You are supporting the reason of lack of knowledge of what science is. A theory is an idea in science which can make falsifiable predictions and then we can test it. The theory of evolution cannot possibly say exactly how evolution happened, or 100% prove how evolution happened. Nothing in science has 100% proof. What evolution can do is have a very high degree of evidence based on many of its prediction being true.
You do not know it was the batteries because you haven't tested your hypothesis yet. If you replace the batteries and get light you have evidence to support your theory. Your hypothesis has now become a theory. A skepic could bring many objections to the theory but that would not deny the fact that changing the batteries made the flashlight work.
Have we excavated the entire earth and removed every fossil from the ground? No. Your argument is a moot point and a red herring to the counter points.
Because they use them so frequently that they don't know the difference between a fallacy and an argument. Problem with debating creationists is that so much time is simply wasted trying to teach them what exactly evolution means (yet they choose to reject the obvious and embrace their own inaccurate definition) and attempting to show the fallacies in use. The actual issue is rarely ever discussed, red herring can be a wonderful to make yourself feel better about being completely ignorant and unwilling to understand.
Sometimes it seems like creationists have their own version of evolution. Lets call it the Guess (Theory) of Evilution. This conjecture says that the universe popped out of nothing, and that a fully formed complex bacteria with DNA, RNA, and proteins popped out of a chemical reaction. This is the guess that says that a fish gave birth to a frog, that gave birth to a lizard, that gave birth to a bird, this lizard also have birth to a mouse, that have birth to a monkey, that gave birth to a chimpanzee, that gave birth to a human. This theory claims that God does not exist, and that morality does not exist, and that humans should live by the survival of the fittest.
The question would be how come there are only a few fossils and why did these fossils not go back to dust.
Anyone would think they misunderstood on purpose, so they could repeat their wornout strawman responses as nauseam.
Let me give you a few simple mathematical statements. (Not equal to) = (!=). Scientific theory != opinion. Scientific theory != assumption. Scientific theory != guess. evolution = scientific theory. Evolution != opinion. Evolution != assumption. Evolution != guess. GGGEEEEEEETTTTTT IIIIITTTTTTTTT??????
I remember explaining this to you on more than one occasion. Fossilization is rare, hence the low number. We have removed just a tiny percentage of the earths crust. Far more fossils remain undiscovered and many more plants and animals are lost to decay than fossilization. May I suggest reading up on fossilization.
You receive answers, yet choose to cling to your own inaccurate version of evolution. You ought to just admit you are wrong and drop the fallacies.
I personally find evolution to be one of the most fascinating parts of biology, even though I don't understand much of the evidence behind it at the moment. I recently bought a copy of Why Evolution is True by Jerry Coyne. Planning to read it soon after I finish another book I'm reading.
It would not change the fact that evolution is vague and full of holes http://www.newgeology.us/presentation32.html
You seem to pop up when an evolution thread starts don't you. I don't like my threads being trolled however since there don't seem to be any real creationists here, I guess your "efforts" have kept this thread alive. Thanks.
What makes you thing creation does not include evolution. To use evolution to come against creation or Christians is not science. Maybe that is why evolution claim the beginning does not matter
Your user picture is too glittery. You made your point, evolution could have been the way God made the earth. Of course there is no proof of that, but it is possible.
To me peoples resistance against evolution, especially when religiously fueled, always comes back to simple emotions. Fear, doubt, and uncertainty. People fear the unknown of death. They fear it so much that they are willing to latch onto anything that gives a happier possible outcome when faced with the bleak and terrifying certainty that we are indeed mortal beings. People want to believe that there is certainty. More than that they want to believe that their is purpose, and some divine equalizer that will punish the wicked and reward the righteous. They are unwilling to accept that there may be no great judge, and that their attempts are living good lives will go unnoticed or unrewarded, or that those who are cruel or evil will go unpunished. It is that uncertainty that makes many grab so quickly for an out. That's the draw to religion, couple that with the number of religions and religious faithful and it's no wonder that people flock to religion for answer instead of the cold logic of science for understanding. Religion gives hope. Evolution doesn't. That's why so many resist evolution and choose religion in its place. Don't get me wrong religion can be a wonderful thing. It has inspired great charity and common good. But in my opinion, mostly, it just offers a nice lie for those who are afraid of their own mortality.