Another great point inadvertently brought up by a believer. The voices in my head also tell me to pray every night, and to worship them regardless of facts. Why am I considered crazy when I call the voices in my head unicorns instead of god? Replace the word unicorns with god, and there is no difference. How is me believing in unicorns any different from me believing in god? By the way piker, I don't consider you able to respond to my question so I will not expect an intelligent and coherent response.
Perhaps if you were an adult you would understand that your beliefs as an adult are of your own making...parental belief is irrelevant... Parents who were complete agnostic, for example would provide neither theistic or atheistic supportive position. The child would make up their own mind upon individuation and adulthood... ...and your guesses are still correct and you are wrong.
Why would I want to disprove it? Those beliefs are irrelevant to me. Whatever floats someone's boat on a personal belief level is their own business...
1) Knock yourself out , why should I care? 2) A brief survey of your posting history is quite evidence enough. Please do describe these mysterious creatures you claim exist. 3) patience my man, patience. 4) I don't know why you automatically consider yourself smarter and possessing better arguments than myself. Perhaps it's trait honed by being cloistered in a self lauding academic environment.
Nothing. That's the point the omnipotent can never be proven because it has no limits or definition. That which is all things is NO THING
I may be wrong on this but, if anyone has solid proof/evidence on this (no theories/hypothosis/claims) I would like to know about it. It seems to me if evolution occurred by slow, minute changes in living creatures, over millions of years, there would be thousands of times more transitional forms of these creatures in the fossil beds than complete forms. The fossils that have been found are all complete forms. Though evolutionists state that there are many transitional forms, this is simply not true according to the information I have been able to find. (websites, pics, articles, etc.) What evolutionists claim to be transitional forms all have fully functional parts. A true transitional form would have non-functioning parts or appendages, such as the nub of a leg or wing or whatever. Would it not? Did the first stage of animal develop 10% of complete veins, then the next stage of animal 20%, and on up to 100%, with veins throughout the entire body and brain? Then, how did the heart slowly develop in the next stage of animal and get attached to the veins in the right spot? How, when, and where did the blood enter the system of the next stage? The blood could not enter before the veins were complete or it would spill out. Where did the blood come from? Did the blood have red corpuscles, white corpuscles, platelets, and plasma? At what point in this process of development did the heart start beating? Did the animal develop a partial stomach, then the next stage of animal a complete stomach? After the stomach was formed, how did the digestive juices enter the stomach of the next stage? Where did the hydrochloric acid as part of the digestive juices come from? What about the liver, kidneys, bladder, etc.? The animals better not eat anything prior to this. How did the animals survive during these changes? (And over thousands of years?) Of course, at the same time the animal's eyes must be fully developed so it can see its food and it's brain must be fully developed so it can control its body to get to the food. If you believe in evolution, can you give just one coercive proof of evolution, i.e., a proof that absolutely eliminates any other possible explanation for the origin of the universe, the material world, and human life?
So when you say proof of evolution, what you really mean is not proof of evolution. The origin of the universe, the material world and human life, is not what the proof of evolution is about. It's like asking for proof of 1+1=2 not by math, but by eliminating all possible explanations for the origins of cake making and breeding sheep .
Good to see you don't adhere to the stupid notion that evolution negates a creator. You're making progress though you are kicking and screaming all along the way.
Actually assz007, it's you who have run away. I welcome you growing a pair and continuing our discussion.