Quote Originally Posted by jamstigator
I think we will all agree that there is no objective, repeatable test that can be done that proves there is a God. Were there such a test, it would've been performed many times by now across the world. I'd perform it myself just to be sure. I postulate that the reason for this lack is that there is, in fact, no God. Because there is no such test, religionists must always fall back on the tired, 'You have to *believe*' schtick.

I find it mildly offensive when someone tells me that they 'know' the truth about God, and at the very same time they cannot produce an objective, repeatable test that proves any such thing. You cannot *know* something for a certainty if it requires faith rather than evidence. You may *think* this or you may *think* that, but until there is evidence, nobody can *know*. Telling someone you've been told this or that or read this or that, and you believe it, despite lack of objective repeatable testing providing evidence, is in no way convincing, nor should it be.

But let's go back to the true human tails for a moment. (Yes, I find them fascinating.) Let's talk, in particular, about the ones that have multiple functioning vertebrae, blood vessels, skin cells, sweat glands, muscles that fit the tail perfectly and provide conscious control, and specialized sensory organs to detect pressure and vibration. According to some, genetic information can only be lost, never gained. Clearly, these tails are controlled by genetics, just as every part of our bodies are. So, this seems to me to leave only two possibilities:

1) The genetic information for the tail existed in the parents of the children born with them. (Makes sense, we get our eye and hair color, height, intelligence, etc from our parents, so why not this too.) If this possibility is the correct one, why would the parents be carrying around genetic information for tails, if we are created in God's image, and did not evolve from an ancestor with a tail?

2) Between the parents and the tailed children, genetic information to allow a complex and functioning limb such as a consciously controllable tail must have been acquired spontaneously, out of nowhere.

Neither possibility looks good for Creationism.

Jamstigator, why are you bringing this one up again? I already adressed this. It's a genetic mutation. A copying error. Some people pass mental retardation through thier heredity, that doesn't make it a leftover from evolution does it?

Well, now that I think of it they used to think this very same thing! They believed in the earlier part of the last century, that
mentally retarted people were a throwback to evolutiuon, and they wern't at the same "level" as modern man. Come to think of it, they thought the same thing about other people too. The Africans, the aboriginals, the latter were massacered all across the island and many were torn apart to get the bones and send back to England as evolutionary "evidence".

It was all based upon corrupt philosophy, faulty assumptions and judging only by appearance. Like I said, I had a freind who had stubs for fingers and they had nerves, skin, bone, fat, and nobody will say that that's from evolution. The human tails are copying errors or a result of damaged genes.

Yes there is a repeatable test that can be verified better than any normal empirical experiment. But it comes from within. Faith isn't blind, and it doesn't make baseless assumptions. God's eternal nature is there for your heart to reocgnise, and that encompasses all. And all the evidence of this world show the handiwork of a designer. The evidence of this world lead logically to recognise a God as necessary to sustain this world.


How would you like to see some good animal evidences of creation? How would you like that? Not that I need to show you any. It's there for everyone to see.