Posted by
Playful Walrus on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 10:04:58 AM
What kind of discovery or series of discoveries would cause you to doubt naturalistic macroevolution? Or, what kind of discovery or series of discoveries would cause you to consider the possibility of intelligent involvement in our origins?
If you can't think of any answer (in other words - if it isn't falsifiable), then isn't it really a matter of faith on your part, and not a conclusion based on evidence?
If no evidence would change your belief in naturalistic macroevolution, then how can you say your belief in it is based on evidence?