when?

if you can show an example of a man with dinosaurs, or chicken in precambrian we will throw out evolution.

can you give me an example of what you are talking about?

but i will say that i dont believe it was god, and wont believe it until i have some evidence for it, that at least matches the mountaints of evidence that stand behind evolution.

there is NO evidence of god, plenty for evolution, and to say that there are a small set of examples that arent proved by evolution YET, does not disprove the theory. of course reasons are found to fit evolution when anomolies are found, since that is the only scientifically viable option at the moment.

these anomolies you so enthusiastically speak of simply have not been explained yet, which gives us more answers to find, and i for one relish that. isnt it more satisfying (as well as more honest, more logical, more intelligent etc) to want to find the truth behind something that is NOT YET explained, instead of just finding a gap and saying “oh well, there you go… 0.01% isnt supported by your crazy evolution theory, so OBVIOUSLY there was some supernatural force behind it”.

to believe in god and creationism is to deny logic and deny irrefutable evidence and is quite frankly arrogant and close minded. religion exists only because parents tell their children god is fact. if we waited until people were intelligent enough to make decisions for themselves, which young children are not (since natural selection has taught the young minds to take what they are taught, pardon the pun, as gospel), and then put forward the two ways of thought, a) scientific theory, evolution etc, b) some guy made us all, answer for everything is just “god”, then the second idea would be laughed at.

i think logically, therefore will happily shout out how wrong i was if evidence shows that god did all of this (something tells me i wont be doing this any time soon). you however, and all of gods hangers-on, are the ones who will not revers your opinion, so your argument against evolutionists on that basis has not a single scrap of weight behind it, and shows a high level of ignorance in your own way of thinking.

to believe in god is also to deny the sheer beauty and diversity that exists in this world, this universe, and the nature that forms it, and perhaps more importantly the thirst for knowledge and discovery of how it came to be. to simply put the answer of “god did it” to everything, stifles that hunger for knowledge, which i think is the saddest thing in this whole argument.

Also, Minchin’s quote is fallacious with regard to large scale evolution. Why? Because if Darwinism has taught us anything, it’s that evolution is assumed to be true. It wasn’t always so, but in our post modern world it has become “fact.” Once a theory is assumed to be true, it’s rather easy to twist facts to suit theories instead fitting theories to suit facts. To that end, Darwinian theory defies Minchin’s claim. Evolutionists have married the vein. Now everything they find is fitted into the theory which is already assumed to be true.

Once Dawkins was asked what it would take to convince him that evolution is a fractured model for how life works. He basically said that he’d have to find something in the geologic column, which didn’t belong. But that has already happened…more than once. And what about so-called living fossils? Yet, another example of facts being twisted to fit evolution instead of the other way ’round. Did Dawkins, his colleagues, or his many hangerons reverse their position in light of these facts? Of course not. What this shows is that no amount of evidence to the contrary would confute their ideas. Since they assume evolution is absolutely correct, any and all evidence to the contrary does nothing more than convince them even more as to the validity of their position.

Having said that, Dawkins is wonderful at pointing out the problems with other philosophies. He’s also a brilliant and witty writer. But he’s completely impotent when it comes to his own hypocrisy, straw man making, question begging, appeals to authority, special pleading and the other devices he employs to prop up his own claims. As far as I’m concerned he’s just as dangerous as the religious fundamentalists….He’s no less extreme, just at the other end of the continuum.

i agree with you that the creationists putting forth their beliefs are ridiculous, as this is simply what they want to believe, and it is an easy copout to say their story is true. science admits to not knowing what began life… YET, but works towards discovering the truth, instead of putting a story together and falsely “educating” young children to these “facts”.

science seeks truth, faith seeks to maintain its own falsehoods

“Science adjusts its views based on what’s observed. Faith is the denial of observation so that belief can be preserved.” – Tim Minchin, “Storm”

TDT