Arbogast

I will have to stew on that tonight...
Georgia Boy certainly aint no dang authority on Occams Razor...

PS. It is my opinion Darwin was blessed by God with more wisdom than most creationists!!!

Racer X

How many cases have you won?

If you want to make this analogy, I assume you realize that the minimum requirement for evidence is relevance to an issue to be decided. Put simply, this means the "evidence" at issue must reasonably tend to show that a desired conclusion is more probably (or less probably) true. There's got to be a reasonable inference between the "evidence" and desired conclusion.

The evidence: A red camaro being operated by Joe Schmoe runs the red light and kills Dan Deader.

My conclusion: Joe negligently killed Dan. The facts clearly show not only Joe was driving and hit Dan, but also that the accident was caused by his violation of a traffic law.

Your conclusion: God exists and was angry at Dan, so Joe is not at fault.

Just because we're looking at the "same evidence," doesn't mean the conclusions based on that evidence are equally reasonable, or reasonable at all.

scigirl

Just click on my profile, hon!

scigirl