The sky is full of self-generating water balloons which periodically break and cause rain to fall to earth, which then re-inflate and the cycle begins again.
Therefore evolution is stupid and ugly and smells bad too.
-
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!
Evolutionism CRUSHED by Creationism
- Thread starter JosephThomas
- Start date
Therefore evolution is stupid and ugly and smells bad too.
FunctionalAtheist
Hammer of Reason
I can't argue with idiocy!
You're just not going about it right.
FunctionalAtheist
Hammer of Reason
LOL, so true. However I can never WIN!!You're just not going about it right.
Ouroboros
Coincidentia oppositorum
Evolution takes after the apes.
What about static electricity? What about piezoelectric effect? What about dark matter? What about the insulating properties of matter? What about the repulsive force between electrons or between protons? What about the strong nuclear force? What about chocolate milk? What about the relations between space-time and gravity? What about matter antimatter annihilation?
Ouroboros
Coincidentia oppositorum
If God had a reason for creating the world, chocolate milk must have been the reason. Just taste it. You can run that experiment an infinite number of times and will always get the same result.What about that I have not clue what you're getting at?
"Get you're stinking paws off me, you damn dirty ape!" See, proof that evolution stinks. Moses himself said this in that movie.Evolution takes after the apes.
Ouroboros
Coincidentia oppositorum
Hmm... it sounds too logical to be true. I'm sure there's some kind of fallacy involved there. It can't be red herring since chocolate milk doesn't taste anything similar to red herrings. Oh, I know which one it is! You're committing a straw fallacy. Not a straw man, but just simply a straw argument. It's plastic and bendable. So no. Therefore Evolution is false and Dawkins is a jerk (it's "rant about Dawkins Tuesday" today too.)
Ouroboros
Coincidentia oppositorum
And the slinging. The monkey poo slinging is something Darwin can't explain! How the heck did monkeys evolve to sling poo???!? Huh!??!?
But we at least know why politicians do now. It's because of the apes. Oh wait, this proves evolution, but we all know it's a lie of the devil. So maybe politicians are simply imitating what they saw at the zoo when they were young because they're fascinated by poop.
Ouroboros
Coincidentia oppositorum
No. The fact that monkeys are more skilled and can sling that poo with efficiency and elegance, while the politicians are just doing it dirty style, it shows that we have devolved. So there! Take that evolutionists!
FearGod
Freedom Of Mind
shawn001
Well-Known Member
Interesting.
Rare fossilized embryos more than 500 million years old found
The Archaeology News Network: Rare fossilized embryos more than 500 million years old found
Rare fossilized embryos more than 500 million years old found
The Archaeology News Network: Rare fossilized embryos more than 500 million years old found
crhodes9898
Member
Let me try and re-phrase this argument.
The bible says, In the beginning, which is a reference to (time). Which has three dimensions; past, present, and future. God created the heaven as (space), which can't escape time. It also has three dimensions; length, width, and height. Where can you be where you're not in space or in time? You can't be, it permeates everything. Then God created the (earth: i.e matter). It comes in three dimensions as well; solid, liquid, and gas. All three of these have to come into existence at the same instance. If you had matter, but no space where would you put it? If you had matter, but no time, when would you put it? You have to have all three simultaneously. So when text books state that nothing came from nothing that is not common sense; time, space, and matter cannot create themselves. They need to have an outside force, such as an all powerful, almighty, and infinite God to create those things.
You may argue all you want about the idea of creation but you will never have the full understanding of where we came from, or better yet where the universe came from.
All you evolutionists can do is claim that the universe came from "nothing".
Not from nothing but more than the fact that the bible and science agrees that the universe began at a finite point in time and with that the material came from the immaterial. What else could be immaterial that would produce such a result? Only two things are immaterial, abstract concepts and minds. Abstract concepts are nothing without a mind to manipulate and interpret them. Therefore God, the conscious being behind the creation, spoke into existence the universe.
The bible says, In the beginning, which is a reference to (time). Which has three dimensions; past, present, and future. God created the heaven as (space), which can't escape time. It also has three dimensions; length, width, and height. Where can you be where you're not in space or in time? You can't be, it permeates everything. Then God created the (earth: i.e matter). It comes in three dimensions as well; solid, liquid, and gas. All three of these have to come into existence at the same instance. If you had matter, but no space where would you put it? If you had matter, but no time, when would you put it? You have to have all three simultaneously. So when text books state that nothing came from nothing that is not common sense; time, space, and matter cannot create themselves. They need to have an outside force, such as an all powerful, almighty, and infinite God to create those things.
You may argue all you want about the idea of creation but you will never have the full understanding of where we came from, or better yet where the universe came from.
All you evolutionists can do is claim that the universe came from "nothing".
Not from nothing but more than the fact that the bible and science agrees that the universe began at a finite point in time and with that the material came from the immaterial. What else could be immaterial that would produce such a result? Only two things are immaterial, abstract concepts and minds. Abstract concepts are nothing without a mind to manipulate and interpret them. Therefore God, the conscious being behind the creation, spoke into existence the universe.
This has nothing at all to do with the theory of evolution. It makes me think that you have no understanding at all of what evolution is.
Evolution is a biological theory that explains the diversity of live. It has absolutely nothing to do with cosmology or where the universe came from.
dust1n
Zindīq
I don't think anyone claims to have the full understanding of where we came from, or where the universe came from. That's what is great about it, is we don't have to fill it in with unprovable, faith-based conjectures on metaphysics. Then we would start making incredibly weird metaphysical claims about God and existence, and we cease to say anything meaningful in the framework of modern science. Which makes most of what you are saying irrelevant to evolution.
crhodes9898
Member
I agree Creationism is faith based, and requires some faith to work, however Evolution (having to do with the Big Bang, and the idea that humans evolved from a common ancestor) is just as religious as Creation, except creation makes more logical sense that Evolution.
You see, there are 6 definitions of Evolution...
First Cosmic Evolution; the origin of time, space, and matter, (i.e Big Bang). Secondly, Chemical Evolution; the origin of higher elements from hydrogen. Thirdly, Stellar and Planetary evolution; origin of stars and planets. Fourthly, Organic Evolution; origin of life. Fifthly Macro-Evolution; Changing from one kind of animal to another. And lastly Micro-Evolution; Variations within kinds. These first five, are purely religious and have never been observed.
The last one, Micro-Evolution, is the only correct one and has been observed.
So when people state that I do not understand evolution or I am completely off topic, well then I think that they need to go ahead and actually look at what i am saying; and not use that excuse of me not "understanding" evolution.
You see, there are 6 definitions of Evolution...
First Cosmic Evolution; the origin of time, space, and matter, (i.e Big Bang). Secondly, Chemical Evolution; the origin of higher elements from hydrogen. Thirdly, Stellar and Planetary evolution; origin of stars and planets. Fourthly, Organic Evolution; origin of life. Fifthly Macro-Evolution; Changing from one kind of animal to another. And lastly Micro-Evolution; Variations within kinds. These first five, are purely religious and have never been observed.
The last one, Micro-Evolution, is the only correct one and has been observed.
So when people state that I do not understand evolution or I am completely off topic, well then I think that they need to go ahead and actually look at what i am saying; and not use that excuse of me not "understanding" evolution.
Bunyip
pro scapegoat
No, evolution is just a word we invented to describe an observed natural process. No faith needed whatsover.
No that is cosmology, not evolution.
That has been demonstrated. Scientists have been experimenting with nuclear fusion for years mate. It is nuclear physics, not evolution.
Erm... that is cosmology.
Which is of course demonstrable and observable. Organisms change over time - we call the fact that organisms change over time 'evolution'.
Macro-evolution is speciation, something that was first observed more than a century ago.
Well only two of those relate to evolution, and both have been demonstrated.
You need to excuse people for pointing out that you do not understand evolution, you have just written a post that confuses cosmology for evolution, nuclear physics for evolution and seems to be unaware of the fact that macro-evolution has also been observed.
Let me help - 'Evolution' is defined as changes in allele frequency over time, which can be and has been proven to occur by direct observation.