Originally posted by Fellowship
You said it. A model.. Not a fact. You believe the model evolution provides is true. The key word "believe" You believe the model is accurate. I don't
There is no evidence that your model is an accurate explination of origins of life on the planet.
There is morphological evidence - the examination of fossils and existing lifeforms. There is genetic evidence verifying evolutionary trees. They are time consistent with our dating techniques. You simply choose not to believe what they say.
You are believing in a belief not a fact. So am I
I can admit it
You are hell bent on calling a theory a fact as you can't seem to be honest.
My belief is based on facts, a model based on facts. It's as if you don't believe in the existence facts or measurements or observations. Are morphological observations beliefs? Are genetic studies beliefs? Are radiometric, geological and genetic dating techniques beliefs?
As of today, is it a belief or a fact that nuclear, biological and chemical weapons have not been found in Iraq? What does that say if one says the weapons were there? If no weapons were found, it means they were not there or were moved. But guess what, there is no evidence of it being moved. So we're left with the fact, not the belief, that the weapons weren't there to begin with - a conclusion of every weapons search group in Iraq.
And so it is with evolution. It's a model based on a preponderance of facts, on multiple levels, consistent on multiple scales. My belief in it is based on facts. Genetics and inherentance are demonstrably true. Morphological and genetics studies of animals in the various geographies of the world are consistent with evolution. The theory is supported by a preponderance of facts.