| | :You hit the nail on the head: ''"Evolutionists say..."'' Yes, they "say." They "say" fish evolved into frogs, dinosaurs evolved into birds, apes evolved into scientists. They can "say" all they want, but ''saying'' it happened is far different from ''proving'' it happened. I can use that same argument - and with just as much authority - by saying a housefly evolved into a house, a horsefly evolved into a horse, or a stinkbug evolved into a Volkswagen Beetle. And just like the evolutionists, I'd have as my "proof" the flies, the house, the horse, and the bugs; I'd have that brilliant scenario to fit what's in between, and I'd have those papers published that compel the public to "accept" what was just explained here. | | :You hit the nail on the head: ''"Evolutionists say..."'' Yes, they "say." They "say" fish evolved into frogs, dinosaurs evolved into birds, apes evolved into scientists. They can "say" all they want, but ''saying'' it happened is far different from ''proving'' it happened. I can use that same argument - and with just as much authority - by saying a housefly evolved into a house, a horsefly evolved into a horse, or a stinkbug evolved into a Volkswagen Beetle. And just like the evolutionists, I'd have as my "proof" the flies, the house, the horse, and the bugs; I'd have that brilliant scenario to fit what's in between, and I'd have those papers published that compel the public to "accept" what was just explained here. |
| | :No, we're not going to accept the so-called "proofs" of whale origins, nor anything else related to evolution; it's just a tale, as per the first sentence of the first link you provided. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 17:48, 3 March 2011 (EST) | | :No, we're not going to accept the so-called "proofs" of whale origins, nor anything else related to evolution; it's just a tale, as per the first sentence of the first link you provided. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 17:48, 3 March 2011 (EST) |
| | + | ::Very well put, Karajou. The "theory of evolution" is a claim about a '''''process''''', and like any other claim it should only be accepted if there is proof for it. Proof of a process requires evidence of a process. Relying on the beginning and end says little about what happened in between. In fact, physics teaches that viewing the beginning and end of work says almost nothing about the nature of the work that occurred in between.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:23, 3 March 2011 (EST) |