"Well CarolinaGuitarman I don't think I am running away from anything. "
You are.
"Your whole Civil War and Holocaust analogy was so absurd to me maybe I did get caught up in it a little bit."
I wasn't the one who brought that up. And it is not absurd. I said that they happened, but we can't prove it in the same way you can prove a mathematical theorem. Do you deny this? I also said that in the same way that we can gather evidence for an historical event we did not witness (The Civil War), we can gather evidence for a natural process we did not witness first-hand (evolution). Creationists deny this; they say that evolution, unlike any other science, unlike any other historical investigation, must be PROVED like we prove a mathematical theorem. This is wrong. Just as it's impossible to prove the Civil War happened but it would be unreasonable to doubt it happened, so we can't prove Evolution (or any other science), but it would be unreasonable to doubt it too happened.
Creationists want an impossibly high evidenciary standard for Evolution, but when it comes to THEIR beliefs, as long as it says so in their Book, there can be no discussion. If you question something from the Bible, you are considered illogical and laughed at. "I mean, it says so right HERE and HERE, what is there to discuss?" Ask for some real, positive, physical evidence that can be studied by unbiased observers to evaluate the Bible's many claims, then they go ballistic. Or pretend they don't know what you are asking for...
"Well why should I go to all ends of the world before I find out what it is you want?"
I told you what I was asking for.
"And that proves what to CarolinaGuitarman?"
That you know of no positive physical evidence that the Resurrection happened. That you don't have the same evidenciary standards for Evolution you do for the Bible; you'll believe the latter with an amount of physical evidence you would laugh at were it presented for Evolution. Or for any other religion for that matter.
Civil War and Holocaust analogy...but we can't prove it in the same way you can prove a mathematical theorem.
It is absurd, the linkage that is
I also said that in the same way that we can gather evidence for an historical event we did not witness (The Civil War)
This is a poor analogy. When I up to approx 10 years old I still had great great family members who had first and second hand accounts for the Civil War.
I was trying to show you that events might not leave physical evidence that is lasting & not ephemeral. evo insists that evidence in the world is evidence of what its prognosticators 'see'
Why should I go to all ends of the world before I find out what it is you want?"
I told you what I was asking for.
You have not presented one shred of positive physical proof the Resurrection happened. I am still waiting.
Like I said about your demand for proof-evidence (you interchange the words) of this event.
One minute you said it is a moot point because you have not received anything, the next minute you refuse to define what that something might be for you other than it is 'physical'.
This is circular, you demand physical proof-evidence for an event (when I have shown that physical evidence for events might not last very long) and then refused to say what you would accept for physical evidence, I doubt you will move from that dichotomy.
Events do not necessarily leave any lasting evidence. Also you seem to have no problem accepting theoretical events as long as they came from Gamow or Darwin or whoever.
That Evolution you see in the physical phenomena of the world reveals more about the mindset preordained conclusion of the ('scientists here?) than the evidence.
You keep calling me a creationist. I tell you that you do not have to be anything at all to see all the holes in your evo, what a flimsy house of cards it is.
You mention being laughed at by scientists. Based upon the performance of the scientists?, here I have little concern about how many scientists laugh at me.
Wolf