[Evolution]'s a naturalistic a priori assumption and it has no real basis in science. It certainly is not answer for the historical content of the Scriptures.
19 comments
[Evolution]'s a naturalistic a priori assumption
"Evolution's a naturalistic a priori assumption that has no real basis in science."
"It certainly is not answer for the historical content of the Scriptures."The fact that you think that we are trying to present the ToE as an "answer for the historical content of the Scriptures" is good evidence that you are an asshat.
A. The ToE is unrelated to your scriptures. A scientific position is true or false on it's own merits, regardless of what some ancient text says.
B. Much of the "historical content" of the Bible is not true.
True, fundies seem to assume that because Jerusalem and Damascus exist, that proves the whole Bible is accurate. Atlanta exists, so "Gone With the Wind" must be a true story!
Wow... a fundie that can make stupidity almost sound smart. Almost. "No real basis in scripture" just kind of ruins the whole feel of it. Better luck next time, Mark. Use more unnecessary Latin and refer to the Bible as "the most revered tome of the Christian faith" and you might be getting somewhere.
It is based in Science and yes, you´re right, it doesn´t deal with history. However, is there any historical account of Adam and Eve?
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
