Evolutionism CRUSHED by Creationism

[kashmir]

You literally mentioned absolutely nothing about evolution in this train wreck of a post. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

I see what you did there

This thread is a fine example of some thinking that evolution can explain how life jump started, two totally different areas of science.
Even if they find every single missing link and have 2947465 trillion diff transitional stages, it cant help tell what happened to start the first step, doubt anything can ever tell that other then going back in time.

I don't feel it is even important, even if science can someday turn non life into life, doesn't mean that is how it did it.
But it does help us learn better heath related issues that will help us now, which is a good thing.

 

[Awkward Fingers]

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.

Well, I'm off to go buy some stock in straw, before it's gone...
P.s. You really, really don't understand evolution. You've shown that more than clearly here.

 

[crhodes9898]

Cosmology has to do with evolution. Cosmology deals with the origin and general structure of the universe, so to say that this is all cosmology and not evolution is kind of an illogical statement.

These are definitions of evolution meaning, in lack of better term, they are the topics that evolution deals with.

First let me address that there is no possible observation of the creation of elements. How do you get Uranium from Hydrogen? Scientists claim it to be a fusion within the stars, however you can't fuse past iron. And the rest are supposedly created only when stars explode. However how could the elements possibly get to earth after a star explosion. The elements would completely incinerate or burn from the stars energy and if they were to fall into the earth's atmosphere it it would completely burn up. So i do not see a possible way to observe elements being created from hydrogen.

Sure origin of stars and planets has to do with cosmology but is also dealt with evolution. I can get into this but i don't want to make this an extremely long reply. Maybe i'll address it in another reply if asked for.

Sure i will agree that organisms change over time but not into a new species such as macro-evolution.

Who has ever seen a dog produce a non-dog?
People claim that horses had a common ancestor; yeah it looked like a horse.
“Many examples commonly cited, such as the evolution of the horse family or of sabertooth 'tigers' can be readily shown to have been unintentionally falsified and not to be really orthogenetic.” There are problems with horse evolution. One, made up by Othniel C. Marsh in 1874 from fossils scattered across the world, not from the same location. Modern horses are found in layers with and lower than “ancient horses”. The “ancient horse” hyracotherium, is not a horse but is just like the hyrax and is still alive in Turkey and East Africa.

Sure i also would agree with some allele changes and mutations but not so dramatically to the point of a new species, there has been no observation of an animal changing from one species to another. Please show me one observation of this.

 

[crhodes9898]

Well, I'm off to go buy some stock in straw, before it's gone...
P.s. You really, really don't understand evolution. You've shown that more than clearly here.

Ok please explain evolution in full, since "i clearly don't understand it".

 

[Triumphant_Loser]

the first day states.

Light, which is electricity, is the beginning of time.
The movement of matter, electricity , IS in fact time. CHECK

The second day states. The sky is water.
it is H2O. aka. CHECK.
these are modern scientific facts.

The third day of creation states, the planet expanded from within itself.
When you add electricity to a mass that had none before hand it expands. CHECK!

hence. when it happened, you can review the geology of the planeta dn prove it. CHECK!

the planet has 100% electricity, the water has 100% electricity? where does the electricity go? SEEDS! on the surface.. logical? CHECK!


the world has +100% electricity. where does it go?
Space. what does it do? cling to itself. The sun, the moon, the stars.
logical? Yes.

Evolutionism suck my book.

 

[kashmir]

I don't get it
I think I am stuck on the athe"tits" and trying to link that to the dog somehow.

 

[Bunyip]

Cosmology has to do with evolution. Cosmology deals with the origin and general structure of the universe, so to say that this is all cosmology and not evolution is kind of an illogical statement.

No, that is false. Evolution is biology, not cosmology.

These are definitions of evolution meaning, in lack of better term, they are the topics that evolution deals with.

No, evolution deals with changes in species over time.

First let me address that there is no possible observation of the creation of elements. How do you get Uranium from Hydrogen? Scientists claim it to be a fusion within the stars, however you can't fuse past iron. And the rest are supposedly created only when stars explode. However how could the elements possibly get to earth after a star explosion. The elements would completely incinerate or burn from the stars energy and if they were to fall into the earth's atmosphere it it would completely burn up. So i do not see a possible way to observe elements being created from hydrogen.

Nuclear fusion was first acheived in the lab many years ago. You ask how the elements created in a stellar explosion got to the earth? Well the earth formed out of those elements.

Sure origin of stars and planets has to do with cosmology but is also dealt with evolution. I can get into this but i don't want to make this an extremely long reply. Maybe i'll address it in another reply if asked for.

No, evolution is about how species change over time.

Sure i will agree that organisms change over time but not into a new species such as macro-evolution.

Who has ever seen a dog produce a non-dog?

A dog producing a non-dog would DISprove evolution and be evidence of magic. If somebody had observed a dog giving birth to a non-dog the theory of evolution would be destroyed, not proven.

People claim that horses had a common ancestor; yeah it looked like a horse.

No, it looked like a cat sized deer.

“Many examples commonly cited, such as the evolution of the horse family or of sabertooth 'tigers' can be readily shown to have been unintentionally falsified and not to be really orthogenetic.” There are problems with horse evolution. One, made up by Othniel C. Marsh in 1874 from fossils scattered across the world, not from the same location. Modern horses are found in layers with and lower than “ancient horses”. The “ancient horse” hyracotherium, is not a horse but is just like the hyrax and is still alive in Turkey and East Africa.

Sure i also would agree with some allele changes and mutations but not so dramatically to the point of a new species, there has been no observation of an animal changing from one species to another. Please show me one observation of this.

There are many examples, millions in fact.

You used the example of a dog - well dogs are canines, there are four species of canines. That is four examples of speciation.

There are about 42 species of felines, that is 42 examples of speciation.

There are some 30,000 species of fruit fly - that is 30,000 examples of speciation. In fact fruit fly speciation has been directly observed under scientific conditions (as have mamy other instances of speciation).

Science observed speciation for the first time more than a century ago.

 

[Triumphant_Loser]

I don't get it
I think I am stuck on the athe"tits" and trying to link that to the dog somehow.

Intentional misspelling of "atheists" mocking religious fundamentalists. Don't look for logic in the picture... that's the point...there is none. Much like this thread as a whole.

 

[Awkward Fingers]

Ok please explain evolution in full, since "i clearly don't understand it".

Evolution is the change in allele frequency over time.

Please explain how that covers planets, universe formation, chemistry and the like that you claimed in your previous post.

Where is the allele frequency change in the formation of the planets.

 

[kashmir]

Intentional misspelling of "atheists" mocking religious fundamentalists. Don't look for logic in the picture... that's the point...there is none. Much like this thread as a whole.

Ohhhh, so we don't need a point to make a point and that is the point of the pic which shows that we DO actually need a point to make a point to begin with
That sort of mockery is too deep even for me. :thud:

 

[crhodes9898]

You used the example of a dog - well dogs are canines, there are four species of canines. That is four examples of speciation.

There are about 42 species of felines, that is 42 examples of speciation.

There are some 30,000 species of fruit fly - that is 30,000 examples of speciation. In fact fruit fly speciation has been directly observed under scientific conditions (as have mamy other instances of speciation).

Science observed speciation for the first time more than a century ago.

These are not new species, these are variations of kinds within species.
You can have a different type of fruit fly, but yet it is still a fruit fly.
You can have a different type of dog, but yet it is still a dog.

I think you are getting that argument confused. I am arguing against the evolutionist idea of how humans or other animals, changed from one species complete species, to another. Not to a different type within that species. I am saying a completely new species.

How could you possibly observe what a cat used to look like, no one was there to see such a creature.

 

[crhodes9898]

Evolution is the change in allele frequency over time.

Please explain how that covers planets, universe formation, chemistry and the like that you claimed in your previous post.

Where is the allele frequency change in the formation of the planets.

I never stated allele frequency changing in the formation of the planets. Alleles have nothing to do with planets.

 

[Bunyip]

These are not new species, these are variations of kinds within species.

No, they are four distinct species of canines. Not variations, four distinct species.

You can have a different type of fruit fly, but yet it is still a fruit fly.

There are over 30000 different SPECIES of fruit fly. Not 'types', SPECIES.

You can have a different type of dog, but yet it is still a dog.

There are four species of canines, and TWO SPECIES OF DOGS. The domestic dog, Canis Familiaris is a different species to the African Hunting dog, Lycaon pictus. Not variations of the same species, they are two distinct species and can not interbreed.

I think you are getting that argument confused. I am arguing against the evolutionist idea of how humans or other animals, changed from one species complete species, to another. Not to a different type within that species. I am saying a completely new species.

That process, where one species diverges into two has been observed - many times.

 

[Awkward Fingers]

I never stated allele frequency changing in the formation of the planets. Alleles have nothing to do with planets.

Congratulations.

You just learned why cosmology has nothing to do with evolution.

Although, I have to admit, with all the really bad science, followed by your constant facepalming, I'm ready to call poe

 

[Triumphant_Loser]

Ohhhh, so we don't need a point to make a point and that is the point of the pic which shows that we DO actually need a point to make a point to begin with
That sort of mockery is too deep even for me. :thud:

Exactly! It makes sense if you don't think about it.

 

[crhodes9898]

Congratulations.

You just learned why cosmology has nothing to do with evolution.

Although, I have to admit, with all the really bad science, followed by your constant facepalming, I'm ready to call poe

All you have done so far is act like you know what you are talking about, have not put any input into this conversation.

 

[kashmir]

Exactly! It makes sense if you don't think about it.

not exactly, I missed the point of the picture, because I did think about it.
Wait, ohhh, so here we have a brand new point, bet you don't know what that is?
pm me if you wanna know, its out of my league to post publicly
the poo is getting deep now :run:

 

[crhodes9898]

That process, where one species diverges into two has been observed - many times.

Could you please show me the reports of these observations.

 

[Ouroboros]

All you evolutionists can do is claim that the universe came from "nothing".

Evolution does NOT claim that the universe came from nothing.

I'm an evolutionist, and I don't think the universe came from nothing.

Evolution is about how life forms from existing life forms, nothing else.

If you don't understand evolution or what it's saying, then don't argue that it's wrong.

 

[Ouroboros]

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 term "Evolution" usually refers to what is called Biological Evolution, not Cosmic Evolution or Chemical evolution and such. It's a fallacy of equivocation.

Macro-evolution usually refers to the changes of species and genera, not "kind" to another "kind". There is nothing that is called "kind" in biology or evolution.