sorry your losing sleep/stezza

prove what dear?

i know god did it
you claim the science did it

science claims faulsifyables
underpin...the theory...of evolution

is it too much..that you/..who claim the science
present them?

is it not unreasonable...that you can claim the science
and its assosiated faulsyfiables and science teqnique

yet im required to disprove...your faulsifiables
faulsifyables..YOU CANT PRESENT!

fauls=if=y-ables...thats science...lol

you claim THE science..of genus evolving
WELL..present them/...faulsifyables

how can i rebut a thing...
you ..are unable to present?

if you claim/science..present your faulsifyables..!

or admit...the science ...lol..of genus evolving...
is comp-lete delusion

no scienc/faulsifyables
then..no rebuttal..of your grand deception is possable

little wonder...your own peers
revieuw the...'science'...in house...lol

it saves you presenting...that ESSENTIAL...
to be a valid/science...to wit...faulsifyables

[that if rebutted..
invalidate the theory...
..and the science]

no faule-as-if-y-ables...
NO SCIENCE

GET IT?

evolution/of species/out of genus
is a fraud...

live with it!

present...faulsifyables...please..
if you have them?...lol

if you dont..
let your silence...invalidate your claim..
to have any science fact..re genus evolving...

present your faulsifyables

no faulsifyable
NO SCIENCE

EVOLUTION ...the grand deception
fooling the decieved

[its the same scam...as religion...
fodder..to confuse the masses]

worse..to lead...the creation
away/from its creator

GIVE BACK TO GOD
that gods alone

Yuyutsu,

There difference I was highlighting was in the semantics of the subjects of sentences. God created the explosion and gunpower created the explosion: These are two sentences of a difference kind.

To say God created the universe was yesterday and we are tricked by making everything appear evolved turns, on the an unidentifiable God (fairy or elf). The sentence, "the backgound radiation of the universe suggests that a BB occured 12-15 billion years ago". Here, one can measure the radiation (2.7 degrees K). One cannot measure the slide-of-hand of God. And even if there was some slide-of-hand, why not aliens from another dimension or The Little People. [On the otherhand, "there is "a pot of god at th end of th rainbow" would a appear more substantial.]

Hello OUG,

"genus may be a manmade label"

Yes, it is a taxonomy designator to classify the products of evolution and its does not disprove evolution, to the contrary it necessarity supports evolution. I have read museums work on the basis that say a cat and dog are separate species, because to subsequent species share them as a common ancestor.

Oliver,

If you mean to say that we cannot have objective information about God, then I fully agree - and thank God for that!

Objective information can only be obtained about objects. While idols are usually objects, God is not.

Correction:

Yes (OUG), it is a taxonomy designator to classify the products of evolution and its does not disprove evolution, to the contrary it necessarily supports evolution. I have read museums work on the basis that say a cat and dog are separate species, because to subsequent species DO NOT share them as a common ancestor.


Yuyutsu,

Thanks.

Yuyutsu wrote: Objective information can only be obtained about objects.

We can have objective information about anything that can be detected by our senses or instruments. eg. Amperage and voltage are objective information about electric currents.