Let's put it this way. When lions and tigers (or some other organisms) stop being able to produce viable offspring after they already have for many years, it'll be sound proof.
It will indeed. But we already have
other sound proof already. I can link to lots of papers which prove speciation has and does occur. Feel free to take a look at this
list of observed occurances.
Who cares anyway?
Those of us who think that science shouldn't be hobbled in an attempt to drag it back to the dark ages.
It's not a defence, it's a statement of fact. The earth really does have most of what we need to know about the origins of life written into some part of it, either the rocks or the organisms on it.
Mefustae's point is that science doesn't need to defend itself. Creationism needs to prove why it is correct. That's how science works. You can't simply say "Theory A is wrong so my theory must be right." You have to prove your theory is correct. If deepblue wants to assert that you can never know he must explain away every single possible way of knowing (including the one you posted as well as more outlandish ones like simply time travelling back and watching it happen).
I said why couldn't they?
They can't because they are incompatible if you take the bible as literal truth. The bible states that wheat came before life in the oceans. That's completely at odds with the evolutionary timeline.
I have no idea on genesis, but I'm really sick of everyone arguing about something so trivial.
Well I hate to say it but the majority of this thread has been people answering your assertions. If you're that sick of people arguing about it maybe you could avoid saying anything in the first place
Umm actualy scientists ,at least those with ana open mind, never said that the Bible was wrong..i mean the whole cration stuff.
Wrong. most scientists with an open mind refuse to say that the bible is wrong
when it is taken symbolically but absolutely deny that it can be taken literally. Any scientist who claims that it can be taken literally is a disgrace to the term.
But there are some very important aspects of the whole evolution theory that actualy dont make sence. Dont ask me now to tell them to you cuz well mi brain is shot to pieces...!
So you claim it doesn't make sense and then further state that your brain is shot to pieces. Could it be that it does make sense to those of us who haven't got their brains shot to pieces and it's just that you don't understand it? Arguement from personal ignorance is a very weak argument. I don't understand how baseball stats work but that doesn't mean that they don't. Simply that either I've never taken the time to understand them or don't have the right kind of brain to understand them.
soo the fact that some scienists have actualy confirmed some of the dates and writings and facts as are mentioned in the bible is of ne consequence right??
It's not completely inconsequential. To be honest I'd be amazed if the bible failed to get some historical facts right. It's pretty hard to write a book about the world around you and not get certain things right. However that doesn't mean that just because some of the bible is historically accurate that it all is. If you examine the writings of any civilisation you'll find that they all got historical facts correct. Does that mean that Ramayana is correct because Ayodhya actually did exist? Does that mean that muslims are correct cause many of the undertakings of Muhammad can be historically proven? Of course not. It's possible for a religious book to contain many correct historical facts.
It's rather foolish to argue that the bible has no historical validity as it is plainly obvious that it does but as with the religious documents of other faiths the fact that some of the details are correct can't be taken as proof that the entire thing is correct.
