Re: solar system
Re: solar system
Not to fear LightSon, it’s not a trick question. You said that macro-evolution is NOT observable so there was no scientific reason to accept macro-evolution-dogma. I am simply pointing out that the earth rotating around the sun is not observable, however most people today believe it does, not because we observe it but because from the evidence we infer it. Back in the 17th century Christians, along with most people, believed the opposite because the Bible said so. (No need quote all the vague verses that might be interpreted otherwise since if they had been so clear there would never have been an argument to begin with).
We cannot observe macroevolution, depending on your definition, but scientists certainly infer it based on the evidence. Just like we infer the earth rotates around the sun based on the evidence. Like you said, “it’s the best model we have”. Creationism is certainly not the best model we have. In fact it’s not even a model, just a belief.
BTW I believe that God does exist.
Re: solar system
Originally posted by LightSon
Is this a trick question? I feel like you are ready to pounce. When I answer you may say "HA, See there! evolution is true and God doesn't exist."
Nevertheless, I'll play. I believe the Earth moving around the sun is the best model we have. Copernicus proposed his system somewhere back in the 16th century. Various sciences purport to confirm this, not to mention recent empirical observations by astronauts and extraterristrial monitoring devices (satellites and telescopes, etc.) Did I miss anything?
Not to fear LightSon, it’s not a trick question. You said that macro-evolution is NOT observable so there was no scientific reason to accept macro-evolution-dogma. I am simply pointing out that the earth rotating around the sun is not observable, however most people today believe it does, not because we observe it but because from the evidence we infer it. Back in the 17th century Christians, along with most people, believed the opposite because the Bible said so. (No need quote all the vague verses that might be interpreted otherwise since if they had been so clear there would never have been an argument to begin with).
We cannot observe macroevolution, depending on your definition, but scientists certainly infer it based on the evidence. Just like we infer the earth rotates around the sun based on the evidence. Like you said, “it’s the best model we have”. Creationism is certainly not the best model we have. In fact it’s not even a model, just a belief.
BTW I believe that God does exist.