Search Engine Phrase pleaseconvinceme
Search Engine Name Google Blog Search
Search Engine Host blogsearch.google.com
Host Name (removed for privacy)
IP Address (also)
Country United States
City Mission Viejo
Visit Length 6 mins 9 secs
doesn't look like they changed anything, so I'll break down their claims and explain WHY they are wrong.
How can you even begin to question something as well established as evolution?'Actually, animals do evolve, this has been demonstrated COUNTLESS times, but here's a really good short list of Lenski's experiments which are pretty good ad explaining why you're wrong. Also, Darwin was not the first to propose that things evolve, that was done by MANY scientists long before, Darwin provided a mechanism and the modern evolutionary synthesis is FAR from Darwin's original, now relatively uninformed, proposal.
Well, you might be surprised to find that the ‘fact’ of evolution is really not a fact at all. Like any other notion of how we got here, it is simply another theory that needs to be fairly examined. I think that enough time has passed since Darwin first proposed the idea for us to now look at it with fresh eyes and the wisdom of years of research. Let’s see if the theory can be supported by the evidence.
'Isn’t the evidence overwhelming?'Yep, it surely is, but let's see what you have to say...
That all depends on what definition of evolution you are trying to prove. If you are trying to argue that the all life here on planet earth evolved from non-living chemical elements (macroevolution), then very little has actually been demonstrated by science.Except, you know, abiogenesis is NOT evolution, it's fundamentally different. For the second part dealing with "macroevolution," you can also look at phylogenetics research around the world which ALL SUPPORT evolution knowing what we know about genetics.
To believe in this form of evolution, one has to have an fair amount of faith; far more faith than is required to believe that a creator God is responsible for the diversity of life that we presently see.All you demonstrated is a lack of understanding of what evolution is, you put up a straw man of your idea of what abiogenesis is (a very inaccurate one at that), called it evolution, and then proceeded to strike it down. This is neither evidence, nor valid argument.
'But aren’t you biased as a Christian?'Let me answer this for you, "yes."
Well, I wasn’t always a Christian, and in the years that I was an atheist, I simply accepted the theory of evolution without truly investigating its claims.Really, you were? Not a very educated one. I would go so far as to say you still aren't very educated in evolutionary biology, genetics, and natural history, but you may very well be educated in them and are just being intellectually dishonest with both yourself the public.
But for the record, as a human being, I definitely have a point of view. Please remember, however, that EVERYONE has a point of view.Some are based upon evidence, others are based upon dogma...
No one comes to ANY question without a history and perspective.Except, you know, you can learn the technique to rid yourself of bias when it is necessary. It is a very useful tool.
The real issue is: does my point of view prevent me from fairly examining the evidence?My question is, what evidence, you haven't presented any yet. This reads like a work of post-modern literature, both verbose and empty.
Let’s simply do our best to lay out the evidence and you be the judge about what it happens to say about the ‘fact’ of evolution…Very well, let's do so, but the only evidence you present is your personal incredulity. This does not make for a very good argument.