^^Example of an intolerant evolutionist.
Please don't start name-calling. I am neither intolerant nor an "evolutionist".
However implausable I find your beliefs, my response as demonstrated by this thread is to provide information and logical argument, with a minimum of opinion.
You stared a thread about evolution, clearly with the direct intention of arguing against it. You did not start a thread about your own beliefs and attempt to explain why they are true. Your entire premise was one of negativity towards thinking that contradicts your beliefs.If I created a thread called "Creationism" then posted "Now I ask you please give me an example of observable evidence of creationism", then continued to refute and LOL at any replies - that might be considered antisocial, perhaps even intolerant, but in this instance you have invited comment and I would invite you to read actually consider what I have written before you decide to start name-calling, and then even if you still think it's a good idea, to refrain from it.
Furthermore I would like to point out that "evolutionist" is a propoganda term invented by religious extremists in an attempt to project the image that views contradictory to their doctrine belong to a small sub-set of the community, when in fact the reverse is true.
i.e. Christians are a minority sub-set of humans, and fundementalist Christians are a minority sub-set of Christians.
If you want to quote extremist propoganda in general discussion that is your choice, but please don't direct it personally towards me.
@Lambchops I'm willing to bet you've never traveled outside of the Australia/American/Euro zone.
The more you travel the more beliefs you will come across.
People in every country on earth understand science and logic .... it's the norm. That is why science works, because it is all about truth. Anybody from any culture can propose anything as long as they have the evidence to back it up, and anybody can provide logical argument and evidence to either support or refute it. It is understood and participated in all over the world. What world do you live in?
HERE IS THE CRUX OF THIS ARGUMENT: THERE IS NO ARGUMENT
Take, for example, string theory. There are a lot of people who think it is correct, however it is not
proven AND there are also a lot of other valid theories out there (see HERE
for example).There are no genuine alternative theories to evolution and nobody even presenting alternatives.
People have been conducting research based on it for many years, and nobody has said, "uh... I think this research is based on a flawed premise". There is only people who just don't WANT
to believe it.
The massive evidence for evolution has been presented, discussed and accepted by the community. That's a done deal, and plain common-sense I might add. If you don't like someone else's explaination you have to come up with evidence to refute it, and preferably also a counter-proposal. You have neither of these things because they don't exist.
Name-calling won't help your case. You have no case.