I remember once talking to an evolutionist and asked, “what sort of evidence, if any, would make you doubt your assumptions?”
(note that the evolutionist was caught in a trap: if they answered “nothing” then they can’t say that their beliefs are held onto b/c of evidence....but out of a mere faith which is not open to evidentiary critique)
the evolutionist offered this: finding a T Rex bone in a layer or otherwise showing that it dropped to the ground only recently. I then asked, ok, what if it is in the “wrong” layer going the other direction, ie, it is in a layer of strata which actually precedes the T Rex? They said, of course, same issue. If the T Rex is ever in the wrong strata, whether too old or too young, then that would be a knockdown against the whole dating system.
so here we are.
i dont however intend to fwd this story to the evolutionist as i know that they are really not going to consider this evidence...which brings us back to the point: no amount of evidence will ever cause evolutionists to doubt for one second the rectitude of their position. But that’s the very definition of ideology.
OOPS!
Exactly. Atheism and evolution are belief systems, essentially, and stem from more from psychology than science.
One thing I saw in Australia put evolution in doubt for me: The redback spider.
It’s nearly identical to the Black Widow spider, except instead of a red hourglass on the belly, there’s an almost perfect red square.
My bias is that I was raised a Christian, and I have zero scientific basis for declaring evolution as a theory is not valid, but I asked myself what the chances of this evolving by accident.
Why an hourglass, and why on another continent, a square?
I believe the world was created by God, which is to say I take it on faith, but have selected empirical evidence which tends to reinforce that belief. I would suspect the same is true for evolutionists.
The thing is, that as time goes by, science seems to support the idea of the existence of God, and tends to erode the theory that it was an accident. It’s just my observation.
I think you should forward it to them anyway, with a link to the original exchange!
exactly...and if you presented the evidence, you'll see the precise same crap you see here...welllll, it was an ancestor"...or "the evidence is contaminated", pretty much any and everything to discount the evidence...you see frankly, when you're in the grip of a cult, you have no hope of recognizing the truth.