• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

A Challenge To All Creationists

Animore

Active Member
I "know" God exists 100%. Can you know more than that?

Knowing God exists is like knowing that in two minutes I will spontaneously combust. No evidence. However, I could also know that my brain could explode, or that in two minutes I will literally just drop dead. So any choices for you to know, all very faulty.
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
Just to interrupt for a minute. What a lot of creationists forget or purposely ignore in their attack on evolution is that the evolution of species is demanded for after Noah docked his boat.


.
 

Animore

Active Member
Just to interrupt for a minute. What a lot of creationists forget or purposely ignore in their attack on evolution is that the evolution of species is demanded for after Noah docked his boat.


.

Good point. I wanted to address the ark somehow, but no one mentioned it.
 

omega2xx

Well-Known Member
It is nothing more than him parroting a bold empty math claim.


Your ignoring the evidence does not make it go away.

Saying it is evidence doesn't make it evidence.

At this point, all you are doing is repeating your bold empty choir sermons.
I stopped taking you seriously on the topic of evolution over 250 posts ago.

I stopped taking ou seriously after I read you first post to me.


I've seen enough of this nonsense, but I might be willing to discuss things with you if you do your homework. You pretend to know science, but you really are clueless as to how we work.
I have done my homework I learned that the TOE can't even offer one example of something it preaches that is has been proved. This has been confirmed as true from you inability to post even one example. I think this may be from the FACT that you do not understand evidence. Let me helop you out here---opinions are not evidence.
Maybe take a humble-pill and realize that there is plenty of information scientists have made available that could help you understand, but you might have to abandon at least some your fairy tales though. Tough choice, right?

If there is plenty out there, it should be easy fcor you to provide one example---You would if you could, but YOU CAN'T.

BTW, you also might seek out a denomination and church that puts a strong emphasis on honesty.

Why?

BTW you might want to find someone who can explain evidence to you. I am sure you are not able to understand my simple explanation. Even though it was so simple even a cave man could understand it.
 

omega2xx

Well-Known Member
You have already been presented with evidence.
You ignore it.
Thus the reason no one takes you seriously.

It is very telling that you can't cut and past the evidence for even one example.

I think the false doctrines of evolution have mesmerized you.

Come on Mes, be the evo hero and post the evidence for just one example.

You would if you could, but YOU CAN'T :D
 

omega2xx

Well-Known Member
Knowing God exists is like knowing that in two minutes I will spontaneously combust. No evidence. However, I could also know that my brain could explode, or that in two minutes I will literally just drop dead. So any choices for you to know, all very faulty.

There is more evidence for God than there is for a the leg of a land animal to become a fin and for it nose to become a blowhole. Even cave men don't believe that.

A perfect creation without a Creator---a doctrine of the church of foolishness, with all of its false prophets.

The heavens are telling of the glory of God.
 

omega2xx

Well-Known Member
Yak, yak, yak. The produce the evidence for just one thing the TO preaches.



What I have is better that 2 folks gabbing with no evdience.



And you're to lazy to cut and paste the evidence in the links you offer.



You don't even understand DNA. DNA does not support evolution. If anything it supports "after their kind." You also don't understand that Mendel's experiments also support "after their kind." The peas remained peas. Do you really not KNOW that evolution preaches a change of species? The changes were not the result of mutations, they were the result of dominant and recessives genes in the gene pool. You also donopt understands that natural selection has NEVER resulted in a change of species. That is just more evo unscientifcic mumbo jumbo.



Even 2 of you best fossile "experts", Gould and Mayr says this: "New species usually appear in the fossil records suddenly NOT CONNECTED with their ancestors by a series of intermediates. IOW thee ae not transitional fossils,



When those "turtle-like features keep developing what that reptile has always had, the consternation will be with those who have predicted it is the missing link. Evolution needs much more than a missing link. The who chain is misssing.



What is sad and deceitful is calling separate and distinct species, transitional.



Even without reading the article I will say with confidence they did not provided one iota of scientic evidence. Go back and cut and paste the evidence they provided and prove me wrong.



YAWN



Wonderful. Then it should be easy for you to provide one example, just one, where a mutation was the mechanism for a change of species.





Only if you include the evident for what you say. Otherwise it is just the usual evo blather.


I just love how you're doing mental gymnastics around everything. It's both sad and funny.

1. DNA STRONGLY SUPPORTS evolution, actually. Do you even understand the basic concept of genetic modification? And here you go rambling on about bull**** with peas.


A LIVING THING IS NOT THE SAME AS A NON-LIVING THING.

2. Dude, of course there are going to be fossils that don't fit within the evolutionary scale! This is not proof, this is a statement of an already-known fact that no-one debates about.

3. Ugh. No one is calling anything wrongly here. We know the damn difference.


And there you go AGAIN. You do not want to read the article because you do not want to be wrong. You waste everyone's time debating here. We've thrown at you countless types of evidence, and you're still whining about no evidence. If you're not going to read what we give you, then there is no use debating us. I' say it frankly, you're lazy. At least try to take in the information we give you.[/QUOTE]


It is very simple. Cut and paste the evidence from any link you gave. That will shut me up and make you the evo hero. You would if you could but you CAN'T. I know you can't, and now all who follow the thread know it also. Is that not embarrassing? Eviodently not.
 

Animore

Active Member
There is more evidence for God than there is for a the leg of a land animal to become a fin and for it nose to become a blowhole. Even cave men don't believe that.

A perfect creation without a Creator---a doctrine of the church of foolishness, with all of its false prophets.

The heavens are telling of the glory of God.


Yeah cavemen didn't believe that because 1. They were cavemen 2. They weren't around when it happened and 3. They had no concept of evolution.

IT DOES NOT NEED A CREATOR. What you still don't understand is it did not happen in the blink of an eye. It's a random mutation with natural selection taking care of the rest.
 

Animore

Active Member
I just love how you're doing mental gymnastics around everything. It's both sad and funny.

1. DNA STRONGLY SUPPORTS evolution, actually. Do you even understand the basic concept of genetic modification? And here you go rambling on about bull**** with peas.


A LIVING THING IS NOT THE SAME AS A NON-LIVING THING.

2. Dude, of course there are going to be fossils that don't fit within the evolutionary scale! This is not proof, this is a statement of an already-known fact that no-one debates about.

3. Ugh. No one is calling anything wrongly here. We know the damn difference.


And there you go AGAIN. You do not want to read the article because you do not want to be wrong. You waste everyone's time debating here. We've thrown at you countless types of evidence, and you're still whining about no evidence. If you're not going to read what we give you, then there is no use debating us. I' say it frankly, you're lazy. At least try to take in the information we give you.


It is very simple. Cut and paste the evidence from any link you gave. That will shut me up and make you the evo hero. You would if you could but you CAN'T. I know you can't, and now all who follow the thread know it also. Is that not embarrassing? Eviodently not.[/QUOTE]

I absolutely did!

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/lines_01

Overwhelming evidence supports this fact. Scientists continue to argue about details of evolution, but the question of whether life has a long history or not was answered in the affirmative at least two centuries ago.

The history of living things is documented through multiple lines of evidence that converge to tell the story of life through time. In this section, we will explore the lines of evidence that are used to reconstruct this story.

These lines of evidence include:

-Fossil Evidence:


dot_clear.gif
stenoshark.gif

Nicholas Steno's anatomical drawing of an extant shark (left) and a fossil shark tooth (right). Steno made the leap and declared that the fossil teeth indeed came from the mouths of once-living sharks.
The fossil record provides snapshots of the past that, when assembled, illustrate a panorama of evolutionary change over the past four billion years. The picture may be smudged in places and may have bits missing, but fossil evidence clearly shows that life is old and has changed over time.

Early fossil discoveries
In the 17th century, Nicholas Steno shook the world of science, noting the similarity between shark teeth and the rocks commonly known as "tongue stones." This was our first understanding that fossils were a record of past life.

Two centuries later, Mary Ann Mantell picked up a tooth, which her husband Gideon thought to be of a large iguana, but it turned out to be the tooth of a dinosaur, Iguanodon. This discovery sent the powerful message that many fossils represented forms of life that are no longer with us today.

Additional clues from fossils
Today we may take fossils for granted, but we continue to learn from them. Each new fossil contains additional clues that increase our understanding of life's history and help us to an

Indication of Interactions

The amonite fossil (see right) shows punctures that some scientists have interpreted as the bite mark of a mosasaur, a type of predatory marine reptile that lived at the same time as the ammonite. Damage to the ammonite has been correlated to the shapes and capabilities of mosasaur teeth and jaws. Others have argued that the holes were created by limpets that attached to the ammonite. Researchers examine ammonite fossils, as well as mosasaur fossils and the behaviors of limpets, in order to explore these hypotheses.


dot_clear.gif
thinsection.gif
Clues at the cellular level
Fossils can tell us about growth patterns in ancient animals. The picture at right is a cross-section through a sub-adult thigh bone of the duckbill dinosaur Maiasaura. The white spaces show that there were lots of blood vessels running through the bone, which indicates that it was a fast-growing bone. The black wavy horizontal line in mid-picture is a growth line, reflecting a seasonal pause in the animal's growth.
-Homologies

Evolutionary theory predicts that related organisms will share similarities that are derived from common ancestors. Similar characteristics due to relatedness are known as homologies. Homologies can be revealed by comparing the anatomies of different living things, looking at cellular similarities and differences, studying embryological development, and studying vestigial structures within individual organisms.

In the following photos of plants, the leaves are quite different from the "normal" leaves we envision.

homology.gif


Each leaf has a very different shape and function, yet all are homologous structures, derived from a common ancestral form. The pitcher plant and Venus' flytrap use leaves to trap and digest insects. The bright red leaves of the poinsettia look like flower petals. The cactus leaves are modified into small spines which reduce water loss and can protect the cactus from herbivory.
Another example of homology is the forelimb of tetrapods (vertebrates with legs).

transition_lobe.gif


Frogs, birds, rabbits and lizards all have different forelimbs, reflecting their different lifestyles. But those different forelimbs all share the same set of bones - the humerus, the radius, and the ulna. These are the same bones seen in fossils of the extinct transitional animal, Eusthenopteron, which demonstrates their common ancestry.

-Distribution in Time and Space:
Understanding the history of life on Earth requires a grasp of the depth of time and breadth of space. We must keep in mind that the time involved is vast compared to a human lifetime and the space necessary for this to occur includes all the water and land surfaces of the world. Establishing chronologies, both relative and absolute, and geographic change over time are essential for viewing the motion picture that is the history of life on Earth.

sm_strat.gif
sm_gondwana.gif



Although the history of life is always in the past, there are many ways we can look at present-day organisms, as well as recent history, to better understand what has occurred through deep time. Artificial selection in agriculture or laboratories provides a model for natural selection. Looking at interactions of organisms in ecosystems helps us to understand how populations adapt over time. Experiments demonstrate selection and adaptive advantage. And we can see nested hierarchies in taxonomies based on common descent.



by_examp2.jpg
by_examp3.jpg
by_examp4.jpg



There. Are we done here?
 

Animore

Active Member
It is very simple. Cut and paste the evidence from any link you gave. That will shut me up and make you the evo hero. You would if you could but you CAN'T. I know you can't, and now all who follow the thread know it also. Is that not embarrassing? Eviodently not.

I absolutely did!

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/lines_01

Overwhelming evidence supports this fact. Scientists continue to argue about details of evolution, but the question of whether life has a long history or not was answered in the affirmative at least two centuries ago.

The history of living things is documented through multiple lines of evidence that converge to tell the story of life through time. In this section, we will explore the lines of evidence that are used to reconstruct this story.

These lines of evidence include:

-Fossil Evidence:


dot_clear.gif
stenoshark.gif

Nicholas Steno's anatomical drawing of an extant shark (left) and a fossil shark tooth (right). Steno made the leap and declared that the fossil teeth indeed came from the mouths of once-living sharks.
The fossil record provides snapshots of the past that, when assembled, illustrate a panorama of evolutionary change over the past four billion years. The picture may be smudged in places and may have bits missing, but fossil evidence clearly shows that life is old and has changed over time.

Early fossil discoveries
In the 17th century, Nicholas Steno shook the world of science, noting the similarity between shark teeth and the rocks commonly known as "tongue stones." This was our first understanding that fossils were a record of past life.

Two centuries later, Mary Ann Mantell picked up a tooth, which her husband Gideon thought to be of a large iguana, but it turned out to be the tooth of a dinosaur, Iguanodon. This discovery sent the powerful message that many fossils represented forms of life that are no longer with us today.

Additional clues from fossils
Today we may take fossils for granted, but we continue to learn from them. Each new fossil contains additional clues that increase our understanding of life's history and help us to an

Indication of Interactions

The amonite fossil (see right) shows punctures that some scientists have interpreted as the bite mark of a mosasaur, a type of predatory marine reptile that lived at the same time as the ammonite. Damage to the ammonite has been correlated to the shapes and capabilities of mosasaur teeth and jaws. Others have argued that the holes were created by limpets that attached to the ammonite. Researchers examine ammonite fossils, as well as mosasaur fossils and the behaviors of limpets, in order to explore these hypotheses.


dot_clear.gif

thinsection.gif
Clues at the cellular level
Fossils can tell us about growth patterns in ancient animals. The picture at right is a cross-section through a sub-adult thigh bone of the duckbill dinosaur Maiasaura. The white spaces show that there were lots of blood vessels running through the bone, which indicates that it was a fast-growing bone. The black wavy horizontal line in mid-picture is a growth line, reflecting a seasonal pause in the animal's growth.
-Homologies

Evolutionary theory predicts that related organisms will share similarities that are derived from common ancestors. Similar characteristics due to relatedness are known as homologies. Homologies can be revealed by comparing the anatomies of different living things, looking at cellular similarities and differences, studying embryological development, and studying vestigial structures within individual organisms.

In the following photos of plants, the leaves are quite different from the "normal" leaves we envision.

homology.gif


Each leaf has a very different shape and function, yet all are homologous structures, derived from a common ancestral form. The pitcher plant and Venus' flytrap use leaves to trap and digest insects. The bright red leaves of the poinsettia look like flower petals. The cactus leaves are modified into small spines which reduce water loss and can protect the cactus from herbivory.
Another example of homology is the forelimb of tetrapods (vertebrates with legs).

transition_lobe.gif


Frogs, birds, rabbits and lizards all have different forelimbs, reflecting their different lifestyles. But those different forelimbs all share the same set of bones - the humerus, the radius, and the ulna. These are the same bones seen in fossils of the extinct transitional animal, Eusthenopteron, which demonstrates their common ancestry.

-Distribution in Time and Space:
Understanding the history of life on Earth requires a grasp of the depth of time and breadth of space. We must keep in mind that the time involved is vast compared to a human lifetime and the space necessary for this to occur includes all the water and land surfaces of the world. Establishing chronologies, both relative and absolute, and geographic change over time are essential for viewing the motion picture that is the history of life on Earth.

sm_strat.gif
sm_gondwana.gif



Although the history of life is always in the past, there are many ways we can look at present-day organisms, as well as recent history, to better understand what has occurred through deep time. Artificial selection in agriculture or laboratories provides a model for natural selection. Looking at interactions of organisms in ecosystems helps us to understand how populations adapt over time. Experiments demonstrate selection and adaptive advantage. And we can see nested hierarchies in taxonomies based on common descent.



by_examp2.jpg
by_examp3.jpg
by_examp4.jpg



There. Are we done here?[/QUOTE]

@omega2xx By the way,I think it's quite embarrassing that you ignore all scientific evidence give to you. Isn't that embarrassing? Evidently it isn't.
 

McBell

Admiral Obvious
It is very telling that you can't cut and past the evidence for even one example.
Yes it is.
Though I seriously doubt your ego will allow you to hear what my refusal to present more evidence for you to ignore means.

I think the false doctrines of evolution have mesmerized you.
More evidence in support of your lack of thinking skills.

Come on Mes, be the evo hero and post the evidence for just one example.
You still don't get it do you?
The only reason I feed you is out of boredom relief.
You are in a thread asking for evidence of creationism that does not rely upon telling lies about evolution.

That you can not present anything to support creation at all, and have instead trolled this thread is a sad attempt at distracting everyone from the fact that there is nothing to support creationism outside of wishful thinking is most comical.

You would if you could, but YOU CAN'T :D
There has already been plenty of evidence presented.
Enough that anyone with any sense would be to embarrassed to continue on with the bold faced lies like you do.

So once again you reveal you have no interest in honest anything.
Thus no reason to take you seriously.
Thus you are nothing but a play thing.

The problem now is that it is getting old handing you *** to you with every other post.
It is like you are not even trying any more.
Whats the matter?
You run out of bull **** to sling?
Should we give you a few days to load back up?
 

Shad

Veteran Member
None of them became a different species.

Yes they did by definition of speciation

They have some variation, but are still the same species.

No, same genus not species

It is no different than breeding a poodle and a bulldog.

Yes it is as these species do not produce viable offspring with the previous species while those two breeds of dogs can.

Teh offspring will be different, but it will still be a dog. and will still produce only dogs.

That is because dogs are still the same species.

All you have done is demonstrate you have no knowledge of taxonomy
 

omega2xx

Well-Known Member
I absolutely did!

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/lines_01

Overwhelming evidence supports this fact. Scientists continue to argue about details of evolution, but the question of whether life has a long history or not was answered in the affirmative at least two centuries ago.

The history of living things is documented through multiple lines of evidence that converge to tell the story of life through time. In this section, we will explore the lines of evidence that are used to reconstruct this story.

These lines of evidence include:

-Fossil Evidence:


dot_clear.gif
stenoshark.gif

Nicholas Steno's anatomical drawing of an extant shark (left) and a fossil shark tooth (right). Steno made the leap and declared that the fossil teeth indeed came from the mouths of once-living sharks.
The fossil record provides snapshots of the past that, when assembled, illustrate a panorama of evolutionary change over the past four billion years. The picture may be smudged in places and may have bits missing, but fossil evidence clearly shows that life is old and has changed over time.

Early fossil discoveries
In the 17th century, Nicholas Steno shook the world of science, noting the similarity between shark teeth and the rocks commonly known as "tongue stones." This was our first understanding that fossils were a record of past life.

Two centuries later, Mary Ann Mantell picked up a tooth, which her husband Gideon thought to be of a large iguana, but it turned out to be the tooth of a dinosaur, Iguanodon. This discovery sent the powerful message that many fossils represented forms of life that are no longer with us today.

Additional clues from fossils
Today we may take fossils for granted, but we continue to learn from them. Each new fossil contains additional clues that increase our understanding of life's history and help us to an

Indication of Interactions

The amonite fossil (see right) shows punctures that some scientists have interpreted as the bite mark of a mosasaur, a type of predatory marine reptile that lived at the same time as the ammonite. Damage to the ammonite has been correlated to the shapes and capabilities of mosasaur teeth and jaws. Others have argued that the holes were created by limpets that attached to the ammonite. Researchers examine ammonite fossils, as well as mosasaur fossils and the behaviors of limpets, in order to explore these hypotheses.


dot_clear.gif

thinsection.gif
Clues at the cellular level
Fossils can tell us about growth patterns in ancient animals. The picture at right is a cross-section through a sub-adult thigh bone of the duckbill dinosaur Maiasaura. The white spaces show that there were lots of blood vessels running through the bone, which indicates that it was a fast-growing bone. The black wavy horizontal line in mid-picture is a growth line, reflecting a seasonal pause in the animal's growth.
-Homologies

Evolutionary theory predicts that related organisms will share similarities that are derived from common ancestors. Similar characteristics due to relatedness are known as homologies. Homologies can be revealed by comparing the anatomies of different living things, looking at cellular similarities and differences, studying embryological development, and studying vestigial structures within individual organisms.

In the following photos of plants, the leaves are quite different from the "normal" leaves we envision.

homology.gif


Each leaf has a very different shape and function, yet all are homologous structures, derived from a common ancestral form. The pitcher plant and Venus' flytrap use leaves to trap and digest insects. The bright red leaves of the poinsettia look like flower petals. The cactus leaves are modified into small spines which reduce water loss and can protect the cactus from herbivory.
Another example of homology is the forelimb of tetrapods (vertebrates with legs).

transition_lobe.gif


Frogs, birds, rabbits and lizards all have different forelimbs, reflecting their different lifestyles. But those different forelimbs all share the same set of bones - the humerus, the radius, and the ulna. These are the same bones seen in fossils of the extinct transitional animal, Eusthenopteron, which demonstrates their common ancestry.

-Distribution in Time and Space:
Understanding the history of life on Earth requires a grasp of the depth of time and breadth of space. We must keep in mind that the time involved is vast compared to a human lifetime and the space necessary for this to occur includes all the water and land surfaces of the world. Establishing chronologies, both relative and absolute, and geographic change over time are essential for viewing the motion picture that is the history of life on Earth.

sm_strat.gif
sm_gondwana.gif



Although the history of life is always in the past, there are many ways we can look at present-day organisms, as well as recent history, to better understand what has occurred through deep time. Artificial selection in agriculture or laboratories provides a model for natural selection. Looking at interactions of organisms in ecosystems helps us to understand how populations adapt over time. Experiments demonstrate selection and adaptive advantage. And we can see nested hierarchies in taxonomies based on common descent.



by_examp2.jpg
by_examp3.jpg
by_examp4.jpg



There. Are we done here?

@omega2xx By the way,I think it's quite embarrassing that you ignore all scientific evidence give to you. Isn't that embarrassing? Evidently it isn't.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for confirming my statement that you do not have a clue as to what constitutes scientific evidence. Let me give you a clue---pictures are not evidence no matter how many you have.
 

omega2xx

Well-Known Member
Yes it is.
Though I seriously doubt your ego will allow you to hear what my refusal to present more evidence for you to ignore means.


More evidence in support of your lack of thinking skills.


You still don't get it do you?
The only reason I feed you is out of boredom relief.
You are in a thread asking for evidence of creationism that does not rely upon telling lies about evolution.

That you can not present anything to support creation at all, and have instead trolled this thread is a sad attempt at distracting everyone from the fact that there is nothing to support creationism outside of wishful thinking is most comical.


There has already been plenty of evidence presented.
Enough that anyone with any sense would be to embarrassed to continue on with the bold faced lies like you do.

So once again you reveal you have no interest in honest anything.
Thus no reason to take you seriously.
Thus you are nothing but a play thing.

The problem now is that it is getting old handing you *** to you with every other post.
It is like you are not even trying any more.
Whats the matter?
You run out of bull **** to sling?
Should we give you a few days to load back up?


upload_2016-12-4_6-44-8.jpeg
 

Animore

Active Member
@omega2xx By the way,I think it's quite embarrassing that you ignore all scientific evidence give to you. Isn't that embarrassing? Evidently it isn't.

Thanks for confirming my statement that you do not have a clue as to what constitutes scientific evidence. Let me give you a clue---pictures are not evidence no matter how many you have.[/QUOTE]

I did not post pictures. I have just posted paragraphs of info along with pictures. Big difference.
 

McBell

Admiral Obvious
Thanks for confirming my statement that you do not have a clue as to what constitutes scientific evidence. Let me give you a clue---pictures are not evidence no matter how many you have.

I did not post pictures. I have just posted paragraphs of info along with pictures. Big difference.[/QUOTE]
um...
maybe if you put the paragraphs in pictures he will look at them?
 
Top