On Sun, 11 May 2008 08:23:17 -0500, Antares 531
<gordonlrDELETE@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>On Sat, 10 May 2008 21:52:12 -0400, Christopher A. Lee
><calee@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 10 May 2008 20:36:15 -0500, Antares 531
>><gordonlrDELETE@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 27 Apr 2008 19:27:27 +0100, "Bill M" <wmech@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>I have asked numerous times for someone to provide any
>>>>objective verifiable evidence that any gods actually exist.
>>>>
>>>>No one has ever supplied it. Not even any god.
>>>>
>>>>the logical conclusion is that no real gods exist except in peoples
over
>>>>active imaginations.
>>>>
>>>Bill, would you consider the Cambrian Explosion of life forms, which
>>>is very congruent with the Genesis story of God's creation, to be
>>>evidence that God was in charge of the creation of life forms on this
>>>planet?
>>
>>Where did you demonstrate this hypothetical god's existence before
>>asking such a remarkably stupid question?
>>
>I didn't "demonstrate" anything. I just asked a civil question. Do you
>have an answer, or any rational ideas, or are you limited to juvenile
>level ranting?
You would have to show how the Cambrian explosion is congruent with a
well-defined theory of creation.
>>>The evidence of this Cambrian Explosion is certainly verifiable, and
>>>indeed has been verified my many paleontologists, geologists and
>>>biologists.
>>>
>>>All phyla that have ever existed came into existence during this very
>>>brief Cambrian Explosion interval. No phyla have come into existence
>>>since. This certainly slams Darwinian Evolution down. So, what does
>>>explain this sequence of events? Gordon
>>
>>How does it do that, moron?
>>
>Darwinian evolution, if it is valid, should have kept on working, even
>after the Cambrian Explosion. Why didn't it? What caused it to stop?
Your question assumes facts that are contrary to the evidence. Evolution
has not stopped working.
>On the other hand, the Bible says that God's creation was completed
>and he rested. This is congruent with the observable facts described
>above.
Which facts? Please specify why creation explains better than current
theories of cosmology and of evolution.
|
