You just lost it. Why? This is a forum where we communicate using words. If we don't understand the meanings of words, then the forum has no meaning.
I showed you the meaning of the word religion. But you don't like the meaning. Why not? Do you simply like to have your own pet meanings for words? If that's what it is, why would you expect anyone to be able to communicate with you in a forum?
Further. Thank you for letting us know that you are not an atheist, although why you did so is unclear.
If you believe in evolution, you have a religion. Believe is what is done in religions. If you KNOW about evolution, then you know it is a hoax. Why? There isn't any proof for evolution. Even evolution evidence fits something else better than it fits evolution. The evolution scientists who study evolution know this. But since you simply believe what they say because you don't know, you have made them the high priests of your evolution religion.
Thanks for showing me what religion means. Great that you put such a complex term in one sentence, really academic approach, you should have your own class on religion on Harvard. I showed you the meaning of the word religion. But you don't like the meaning. Why not? Do you simply like to have your own pet meanings for words? If that's what it is, why would you expect anyone to be able to communicate with you in a forum?
Further. Thank you for letting us know that you are not an atheist, although why you did so is unclear.
If you believe in evolution, you have a religion. Believe is what is done in religions. If you KNOW about evolution, then you know it is a hoax. Why? There isn't any proof for evolution. Even evolution evidence fits something else better than it fits evolution. The evolution scientists who study evolution know this. But since you simply believe what they say because you don't know, you have made them the high priests of your evolution religion.
In line with this definition - I fully believe red traffic light means "don't go", so is it a religion? Do you see how absurd you sound when you use this definition out of its context?
Proof of evolution is all around you, in fossils, in DNA, but you think it's a hoax. Where is the proof of creationism? I don't consider ancient books as proof if they are contradicted with scientific evidence and ordinary logic. This is the difference between creationists and evolutionists.
I don't believe evolution because someone says so, but because it feels so natural and logical. After all, it feels so elegant, actually divine. But creationists cannot think of an elegant God who uses evolution, they see God with a magic wand, like kindergarten kids. But I don't have a problem with that because I accept different viewpoints. The problem is when you use the words like "hoax" for things you don't like or don't understand.
You are welcome for the thanks. But I'm not interested in teaching a class at Harvard right now.
A couple of buddies were driving down the road one day. As they were going along, they came to a red light, but the driver didn't stop. He drove right on through. The passenger thought, "Well, everybody does that once in a while." They came to another red light, and again, the driver drove right on through like he didn't see that the light was red. His buddy casually remarked, "Who taught you to drive? That was a red light back there." The driver replied, "My brother taught me to drive, and doesn't red mean 'go' and green mean 'stop'?" His buddy, the passenger, was shocked. He said, "No, no. It's just the opposite. Red means 'stop' and green means 'go'. Your brother has it backwards. If you don't change, we're liable to get into an accident." "I see," said the drive. "I'll do it the right way from now on." As they were driving along, they came to a green light. The driver stopped. The passenger thought, What? He said, "Didn't we just go through this - red means 'stop' but green means 'go'? Why did you stop for green?" The driver said, "My brother might have been coming the other way."
All the evidence that fits evolution theory so far, fits something else better... something like adaptation.
All the so-called proof for evolution so far, has been found to not prove evolution when it is examined according to further and more complex scientific examination.
There are many things in nature and life that show that evolution in any way we can imagine it is impossible.
When we think that our brother might be coming down the road with mixed up evolution evidence, we need to slow down for the "green," not stop for it. We need to show him that the proof for evolution is all talk, even though it might be something that maintains evolution theory.
The only reason that evolution is maintained as a theory rather than simply dropped, is because some people want it to remain a theory. They want it to remain a theory for several reason, among which are:
1. They make money off the belief of people, via the universities, and the digs;
2. They remain popular and famous because of it;
3. Dropping evolution, as it should be dropped, would upset the current flow of science;
4. Dropping evolution, as it should be dropped, would upset society because of how wide-spread the evolution religion has become.
But the evolution lie needs to stop so that people can wake up and live with correct thinking.
Evolution is a pure hoax.