Replies

What facts presented?

I pointed out that the two "example" quotes that the person who started this discussion provided are either out of context or not about evolution. I'd call it a fact that the two presented quotes were misrepresentations.

? I just wanted to have a debate on the validity of evolution.

Then we should start with facts, not out-of-context or irrelevant quotes. Citing the work of a physicist who says that he cannot understand how life emerged from non-life is not an honest criticism of evolution. It would be like attacking gravitational theory for not explaining the origin of all matter.

I just wanted to see some quotes that remotely even come close to proving evolution. Instead I get neither.

As has already been explained, science is not done through quotes and science is not about "proving". Science is about formulating the best explanation for collected data. To that end, scientists (biologists in particular) have come up with the theory of evolution and while a number of creationists have attempted to knock it down through misapplication of scientific principles that they apparently do not understand or even just dishonestly quote-mining scientists and presenting out-of-context statements, evolution has yet to be falsified.

What I get is cute remarks, cut downs and deafening silence by you pro-evolutionists here when it comes to providing ample, solid proof that absolutely proves that evolution is anything more than a hole-ridden theory.

When you actually have an argument against evolution that is based upon fact, let us know. Until then, the only response to the out of context quotes provided is an explanation that the creationist providing them is dishonestly misquoting scientists in an attempt to support their agenda through the use of lies.

Please prove that it is absolutely true and not just one of many hole-ridden theories.

No theory in science is "absolutely proven". Demanding that any theory -- evolution, gravity or atomic -- be "absolutely proven" implies either outright ignorance of science or brazen dishonesty of the highest order. As you have already been told that nothing in science is "absolutely proven", the fact that you continue to make this demand makes me strongly suspect that the implication for you is the latter, rather than the former.

A fact in your opinion. That only. You patently ignore the numerous quotes at the site which run counter to evolutionary thought.

Well, please prove that life did come from non-life. Give me and the rest on here some proof.

Well, then, please give us some proof on here that definitively and conclusively shows evolutionary theory being the best explanation for the origin of life.

Apparently what you don't like is the fact that there are a lot of quotes from evolutionists, which undermine evolutionary theory, that never make it to print for mass consumption.

Apparently what we have are the "foxes guarding the hen house" when it comes to having the whole tale told on evolutionary theory.