[_ Old Earth _] A question for evolutionists

[Featherbop]

Is bigfoot considered a missing link?

 

[Barbarian]

"Missing link" is not a scientific term. Neither for that matter, is "bigfoot."

I don't see any evidence that there is such a thing as "bigfoot".

 

[SyntaxVorlon]

Even if yetis/the sasquatch what have you existed, they would be the decendant of a cousin, and not a holdover from the earlier homonids.

 

[la verdad]

ouch, featherbop got sonned :

 

[Featherbop]

eww, la verdad got stupid :

 

[Bryan]

I don't see any evidence that there is such a thing as "bigfoot".

I don't believe in Bigfoot either, but there's more evidence for it than there is for evolution.

 

[cubedbee]

I don't see any evidence that there is such a thing as "bigfoot".

I don't believe in Bigfoot either, but there's more evidence for it than there is for evolution.

Which is why millions of well educated scientists accept bigfoot but reject evolution. Oh, wait a minute...

 

[Blue-Lightning]

Thank you, I feel much smarter having read this thread.

:

BL

 

[Bryan]

I don't see any evidence that there is such a thing as "bigfoot".

I don't believe in Bigfoot either, but there's more evidence for it than there is for evolution.

Which is why millions of well educated scientists accept bigfoot but reject evolution. Oh, wait a minute...

It's a religion, there are millions of people who believe a LOT of dumb things.

 

[cubedbee]

I don't see any evidence that there is such a thing as "bigfoot".

I don't believe in Bigfoot either, but there's more evidence for it than there is for evolution.

Which is why millions of well educated scientists accept bigfoot but reject evolution. Oh, wait a minute...

It's a religion, there are millions of people who believe a LOT of dumb things.

Yeah, like those who believe the millions of people who accept evolution do so in any sort of religious manner.

 

[Blue-Lightning]

Some do, some don't. Some accept God exists in a religous way, some don't.

Let's just throw out the word "religion." Nobody knows what the little sucker means.

BL

 

[Barbarian]

Basically, Christians accept God on faith. That's what a religion does.

Scientists accept evolution on the evidence. That's what science does.

So far, so good.

The problem is when one tries to apply science to God, or to present creationism as a science.

 

[reznwerks]

evidence

I don't see any evidence that there is such a thing as "bigfoot".

I don't believe in Bigfoot either, but there's more evidence for it than there is for evolution.

Don't forget their is more evidence for bigfoot than their is for the reality of Jesus and the promises in the bible.



Which is why millions of well educated scientists accept bigfoot but reject evolution. Oh, wait a minute...

Did you forget to mention just one notable well educated scientist?

It's a religion, there are millions of people who believe a LOT of dumb things.

I guess we agree on something for a change since Christianity is a religion.

 

[Featherbop]

A dead topic revived into a debate on the words evolution and religion.

LETS MAKE STUPID

 

[Bryan]

Re: evidence

I guess we agree on something for a change since Christianity is a religion.

Not quite. Religion is man's futile attempt to search for meaning on his own. Christianity is God reaching down to us.

 

[Barbarian]

Hmm.. Christianity depends on faith, like other religions.

Only if you define religion as false beliefs does Christianity fail the test to be a religion.

 

[SyntaxVorlon]

How do you[bryan] make the distinction between correct faith and incorrect faith?

 

[Arnold Philips]

Re: evidence

Not quite. Religion is man's futile attempt to search for meaning on his own. Christianity is God reaching down to us.

Let's not play semantic games in order to prove some cheap theological point.

 

[SyntaxVorlon]

Necromancy is bad. :evil: