If you weren't making a counter-argument, then why bring it up at all? Pointless.

Depends on the definition for existence. But yes, it is a null hypothesis in general terms.

It is inherently true. How is the scientific method not true? The scientific method is true through it's use of logic, something with is a priori knowledge - an understanding of the concept means that it is inherently true without research needed e.g. all bachelors are unmarried.

there's nothing illogical about animals, especially mammals, being alike. Mammals, and especially our genus of primates have literally dozens of similarities, if not hundreds. However difficult you want this argument to be the stronger the evidence I'm going to use, until we figure out exactly what the problem is.

I believe that the root is somewhere hidden in the idea that we are special....we are not special. We are fucking amazing creatures, but we are not special. apes and chimps are basically 3yr old versions of us with the strengths of 10 grown men. Maybe as primates grow weaker they are smarter?

like i said, i started with saying "all animals" expecting the point not to be argued. You wanna argue details, then lets argue details.

I like that pic. I have nothing else to add to this thread.

I was going to quote another user on this, but if you don`t mind i`ll do it with you. Sorry if it`s a big post. If you want go to the last paraghraph.

It`s not that hard to put scientific knowledge into question.
People see or observ something and what is the conclusion? It`s a mix of what they see with what they don`t see. Where, through our imperfect and incomplete knowledge, do we see that what happens can only happen that specific way? Where in what we aprehend is "written" that it isn`t possible to be in a different way? Isn`t that a leap of faith? Wouldn`t it be fair to just say that what i see is what i see and at the same time i can`t tell if it`s the only way or not as my ability to know isn`t perfect or absolute.

People question the flood, people question Mary`s conception, for example, but is it based on the absolute certainty that it can`t be? You can answer that question yourself.

The thing is people don`t make real conclusions from what they aprehend, they make assumptions and sometimes not even that.
For example, people believe that nothing can`t create something. But somehow in the beggining of the universe and it`s continuation they stop taking that into consideration.
Imagine that the so called singularity was constituted by letters A and B. They were there from the start and then the world evolved and AB and BA were created. What is the explanation you will hear? A and B got together and AB and BA were formed.
But the truth is only A and B existed so how something new like AB and BA got to be? That isn`t explained. And to me (my vision of ID) is that AB and BA were already there in each one of A and B. They didn`t exist as AB and BA because you can only be one at once but the potential was there. Just like a videogame that allows you to do a certain amount of actions yet you don`t get to do all of them at once. It takes time!

This is an extract from an apparition in Portugal in 1917. If you want and i invite you, read about it and you`ll understand why scientific knowledge or any kind of knowledge is the end all be all:

"The people had gathered because three young shepherd children had predicted that at high noon the Blessed Virgin Mary would appear in a field in an area of Fatima called Cova da Iria. According to many witnesses, after a period of rain, the dark clouds broke and the sun appeared as an opaque, spinning disc in the sky.^[4] It was said to be significantly duller than normal, and to cast multicolored lights across the landscape, the shadows on the landscape, the people, and the surrounding clouds.^[4] The sun was then reported to have careened towards the earth in a zigzag pattern,^[4] frightening those who thought it a sign of the end of the world.^[5] Witnesses reported that their previously wet clothes became "suddenly and completely dry, as well as the wet and muddy ground that had been previously soaked because of the rain that had been falling".^[6]

Estimates of number present range from 30,000 to 40,000 by Avelino de Almeida, writing for the Portuguese newspaper O Século,^[7] to 100,000, estimated by Dr. Joseph Garrett, professor of natural sciences at the University of Coimbra,^[8] both of whom were present that day.^[9]

The event was attributed by believers to Our Lady of Fátima, a reported apparition of the Blessed Virgin Mary to the children who had made predictions of the event on 13 July 1917,^[10] 19 August,^[11] and 13 September.^[12] The children stated that the Lady had promised them that she would on 13 October reveal her identity to them^[13] and provide a miracle "so that all may believe."^[14]"

1st of all, delio, the big bang isn't taken as full unquestioned fact, so don't try and portray us as hypocrites. All we know for sure is that the big bang happened unquestionably.
What we don't know and can never ascertain or prove is exactly what caused it. There are many different theories on the subject but none can be proven because the event of the big bang overshadows everything else.
As for your maria story, it's so funny how nobody ever has a camera at these events. If you chose to question science but not strangers in a field in a poor third world country, well that really says it all.

If you felt i was calling you or anyone a hypocrite, that was not my intention. Honestly. And what i said applies to everyone including me.
I wasn`t questioning this or that event. I wasn`t talking about specifics, just the conclusions that are made of those events. It could be the Big bang it could be a bird in the sky flying, that was not my point.

It was 1917. I don`t think there were cameras back then. But there are many apparitions even to this day so you can check them out if you want.
I wasn`t questioning science or any other source of knowledge. If you reread what i wrote you will see that.

there are no unexplainable apparitions, another mystery solved by the modern eram Apparitions are a lie.
I wish there were, and i live ghost shows and horror movies about ghost and monsters and i love aliens and ancient aliens on history channel.
They don't exist mate. It is a romantic fairly tale, that's it.

I told you man, I'm not irrational.  Just becuase you've only seen the endgame, sick of the zealots Runa doesn't mean I was always like that, or that there isn't more to my stance.  I've always believed that Jesus was real, and that the bible was at least partially historically accurate.  I just don't think for a second that automatically means everything in the bible is unadulterated truth.

I also don't think that all religious folks are bad, in fact I grew up with enough people of MANY faiths that I know better.  Religious people are just like every other religious and non religious person:  we're all just trying to do the best we can with what we've got, and we're ALL trying to make the world a better place (even if your moral stances are less than desirable to the masses.)  The only real difference is that SOME people are using religion as a way to make the world worse, to preach hatred and bigotry, to start wars, and to generally be asshats.  My 'goal' has never been to take people's hope away (though I do thoroughly and honestly believe that any faith is hogwash), but to take away that weapon used to preach intolerance and hate.  The reason I am so aggressively against it is becuase the world has this collective shit on the idea that religion needs to follow the same logic any other argument needs to take, and I take great offense to that, and you should too.  

So really, I just want to take this 'perfect' weapon away from those who would use it to spread ignorance, halt scientific progress, or preach hatred and bigotry.

Get where I'm coming from now? 

@bold. I really do, because I like you believe that all things in life need to submit to the rules of logic, reason and science, even religion.

I believe I finally see where you're coming from.

My commitment is to truth, if that's your too, then if we disagree, let's remember that we're fighting for the same goal, in different paths. Since I don't expect anyone to have the absolute truth, I understand we may be at different paths in our quest for truth, but knowing that our direction isone and the same, we need to work together. I'm hoping that will be possible.