>>You lie when you claim my statement is a lie.
Try telling the truth. It only hurts for a minute.
****************************
>>More lies, and for those no “redemption”.
You claim there are mountains of evidence for evolution, and yet you cannot present a single pebble of evidence. Are you lying, or brainwashed?
****************************
>>The truth is, you don’t need me to present anything, because you can find evidence in any natural history museum, but you’d refuse to see it even there.
I have visited plenty of museums.
Wanna hear a related story? An acquaintance took a trip to Chicago, and while there he visited the Chicago Natural History Museum. He went in the doors as a long-time evolutionist, and came out believing in intelligent design. His medical training provided him the knowledge to spot the massive fraud within the exhibits that most people will never see.
****************************
>>So my presenting yet more will have no effect on you. You have blinded yourself.
You have presented no scientific evidence: only just-so stories and highly imaginative artwork.
****************************
>>”Sanctimonious belligerence” is your specialty, pal, not mine.
No. That label defines you perfectly.
****************************
>>Such evidence is splattered all over this thread, you simply refuse to see it, here or anywhere else.
Obviously, you don’t understand the definition of evidence, nor of science. A good scientist will spend time trying to prove his theories wrong, rather than to prove them right:
“[O]nce the theory is in hand, Popper tells us, it is the duty of the scientist to extract from it logical but unexpected predictions that, if they are shown by experiment not to be correct, will serve to render the theory invalid. Popper was deeply influenced by the fact that a theory can never be proved right by agreement with observation, but it can be proved wrong by disagreement with observation. Because of this asymmetry, science uniquely makes progress by proving that good ideas are wrong so that they can be replaced by even better ideas. Thus, Bacon’s impartial observer of nature is replaced by Popper’s skeptical theorist. The good Popperian scientist somehow comes up with a hypothesis that fits all or most of the known facts, then proceeds to attack that hypothesis at its weakest point by extracting from it predictions that can be shown to be false. This process is known as falsification.” [Karl Poppers Falsification Theory, in, Kassirer & Kessler, “Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence.” National Academies Press, 3rd Ed, 2011, p.40]
Evolutionists tend to spend their time trying to prove evolution and uniformitarianism to be true, except maybe when they are in the “cover up” mode. That is not science.
Mr. Kalamata
Sure, here's the truth about Kalamata: to defend your own misinterpretations of the Bible you've swallowed -- hook, line & sinker -- a huge pack of lies about natural-science.
The results have blinded you to evidence, to facts and even truth itself.
Kalamata: "You claim there are mountains of evidence for evolution, and yet you cannot present a single pebble of evidence.
Are you lying, or brainwashed?"
Complete nonsense -- there's evidence all around you, but you've blinded yourself to it and now claim there's no sucha thang as "sight".
Kalamata: "I have visited plenty of museums."
And yet you saw nothing because you'd already blinded yourself to it.
Kalamata: Wanna hear a related story?"
So apparently your acquaintance blinded himself while there?!
Kalamata: "You have presented no scientific evidence: only just-so stories and highly imaginative artwork."
You sound just like the Holocaust deniers I debated many years ago -- you close your eyes, you say you don't see it and then claim it's not even there.
Kalamata quoting: "[O]nce the theory is in hand, Popper tells us, it is the duty of the scientist to extract from it logical but unexpected predictions that, if they are shown by experiment not to be correct, will serve to render the theory invalid. "
Exactly right, and the fact is that Darwin's little seed of an idea has grown & modified with accumulating evidence, now 150+ years later into a large tree, but his basic little idea has never been falsified.
Kalamata: "Evolutionists tend to spend their time trying to prove evolution and uniformitarianism to be true, except maybe when they are in the cover up mode.
That is not science."
Here's an example: the work of finding, recovering & identifying fossils has occupied many thousands of researchers over many, many decades.
Each researcher hopes to find a fossil which will upset, overturn & rewrite existing understandings of our past, and some actually do.
Those become famous and often enjoy a long rewarding career.
That's how science is supposed to work.