11
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 123:
Line 123: +
Talk:Theory of evolution/Archive 2 (view source)
Revision as of 21:21, March 14, 2007
, 21:21, March 14, 2007→What Evolution is and Is Not
:The burden of proof is on you, Scorpionman. For over a hundred years, the theory of evolution has been tested to try to prove it wrong. As of yet, nobody has succeeded. What is your scientific proof that genes do not change over time?--[[User:Venfayth|Venfayth]] 23:01, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
:The burden of proof is on you, Scorpionman. For over a hundred years, the theory of evolution has been tested to try to prove it wrong. As of yet, nobody has succeeded. What is your scientific proof that genes do not change over time?--[[User:Venfayth|Venfayth]] 23:01, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
::No, the burden is on you. You don't have proof that they ''do'' change over time. And the theory of evolution has been disproved, though evolutionists will not admit it. And the Bible has been around a lot longer than your theory and it has never been disproven, so you've got nothing to brag about. [[User:Scorpionman|Scorpionman]] 08:13, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
::No, the burden is on you. You don't have proof that they ''do'' change over time. And the theory of evolution has been disproved, though evolutionists will not admit it. And the Bible has been around a lot longer than your theory and it has never been disproven, so you've got nothing to brag about. [[User:Scorpionman|Scorpionman]] 08:13, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
:::Did you honestly just say the Bible has never been disproven? When it comes to scientific matters, the Bible has constantly been disproven. "The sun stood still and the moon stayed — and hasted not to go down about a whole day!" (Joshua 10:12-13) This seems to conflict with the heliocentric theory of our solar system. We now know that the sun does not revolve around the earth, and that is fairly clear. I noticed that you are a young-earth creationist and believe that the earth is 6,000 years old or so. However, the grand canyon is six million years old, according to all modern geologists. Are you telling me that you know more than scientific proof? Don't give me any crap about a flood forming it; it still takes millions of years to carve that out of the ground. People have spent years objectively studying rock formations around the world, and they have concluded that the earth is billions of years old. You have one poetic book to support your case. I have more than a hundred years of scientific evidence, experiment after experiment, all proving my case. How does creationism explain poodles? Those dogs obviously were not around at the beginning of the world, and in just a few thousand years, they have truly changed from their original form: wolves. You claim that fossil evidence fails to support evolution, but try to find a fossil of a poodle that was alive at the same time as the dinosaurs. Plus, whale fossils have consistently supported the theory of evolution.--[[User:Venfayth|Venfayth]] 17:21, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
If that be so, perhaps you might feel inclined to list some of the undeniable evidence proving that evolution is erroneos in all aspects it claims to explain. Regardless of your own personal feeling on the accuracy of either opinion, codes of conduct for debating scenarios place the burden of proof upon yourself at the present time.--[[User:Fpresjh|Fpresjh]] 09:27, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
If that be so, perhaps you might feel inclined to list some of the undeniable evidence proving that evolution is erroneos in all aspects it claims to explain. Regardless of your own personal feeling on the accuracy of either opinion, codes of conduct for debating scenarios place the burden of proof upon yourself at the present time.--[[User:Fpresjh|Fpresjh]] 09:27, 14 March 2007 (EDT)