Darwin believed in jin(super natural) or Dawkins does?

[Theorist]

Re: Darwin believed in jin(super natural) or Dawkins does?

@kprasad

Brother Psyah,

I’m going to assume you’re being serious, because this is a laughable assertion. But, I would add, this is par for course for the faithful. Luckily the law, courts, and science don’t work this way. No one has top prove innocence, it is guilt that must be proven.

Your requirement for proof is a logical fallacy. That requirement only exists in the mind of people willfully ignorant of science.

Science has much more simple requirements. Show evidence, show data, then make predictions. If your predictions are wrong, go back and start over again. Evolution is a fact. It occurred. Scientists make predictions about what they will find in the fossil record and then, years later, they find it. Take a look at the tiktaalik. No religion can do that!

But here is an even better proposition, that religion fails at again, and why science is superior:
If you can show the evidence, scientists would relegate evolution! How many predictions do people make with their religious texts that never come to be?

Nicely said! It is like accusing the weatherman of witchcraft for accurately predicting the weather patterns.