Why do you call this belief superstition, and christianity divinely inspired truth?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Din%C3%A9_Bahane%CA%BC

danny, I might use the word miracle.
I respect your use of the term "evidence" from finite minds on a finite number of subjects. I have a graduate level degree in Biology, hard earned back in the 70's and 80's from universities... 100 years after Charles Darwin, changed the theological landscape for our country, and I remember then asking my professors about how to explain the fact that during our invertebrate research thesis projects we couldn't make the connection of trans-species mutability. Fancy words for; one species changes into another. Darwin never explained that in his theory and it's incomplete without it. You can't have a homo- anything turn into a homo-sapien unless you have one species change into another for reproductive mutability (you can mate and it works out). Same reason a zebra doesn't mate with a frog and make a zerog. My profs just told me to make it work in my project, literally by making up my own theory. Ahhhhh. I hold truth! Sweet! Got a passing grade and a Masters degree outta the deal, so they were right. Make it up and make it work. Got it.

Now, that kind of junk is evidence. Same dudes, just 40 years later. Same thinking. But when I can't prove at a research level, with brilliant minds around the world seeking to find the same answers, using the finest gear tuition funds can purchase, the answer to why one invertebrate is so much more diverse in a span of three generations? That flies in the face of Dr. Darwin and his hocus pocus (that's what we called it) who professed evolution of the strongest and fittest, and our microscopes were discovering things that looked like a creator was at work. Well, it was fun. And I didn't believe in God at the time. That didn't come until much later. I just saw how "evidence" in research was done. Pretty shady and money drives too much to too many conclusions. Now the new game is climate change. Same crowd. Different tactics.

And do not tell some that climate change is not real and that we're all headed for doom cause danny sir, they will tell you that you are believing in magic and they hold the new truth. Yours is outdated.

There is a game changer and it's not actually in any of this discussion.
It's the God-man who waited until all knew he was dead-dead-dead.
And then He rose again.
That's evidence enough for some. Not for all.

And sorry DonnerS,
There has never been a trans-mutable discovery between two distinct species. Close cousins becoming one, yes. Two distinct. Never.

Danny Catholics burned Christians for sharing the Bible. Scientists weren't the only ones burned.
Do you think the science of climate change is not being used to control people. As well as evolution, big bang, etc. Believe in science, not in God.
Donnersurvivor I guess witnesses seeing the resurrected Jesus ain't good enough for you. I know scientists are as pure as the fresh driven snow. There is no possible way that data would/could be manipulated to prove a point a person wants to make, or to receive funding for a particular project, etc. We all know scientists walk on water.

i never saw anyone walk on water. Never saw starving people get manna from heaven. Never heard any fell for starving jews during the holocaust.

Catholics were burning protestants because they were losing some of their control and a lot of their money. It was more about showing relics capable of miracles as being hoax's rather than bible interpretation. The whole statue crying blood and skulls with eyes that moved etc was a BIG money maker. When the pope said no more church owned brothels they needed new sources of revenue. the protestants were costing them a fortune in lost revenue.

I am starting to feel like I am being interrogated lol.

Some individual scientist have undoubtedly fudged some things throughout history or even went so far as to fake data. Scientist are human and prone to mistakes, that is one reason it is good that multiple people in the same field replicate and review findings and that nobody is above reproach in science.

I dont believe the witnesses that say they have seen Sasquatch, I dont believe the witnesses that say they have seen the lochness monster, I dont believe witnesses who said they have seen angels or demons and I dont believe the witnesses who seen a dead guy rise out of a grave move a giant stone and then went to visit his friends.

One time I seen a fox, I barely caught a glimpse of him cresting a hill, I ran up to get a better look and that fox had turned into a squirrel and had left squirrel tracks right were I had seen the fox, but I was 100% sure I seen a fox...

Look at an eye. Absolutely no way an eye arises through random selection. EVERY intermediate step is COMPLETELY USELESS. Yet we are supposed to believe that millions of organisms perpetuated thousands of *useless* intermediate, *nonfunctional* organs over millions of years until voila! a fully functioning eye pops up, and then... eyes get instantly spread across hundreds of species. Yeah right!!

The only evolution is devolution - narrowing, aka lessening, of genetic information. The evidence has clearly shown that genetic information is *never* expanding, only contracting. Like all Lefties, Darwin got it backwards.

Have you seen evolution, a big bang, etc.? You seem to have no problem believing those things that are unseen.

Look at an eye. Absolutely no way an eye arises through random selection. EVERY intermediate step is COMPLETELY USELESS. Yet we are supposed to believe that millions of organisms perpetuated thousands of *useless* intermediate, *nonfunctional* organs over millions of years until voila! a fully functioning eye pops up, and then... eyes get instantly spread across hundreds of species. Yeah right!!

The only evolution is devolution - narrowing, aka lessening, of genetic information. The evidence has clearly shown that genetic information is *never* expanding, only contracting. Like all Lefties, Darwin got it backwards.