Changes

:Ryancsh, also,your gumball analogy failed. Scientific proof/arguments is not the only kind of evidence/arguments (for example, historical evidence/arguments, logical arguments, etc.).  Biblical creation belief [http://creation.com/creation-answers has sound historical evidence and arguments].  

:Ryancsh, also,your gumball analogy failed. Scientific proof/arguments is not the only kind of evidence/arguments (for example, historical evidence/arguments, logical arguments, etc.).  Biblical creation belief [http://creation.com/creation-answers has sound historical evidence and arguments].  

:Second, you wrote: "The same can be said for evolution vs creationism. Neither side has proven to be scientific fact and, after consulting the evidence, I am not going to say that I believe either side to be true without conclusive proof. I treat everything with the same decree of Falsifiability (a trait of a theory where it can be shown to be false if some conceivable observation were true)." If you only made decisions based on conclusive proof, you wouldn't eat/drink food at restaurants unless you had a food taster lest the food/drinks were poisoned, etc. etc.  Historical arguments are probabilistic. I know you don't live your life's decisions solely on conclusive proof. Your atheistic/agnostic argumentation is weak. I am glad I have the [http://www.conservapedia.com/Christian_apologetics_website_resources strong proofs and evidence of Christianity/creation] and I am not reliant on weak argumentation.  

:Second, you wrote: "The same can be said for evolution vs creationism. Neither side has proven to be scientific fact and, after consulting the evidence, I am not going to say that I believe either side to be true without conclusive proof. I treat everything with the same decree of Falsifiability (a trait of a theory where it can be shown to be false if some conceivable observation were true)." If you only made decisions based on conclusive proof, you wouldn't eat/drink at restaurants unless you had a food/drink taster lest the food/drinks were poisoned, etc. etc.  Historical arguments are probabilistic. I know you don't live your life's decisions solely on conclusive proof. Your atheistic/agnostic argumentation is weak. I am glad I have the [http://www.conservapedia.com/Christian_apologetics_website_resources strong proofs and evidence of Christianity/creation] and I am not reliant on weak argumentation.  

:Lastly, you are still dodging. You wrote: "Firstly, Children believe whatever they are told."  Again, children in atheistic Japan are not told the world is designed, but nevertheless researchers found they see the world as designed.[http://creation.com/children-see-the-world-as-designed] Your argument still failed from the gitgo.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:10, 11 August 2013 (EDT)

:Lastly, you are still dodging. You wrote: "Firstly, Children believe whatever they are told."  Again, children in atheistic Japan are not told the world is designed, but nevertheless researchers found they see the world as designed.[http://creation.com/children-see-the-world-as-designed] Your argument still failed from the gitgo.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:10, 11 August 2013 (EDT)

::Karajou, it is now apparent that Conservative wants to keep debating! May we answer him. His arguments can be easily disproved and his communist-like, liberal and inefficient tactics rebuked. May I? --[[User:RonaldV|RonaldV]] 18:14, 11 August 2013 (EDT)

::Karajou, it is now apparent that Conservative wants to keep debating! May we answer him. His arguments can be easily disproved and his communist-like, liberal and inefficient tactics rebuked. May I? --[[User:RonaldV|RonaldV]] 18:14, 11 August 2013 (EDT)