Replies

"I don't know how they have "rigorously tested" something that happened billions of years ago and has no parallel in modern biology. Variations do not equal evolution, but it's all they have. From there they can only extrapolate the rest. That's not rigorous testing"

Bingo! This is what really gets me....it has not, and can not, be rigourously tested in the same manner as a chemistry or physics experiment that is repeatable. Its all Sherlock Holmes style science...logical deduction from the evidence available. Its like solving a crime. Darwinists say that Darwinism best fits the evidence.....others say that there are too many contradictions and too much missing evidence to confidently make that claim.

Unfortunateley Darwinism has become a relgion of sorts....a pagan science cult.

The system seems to be to simply repeat something often enough and then shout down any opposition. Science knows that it can not prove the kind of massive evolution that amoeba to man would necessitate, so they point to variations within species or simple soil erosion and say that those things probe their billions theory. When I was growing up, science told us that it was only millions of years. Why did those ages increase? And why are they so vague if this thing is such a solid fact?

"I don't know how they have "rigorously tested" something that happened billions of years ago

So much for astronomy since Hubble.