Debate: Creationism vs. Evolutionism
Side: creationism

Do you believe that an antibiotic or medication that you have never used does not work because you have never personally seen it work?If my doctor perscribes me medication, I am always unsure of it till it takes effect if it does. Sure, I might believe it works if I have heard it to be successful but this does not in any way relate to evolution. Stop giving examples of things that do not relate to this and talk about what we are debating; evolution.You have provided nothing that stands up to your own critiques. Nothing.Oh, and you have? All you do is give examples of things that have nothing to do with men evolving from apes yet you believe it somehow strengthens your argument? Wrong. If you want to convince me that I evolved from an ape, give me evidence, not examples of medication.That paper you sent me covered a lot of topics but never once showed how this information was confirmedA little thing called logic that has a suprisingly impressive effect when used correctly.I have shown you links from several different sources and fields, have used logic, have given you countless keywords that you can research on your own. You have sent me men making claims that they have no evidence for; a complete waste of my time.If we were having a discussion about something that didn't disprove the Bible, say geography or economic systems, I doubt you would be so demanding.In what way am I being demanding? We are having a debate therefore for you to convince me of something I need sufficient evidence that will make this happen so if that is what you call demanding then fair enough but I call it debating.What I said: ""you clearly do have faith as you have faith in men's words yet do not see any evidence for their claims yet still believe."" What you said in response: "To an extent this is right". WOOT WOOT = progress!!Do you have a clue how many things are going on in the world every day? I don't have the time to watch every recorded session of congress, or be in the room for their untelevised meetings, so I can't help but have a little faith in news reports concerning their decisions assuming it holds up to the scrutiny that I do have the time to put in to it. I can't be in the room every time my bosses discuss my work so I can only have faith that they are accurately dictating their assessments of me when the talk to me. Economics, food preparation, medicine, my cat's activities when I am absent, these are all things that I have to ultimately take on some degree of faith when I come to conclusions about them based on the limited, but available dataLOL, this does not justify a blind belief in something, my friend. If you have faith in men's words yet do not see any evidence for their claims yet still believe, this is blind faith and false. Your cats activities and untelevised meetings have absolutely nothing to do with this; stop using examples that in no way relate. My faith in evolution is not blind, it is based on a vast amount of evidence presented to me and it stands up not only to my own scrutiny, but to every attack I've ever seen made against it.Your faith in evolution is blind as you believe claims yet see no evidence for them, and it is not standing up very well at this moment.But your arguments supporting the Bible are based on your refusal to accept that you have been conned, that virtually nothing in it is confirmable by science, history or logic; that several parts of it have actually been disproved, that the only reason to hold on so strongly to it is that it appeals to your heart.They are based on no such thing; my argument supporting the Bible is based on God, His Word and logic. If it is not confirmable by science, history or logic then disprove God to me. You will fail, we both know this. several parts of it have actually been disprovedShow me them.Actually, I have run the numbers for a radiometric confirmation, but no I didn't collect the sample or have anything to do with determining the established 238U half-life. But I have been actively pursuing education for a while now, seeing how everything fits together across disciplines, I know how many scientists there are out there and how thoroughly they examine each others work, I have seen friends go through the very frustrating and difficult process of peer review and have consulted with and learned from researchers who have made original contributions to their fields.So, in other words, no, you have not seen any of the raw data or evidence and have in fact just been "conned" by the words of fools. Interesting.You, are you an experienced historian who has seen confirmation of Biblical events? Have you ever done a biology lab or a geology practical? Have you ever logically analyzed the discrepancies between the world's religions using objective methodologies? I can't say I qualify for the first question, but I have experience with the other two. How much time have you put in? Experienced historian... depends how one would define this. In my own definition, yes I have studied history in great detail but have yet to cover many aspects but still will be learning new facts till the day I die as will most historians great and small. I have conducted experiences in the lab, most people have at some point in their life whether it be at their work, field trips or in high school. I have analyzed some of the discrepancies between world religions and have disproved the alleged discrepancies in the book of Genesis. As for the last part, how much time do I put in to what? Learning? Science? My faith? Praying? What exactly are you talking about when you ask this?First, the amount of change has declined drastically as research has improved. The most up to date estimate is 4.567 billion years, in which about two million years were added. This is nothing compared to the range of estimates presented in Rev. Williams' time. We've gotten a lot better. And the estimate might be updated again tomorrow, but as long as the evidence is sound and peer-reviewed I have no problem updating to work alongside the best evidence. Religion does have this problem. They not only have confidence that what they were told was true, but they are actually opposed to in-depth analysis of the data or adapting to the ever advancing world (hmm, maybe they don't have so much confidence after all). Lol, that in no way disproves my statement. You only further prove that scientists are changing the estimate over and over again which does in fact mean that the estimate you have in your head right now is false. As for Christians, the more logical ones, we are not opposed to new data in any way. The majority of us welcome it as it contribues hugely to our health and lifestyles. However, we don't welcome lies such as the world suddenly banging into existance and our bodies evolving from apes - like I said, some of us are logical :).What? The belief that we don't know everything, but we learn more every year?No, its interesting because you believe in something that men tell you and write to you in textbooks. Its interesting because you have the very thing that we Christians are falsly accused by you atheists for having; blind faith. I think we can now see who has the blind faith. As far as your challenge: not unless you can do it (to confirm whatever age you like). I have already provided link after link, already dumped numerous hours into a very long article, and watched you try to debunk them using standards you can't live up to. The information is out there, but there is no point showing it to you if you so stubbornly refuse to accept it just because you made up your mind years ago. In my books, that is someone afraid or unable to accept the challenge. Providing "link after link" does not mean a thing other than you have found someone else to do your dirty work for you. I only provided my link when I was asked to by numorous debaters. I believe in doing my own debating rather than leaning on others. Like I said before, I still challenge you to use real evidence and prove to me that the world is the amount of years old you believe it to be. :)you have been connedIf this is so, then I have to admit that I am happier being conned by God than conned by foolish men. No one is conning me though, my fellow debater. No one. No matter what way you look at it, you are falling further than me here and I would reach out to stop you falling past me but I'm not sure that you want me to.