I stand by my statement. Your definition of evolution is irrelevant as it does not apply to science. I'd like to know what evidence you have that would support the idea that Darwinism is a "Lie".
Your statement that the human body is too complex does not disprove or put a dent in evolution in the slightest. I think its fairly obvious that the human body is massively complex. The statement that our bodies continue to baffle the greatest minds is also a weak argumentagainst evolution. In fact it's no argument at all. Feel free to elaborate.
To referece cloning,the fact that the application of scientific discovery may be used for greed or ill intent doesn't invalidate scientific truth. Perhaps it speaks to human nature but again makes it no less true. This would be an ethics debate.
Your claim that "this world's" approximate age of 14,000 years old coinciding with "carbon dating" is confusing. I don't know what you mean by "this world" when in the same paragraph you say the Earth's age of hundreds of billions of years is a good place to start. I also don't know why you've put Earth in quotations. The earth is estimated at 4.5 billion not hundreds of billions (i'm curious as to where you got that figure) and carbon dating is not a method used in estimating the earth's age. So your claim that scientific studies via carbon dating support thisfigure is innaccurate.
Finally,I'm not claiming you subscribe to any particular "lie". However,I think you are misinformed about what something means to be a scientific theory.
This comment thread is locked. Please enter a new comment to start a new comment thread.
Enter new comment
@Just Me.
I stand by my statement. Your definition of evolution is irrelevant as it does not apply to science. I'd like to know what evidence you have that would support the idea that Darwinism is a "Lie".
Your statement that the human body is too complex does not disprove or put a dent in evolution in the slightest. I think its fairly obvious that the human body is massively complex. The statement that our bodies continue to baffle the greatest minds is also a weak argumentagainst evolution. In fact it's no argument at all. Feel free to elaborate.
To referece cloning,the fact that the application of scientific discovery may be used for greed or ill intent doesn't invalidate scientific truth. Perhaps it speaks to human nature but again makes it no less true. This would be an ethics debate.
Your claim that "this world's" approximate age of 14,000 years old coinciding with "carbon dating" is confusing. I don't know what you mean by "this world" when in the same paragraph you say the Earth's age of hundreds of billions of years is a good place to start. I also don't know why you've put Earth in quotations. The earth is estimated at 4.5 billion not hundreds of billions (i'm curious as to where you got that figure) and carbon dating is not a method used in estimating the earth's age. So your claim that scientific studies via carbon dating support thisfigure is innaccurate.
Finally,I'm not claiming you subscribe to any particular "lie". However,I think you are misinformed about what something means to be a scientific theory.
This comment thread is locked. Please enter a new comment below to start a new comment thread.
Note: Comment threads older than 2 months are automatically locked.
Do you have a Bible comment or question?
Posting comments is currently unavailable due to high demand on the server.
Please check back in an hour or more. Thank you for your patience!
Report Comment
Which best represents the problem with the comment?