Quote:
Originally Posted by questor
This thread shows that none of us are experts on this subject. I do not think the evidence of evolution is overwhelming as yet. When it is, there will be no questions from me.
|
Then your beliefs are at odds with the scientific data and the consensus of the biological science community. You have simply not acknowledged the majority of the evidence(or presented a rival hypothesis, for that matter).
This is also an
argument from incredulity on your part; a fallacy and failure to reason properly.
When you are ready, feel free to acknowledge the genetic evidence for common descent:
Evidence of common descent - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: the Scientific Case for Common Descent
Quote:
Originally Posted by questor
Galapagos, you have called me a liar but not presented the lie that I told. Would you like to apologize or produce the truth? You do not need to post any more links to Wikipedia since they do not answer my questions.
|
You are dishonest in that you claim to have valid objections to evolution, but you have simply been playing a
"just asking questions" game, which was really an expression of your own
god of the gaps theology. You even admitted to holding intelligent design beliefs(
here) before you finally slipped a bit of anthropomorphizing in one of your strings of rhetorical questions, revealing your own irrational beliefs and the real underlying cause of your skepticism(
see here).
You have also repeatedly posted objections to, and baseless assertions about evolution as claims made by others, then not stuck around to address the evidence. You have repeatedly responded with more questions, trying to find a gap of knowledge in which you can place your deity of choice. Needless to say, this has been incredibly dishonest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by questor
You have finally gotten down to the level of enzymatic reactions but these are molecules which need something to motivate their activity. Every link you have posted gives reactions which must have some causal factor. Do you know what that factor is?
None of the biochemical molecules have a brain, so what causes their activity?
|
The laws of physics and chemistry govern the behavior of biological molecules such as monomers, polymers etc. Again, you are implying that some personality or "intelligence" must be behind all of this, which is both incorrect and dishonest.
These fallacies were all covered in the previous links, which like most of the other information contradicting your belief in this thread, you have conveniently ignored.
Look at where the argument has lead; every objection has had a scientific response given, and your last hold out--- the last gap you could fill with your supernatural deity-- is that the behavior of molecules is governed by physical laws.
Here is your answer: evolution does not explain the laws of physics or chemistry. The scientific field of
physics explains the laws of physics, and how physical bodies, large and small behave and interact.
And I know you said not to link to wiki anymore(would it kill you to spend an afternoon on wiki, instead of browsing conspiracy theory websites that simply validate your religious presumptions?) but here is the page on biophysics:
Biophysics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
