Evolution debunked in 1 paragraph.

Tell me something, jem. When you were writing exams in school and didn't know the answer to a question, did you always write "God" as your response?

 

I thought I was, until I saw a "modern" definition of scientific theory.

I'm glad you noticed, and I try to be the same way. Which is in part why sometimes I have a problem swallowing the latest scientific theory as fact until proven wrong.

Until it's proven indisputable fact with no caveats I'll consider it just a theory. Just for the record I think evolution to some extent/up to a point at least is a fact. I just have a hard time swallowing the whole life from inert space dust which itself supposedly suddenly appeared from nothingness theory.

Now you're just presuming anyone with questions about evolution, as it's currently preached, is automatically a creationist. Again just for the record; I don't pretend to know if there is/was a creator or not. Although I don't see that possibility as any less far fetched than the big bang/evolution theory. I think both should be presented in the classroom for what they are (unproven theory and belief/faith) and let the students decide for themselves.

 

I see that you have not yet muddled your way out of false equivalency, and have not yet fully comprehended what constitutes a bona fide scientific theory and how it contrasts with mere belief or untested hypothesis. By scientific standards, evolution is for all intents and purposes a matter of fact. These are the standards that have brought science and human understanding to where it is today. That is not my conclusion. It is the conclusion of all objective (non-creationist) scientists.

The only countries where these matters are disputed by a relatively significant segment of the population, and not on the basis of objective contrary evidence, is in the US and in the Islamic countries of the Middle East. Does THAT make you feel warm all over?

 

Damn, that's fine art.

 

I can only translate this to read: a scientist is only a real scientist if they agree with you. Only you yourself are not even a scientist.

 

Aside from your non sequitur...

 

Oh ok, then all those drive by strawmen red herring pre-conclusions you call questions, is just your prejudice showing through.