dsgrue3 said:
Rushida said:
dsgrue3 said:
It's clearly an issue when the general public (laymen) are telling the experts they are wrong.
Do you tell your doctor (s)he's wrong?
Do you tell your dentist (s)he's wrong?
Do you tell your veterinarian (s)he's wrong?
Do you tell your mechanic (s)he's wrong?
Do you tell your financial advisor (s)he's wrong?
Just a couple of extremely obvious questions which should convey to you why your position is totally and completely ridiculous. Creation isn't science, it's a religious theory based upon nothing.
|
Your argument is fundamentally fallacious on several levels.
Firstly, these experts you listed are experts in the natural world of what's happening currently (or the recordable past). For example, a mechanic is trustworthy because he and his peers were able to get hands-on interaction with cars do determine how the function most efficiently. The entities in which they study can be studied today in all their glory. Whereas an evolutionary "scientist" finds some bones in the dirt and says, "must be ancestors to humans." Ridiculous, as if they couldn't just be artificial bones our ancestors created for fun. What a load BS.
Secondly, these "experts" you listed were wrong many times. Doctors of the 1800s were not as smarts as doctors today, etc. The reason they are so knowledgeable today is because they've had centuries to refine and improve their profession. They can do this by testing new techniques and seeing if they work. Thus, they can give themselves concrete proof about if their theories work in practise. Whereas a evolutionary "scientists" can never effectively test his theories. They are all just unsupported theories with the only evidence being, "Well it may have happened. I dunno lol. These bones look like human bones. Must be ancestor to human" You cannot prove what happened before humans could recorded history so it's all conjecture.
Btw, if a doctor seemed to want to diagnose a child with ADHD, I would be inclined to call him out on it. I've did it a few times actually.
Thirdly, I don't have a pet so why would I have a veterinarian? Your lack of logic astounds me.
Fourthly, The implication that a person should never challenge an authority by virtue of the fact that the person is an authority is fundamentally nonsensical. I hope you have a mind that is more free than the propoganda you preach here. I for one welcome asking questions for a quest to knowledge, rather than blind submission.
Good day
|
You didn't list any fallacies, just repeatedly claimed I used them. Sorry sport, that isn't how things work.
Alright it's clear you're totally ignorant on the topic. Fossils are totally unnecessary to the theory of evolution. We don't even need them to establish sufficiently that it occurred. It's also laughable that you suggest the entire collection of fossils is fake.
Evolutionary biologists can test their theories. Any new fossils found are an opportunity to test them. If any fossil is found from the wrong era, that would really put a substantial dagger in evolutionary theory. Furthmore, artificial selection is principled from natural selection (an evolutionary construct) for crops and breeding of animals.
Yes, because you know better than the doctor about ADHD right? You called them out based upon total ignorance.
I never said you had a pet. I never made any claims, I asked questions. Maybe understand the difference, okay?
I never said not to challenge authority, I said the authority is in a better position than laymen to form judgements because they have credibility on such topics.
Your position seems to be that you know everything. Hilarious stuff.
|
