• 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!

Just Accidental?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Sapiens

Polymathematician
LOL.....what incredible "evidence" are you talking about?
There is verifiable evidence for adaptation, but there's is not one single shred of verifiable evidence for macroevolution. It's all smoke and mirrors.
Keep saying that, over and over, now close your eyes and click your heels three times ... oh my! still not true.
You have been led to believe that one automatically proves the other.....that I say pure fiction.

You have as much "real" evidence as we do.
Keep saying that, over and over, now close your eyes and click your heels three times ... oh my!

Still not on an even plain with as much evidence as the scientists have?

Lies, traducement and bluff ... oh my! Here's why: Index to Creationist Claims
 

Monk Of Reason

༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
LOL.....what incredible "evidence" are you talking about?
There is verifiable evidence for adaptation, but there's is not one single shred of verifiable evidence for macroevolution. It's all smoke and mirrors.

You have been led to believe that one automatically proves the other.....that I say pure fiction.

You have as much "real" evidence as we do.
The very fact that vaccines work proves you're full of it. But sure. LIve in your echo chamber.
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
Keep saying that, over and over, now close your eyes and click your heels three times ... oh my! still not true.Keep saying that, over and over, now close your eyes and click your heels three times ... oh my!

Still not on an even plain with as much evidence as the scientists have?

Lies, traducement and bluff ... oh my! Here's why: Index to Creationist Claims

And you can't see that you describe those who rely on 'presupposition' to transform microbes into dinosaurs in exactly the same way. Science fiction can make dinosaurs out of microbes, but verifiable science cannot.
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
The very fact that vaccines work proves you're full of it. But sure. LIve in your echo chamber.

I can suggest that you live in your own echo chamber.
LOL......vaccines do what ? They aid the human immune system by introducing a milder form of a disease which helps the body to produce antibodies, making it less likely to contract that disease in the future. The human immune system is beautifully designed.

What are you trying to prove?
 
Last edited:

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
We can measure God's existence by the evidence that is all around us....the stuff you assume is accidental.
We measure God by what we observe in creation...by the tenacity of life itself. A weed growing in the cracks of the pavement is testimony to how tenacious life really is....designed to take all opportunities to self replicate even against the odds, to perpetuate their species.
What's taking so long for creationists to do this then?

A weed growing in a crack in a sidewalk is not evidence for any kind of god. It's evidence of a weed growing in a crack in a sidewalk. The scientific method is much more rigorous than your "method" so I'm going to go with science. Your "method" doesn't provide any explanation whatsoever about how, why, what, where and when plants grow. Your "method" never gets us beyond "god did it," as far as I can see. Your "method" provides no explanatory power for anything.


Oh, but God's existence IS in the realm of human experience. We have written testimony by eye witnesses who saw the operation of God's spirit in miraculous ways, in many different times and in many different encounters. How is their testimony any less valid than a bunch of bones in a rock? Each one needs an interpreter. Each ones interpreter exhibits bias in the translation of that evidence. Science has no advantage over ID.....they are simply better at marketing it.
Well for starters, because it's anecdotal. Because we don't actually have these thousands of eyewitness accounts. Because we have no way of testing accounts of specific "miraculous" events that supposedly happened thousands of years ago. Because people can be (and often are) mistaken about things. Because random stories are no where near as verifiable or testable as the systematic collection and analysis of evidence by multiple groups of people all across the globe, using multiple different tools of investigation, across multiple fields of science. Because empirical evidence is measurable, testable, repeatable and verifiable in ways that the stories of ancient sheepherders are not.

Science has every advantage over anecdotal stories orally passed down thousands of years ago, then recorded (sometimes in dead languages) which have since been translated, re-translated, interpreted and re-interpreted many times over. And even today there are thousands of different Christian denominations that still can't agree on what all these stories mean. Not to mention all the other thousands of religious beliefs that have existed in the past and currently exist in the world, each with their very own set of religious texts containing their own miracles and anecdotal stories about the past. If you have some method to sort this all out, I'm all ears.

On there other hand, science is universal. It spans across time, different cultures and different languages. The scientific method has a built-in self-correcting mechanism, it adheres to a rigorous standard of rules that must be met so that anyone can pick up the same tools, recreate the same conditions and produce the same results. In other words, science provides consistency. Science provides detailed explanations. Science is the reason we know what we know about the world we live in. Unless you have something to offer that is better than that, I'm sticking with science.
 
Last edited:

Sapiens

Polymathematician
And you can't see that you describe those who rely on 'presupposition' to transform microbes into dinosaurs in exactly the same way. Science fiction can make dinosaurs out of microbes, but verifiable science cannot.
Again with the lie, you think that if you say if often enough it will become true. I am amazed at the egotism you display going up against the best minds in the world, who say, to a virtual certainty and a virtual consensus that you're full of beans and have naught to offer but arguments from ignorance.
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
I do not see that science is on the same level as religion, even though I do see equivalent religious fervor displayed by many of its devotees.

You treat science like I treat God.....did you not notice this?
worship.gif




Ever heard of adoption? The poor orphaned child was so alone that all the sciences decided to become its surrogate daddy. Tell me what branch of science rejects evolution.....?



In whose opinion?



If you had kept up with the theme of this thread, you would understand that I have equated these two belief systems all along.
You have no more proof for organic evolution than I do for an Intelligent Designer. Your position is not superior to mine just because science markets its beliefs better than ID proponents do.....then we have to consider the nonsense that creationist rattle on with, so no wonder we are behind the eight ball......yet this is exactly the position that the Bible says we would be in at this time in history....go figure.
looksmiley.gif




The same psychology works for the power of suggestion, no matter what the subject is. Advertisers know full well that the way to get your product out there is to shoot down the other fellow's product and tell them how much better off they are with yours. Truth is lost in the marketing. Have you never heard of perception management?......look it up.
Where does the Bible say, "In 2016 ... this and this will happen " ... ? Oh, it doesn't. It's just vague suggestions and ambiguous statements. hmmmmm
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
I have spent many years investigating evolution. I only have to read their articles or listen to their videos to see and hear the vague language that evolutionist use, but their devotees never seem to notice. It doesn't take long to discover that evolution is a massive fraud, masquerading as scientific fact. Evolution is sold to the masses by deception....everything is based on assumption....but assumptions are not facts.
You cannot take adaptation, which involves minor changes within a species, and turn it into "a microbe became a dinosaur".
Throwing millions of years at this scenario will never make it true. There is simply no way to prove that it ever happened.

Now, don't tell me...let me guess...have you sold out to theistic evolution......?
sigh.gif
That appears to be the place where Christians or those who want to believe in a Creator, yet are led to also believe in evolution, compromise God's word and creative genius to sell out to the opposition. I won't do that.
no.gif
There is no need.
Still waiting for you to provide evidence of some kind of mechanism that acts as a barrier for small changes adding up to larger ones over long periods of time. Remember, you'd be the first to find it.

And waiting and waiting ......
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
Sorry, I don't intentionally set out to be snarky, but sometimes it just sneaks out when I'm not looking.....
4fvgdaq_th.gif




You know that the Bible tells us about just such a conspiracy.....
There is a powerful entity whose influence is felt in this world without most people even being aware of it.
The world as it is today, with all of our technology and advancements, is degenerating into a cess pit of unrelenting violence, unimaginable cruelty and disgusting immorality, in an age where we should expect to see advancements in knowledge, intellectual appreciation and greater understanding of human behavior. Even my own unbelieving mother says 'its like some evil force is controlling the world'.
More and more people are feeling this way.....we know that because we talk to them every day in our evangelizing work.

The apostle John describes this "evil force" ....."We know that we originate with God, but the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one." (1 John 5:19) This entity has the power to "blind minds" (2 Corinthians 4:3-4)....which means that the center that processes all information gathered by the senses is essentially disabled, no matter how intelligent a person purports to be. That explains why there is such a general acceptance of something so 'godless' when there is no real solid, verifiable evidence to support it.
It is sold to those who have sold out to 'the world'....the one Jesus told us to be "no part" of. (John 15:19)



And that is what I have said all along Metis.....science has no more scientifically verifiable "evidence" than we do.
If you tell the real truth, there is "None. Nada. Nyet" in anything science presents to suggest a continuous chain of descent in all the creatures who have ever lived on this earth. All they have is supposition linking species to one another over millions of years. Is this "objective"? Or is evidence interpreted to agree with a pre-conceived idea? They can suggest that 'microbes evolved into dinosaurs' over millions of years, but how can anyone say that that is more believable than an Intelligent Creator? Science has no more "proof" of that being the case, than we can prove the existence of an all powerful Creator.



Its all around you....open your eyes. Use your senses to see what God has beautifully designed.
If biomimetics is the science that tries to copy the marvelous designs in nature and it takes trained scientific brains to work out how to imitate nature...how come the original design needed no intelligence to create them in the first place? :shrug:



The change you see is confined to within a species. Adaptation continues to this day. But science has never once seen one species transition into another completely different kind of creature altogether. That is where evidence ends and fantasy begins.



If you are going to argue from the Biblical aspect, then at least argue from what the Bible actually says.....it tells us exactly why we do not enjoy the perfection that our bodies suggest is possible. Why would you see miscarriage as a punishment? "Sin" simply means to be imperfect. We see evidence of that imperfection every day.
If Jesus said that "not even a bird falls to the ground without his Father's knowledge", how much more concerned is he with the death of a human....even an unborn human?

The potential for humans to keep living without aging or death is high on the agenda of many scientists. The "fountain of youth" is still as eagerly sought today as it ever was, though through different avenues. No one wants to die if they have a good quality of life. Science cannot explain why we die....they can tell us how, but not why the process of cell renewal fails to keep going. Theoretically it should last indefinitely.

Pain, suffering and death were never supposed to enter the realm of human experience but they did when humans walked away from their Creator....all are completely foreign and unacceptable to us. The Revelation tells us that all those things will be abolished under the rule of God's Kingdom. (Revelation 21:2-5) That is a hope I cherish.
128fs318181.gif


We only have to consider the talents of servants to understand that a pocket of pure genius can exist in human brains. An extraordinary capability is demonstrated in art, music or mathematics to an almost unimaginable degree......this is what humankind were meant to manifest....abilities that reflect the perfection achieved by the Creator in all that he does. We lost it in Eden, but we are promised that we will get it back...not in heaven, but right here on earth where the Creator put us in the first place.



A spiritual "leaning" is programmed into all of us. But like a muscle, if spirituality is not fed or fostered, it will be overtaken by selfish pursuits and the latest 'leanings' of the world's fads and fashions. Evolution is a 'new kid on the block' relatively speaking.

I sympathize with your position because we should all be able to rest our hopes on something solid. It is unsettling to feel like you are in limbo, so to speak, unable to come to solid conclusions about these things.
balloony.gif


If this life is all there is, then what is the point of our existence? Animals are blissfully ignorant about their future as they live only in the moment.....we do not have that capacity....we alone can process concepts that animals simply do not have. We can consciously understand and calculate time....a past, present and future. We can use the past and the present knowledge that we have gained to plan our future. We alone have a consciousness of our own demise and the possible loss of loved ones. It causes us great distress. It feels entirely wrong...and the Bible explains why. What does evolution explain? Nothing.



In a world ruled by the devil, nothing is as it seems. His MO is deception and he is an expert at it. How many people know when they are being conned by an expert? Only when things end badly. How does the Bible explain that end? Now compare that with what evolution explains as that end......who do you hope is right? What will the majority choose if it means that they are nothing more than animals and can behave like them with no higher power to answer to? (Matthew 7:13-14)



Thank you Metis.....I know you find people like me frustrating....but you will never wear me down. I know what I believe and why I believe it. I know what foundation evolution is built on and I believe that it will collapse in a big way in the not too distant future.....but that is just my belief. We are all free to believe whatever we wish.....we just have the capacity to contemplate what will happen if our faith is misplaced. :( Evolutionists have way more to lose than we do.
I wonder what you'll do if you find yourself facing Allah or Thor, when you die. Then you'll be in the same boat as atheists. ;) There are thousands of gods that have been worshiped and discarded throughout history. There are thousands more that people worship today. Maybe one of the exists Or some of them. Or none of them. Maybe there's something out there that we haven't even imagined yet. Who knows. What I do know, is that Pascal's wager is BS.
 

Monk Of Reason

༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
I can suggest that you live in your own echo chamber.
LOL......vaccines do what ? They aid the human immune system by introducing a milder form a disease which helps the body to produce antibodies, making it less likely to contract that disease in the future. The human immune system is beautifully designed.

What are you trying to prove?
That the flu vaccine this year will be inefectve next year because the viruses evolve. Bacteria evolve. Everything evolves and this is just one example. One that is palpable and objectively viewed.
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Science fiction can make dinosaurs out of microbes, but verifiable science cannot.

Evolutionary science has already experimentally demonstrated that unicellular microbes can form multicellular organisms in a few months in the lab. Yet more evidence you would avoid and ignore of course.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn24535-alga-takes-first-evolutionary-leap-to-multicellularity/

https://www.newscientist.com/articl...es-an-evolutionary-leap-in-a-few-generations/
 
Last edited:

Sapiens

Polymathematician
And you can't see that you describe those who rely on 'presupposition' to transform microbes into dinosaurs in exactly the same way. Science fiction can make dinosaurs out of microbes, but verifiable science cannot.
You keep saying these sorts of things, but they are just your claims based on nothing, nada! You have yet to provide an iota of evidence, just lots of muttering and hand waving.
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
What's taking so long for creationists to do this then?

A weed growing in a crack in a sidewalk is not evidence for any kind of god. It's evidence of a weed growing in a crack in a sidewalk. The scientific method is much more rigorous than your "method" so I'm going to go with science.

And that is entirely your prerogative. You believe what science 'assumes'. Regardless of how rigorous the method, presupposition will blind you to the logical facts. You have been led down one path, and I have been led down another, let no one presume that science has better "real evidence" for what it assumes...because it clearly doesn't. It only has better marketing. :)

Your "method" doesn't provide any explanation whatsoever about how, why, what, where and when plants grow. Your "method" never gets us beyond "god did it," as far as I can see. Your "method" provides no explanatory power for anything.

We are at a stage in human existence where the Creator's original purpose for the earth is about to be realized. Science has explained many things about how nature operates, but it cannot tell us about how life began. Which is the more important issue.....how life adapted, or how it originated? Don't you think that if there was a Creator who manifested himself tomorrow, that evolution would have to yield?
shy2.gif


We are happy to wait for the answers from the source, when he is ready to educate us in a real way....not by poking around in the dark, making predictions and assumptions and then making them come true with nothing but educated guessing and good graphics.

Well first starters, because it's anecdotal. Because we don't actually have these thousands of eyewitness accounts. Because we have no way of testing accounts of specific "miraculous" events that supposedly happened thousands of years ago. Because people can be (and often are) mistaken about things. Because random stories are no where near as verifiable or testable as the systematic collection and analysis of evidence by multiple groups of people all across the globe, using multiple different tools of investigation, across multiple fields of science. Because empirical evidence is measurable, testable, repeatable and verifiable in ways that the stories of ancient sheepherders are not.

You have been successfully programmed by a system that has done exactly the same thing. There were no "eye-witnesses" to the 'evolving chain of creatures' that supposedly appear in the fossil record either. Science is anecdotal on that front also. If it weren't for the interpretation placed on these findings, no one would come that conclusion, without the need to connect them in some imaginary line of creatures leading to what we see today. There is simply no real evidence for that. Science supposes a lot of things....but none of them are provable. How many times do I have to say it?

Science has every advantage over anecdotal stories orally passed down thousands of years ago, then recorded (sometimes in dead languages) which have since been translated, re-translated, interpreted and re-interpreted many times over. And even today there are thousands of different Christian denominations that still can't agree on what all these stories mean. Not to mention all the other thousands of religious beliefs that have existed in the past and currently exist in the world, each with their very own set of religious texts containing their own miracles and anecdotal stories about the past. If you have some method to sort this all out, I'm all ears.

This is where I tell you that we each come to a fork in the road on our journey through life. All of us are presented with two ways to go....we either choose a Creator or we ignore what is right under our noses and fall for rhetoric and fake evidence of pseudo-science, and eliminate him from existence.

The Bible is one story from start to finish...a virtual library of 66 little books.....it tells us through many different authors over hundreds of years, what happened in the beginning....how we lost our perfection due to the abuse of free will....what God did to solve the problem, serving justice, but preserving free will as the gift it was meant to be.
The Creator has the power to have his instructions written down and compiled in the correct order, despite many attempts to destroy it. It is one of the most widely read book on the planet....still.

Why are scientists so busy looking down their noses at ID, that they overlook who gave them that nose in the first place? :confused:

On there other hand, science is universal. It spans across time, different cultures and different languages. The scientific method has a built-in self-correcting mechanism, it adheres to a rigorous standard of rules that must be met so that anyone can pick up the same tools, recreate the same conditions and produce the same results. In other words, science provides consistency. Science provides detailed explanations. Science is the reason we know what we know about the world we live in. Unless you have something to offer that is better than that, I'm sticking with science.

Since the Bible speaks of the actions of his adversary as involving the "whole world" that is not surprising.
What science can universally prove is adaptation....not macro-evolution. Science does not want to separate them.....because they need one as leverage to sell the other.

The Bible's explanation is good enough for me because it speaks to a part of me that many scientists refuse to acknowledge.....our spirituality. Humans are spiritual beings, unique in all creation. ;)
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
Where does the Bible say, "In 2016 ... this and this will happen " ... ? Oh, it doesn't. It's just vague suggestions and ambiguous statements. hmmmmm

Have you ever studied the Bible? According to scripture, we are living in the time of the last ruling entity before God brings his rulership back to mankind. It's all in the book of Daniel, which parallels the book of Revelation, written almost 700 years apart. How did Daniel know what would take place 700 years into the future? How did he know that Babylon would be overthrown by Medo-Persia....or that Greece would topple Medo-Persia under Alexander the Great? The Grecian Empire was taken over by Rome, and Rome was not conquered, but fell due to its own decadence.....out of the ashes of Rome arose the British Empire, joined by the USA in the 20th century to become an alliance that has continued to the present. There are no more kings after that but in the days of those last kings, God brings in his kingdom and crushes all opposing rulerships out of existence. (Daniel 2:44) Jesus taught us to pray for this kingdom to "come" so that God's will can finally "be done on earth as it is in heaven". None of God's servants on earth will have to lift a finger.

Bible prophesy is fascinating.....;)
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
Still waiting for you to provide evidence of some kind of mechanism that acts as a barrier for small changes adding up to larger ones over long periods of time. Remember, you'd be the first to find it.

And waiting and waiting ......

Perhaps you can furnish real verifiable evidence for an unbroken chain of evolutionary changes that did not involve simple adaptation within one species....That is what I see in the science experiments. But adaptation does not prove macroevolution.....that is the real science. Genetic barriers will not even allow related species to interbreed, let alone produce new creatures altogether. Breeding "according to their kinds" is still seen to this day. Creatures do not seek to breed outside of their kinds, not on land and not in the oceans.

Beneficial mutations are so incredibly rare that they cannot possibly be used to explain the 'microbes to dinosaurs' scenario without sounding like complete idiots.....If it can't be proven...its not scientific fact......its a science theory.
 

Sapiens

Polymathematician
Perhaps you can furnish real verifiable evidence for an unbroken chain of evolutionary changes that did not involve simple adaptation within one species....That is what I see in the science experiments. But adaptation does not prove macroevolution.....that is the real science. Genetic barriers will not even allow related species to interbreed, let alone produce new creatures altogether. Breeding "according to their kinds" is still seen to this day. Creatures do not seek to breed outside of their kinds, not on land and not in the oceans.

Beneficial mutations are so incredibly rare that they cannot possibly be used to explain the 'microbes to dinosaurs' scenario without sounding like complete idiots.....If it can't be proven...its not scientific fact......its a science theory.
Since that would require that every skeleton of every link in the chain, that is to say every single generation, be fossilized and preserved and found and prepared and stored it is an impossible (and unnecessary) requirement. All you need do, actually, to meet your specification is to understand the significance of ring species, which you clearly do not.
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
Evolutionary science has already experimentally demonstrated that unicellular microbes can form multicellular organisms in a few months in the lab. Yet more evidence you would avoid and ignore of course.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn24535-alga-takes-first-evolutionary-leap-to-multicellularity/

Sayak, do you not read what you post in your links? "More evidence to avoid and ignore"?
171.gif


Let's take this first one....

"A single-celled alga has evolved a crude form of multicellularity in the lab – a configuration it never adopts in nature – giving researchers a chance to replay one of life’s most important evolutionary leaps in real time.

This is the second time researchers have coaxed a single-celled organism into becoming multicellular – two years ago, the same was done with brewers yeast. But the alga is an entirely different organism, and comparing the two could explain how the transition to multicellular life happened a billion years ago.


Multicellularity has evolved at least 20 times since life first began, but no organisms have made the leap in the past 200 million years, so the process is difficult to study. To replicate the step in the lab, Will Ratcliff and Michael Travisano, evolutionary biologists at the University of Minnesota in St Paul, and their colleagues grew 10 cultures of a single-celled alga, Chlamydomonas reinhardtii. Every three days, they centrifuged each culture gently and used the bottom tenth to found the next generation. Since clusters of cells settle faster than single ones, this meant that they effectively selected for algal cells that had a tendency to clump together. o_O


Now, don't we have to ask if this process is something it "never adopts in nature" but needed researchers to "coax" them to become multicellular.....and "no organism has made the leap in the past 200 million years"!!!....and you are going to get excited? :rolleyes: Really?

Who is the creator of these organisms? Did they happen by undirected chance? Seriously...

How about the next one....?


Just a few generations after evolving multicellularity, lab yeasts have already settled into at least two distinct lifestyles.

The discovery suggests that organisms can swiftly fill new niches opened up by evolutionary innovations, just as the first multicellular animals appear to have done on Earth, hundreds of millions of years ago.


In 2011, evolutionary biologist Michael Travisano and his student William Ratcliff at the University of Minnesota in St Paul made single celled brewer's yeast evolve into multicellular forms in the lab. They did that by centrifuging yeast cultures and selecting the fastest-settling yeasts to found the next generation. Since clumps of cells settle faster than single cells, this quickly led to multicellular “snowflakes”.


When another of Travisano’s students, Maria Rebolleda-Gomez, looked at Ratcliff’s multicellular strains, she noticed that some snowflakes were up to 10 times larger than others. So she took individual cells from large and small snowflakes in Ratcliff’s original samples and grew them into new multicellular snowflakes.


The daughter colonies resembled the parents in size meaning that the size difference was heritable, giving her in effect two different morphs of snowflake yeast. See the difference in two forms by moving the slider below:

And the two morphs respond differently to the centrifuge-and-settle conditions........

Many years ago, palaeontologist Stephen Jay Gould suggested that a similar sudden ecological diversification may have led to the Cambrian Explosion in which most animal body forms arose in the fossil record within a few tens of millions of years.


Possibly what we see here is the first step of what Gould’s talking about – the opening up of diversity due to a key innovation,” says Travisano.


The yeast also show that this diversification can take place in unexpected ways, based on even the simplest of conditions, says Zachary Blount, an experimental evolutionary biologist at Michigan State University in East Lansing. “I’ve come to think that life really rather abhors simplicity,” he says."


Do you see what I see? I see intervention by humans to produce something that was "made" to happen by their intelligent direction.


"Life abhors simplicity" because no life is simple....all of it required intelligent direction.

These links are not the language of provable science...it is pure suggestion and supposition masquerading as science.
How can you not see the obvious? :D The power of suggestion....



 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
That the flu vaccine this year will be inefectve next year because the viruses evolve. Bacteria evolve. Everything evolves and this is just one example. One that is palpable and objectively viewed.

And the flu virus will still be a flu virus...a different strain perhaps, but it will not eventually become another completely different organism.
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
Again with the lie, you think that if you say if often enough it will become true. I am amazed at the egotism you display going up against the best minds in the world, who say, to a virtual certainty and a virtual consensus that you're full of beans and have naught to offer but arguments from ignorance.
So this is a reasonable response? You sound like a three year old chucking a tanny.
tantrumsmiley.gif
If you say evolution is true often enough, are you going to make it any more true? It was never true to begin with.....it was a thought that developed into a hypothesis, which developed into a theory, which developed into a branch of science.....Oh no!...it was evolution!
4fvgdaq_th.gif


I believe that egotism is what evolutionary science thrives on...it certainly isn't evidence. The "best minds" and "virtual certainty" and "virtual consensus" is a bit like "virtual reality"......it looks real, but it isn't.
What does it mean to the Creator? I am sure that he is amused by their collective arrogance.
171.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top