Replies

You and your evolutionist friends are as usual trying to confuse things. There are many kinds of proofs, not just mathematical proofs. Since evolution is clearly not a theory of logic, it cannot and I am not asking for it to provide logical proofs.

I see. I take it, than, that you agree with me that definitive proof (which deductive proofs are the only example of) is not a question on the table for natural sciences. We have theories, and varying degrees of confidence in those thories. We do not have incontravertable "facts", we do not have proof in any formally exact sense. We only have theories, and various degrees of confidence in those theories.

Calling theories in which we currently have a very high degree of confidence "facts" or "proved" is just a good way to confuse ourselves about why we believe things...you cannot bring to bear the power of actual proof just by using the word like a magical incantation.

THe distinction needs to be made between "proof" and "evidence." There is a lot of evidence in favor of the theory of gravity. However, it is not "provable" in the way that a mathematical theorem is. The "American Flag of the Moon" isn't proof of the theory of gravity, just evidence in favor of it.

"We do not have incontravertable "facts", we do not have proof in any formally exact sense."

Aaah, so boring, the nothing is true excuse. The point is that the natural sciences (which evolution claims to be - but is not) do provide proofs of its veracity. Evolutionists have taken the honoroble name of science without providing any proof for their theory. We are almost at post 500 in this thread with the evolutionists providing nothing but excuses for not providing proof of their theory.