badgerx16

But it is not your place to point it out to them if that is what they wish to believe.

You mean nobody has surrendered in the face of your obstinacy. How many times have your 'facts' been shown to be erroneous, yet you keep rolling them out.

Matthew, go back and re-read my post #1552. Also, do you understand the word allegory ?

I have already tried to help him in post #1552.

Would it not be better for you to admit that your quest to bend everybody on here to your will is futile ? You keep driving us round and round the same hamster wheel, and every time somebody puts up viable counter arguments you hit the reset button and kick the whole thing off again. We all know your position, and respect it, but you fail to exhibit any acceptance that other people don't want to live their lives by your absolutist precept, as is their right.

But a scentific theory is not cast in stone and immutable. It can change as fresh interpretations of known phemonema arise, or advances in technology or understanding cause revisions of 'facts'. In science a Law is only a Law until it is disproved. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superseded_theories_in_science

Catcher

There used to be 'evidence' that the Sun orbited around the Earth. What is accepted as fact is dependent on how far our knowledge and understanding of our surroundings evolves. But who is to say that what we discover, and can 'prove', is being surrepticiously guided by the hand of an unseen overlord who hides certain things from us as 'verboten' ?

It does, but you assert that it is not true.

No, your assertion is that salt water fish have larger bones because they live in salt water, which is patently untrue, as my full post points out. See, you can easily make 'facts' to support a falacious line of argument by selectively quoting.

That is a general statement that is not supported by fact. Fish skeletons across the range of aquatic environments vary by number of bones, and the structure of those bones, and can be affected by the niche environment within which the fish species lives. Bottom dwelling flat fish have smaller but more numerous bones than free swimming species, deep sea species will have thicker bones than surface dwellers to cope with vastly increased pressures. In general, the larger fish species tend to be ocean dwellers, so by default will have larger bones than their physically smaller fresh water cousins.

Q} How do you tell that from either the fossil record or DNA analysis ? A} You can't.

How do you definitively know from a fossil fish what environment it inhabited ? What part of the DNA sequence identifies the physiological adaptations necessary for a specific aquatic environment ?

Some people believe thay are skilled football managers because they play computer games.

Obviously not, or the churches and mosques would be empty.

The Atlantic Ocean didn't exist when life moved onto land.

They are flaws from your perspective, they are Truth from Raging Bull's, and continually trying to nit-pick at his beliefs most certainly verges on insult.

Salt water or fresh water ?

I feel that many of the postings on this thread this afternoon have been completely unnecessary.

How about bit of tangential thinking. Perhaps the Flood story, in part, is an attempt by an ancient society to explain something they experienced when their 'world' was affected by a catastrophic event. Lacking the scientific knowledge to explain what had happened they put it down to an act of whatever God they worshipped. ( The God of the Gaps theological perspective ). Being superstitious, scientifically naive, and without a secure written history, the passing on of their oral history gradually embellished and extended the story. As far as these people were concerned the entire world was flooded. The Old Testament is not entirely fictitious, there is plenty of achaeological evidence to support aspects of it. You just have to accept that it is a translation of a translation, ( etc, etc ), of an oral history originating with a less sophisticated and far more superstitious society. You also have to accept that a very large number of people have faith in it's content, and you are on the verge of coming over not only as arrogant in dismissing their views, but insulting.

Is God that conceited that he gives Mankind the gift of free will, then dictates what Man has to do with it ?

But MLG's life and opinions are all fixed as part of God's great pre-planned scheme for the Universe.

Matthew, I don't necessarily take everything/anything in the Bible as ' Gospel' (sic), particularly the Old Testament, but you keep trying to construct definitive either/or arguments based on insecure constructs. Look at it this way; if you are right and there is no God or Heaven, we will actually never know, but if there is, you will hopefully be pleasantly surprised.

How do you know what the human genome looked like before the interbreeding ? The only documentary evidence we have was generated within the last 50 years, millenia after any such interaction, and therefore includes any cross species transfer of genes. Where is the reference sample of giant angel DNA ?