attacks on evolution are religious dogma, which leads to religious arguments. I don't think anyone enjoys those much.
It is frustrating for some of us to have to defend something that we view as proved (evolution) from someone like yourself who knows "just enough to be dangerous." That is, I feel macroevolution has been proved and I have presented some of the evidence in other threads.
So please I urge you to stop making empty claims. There is irrefutable evidence for Micro evolution.. we all know that occurs. It is observed in nature and in laboratories.. however there is zero evidence of a promordial soup where an amoeba crawls out and is supposedly the mother of all living things. These are BELIEFS not facts.
I will address this in a diffent post...Quote:
You have said you are not personally satisfied with any evidence for evolution--although I have to say that biology for the last 100 years IS satisfied, so this lack of satisfaction with the evidence is particular to you and other people who are mostly not practicing biologists. I have asked you what sort of evidence could satisfy you as to the truth of evolution, but if you answered, I didn't see it. I feel that a serious conversation about evolution would have to start with that, because I can't keep guessing what evidence might satisfy you. If your discussion of evolution is in fact a scientific discussion (and not religious), then it's incumbent on you to state your terms--that is, what would it take to prove that new species can form?