And my answer was to dispute the accuracy of the question, which you've accepted was inaccurate.
only to avoid being labelled as creationist.
By asking them to prove that their beliefs are grounded in reality?
How is that mockery?
no by saying to other posters that you are addressing crap/bullshit hence ridiculing the belief of others
Why did it have to come from anywhere?
because based on what we know everything has an origin
No.
We've yet to prove that matter or energy can be created or destroyed.
They do change form, though.
isnt the general definition of matter ending in '....the issue of matter remains a theoretical construct."
besides the issue is it had to come from somewhere, as nothing is ......you know the rest
No, it clearly wasn't based upon my perspective and your name for this creative force is irrelevant.
it is most relevant, as labelling it conjures up images. and yes it was as far as i am concerned anyway
What evidence do we have for things being created?
the knowledge that something doesnt come out of nothing
No, it isn't.
It's a claim.
a claim embedded in the fact thta as we know it everything has a point of origin/creation
And I've pointed out repeatedly why it defeats your own claim, yet you choose not to see it.
how does it defeat my claim? I certainly dont accept it
Wisdom teeth were for grinding down plant tissue.
A third eye-lid isn't for another eye.
never claimed it was
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nictitating_membrane
Nobody claims that we evolved from monkeys, either.
they did on the thread that i said I didnt accept it.
All of this is utterly untrue and more evidence that you're a creationist, as it's a standard creationist argument.
They call it irreducible complexity and it's been thoroughly debunked.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreducible_complexity#Eye
sorry you are treating it like a creationist argument
Darwin had a theory for the development of the eye, that is true. But the eye does not support his natural selection theory
and it still defies explanation. The theories that exist are just theories (and not in th escientific theory sense). I suggest YOU read the article you linked
Note that they refer to your Darwin's Eye bullshit from earlier, too.
yes and leave more questions than answer
You clearly didn't and I'd be wasting my time repeating it here.
Read it again and then you might understand why your quotes were ridiculous.
More assumptions?
And your answer isn't actually an answer.
How did we get here?
God did it.
How did god get here?
His god did it, etc.
It doesn't tell us anything.
