Quote:
Originally Posted by lagtight
At least we agree that Darwinian Evolution is not science (since it is not repeatable).
Damn, why did you have to do that?
I'm a life-long atheist, and this is the first time I've ever seen a Christian laying waste to the arguments of atheists. (Granted, the competition wasn't up to much, but generally Christian arguments tend to be irrational, not based on evidence and weak so it's usually pretty easy for even the dimmest of atheists to demolish them. But hey. I was genuinely charmed by how well you were decimating your opponents. Humility is always a good look and nowhere does it work better than in argument.)
But then you couldn't stop yourself. You just had to go there.
For future reference: Darwinian Evolution is the theory. Science is the method we use to test the theory. It doesn't matter that theory is 'repeatable' or not -- theory doesn't have to be 'repeatable' what matters is whether it's testable. And whether the findings are replicable.
The scientific consensus is that most of the propositions Darwin theorized have been repeatedly validated by scientific method. The bits that aren't are either falsified (demonstrated by the evidence to be fallacious) or currently unproven. Like it or not, Darwin's theory still dominates the scientific landscape across a huge range of disciplines.
None of this is at all contentious among scientists -- or indeed, among most religious people outside of the USA.
Stick to arguing the stuff you know about. It works much better for you.
OK, that's me done.