Let's cut to the chase. Do you have any evidence?

[no evidence no belief]

I feel like we've been beating around the bush for... 6000 years!

Can you please either provide some evidence for your supernatural beliefs, or admit that you have no evidence?

If you believe there once was a talking donkey (Numbers 22) could you please provide evidence?

If you believe there once was a zombie invasion in Jerusalem (Mat 27) could you please provide evidence?

If you believe in the flying horse (Islam) could you please provide evidence?

Walking on water, virgin births, radioactive spiders who give you superpowers, turning water into wine, turning iron into gold, demons, goblins, ghosts, hobbits, elves, angels, unicorns and Santa.

Can you PLEASE provide evidence?

[AdHoc]

The evidence itself for each event should be held to the same standard. Otherwise we are discriminating against the evidence on the basis the claim disagrees with our world view. Each event should then either pass or fail on its own merits. Whether or not one is more extraordinary than the other should be irrelevant at the outset.

That's not how it works for anything except conspiracy theory and theist apologetics.

Criminal and civil courts have much different standards of evidence. Criminal is proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and civil is based on the preponderance of the evidence. And for good reason.

Evolution has a tremendous amount of evidence from various disciplines showing us that it does in fact happen. In contrast, a biologist wouldn't have to collect the same amount evidence on the duckbill platypus' mating habits to tell us they reproduce sexually.

Likewise, there's enough evidence to suggest Caesar was a real man who was stabbed to death. It doesn't conflict with the laws of physics and is consistent with real evidence. Anthropologists and archaeologists (scientists) have objective methodologies which theologians and apologists lack.

Carl Sagan popularized the saying, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

This basically means that the more unlikely, important, or seemingly impossible the claim (eg, resurrection by truly dead people), the higher the standard of evidence. I don't even believe video of alleged supernatural events. I invite you to do some critical thinking of your own and consider this information.

You haven't presented sufficient evidence to convince us that Jesus rose from the dead. In fact, you haven't even presented sufficient evidence he actually existed.

Why do so many atheists insist that there is an abundance of evidence for evolution, but they never provide any evidence? So please show me evidence. I don't want to see some book of fiction written by some scientist with a social agenda. I want to see real evidence of evolution. If eye witness accounts of Biblical authors are not admissible evidence for the existence of God, then your eye witness accounts in your science text books are also inadmissible evidence for the existence of evolution. Show me evidence of evolution. I don't want your personal opinions. I want proof. I don't want your textbook myths. I want proof. So, now, prove that evolution is a reality.

Dude, the evidence for evolution is conclusive. The fact that the subject matter is too complicated for you to understand, doesn't mean that the evidence isn't there.

I could give you very strong evidence right now, but I would have to use a bunch of words you don't understand.

Eh, I'll try. Here's the simplest piece of evidence for evolution I can think of: A second inactive centomere and a centrally located talomere are present in human chromosome 2.

There you go. Did nothing for you, right? I promise, once you hit 8th grade it will all make sense.

Because an extraneous centromere and an apparently misplaced telomere exist you believe this is evidence for evolution?

Are wisdom teeth, tonsils and adipose fins also evidence for evolution in your eyes?

Its possible I don't correctly understand your argument. Please explain it for me in more simple terms, id est, use small words so I can understand.

[no evidence no belief]

I'm still waiting for Goose to answer my question:

Are you claiming the alleged resurrection of Jesus was an event that DIDN'T violate the laws of physics (like Caesar's assassination) or that it was an event that DID violate the laws of physics (like a flying reindeer)?

If it allegedly was an event that didn't violate the laws of physics, why on earth are you presenting it as evidence of the supernatural?

If you claim it was an event that did violate the laws of physics, why on earth do you think that vague anecdotal historical testimony from decades later would be sufficient to take the claim seriously?

[Sonofason]

I get it. You don't have any evidence that evolution is true.

I for one have no problem believing that evolution is true. It seems to me to be a rather reasonable theory. If there should be evidence in existence that shows that evolution is true, I have not seen it. ...

You appear to be making contradictory statements. You claim there is no evidence that evolution is true, yet you also say it is a reasonable theory.

Let's clarify.
Are you saying there is no evidence to support the theory of evolution?

Are you saying there is a reasonable amount of evidence to support the theory of evolution, but it fails to prove evolution is 'true' absolutely?

Actually, I have not stated that there is no evidence that evolution is true. What I have stated is that "no evidence no belief" has not provided any evidence that evolution is true. All he has provided is claims of evidence that evolution is true. Claims are not evidence. I have even gone out on a limb and stated that "no evidence no belief" has never seen evidence that evolution is true, and that he accepts such a notion as true by faith.

I suggest that evolution is a reasonable theory because I have accepted by faith that scientists who claim to have evidence that genetic mutations can occur that can be passed from generation to generation are telling the truth. I have not seen their evidence. I personally would not go so far as to say that one species can be transformed into an entirely new species however. I could however accept that a species could evolve over time. That is not to say that a species becomes a new species, but that a species over time changes. It is scientists of evolution and biology who have set limits on what a species is. I do not accept their limits. Every generation of one kind of species is the same species as it's predecessor. My concept is rather more thoughtful and more reasonable than the notion that one species can become another species over time. We do not change into a new species over time, but a species may indeed change over time.

I am saying that I have faith that scientists are making observations. I have faith that they are recording their observations with some degree of accuracy. And so I have faith in the idea that a species can change over time. And so, if evolution is a gradual change in a species over time, I believe, by faith, that species do indeed change over time. But I have not seen any of this evidence. I have no idea if the evidence that supports evolution is overwhelming evidence or not. It sounds reasonable to me. It may indeed be reasonable. But I accept the idea by faith.

[Sonofason]

[Replying to post 1482 by no evidence no belief]

no evidence no belief wrote:

Dude, the evidence for evolution is conclusive. The fact that the subject matter is too complicated for you to understand, doesn't mean that the evidence isn't there.

I could give you very strong evidence right now, but I would have to use a bunch of words you don't understand.

Eh, I'll try. Here's the simplest piece of evidence for evolution I can think of: A second inactive centomere and a centrally located talomere are present in human chromosome 2.
There you go. Did nothing for you, right? I promise, once you hit 8th grade it will all make sense.

Sonofason wrote:

I'm sorry, but substituting one claim for another claim is not evidence. Please show me the evidence that "a second inactive centomere and a centrally located talomere are present in human chromosome 2".

This is just another claim. Now, prove your claim.

no evidence no belief wrote:

Buddy, I'm sorry that this frustrates you, but this is not just "some claim".

So far, everything you have submitted appears to be a claim to me. I am asking for evidence. I am not asking for claims of evidence.

no evidence no belief wrote:

The same DNA-detection technology that allows us to determine if somebody is somebody else's father, and allows us to solve crimes, and allows us to discover whether you have some kind of genetic disease, is also used to determine the veracity of the claim above.

And here you submit yet another claim. No please show the evidence that The same DNA-detection technology that allows us to determine if somebody is somebody else's father, and allows us to solve crimes, and allows us to discover whether you have some kind of genetic disease...

no evidence no belief wrote:

I mean, seriously, you can take a genetic sample to a lab, they will inspect it with the technology above, and they will be able to tell you the person's ethnicity and gender, they will be able to tell you if he has Down Syndrome or not, whether he has muscular distrophy or not, and hundreds of other diseases and genital defects. They will be able to tell you the person's eye color, whether he has mid-falangial hair, a widow's peak and whether he is able to make a "U" shape with his tongue.

And another claim. When are you going to present evidence, instead of claims of evidence? I do not doubt that evidence may exist that these claims are true, but you are the one making this claim, and I am asking for your evidence?

no evidence no belief wrote:

You can discover if this is true YOURSELF. TODAY. Go to a pharmacy and buy a kit to collect mouth lining cells. Scrape the inside of the mouth of a friend or family member of yours, by so doing you will obtain some cells containing DNA information. Take the stuff to the nearest lab in your town and for a few thousand dollars they will run the tests for you, and tell you all these genetic details about your friend, without ever having met him/her.

And now you are telling me that if I want evidence for your claims, I have to go out and find it for myself? What sort of evidence is this, that you cannot provide, to support your own claims, that I should have to go out of my way to discover it for myself?

no evidence no belief wrote:

So, go do that, and once the lab technician has proven beyond any doubt that he is able to obtain detailed and accurate information from the genetic material, and that he is able to truly explore the details of DNA, then pay him another couple thousand dollars to find out if there is a second inactive centomere and a centrally located talomere in your friend's chromosome 2.

And now you demand that if I want the evidence, I must spend thousands of dollars to see it?

no evidence no belief wrote:

The claim that "a second inactive centomere and a centrally located talomere are present in human chromosome 2" has been proven to be true CONCLUSIVELY. And it's evidnece for evolution.

I get it. You don't have any evidence that evolution is true.

I for one have no problem believing that evolution is true. It seems to me to be a rather reasonable theory. If there should be evidence in existence that shows that evolution is true, I have not seen it. And apparently, you haven't either. Sometimes we just have to have faith in other people. That's all I'm asking of you. I have evidence that God exists. I cannot share this evidence with you, just as you cannot share your supposed evidence of evolution with me. I get it. But if you were to love and obey God, as I have often suggested to others on this site, you would have your evidence of God, and you won't have to spend thousands of dollars to do it.

Dude, you just won the gold medal for false equivalency.

I am providing evidence that you could corroborate easily with a simple google search, and which you could confirm with almost complete certainty, if you cared enough to spend some time, money and energy educating yourself on the facts and researching the subject.

If I were trying to convince you the earth is round, I'd probably say "rent a chartered airplane, go to the equator, bang a left and keep going east, and eventually you'll get back to the same spot you started from", and you'd say "What? Are you saying that I have to spend money to verify this evidence? All you do is talk and tell me I should think for myself. Show me the evidence"

This is you:


Let's do this buddy:
How about you tell me your name and city of residence. I will buy you a first class ticket to come to New York. A limo will take you from your home to your airport, and there will be a limo waiting for you at the airport in NYC which will take you to a DNA testing lab in Manhattan. You will go there, and provide a DNA sample you will have PERSONALLY selected from anybody in the world. They will analyze this microscopic sample, and from it tell you all sorts of details about the person. This will constitute EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE that DNA analysis technology works.

While you're waiting for the results, I will pay for a hotel room right on Central Park, give you a stipend of $1000/day, plus fully reimburse you of any money you may have lost from taking time off work.

In addition to that, I will agree to pay you $1,000,000 in cash IF it turns out that the lab technicians are NOT able to provide accurate data about your friend from the DNA sample. I will give you this money, if you agree to give me $100,000 IF the lab technicians ARE able to provide accurate data.

If you truly cared about knowing the truth, and if you truly believed there was no good evidence for evolution, you would take this deal, right? Ball is in your court.

By the way, if you wanted to offer me a similar deal revolving around you providing empirical evidence for the supernatural, I'd take it in a heartbeat.

Are we done?

You still have not submitted any evidence that evolution is true. You have thoroughly pointed out that if I want to see this evidence I must go elsewhere, that you are incapable of providing any evidence of evolution yourself. I understand that clearly. But do realize that you have not provided any evidence for your claim. I am wondering. If I should go to this genetics laboratory, will I need to believe that what they tell me is true? Or will it be completely obvious? If you think it will be completely obvious, is that because you have done this, and they convinced you of evolution? Or did you come to believe in evolution by some other means? Why do you believe in evolution. What is your evidence?

Okay, Go get yourself a copy of the New Testament of the Bible. Read it. Understand that what you are reading is true. Acknowledge the truth as you read it. Do what it says, as it is a prescription for knowing the Creator. Love God. Obey God. And you will have substantial evidence of the existence of God.

[no evidence no belief]

The evidence itself for each event should be held to the same standard. Otherwise we are discriminating against the evidence on the basis the claim disagrees with our world view. Each event should then either pass or fail on its own merits. Whether or not one is more extraordinary than the other should be irrelevant at the outset.

That's not how it works for anything except conspiracy theory and theist apologetics.

Criminal and civil courts have much different standards of evidence. Criminal is proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and civil is based on the preponderance of the evidence. And for good reason.

Evolution has a tremendous amount of evidence from various disciplines showing us that it does in fact happen. In contrast, a biologist wouldn't have to collect the same amount evidence on the duckbill platypus' mating habits to tell us they reproduce sexually.

Likewise, there's enough evidence to suggest Caesar was a real man who was stabbed to death. It doesn't conflict with the laws of physics and is consistent with real evidence. Anthropologists and archaeologists (scientists) have objective methodologies which theologians and apologists lack.

Carl Sagan popularized the saying, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

This basically means that the more unlikely, important, or seemingly impossible the claim (eg, resurrection by truly dead people), the higher the standard of evidence. I don't even believe video of alleged supernatural events. I invite you to do some critical thinking of your own and consider this information.

You haven't presented sufficient evidence to convince us that Jesus rose from the dead. In fact, you haven't even presented sufficient evidence he actually existed.

Why do so many atheists insist that there is an abundance of evidence for evolution, but they never provide any evidence? So please show me evidence. I don't want to see some book of fiction written by some scientist with a social agenda. I want to see real evidence of evolution. If eye witness accounts of Biblical authors are not admissible evidence for the existence of God, then your eye witness accounts in your science text books are also inadmissible evidence for the existence of evolution. Show me evidence of evolution. I don't want your personal opinions. I want proof. I don't want your textbook myths. I want proof. So, now, prove that evolution is a reality.

Dude, the evidence for evolution is conclusive. The fact that the subject matter is too complicated for you to understand, doesn't mean that the evidence isn't there.

I could give you very strong evidence right now, but I would have to use a bunch of words you don't understand.

Eh, I'll try. Here's the simplest piece of evidence for evolution I can think of: A second inactive centomere and a centrally located talomere are present in human chromosome 2.

There you go. Did nothing for you, right? I promise, once you hit 8th grade it will all make sense.

Because an extraneous centromere and an apparently misplaced telomere exist you believe this is evidence for evolution?

Yes. It's not just my belief.

I'll gladly pay you $10,000 for every biologist you can find who doesn't think this constitutes evidence for evolution, if in turn you agree to give me $1 for every one I can find who does. I promise you I'd end up with WAAAAAY more money than you. In the scientific community the fusion of chromosomes 2a and 2b in ancestors we share with modern apes is accepted as evidence for evolution at about the same rate as the acceptance for the earth being a globe.

Are wisdom teeth, tonsils and adipose fins also evidence for evolution in your eyes?

Of course. Vestigial organs are very strong evidence for evolution.

Its possible I don't correctly understand your argument. Please explain it for me in more simple terms, id est, use small words so I can understand.

I'm sorry man, I absolutely do NOT mean as a diss or anything, but if you lack the basic scientific education to figure it out by yourself, then I honestly doubt that I'll be able to convey this to you in a simple enough way that you'll understand it.

The best I can do is direct you to a video that explains EXACTLY this subject. Hopefully you can follow it. It's only 4 minute long.

Here is it:

Let me know your thoughts

[Tired of the Nonsense]

You need an avatar Goose, so that your posts will be easier to locate. Certainly no one has a problem locating MY posts. No evidence no belief provided you with one possibility in his posting #1488. Here are a few more suggestions.

[connermt]

[Replying to post 1492 by Sonofason]

Go get yourself a copy of the New Testament of the Bible. Read it. Understand that what you are reading is true. Acknowledge the truth as you read it. Do what it says, as it is a prescription for knowing the Creator. Love God. Obey God. And you will have substantial evidence of the existence of God.

Only in "Wishland" (which doesn't really exist - just to be clear).
I've read the bible (recently recycled all of mine BTW - even the recorded versions).
The bible is not substantial evidence of any deity. The only evidence the bible proves is that it's a book of stories written by dead men and edited by other (mostly dead) men that will likely be edited in the future.
Any further claims (specifically about a supernatural deity being real) is simply a taught and biased interpretation of words, nothing more.

[no evidence no belief]

[Replying to post 1482 by no evidence no belief]

no evidence no belief wrote:

Dude, the evidence for evolution is conclusive. The fact that the subject matter is too complicated for you to understand, doesn't mean that the evidence isn't there.

I could give you very strong evidence right now, but I would have to use a bunch of words you don't understand.

Eh, I'll try. Here's the simplest piece of evidence for evolution I can think of: A second inactive centomere and a centrally located talomere are present in human chromosome 2.
There you go. Did nothing for you, right? I promise, once you hit 8th grade it will all make sense.

Sonofason wrote:

I'm sorry, but substituting one claim for another claim is not evidence. Please show me the evidence that "a second inactive centomere and a centrally located talomere are present in human chromosome 2".

This is just another claim. Now, prove your claim.

no evidence no belief wrote:

Buddy, I'm sorry that this frustrates you, but this is not just "some claim".

So far, everything you have submitted appears to be a claim to me. I am asking for evidence. I am not asking for claims of evidence.

no evidence no belief wrote:

The same DNA-detection technology that allows us to determine if somebody is somebody else's father, and allows us to solve crimes, and allows us to discover whether you have some kind of genetic disease, is also used to determine the veracity of the claim above.

And here you submit yet another claim. No please show the evidence that The same DNA-detection technology that allows us to determine if somebody is somebody else's father, and allows us to solve crimes, and allows us to discover whether you have some kind of genetic disease...

no evidence no belief wrote:

I mean, seriously, you can take a genetic sample to a lab, they will inspect it with the technology above, and they will be able to tell you the person's ethnicity and gender, they will be able to tell you if he has Down Syndrome or not, whether he has muscular distrophy or not, and hundreds of other diseases and genital defects. They will be able to tell you the person's eye color, whether he has mid-falangial hair, a widow's peak and whether he is able to make a "U" shape with his tongue.

And another claim. When are you going to present evidence, instead of claims of evidence? I do not doubt that evidence may exist that these claims are true, but you are the one making this claim, and I am asking for your evidence?

no evidence no belief wrote:

You can discover if this is true YOURSELF. TODAY. Go to a pharmacy and buy a kit to collect mouth lining cells. Scrape the inside of the mouth of a friend or family member of yours, by so doing you will obtain some cells containing DNA information. Take the stuff to the nearest lab in your town and for a few thousand dollars they will run the tests for you, and tell you all these genetic details about your friend, without ever having met him/her.

And now you are telling me that if I want evidence for your claims, I have to go out and find it for myself? What sort of evidence is this, that you cannot provide, to support your own claims, that I should have to go out of my way to discover it for myself?

no evidence no belief wrote:

So, go do that, and once the lab technician has proven beyond any doubt that he is able to obtain detailed and accurate information from the genetic material, and that he is able to truly explore the details of DNA, then pay him another couple thousand dollars to find out if there is a second inactive centomere and a centrally located talomere in your friend's chromosome 2.

And now you demand that if I want the evidence, I must spend thousands of dollars to see it?

no evidence no belief wrote:

The claim that "a second inactive centomere and a centrally located talomere are present in human chromosome 2" has been proven to be true CONCLUSIVELY. And it's evidnece for evolution.

I get it. You don't have any evidence that evolution is true.

I for one have no problem believing that evolution is true. It seems to me to be a rather reasonable theory. If there should be evidence in existence that shows that evolution is true, I have not seen it. And apparently, you haven't either. Sometimes we just have to have faith in other people. That's all I'm asking of you. I have evidence that God exists. I cannot share this evidence with you, just as you cannot share your supposed evidence of evolution with me. I get it. But if you were to love and obey God, as I have often suggested to others on this site, you would have your evidence of God, and you won't have to spend thousands of dollars to do it.

Dude, you just won the gold medal for false equivalency.

I am providing evidence that you could corroborate easily with a simple google search, and which you could confirm with almost complete certainty, if you cared enough to spend some time, money and energy educating yourself on the facts and researching the subject.

If I were trying to convince you the earth is round, I'd probably say "rent a chartered airplane, go to the equator, bang a left and keep going east, and eventually you'll get back to the same spot you started from", and you'd say "What? Are you saying that I have to spend money to verify this evidence? All you do is talk and tell me I should think for myself. Show me the evidence"

This is you:


Let's do this buddy:
How about you tell me your name and city of residence. I will buy you a first class ticket to come to New York. A limo will take you from your home to your airport, and there will be a limo waiting for you at the airport in NYC which will take you to a DNA testing lab in Manhattan. You will go there, and provide a DNA sample you will have PERSONALLY selected from anybody in the world. They will analyze this microscopic sample, and from it tell you all sorts of details about the person. This will constitute EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE that DNA analysis technology works.

While you're waiting for the results, I will pay for a hotel room right on Central Park, give you a stipend of $1000/day, plus fully reimburse you of any money you may have lost from taking time off work.

In addition to that, I will agree to pay you $1,000,000 in cash IF it turns out that the lab technicians are NOT able to provide accurate data about your friend from the DNA sample. I will give you this money, if you agree to give me $100,000 IF the lab technicians ARE able to provide accurate data.

If you truly cared about knowing the truth, and if you truly believed there was no good evidence for evolution, you would take this deal, right? Ball is in your court.

By the way, if you wanted to offer me a similar deal revolving around you providing empirical evidence for the supernatural, I'd take it in a heartbeat.

Are we done?

You still have not submitted any evidence that evolution is true. You have thoroughly pointed out that if I want to see this evidence I must go elsewhere, that you are incapable of providing any evidence of evolution yourself.

Are you serious dude? I just offered to pay for the trip to see the evidence for yourself. You just turned down a free vacation to New York, with first class airfare, limo, 5 star hotel. THAT'S how much you are refusing to hear any evidence. You don't WANT to see the evidence.

I understand that clearly. But do realize that you have not provided any evidence for your claim. I am wondering. If I should go to this genetics laboratory, will I need to believe that what they tell me is true? Or will it be completely obvious?

you will not need to believe ANYTHING. It will be completely obvious.
You will be the only person who knows who the DNA sample you give them belongs to, and they will be able to tell you MANY DETAILS about it. They will be able to tell you the gender of the person, the ethnicity, the eye and hair color, whether they have freckles, whether they have a widow's peak, whether they have straight or curly hair, whether they have hair in between the first and second knuckle of their hands. They will be able to tell you scientific details about this person that he/she might not know him/herself.

This will convince you of the validity of the empirical evidence for evolution.

If you think it will be completely obvious, is that because you have done this, and they convinced you of evolution?

Yes. I have done this. I've had full DNA mapping done when my wife and I were considering having a baby.

Or did you come to believe in evolution by some other means? Why do you believe in evolution. What is your evidence?

This is one of the hundreds of pieces of evidence I've had the opportunity to personally test empirically. If you do the same tests, you will get equally strong evidence.

Okay, Go get yourself a copy of the New Testament of the Bible. Read it. Understand that what you are reading is true. Acknowledge the truth as you read it. Do what it says, as it is a prescription for knowing the Creator. Love God. Obey God. And you will have substantial evidence of the existence of God.

There is no way that I will obey the NT! It's one of the most evil books ever written! If I were to obey it I would end up in jail immediately. Are you kidding me? Prevent women from speaking in church? Give all my money away and live in poverty? Abandon my family? Not even show up at my dad's funeral? Kill my brothers? Cause my parents to be executed? Enforce laws in favor of slavery? Obey the letter of the Mosaic Law? Kill my children if they misbehave? Force my daughter to marry her rapist? Kill any gay man I can find? Have sex with my daughters? Are you kidding me, man?

Have you ever even read the Bible?

[Nickman]

Okay, Go get yourself a copy of the New Testament of the Bible. Read it. Understand that what you are reading is true. Acknowledge the truth as you read it. Do what it says, as it is a prescription for knowing the Creator. Love God. Obey God. And you will have substantial evidence of the existence of God.

So basically, get a copy of the NT, read it with the presupposition that it is true, acknowledge that it is true, repeat, do what it says blindly, love an invisible entity, obey and invisible entity, and then confirm to yourself that what you are doing is true.
That makes perfect sense.

[Sonofason]

Okay, Go get yourself a copy of the New Testament of the Bible. Read it. Understand that what you are reading is true. Acknowledge the truth as you read it. Do what it says, as it is a prescription for knowing the Creator. Love God. Obey God. And you will have substantial evidence of the existence of God.

So basically, get a copy of the NT, read it with the presupposition that it is true, acknowledge that it is true, repeat, do what it says blindly, love an invisible entity, obey and invisible entity, and then confirm to yourself that what you are doing is true.
That makes perfect sense.

Yes, I thought so too.