What I actually said was: there is no evidence for the existence of a God (whatever that is supposed to be), nor is such a thing necessary to explain evolution or how it works.
No, that's wrong. What you "actually said" went quite a bit further than that, here it is verbatim:
Originally Posted by DBT
Life evolves for reasons that have nothing to do with a God.
What you "actually said" was a definitive statement with no qualifiers. That's why I'm asking you for the evidence you're using to support your contention that God is not involved with evolution. Are you backing off that now? If so, go ahead and admit that what you actually said was wrong, don't just deny you said it. That would be "cowardly" as you put it.
You've said repeatedly that there is no evidence that God is involved with evolution and I've never challenged that. Because in your context of scientific evidence, I don't believe there is, and I don't believe it can be "proven" scientifically one way or the other. Because I'm not one who believes that we currently understand everything there is to know about the universe and how it works. Are you?
Earlier, you laid out your concept of God as being "all-powerful" and "all-knowing." Either that was a strawman you created to argue that such a being "should have no problem proving His existence" or you actually believe it. If you actually believe that there could be a Creator that is all-powerful and all-knowing, why on earth would you presume that you or anyone else is capable of understanding how He operates?
