I'm conflicted about the Bible. Will you discuss it with me?

[L Gilbert]

Parables? Like I said, faerie tales. And Mother Goose, Grimm brothers, Andersen, etc. wrote better ones.
Parables about what? Basically "Obey me or else you'll be in a boatload of shyte"." There's better advice here

 

[Dexter Sinister]

So you see no advantage in eliminating the need for a trillion cubic miles of water...

Not quite. I see no advantage in making stuff up to explain the inconsistencies in that story, because that story is not true. It's a waste of time and energy.

 

[MHz]

Nope. In order for me to keep up with the inane claims, I'd have to develop inane answers. I'll leave that for people that are into writing faerie tales.

Which is worse, denying anything in the Bible as being possible (no matter what) or defending stories without having to resort to 'goddidit' as being a standard reply. If the flood story was symbolic of a period of time covering 360,000 years would you find it more believable?

Yup. Two koalas can survive indefinitely on two eucalyptus trees. Two kites could survive indefinitely on two snails. Sorry, but you quoted the Bible as saying the plants and animals came to Noah, not how they all got there. And how long was this supposed to have taken place in? 100 years? It took Noah that long to build a boat and took that long for flora and fauna to get to him? Some all-powerful god that is. I wonder why this god didn't just poof the boat and all the flora and fauna to put in it.
Noah was designing and building this ark. I think I read somewhere that Noah was a vintner or at least had vineyards. Where in the Bible does it say that this god taught Noah how to build boats? As far as I can understand, all the god did was give Noah the size it wanted to boat to be.Funny how we can dig up remains of hominids from 3.3 million years ago but can't find a single of these giant's remains. Claims have been made from various places around the planet of people that reached 10 to 12' but none are substantiated by conclusive evidence. A few people have made it to 9'+ but claims of 14" plus is a bit tough to accept, especially when there was supposed to have been many and they all had 6 digits at the ends of each limb.

It never mentions plants so is this where the trolling starts and discussion returns to 'normal'? (not that we ever strayed too far from normal for you) When you get to this point why bother going on. If the verse below doesn't solve the issues for you then you are right to stay a long way from the Bible, any other book as well.

Ge:2:19:
And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field,
and every fowl of the air;
and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them:
and whatsoever Adam called every living creature,
that was the name thereof.

lol Yeah, and the Silver Surfer killed his god and survived. Can you use lucid English for that comment?

Barring all the evil things they were doing. My bad, 'got dumber' would be the English version in that comment.

ANY fossil evidence of the story about the ark.

Nope, what would be left of mud-brick after being submerged for 6 months and then stirred up with 6 months of swift currents.

Especially when any water that lands will head right back into the oceans. But saltwater and fresh water do not mix immediately. There must have been a massive die off after having so much freshwater introduced into the seas in such a short time (assuming the story is true).

Not when God is directing things, the words say it rained till a depth was reached and that dept stayed there for 150 days after the rain stopped.

Ah, more "perhaps this, if that" stuff. I see. So the smallest creatures like bacteria and other creatures had immensely long lifespans, too. Now that's believable alright. Since some of those creatures' lifespans are measured in minutes. And I bet things like deer were shortlived as well considering the predators had to eat something.

If you don't like speculation why not cover things the Bible does, the flood is only covered in a few pages, some prophecies take up many pages, why not study them, they should provide you with more ammo as there is more to choose from.

Sorry, but that doesn't say that this god herded anything let alone lifted the gangplank.
I read the book alright. I just don;'t believe half the bullshyte in it nor do I believe your goofy interpretations of it.

Is your memory as bad for other material you have read?

Must have been freakin cold with all that sunlight being reflected back to space.

Never been in a barn in the winter have you?

Ah, so there weren't just 2 of each on this boat. So 120 million animals and plants fit onto this boat -the sealife and birds (who apparently were flying 24/7)? roflmao This is just getting funnier and funnier.

Rescuing sea-life from a flood is like a dog swimming across a river to get a drink of water.

Yeah I can see safe places to lie down in under 7 meters of water.

Wrong time but whatever.

Obviously you don't understand the ramifications of inbreeding.

What is it in the West, 3rd cousin then you can get a baby license?

.... and it doesn't make sense. All you can do is grasp at "what ifs" and there are too many of those to make the tales anything but believable.

Once you understand then the 'if/then' don't have to be given to help you as you struggle along.

And it doesn't do any good to explain reality to you, you just reject it. Adam and Eve weren't real people, for instance, .

Prove it.

Parables about what? Basically "Obey me or else you'll be in a boatload of shyte"." There's better advice here

Exactly, if there is no clear moral to the story that covers from when daughters of Adam and Eve were taken for wives by the 'sons of God' until the rainbow appeared then it is something else, like the other things it was a story of history.

 

[L Gilbert]

Which is worse, denying anything in the Bible as being possible (no matter what) or defending stories without having to resort to 'goddidit' as being a standard reply. If the flood story was symbolic of a period of time covering 360,000 years would you find it more believable?

The latter. The stories aren't defensible except as faerie tales.

It never mentions plants

Well, you said that lions and lambs ate grass.

so is this where the trolling starts and discussion returns to 'normal'? (not that we ever strayed too far from normal for you).Ditto.

When you get to this point why bother going on. If the verse below doesn't solve the issues for you then you are right to stay a long way from the Bible,

I know.

any other book as well.

Why? Some books actually don't require me to believe in faerie tales for me to understand them and accept evidence from them.

Ge:2:19:
And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field,
and every fowl of the air;
and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them:
and whatsoever Adam called every living creature,
that was the name thereof.

It's much easier to accept evolution than Biblical nonsense.

Nope, what would be left of mud-brick after being submerged for 6 months and then stirred up with 6 months of swift currents.

Sediment with bones and other items buried in it.

Not when God is directing things, the words say it rained till a depth was reached and that dept stayed there for 150 days after the rain stopped.

Ah, the bit about defying gravity again. Irrational.

If you don't like speculation why not cover things the Bible does, the flood is only covered in a few pages, some prophecies take up many pages, why not study them, they should provide you with more ammo as there is more to choose from.

It was one example of the nonsense written in the Bible. Why should I have to justify using rational thought against the Bible and it's nonsense?

Is your memory as bad for other material you have read?

My memory is healthier than your sense of reason.

Never been in a barn in the winter have you?

Yep, but not with some 160,000 animals.

Rescuing sea-life from a flood is like a dog swimming across a river to get a drink of water.

DUH Like I said, - the sealife and birds flying 24/7. That leaves at least 2 each of some 800,000 species of land animals occupying the boat.

Wrong time but whatever.

"Whatever"? Most rational answer you've come up with yet.

What is it in the West, 3rd cousin then you can get a baby license?

Like I said, you don't seem to understand the ramifications of inbreeding.

Once you understand then the 'if/then' don't have to be given to help you as you struggle along.

Ah, so once I understand the nonsense then it becomes reasonable? lol And birds actually lay oranges, not eggs. I can imagine that and understand that it it is nonsense, too, but that hardly makes it rational or believable.

 

[Omicron]

Greetings everyone. I found this forum through a web search. I'm brand new here. I would describe myself as a "believer", but I'd be reluctant to call myself a "Christian." There are things in the Bible that I cannot help but believe. However, there are also things in the Bible that I simply cannot reconcile.

I would welcome an honest, civil discussion of the Bible in a general sense. I'm not as interested in doctrinal views as I am in general issues of faith and interpretation. If you'd be willing to engage in an open dialogue of this nature, please respond with your comments.

Thank you.

Okay... as long as you can understand why you might have told your kids about Santa Clause and the Easter Bunny.

 

[MHz]

Okay... as long as you can understand why you might have told your kids about Santa Clause and the Easter Bunny.

This isn't going to work out very well for Puff the Magic Dragon is it?

The latter. The stories aren't defensible except as faerie tales.

The various stories that allow war in Iraq were obvious lies even before the invasion, why weren't those stories held up to the same standards you use for the text of Genesis. You seem to have difficulty in that area unless you only have blindness when it comes God. All that was to be done was bring you the words about God, it doesn't say anything about you having to have to accept them in any fashion, although there is a penalty clause attached that can be avoided if you play the game properly. The goal is ti see many people fall down dead all around you while you remain alive and are one of the first to meet the guy responsible for events that are beyond mankind's ability.

Some books actually don't require me to believe in faerie tales for me to understand them and accept evidence from them.

The nightly news does and you do, one of the first lies you swallowed whole is the 'illusion' that you can spot the truth and avoid the lies.

It's much easier to accept evolution than Biblical nonsense.

Still no actual proof is there and the Bible must believe in adaptation or the few species taken on the ark could not have resulted in panthers in South America. How much does adaptation eat away your evolution theory compared to the Bible promoting 3 species of life, air, sea and land creatures.

Sediment with bones and other items buried in it.

The is a bison skeleton that was pulled out of a gravel pit fully intact, that it was 10ft down into the gravel seam would inducate it died during a time that the gravel was being mixed up unless you think somebody buried him on purpose. How much more proof do you need that there was a flood of proportions we do not see today.

Ah, the bit about defying gravity again. Irrational.

Freezing rain would solve the gravity thing, for the higher elevations, and if you can't make water defy things then you don't qualify as God. In Job it say that God causes it to rain, if we ever master cloud seeding have we elevated ourselves to God status?

It was one example of the nonsense written in the Bible. Why should I have to justify using rational thought against the Bible and it's nonsense?

Why do you have to take it to the extreme version in order to reject it, like that amount of water needed is equal to 20ft above Everest and that level across the whole planet, come and gone in one year, you not only cling to that version you demand it be the only one possible. At some point that has to stop, that is where we are now.

My memory is healthier than your sense of reason.

I doubt it but I'll take it to mean you misquoting the various stories is a troll tactic then, that seems like a reasonable conclusion to me.

Yep, but not with some 160,000 animals.

The Bible doesn't say they were under stress, why are you under it? A few animals being gathered for the feast will also be something God arranges so men aren't going to have to do it. Really would you think you get to go home if you are dragging a lion off to eat some men that are about to be killed? Rather naive if you do assume it is for others.

DUH Like I said, - the sealife and birds flying 24/7. That leaves at least 2 each of some 800,000 species of land animals occupying the boat.

Trolls survived I see.

"Whatever"? Most rational answer you've come up with yet.

Amazing considering the audience of one.

Like I said, you don't seem to understand the ramifications of inbreeding.

Not as good as the Jews but what is your point, trying to put Gentiles on the same level as inbreed dogs who are mentally unstable and their bodies also have problems that hienz-57 mutts don't have.

Ah, so once I understand the nonsense then it becomes reasonable? lol And birds actually lay oranges, not eggs. I can imagine that and understand that it it is nonsense, too, but that hardly makes it rational or believable.

And you call yourself mentally balanced, you would be the only one. If a bird pollinates some orange blossoms did it help 'grow an orange?'

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Prove it.

Nope, not my problem. Given a story that flies in the face of everything we've discovered about the origins and history of the planet and the evolution of life on it and the history of humanity, the burden of proof is yours.

 

[Cliffy]

Nope, not my problem. Given a story that flies in the face of everything we've discovered about the origins and history of the planet and the evolution of life on it and the history of humanity, the burden of proof is yours.

Not to mention that any proof would be dismissed and then we would be exposed to another one of his convoluted mental masturbation attempts at justifying his continued belief in Genesis anyway.

 

[MHz]

Not to mention that any proof would be dismissed ........

Of that I have no doubt.

 

[L Gilbert]

The various stories that allow war in Iraq were obvious lies even before the invasion, why weren't those stories held up to the same standards you use for the text of Genesis.

Who says they didn't get the same type of analysis from me?

You seem to have difficulty in that area unless you only have blindness when it comes God.

You imagine there's a difficulty there. There isn't.

All that was to be done was bring you the words about God, it doesn't say anything about you having to have to accept them in any fashion, although there is a penalty clause attached that can be avoided if you play the game properly.

More speculation.

The goal is ti see many people fall down dead all around you while you remain alive and are one of the first to meet the guy responsible for events that are beyond mankind's ability.

Silly game. I prefer some different games.

The nightly news does and you do, one of the first lies you swallowed whole is the 'illusion' that you can spot the truth and avoid the lies.

Ah, what more do I swallow? Come on, you can tell me. After all, you're the expert on me, right? Some lies get past me. Most don't. Obviously this Biblical BS doesn't. The more evidence there is, though, the more likely I am to "swallow" something. IOW, if it looks like BS, smells like BS, feels like BS, the Bible is likely BS.

Still no actual proof is there

Oh, there's shiploads of evidence for evolution. We can actually watch it in motion. Seven signs of evolution in action - Technology & science - Science - msnbc.com

and the Bible must believe in adaptation or the few species taken on the ark could not have resulted in panthers in South America. How much does adaptation eat away your evolution theory compared to the Bible promoting 3 species of life, air, sea and land creatures.

Not much.

The is a bison skeleton that was pulled out of a gravel pit fully intact, that it was 10ft down into the gravel seam would inducate it died during a time that the gravel was being mixed up unless you think somebody buried him on purpose. How much more proof do you need that there was a flood of proportions we do not see today.

Ah, it couldn't have happened that the bison was buried in a slide? An earthquake?

Freezing rain would solve the gravity thing, for the higher elevations, and if you can't make water defy things then you don't qualify as God. In Job it say that God causes it to rain, if we ever master cloud seeding have we elevated ourselves to God status?

Ah, the "God works in mysterious ways" copout again.
Nope, we wouldn't have. We'd have to still combine it with making water defy gravity.
Ice? The Bible mentions ice in Noah's story?

Why do you have to take it to the extreme version in order to reject it,[/quote]It's more fun.

like that amount of water needed is equal to 20ft above Everest and that level across the whole planet, come and gone in one year, you not only cling to that version you demand it be the only one possible. At some point that has to stop, that is where we are now.

You have a different rational explanation?

I doubt it but I'll take it to mean you misquoting the various stories is a troll tactic then, that seems like a reasonable conclusion to me.

Lots of things "seems to you"; lots of them aren't rational.

The Bible doesn't say they were under stress, why are you under it? A few animals being gathered for the feast will also be something God arranges so men aren't going to have to do it. Really would you think you get to go home if you are dragging a lion off to eat some men that are about to be killed? Rather naive if you do assume it is for others.

Who's under stress? If I were trying to stop laughing at you and your nonsense, I'd be under stress.

Trolls survived I see.

Now there's a rational and relevant reply.

Amazing considering the audience of one.

A lot of things apparently amaze you, especially if there's no evidence for them.
Audience of one? Did all the other posters in this thread desert us?

Not as good as the Jews but what is your point, trying to put Gentiles on the same level as inbreed dogs who are mentally unstable and their bodies also have problems that hienz-57 mutts don't have.

Scroll back. You didn't get the point and I'm not going to reiterate it.

And you call yourself mentally balanced, you would be the only one.

All I did was use my imagination. Following you and your god's MO, I don't have to produce evidence for it.

If a bird pollinates some orange blossoms did it help 'grow an orange?'

Possibly. Possibly the bird ate the blossom. Possibly something else ate the blossom. Possibly someone cut the tree down for lumber. Possibly .......

Not to mention that any proof would be dismissed and then we would be exposed to another one of his convoluted mental masturbation attempts at justifying his continued belief in Genesis anyway.

Of that I have no doubt.

Me either.

 

[Cliffy]

Me either.

Small minds are amusing though. I must commend you for your patience and compassion dealing with this ......

 

[MHz]

Small minds are amusing though. I must commend you for your patience and compassion dealing with this ......

You should know, too bad you can't get yours to expand in the area of 'who is God'. At least He answers my prayers, must be maddening (as in on the road to insanity) to search and search and come up completely empty-handed and empty-headed about who God is. Having a ready answer is sometimes a bit unnerving, to draw blank after blank must be, well you would brag it up but to look so long for something and end up with squat (SFA) might just be part of the way your world is. Not like you probably don't deserve to be left a bn;ank sheet by God.

 

[Cliffy]

You should know, too bad you can't get yours to expand in the area of 'who is God'. At least He answers my prayers, must be maddening (as in on the road to insanity) to search and search and come up completely empty-handed and empty-headed about who God is. Having a ready answer is sometimes a bit unnerving, to draw blank after blank must be, well you would brag it up but to look so long for something and end up with squat (SFA) might just be part of the way your world is. Not like you probably don't deserve to be left a bn;ank sheet by God.

Wrong again Sherlock. I have a very personal relationship with my creator. I don't need books to tell me who or what it is. There is no mystery to be solved. All you have to do is go to the source and ask. What I know to be true is that the Creator is not the psychopath fundies and literalists claim him to be.

 

[MHz]

Who says they didn't get the same type of analysis from me?

I have yet to see you post anything but a regurgitation of the 'official news reports'. You just did it in a post just past, anybody who 'bucks' the official story are "useful idiots or oxymorons?"

You imagine there's a difficulty there. There isn't. More speculation. Silly game. I prefer some different games.

The lack of WMD was bull**** from the start and you are still defending it, lol. Your gane is stick your head in the sand for **** 'your side' does and scream from the rooftop anytime 'the enemy' is accused of something, truth be damned in those 'reports'. Are you so niave to think that was the one and only lie to be floated around. Is you world a 1950's duster with a guy in a white hat and everybody else is a bad guy wearing black?

Ah, what more do I swallow? Come on, you can tell me. After all, you're the expert on me, right?

Probably more than you reject. No need to be a expert to spot a cumalonger.

Some lies get past me. Most don't. Obviously this Biblical BS doesn't.

Do they ever get corrected, the WMD lie still seems to still have you in their corner so a lie doesn't direct you as to who to believe so you don't have much of a future as an individual, at least that part is something you have in common with some people here and no it wasn't a complement to either.

The more evidence there is, though, the more likely I am to "swallow" something. IOW, if it looks like BS, smells like BS, feels like BS, the Bible is likely BS.

The WMD's was one presentation at the UN and a lot of 'just words' from the obliging media. Perhaps you still hgaven't come to terms with your support for a group that has to lie to get approval. You are just the sheeple they are looking for so there you go, you are useful and it even fits your desired terms.

Oh, there's shiploads of evidence for evolution. We can actually watch it in motion. Seven signs of evolution in action - Technology & science - Science - msnbc.comNot much.

There isn't one thing in there that covers a species jump, that is what evolution is, everything in the article points to a species adapting. Evolution is a finch turning into something other than another finch.

Ah, it couldn't have happened that the bison was buried in a slide? An earthquake?

No and he didn't did himself down there either. 50ft of gravel below him and 19 ft of gravel above him and 10ft of overburden above that. It was a ice dam breaking and the flood crossed a river valley at 90Deg. The water was so high and fast it moved sand-dunes from one side of the river to the other.
Now you going to say you know more about the bison that I do?

Ah, the "God works in mysterious ways" copout again.
Nope, we wouldn't have. We'd have to still combine it with making water defy gravity.
Ice? The Bible mentions ice in Noah's story?

Not one of my lines. First you complain that the stories are too hard for you to figure out and now you want so many details you don't have to even think. Good luck with that program, I can see how well it has served you in the past.

It's more fun. You have a different rational explanation?

At least that explains your whole purpose in the religious threads, maybe in all your thread replies, I'll have top watch for signs of that deception.
I already posted my version.

Lots of things "seems to you"; lots of them aren't rational.

To who, a Bible hater? I wouldn't expect anything to be acceptable to somebody like that, cliffy and Dex and now you, three monkeys who fit the do not listen, do not see, do nor repeat standard for being able to remain ignorant in the face of documents and what they claim.

Who's under stress? If I were trying to stop laughing at you and your nonsense, I'd be under stress.

How can 3 guys tackle a book and some decades later all three have nothing but blank stares when asked what they learned from any part of the book. You can spend another decade 'considering the flood' and what is written is all there will be, try biting into the passages that say 'day of the Lord' and try and say you didn't learn anything after reading 24 passages (for starters). Tackle something like that, you obviously have lots of spare time.

Now there's a rational and relevant reply.

Perhaps being a troll is a step up for you.

A lot of things apparently amaze you, especially if there's no evidence for them.
Audience of one? Did all the other posters in this thread desert us?

Amazed is different from belief, you amaze me in some of the **** you say, none of it is believed. see how that works?

Scroll back. You didn't get the point and I'm not going to reiterate it.

I don't see that happening.

All I did was use my imagination. Following you and your god's MO, I don't have to produce evidence for it. Possibly. Possibly the bird ate the blossom. Possibly something else ate the blossom. Possibly someone cut the tree down for lumber. Possibly .......

Proving God exists isn't part of my agenda, I already did that exercise for myself and I was so impressed I decided to read the book just to see who can be so convincing in just a short amount of time. I was so impressed by the book I thought it would be worth talking about, then I met you and cliffy and dex and a few others who actually hate the bible, how sad for you guys.
More like tuff-**** apparently God has no use for any of you, cry me a river. If you three want to think the abandonment is forever so be it, who cares how deluded you are. I find it almost funny looking at the pompus posts yet I know how devastated inside you must be to look for so long and come up empty-handed and empty -headed to boot.

Me either.

Whatever, lol

Wrong again Sherlock. I have a very personal relationship with my creator. I don't need books to tell me who or what it is. There is no mystery to be solved. All you have to do is go to the source and ask. What I know to be true is that the Creator is not the psychopath fundies and literalists claim him to be.

There you go, make him whatever you desire, it isn't like anything will ever come of it. At least the Bible is telling us who God is and what He can do.

BTW when your creator is made up in your imagination. you are the creator and 'your God' is the creation.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

There isn't one thing in there that covers a species jump, that is what evolution is...

No it's not, not even close, the theory of evolution neither predicts nor seeks a species jump, in fact it explicitly predicts that species jumps won't happen, that's not how it works. No wonder you think it's wrong, you have no idea what it is, you've just accepted the straw man criticisms of it from people who know no more than you do.

 

[MHz]

No it's not, not even close, the theory of evolution neither predicts nor seeks a species jump, in fact it explicitly predicts that species jumps won't happen, that's not how it works. No wonder you think it's wrong, you have no idea what it is, you've just accepted the straw man criticisms of it from people who know no more than you do.

Here is one part of the definition of 'evolution', # 4 to be exact.

a : the historical development of a biological group (as a race or species) :

phylogeny b : a theory that the various types of animals and plants have their origin in other preexisting types and that the distinguishable differences are due to modifications in successive generations; also : the process described by this theory

This is adaptation.

b : modification of an organism or its parts that makes it more fit for existence under the conditions of its environment


Darwin's Theory Of Evolution
[FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica]Darwin's Theory of Evolution - The Premise
Darwin's Theory of Evolution is the widely held notion that all life is related and has descended from a common ancestor: the birds and the bananas, the fishes and the flowers -- all related. [/FONT]

That is about as basic as it gets so I have an idea of what it is defining so yes i am making an 'educated judgment' that species jumps are impossible. That defies science and God. One species can adapt and over millions of years they could even become sterile to other 'breeds' in the same species. Horses and all other one toed beasts of the field are 'breeds' and some can produce offspring in the wild that reproduce themselves with others that have the same 'modifications'. Even that is still adaptation. A one toed species will not evolve into a two-toed beast of the field, that is a species jump.

The 'strawman version' is in the definition of the 'Theory of Evolution', not the 'Facts of Evolution'.

 

[Cliffy]

Darwin's Theory Of Evolution
Darwin's Theory of Evolution - The Premise
Darwin's Theory of Evolution is the widely held notion that all life is related and has descended from a common ancestor: the birds and the bananas, the fishes and the flowers -- all related.

The 'strawman version' is in the definition of the 'Theory of Evolution', not the 'Facts of Evolution'.

Not surprising that you chose a Christian Creationist web sight to misquote the theory of evolution. Have you no shame? But I guess that is the best we can expect from you.

 

[MHz]

You are a living example of what a blown head gasket looks like.

Theory of evolution - CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science
More formally known as the General Theory of Evolution, it was defined by the evolutionist Gerald A. Kerkut as the theory that all the living forms in the world have arisen from a single source which itself came from an inorganic form.[1]

Evolution - Conservapedia
The theory of evolution posits a process of transformation from simple life forms to more complex life forms, which has never been observed or duplicated in a laboratory.[14][15]

 

[Cliffy]

How about reading some real science:

"Evolution is both fact and theory" is a statement that appears in numerous publications on biological evolution. The statement is framed to clarify misconceptions about evolution primarily in response to creationist statements that "evolution is only a theory". In the context of the creationist claim, theory is used in its vernacular meaning as an imperfect fact or an unsubstantiated speculation. The purported intent is to discredit or reject the scientific credibility of evolution. However, this claim cannot be substantiated.[1][2]
In the statement "evolution is both fact and theory", evolution as theory refers to the scientific (as opposed to the vernacular) definition of theory. In the first scientific meaning, a theory is an overarching framework that makes sense of otherwise disconnected observations and includes, for example, the theory of gravity. Evolutionary theory unifies observations from fossils, DNA sequences, systematics, biogeography, and laboratory experiments. Theodosius Dobzhansky, a key contributor to the modern evolutionary synthesis, articulated the unifying power of evolutionary theory in a famous paper entitled: "Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution".[3]
In the second scientific meaning, a scientific theory of evolution describes the causes of evolution, as distinct from the more straightforward factual claim that evolution occurs. Natural selection and the neutral theory are examples of theories of evolution in the second scientific sense. These and many other causal evolutionary theories can be expressed in the mathematical framework of population genetics. Since Darwin, the theory of evolution by means of natural selection has not only been expressed mathematically, but has also been rigorously tested and corroborated empirically by scientific evidence from countless studies. Evolutionary theories continue to generate new testable hypotheses within paleontology, genetics, ecology, and developmental biology.
A fact is not a statement of certainty, but through repeated confirmation it is generally accepted as true according to the reliability of inference (inductive, deductive, and abductive). Facts are "events that occur" or "the state of being of things" that can be publicly verified, proven through experiment, or witnessed by direct observation.[4][5] That all forms of life on Earth are related by common descent with modification is one of the most reliable facts in the biological sciences.[2]

 

[Dexter Sinister]

The theory of evolution posits a process of transformation from simple life forms to more complex life forms, which has never been observed or duplicated in a laboratory.

Not even a straw man this time, that's just false. You originally claimed the species jump, that is, some living thing producing a different species from itself in one generation, is the defining characteristic of evolutionary theory. That's just ignorant crap, and none of your links redeem that stupid claim. I say it again, you have no idea what you're talking about. You don't even seem to remember what you claim yourself, you produce a bunch of links in support of your claim that don't support it.