Online Reference: Selected Sites Denying the Theory of Evolution

[Subduction Zone]

I said 500. You say 521. We disagree over a detail. Clearly all that we know and theorize about science has been destroyed.

500 is more than close enough. The 521 figure comes from a study based upon one area. I would be willing to be that in a damp temperate area that the half life would be much shorter. I don't know why I used the whole 521 figure. Old habits from the days when scientific calculators first came out. I remember profs correcting students several times in introductory classes about using too many significant figures.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Ok so no salvageable DNA. Before I go on, when does finding DNA stop, meaning when does the structure deteriorate to the point of not being capable of being analyzed for DNA?

I don't think there is a definitive answer to that. Probably not more than a few thousand years I would suppose based on the half life. You may want to ask a biochemist that studies DNA degradation.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

500 is more than close enough. The 521 figure comes from a study based upon one area. I would be willing to be that in a damp temperate area that the half life would be much shorter. I don't know why I used the whole 521 figure. Old habits from the days when scientific calculators first came out. I remember profs correcting students several times in introductory classes about using too many significant figures.

I was just being facetious regarding how creationists take any trivial disagreement about scientific findings to mean that all the theories collapse.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I was just being facetious regarding how creationists take any trivial disagreement about scientific findings to mean that all the theories collapse.

I know, but I was kicking myself for posting that full 521 number and that gave me an excuse to get it off of my chest. Though to be honest there are those that would take the "521" figure to be written in stone.

 

[SkepticThinker]

quote mining, honestly?

That is your response to references from a United States museums take on this?

I find it laughable when evolutionists attempt to discredit statements from their own side..."stupid is as stupid does sir!"

Good thing nobody is doing that. What we are doing is pointing out the dishonest "debate" tactics used by dishonest religious apologetics sites. You guys have been trying this for decades.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I think several of us have pointed out this obvious parallel that refutes the reasoning used to dismiss common ancestry.

I myself have done it endlessly. To no avail it seems. The cognitive dissonance is too strong.

 

[AdamjEdgar]

Good thing nobody is doing that. What we are doing is pointing out the dishonest "debate" tactics used by dishonest religious apologetics sites. You guys have been trying this for decades.

perhaps as you are a sceptic thinker...think on this...

given that one cannot automatically gain salvation if there is a God, ie if you don't believe you cannot be saved. if it turns out Christians are right, given the large amount of historical evidence supporting Christianity as being true, what is next for you?

Are you content as a person who aims to progress in life, to spend time making a life for yourself only to lose it ...ie when you die its kaput?

If it turned out that in the end, you do look upon those who did believe and are saved, knowing your about to die permanently as illustrated in Revelation, wouldnt that be a terrible end? Wouldn't you wish you had given God a chance?

Is there anything dishonest about my view on this?

As far as I see it,
if Christians are wrong, we end up the same as you...so what is there to lose exactly?

 

[Subduction Zone]

perhaps as you are a sceptic thinker...think on this...

given that one cannot automatically gain salvation if there is a God, ie if you don't believe you cannot be saved. if it turns out Christians are right, given the large amount of historical evidence supporting Christianity as being true, what is next for you?

Are you content as a person who aims to progress in life, to spend time making a life for yourself only to lose it ...ie when you die its kaput?

If it turned out that in the end, you do look upon those who did believe and are saved, knowing your about to die permanently as illustrated in Revelation, wouldnt that be a terrible end? Wouldn't you wish you had given God a chance?

Is there anything dishonest about my view on this?

As far as I see it,
if Christians are wrong, we end up the same as you...so what is there to lose exactly?

This is Pascal's Wager. It makes the unjustified assumption that there is only the Christian God or no God at all. But what if the universe was made by a rational God? Not the irrational and often evil Christian one? Don't you think that he might get a bit irate at people calling him a liar? Even if the Christian God exists you are calling him a liar. He might have a friendlier attitude towards people that did not believe in him ,but never called him a liar.

 

[AdamjEdgar]

This is Pascal's Wager. It makes the unjustified assumption that there is only the Christian God or no God at all. But what if the universe was made by a rational God? Not the irrational and often evil Christian one? Don't you think that he might get a bit irate at people calling him a liar? Even if the Christian God exists you are calling him a liar. He might have a friendlier attitude towards people that did not believe in him ,but never called him a liar.

Claims of Pascal's water does not resolve the dilema that non Christians face. In any case I can answer the question for those who like to throw red herrings as evidence...many atheists buy lotto tickets in the hope they might win whilst knowing they are funding the gain of a 1%'er (for want of a better description).

I am of the opinion that largely, society has fallen into the trap of "buying good health" because it is not willing to make lifestyle changes to achieve that outcome of good health.

When applied to this topic, it means most atheists cannot bring themselves to put in the effort...they are too lazy to study the issues, instead relying on muttonhead answers like "oh this is Pascal's Wager"...not realising that said criticism does not actually resolve the underlying dilemma!

 

[Subduction Zone]

Claims of Pascal's water does not resolve the dilema that non Christians face. In any case I can answer the question for those who like to throw red herrings as evidence...many atheists buy lotto tickets in the hope they might win whilst knowing they are funding the gain of a 1%'er (for want of a better description).

I am of the opinion that largely, society has fallen into the trap of "buying good health" because it is not willing to make lifestyle changes to achieve that outcome of good health.

When applied to this topic, it means most atheists cannot bring themselves to put in the effort...they are too lazy to study the issues, instead relying on muttonhead answers like "oh this is Pascal's Wager"...not realising that said criticism does not actually resolve the underlying dilemma!

You have it backwards. Atheists know that your religion is no different from others. If you had done the research you would know why that argument fails.

 

[rational experiences]

This is Pascal's Wager. It makes the unjustified assumption that there is only the Christian God or no God at all. But what if the universe was made by a rational God? Not the irrational and often evil Christian one? Don't you think that he might get a bit irate at people calling him a liar? Even if the Christian God exists you are calling him a liar. He might have a friendlier attitude towards people that did not believe in him ,but never called him a liar.

All said as a man's humans consciousness. Living as the human man.

Now say as you should that you don't actually speak on behalf of a God that you claim you idolise....what would be said?

Is the true question.

Even just our original father's mother's human memories tell us as their baby human adults. That you cannot question their existence.

Yet you do.

You the baby human claim you know what it's like not having them in your life. Whilst you live now on their behalf. Using their body types. One or the other yet two fully owned biological humans created your life.

The baby.

You know you die...you know you are conceived biology. You pretend you didn't die.

Hence you then have to question why don't you believe you die when biology does?

The advice consciousness uses heavenly pre recorded memories of once living humans including your first ever parents.

Where all ideas a heavenly God came from. As just a human always no matter what you say.

So when two fully owned bio life humans owned sperm naturally not without it and ovaries naturally not without it. Within two fully owned bodies.

How would a man's consciousness relate father's memories. As never had he been mother's human woman's ovary first.

Is how you behave first as any human thinker. Before using indoctrinations as human only studies. Just humans stated.

The term I think says masses of all types pre existed my known human aware stated being. One human.

Yet each advice is consciously stated as exactly advised as it's form. By a human thinking seeing determining I'm looking to talk about it first. Is not a theory.

It hence does not own a thesis by a human.

Reason for teaching. The huge sun mass huge space body a planet earth and it's heavens is not any history a small controlled reaction.

Yet the history a human man's reason to science theory. Was machine direct to another small body. Machine. Yet it's history is direct bodily mass.

No reaction as a history even exists. As the scientist just a human and just a man wants to put the reaction into a future. Where it's reacted at the future time moment he chose. His action.

Seeing he built machines to transmit to pyramids owning machines. All themes were only ever man's sciences his machines.

Only by the machine being present.

So it's not natural history whatsoever.

Is how a human man messed with his owned natural mind. Is why the teaching is about humans consciousness and it's lost first reasoning.

Theism said earth as a planet in space was it's owned entity deity. It's bases as the planet is man's sciences beginnings to practice science.

Taken off of gods stone ark the earth. He breaks it's fused laws he said. Ark hence is his human only scientific practices.

The reactive moment history he themes the moment begining a reaction is the evil moment. Evolution does not support his theory.

He knows he lives in position change and cooling evolution.

So he knows he's not owner in history position a natural mass reactions beginning.

In themes past heavens reactive beginnings is an evil volcanic mass. No heavens in that theme. No anything about life.

In themes above reactive changes to evolution heavens is a form above of evil sun dust mass in a void vacuum. Position the sun owns producing light.

So man said sun mass shifted it's time body light to earth. Yet our heavens above is only alight.

Evil above.

So heavens mass began from mass evil evolved and evolution itself was changed at mass gained as evil above. As if heavens above had returned to its evil mass beginnings of no heavens first.

We only survive within the evolution heavens it's owned natural event

The human warning no man is God.

As a human I know I can tell stories not a theory.

My study said eternal being is past terms spiritual. Was never owned in created creation. As I'm allowed. it's not a thesis. Nor is it evil by intention the words I use the explanations position.

So as I'm a human I understand whatever communication it used I don't own nor use. As I'm not it's body type.

Science says I want the origin body type before any change. That advice says exactly the same advice as my own.

He'll argue. No I want it. He wants it for machines not for life.

So we need to ask him what are you talking about as a humans only thesis?

He says he wants a reaction in his chosen future where I cause it. Yet he says a machine.

A machine is only from reactive history itself of man's choosing.

Ended sealed cooled. Told to his thinkers mind.

He says life only exists as every type is sealed cooled.

No reaction.

His theist brother therefore states there is no God type as a theory.

As science is only a human man's indoctrinated reasoning. And science of God was mans historic reasoning to sciences practices today. As science human chosen.

So I can say I believe just the eternal body exists as Eternal without quantifying any status about a secret. I know I don't own it have it nor speak as if I'm speaking for it.

I can say I believe bio life came out of it and was released from it. Without my study owning hurt nor harm to anything naturally existing now.

Science a human practice however cannot make the same claim.

Instead bullying tactics are used claiming I must reveal my source of advice.

There isn't any. What science will not accept as the bully himself history...humans behaviours. As his claim is only a man and a human as a theist speaks on behalf of science.

Being his reality as he invented all of its human used inferred terms as practices. As a human man thinker using words and drawn design position one first...not reality.

So he says my story isn't true....nor was his story ever true first. Science.

I hence give human reasons about particular experiences that support origin creation was caused. And came from a body release. And origin body still exists not as creation.

Creation was the owner a changed released portion only.

His machines purposes only uses the presence of creation...taken from its mass.

He says he will use a machine to force change origin. As if none of it exists yet. In mind it's his reaction only that doesn't exist yet. In science it's created creations origins as his machines only history.

Claims Im illogical for believing in a creator when he proves he's being illogical as the scientist.

I am told what his science humans terms were about O as G O D theism explanations he theoried as a man only.

O the circle he says in mind is a flat plane no numbers. Just a circle.

So it's type doesnt even exist first it's just a thought concept and it's energy held by pressures..

As mass isn't a circle says his science mind it's just what I know...mass is held circular pressures.

Science theoried GOD O falsely. As human advice said by man's science terms it hadn't even existed.

 

[SkepticThinker]

perhaps as you are a sceptic thinker...think on this...

given that one cannot automatically gain salvation if there is a God, ie if you don't believe you cannot be saved. if it turns out Christians are right, given the large amount of historical evidence supporting Christianity as being true, what is next for you?

What "historical evidence supporting Christianity" do you refer to?

Are you content as a person who aims to progress in life, to spend time making a life for yourself only to lose it ...ie when you die its kaput?

Yep, when we die, this life - the only one we know we get for sure - will end. That's what the evidence tells me. It doesn't matter if I like it or not, it's just the way it is.

If it turned out that in the end, you do look upon those who did believe and are saved, knowing your about to die permanently as illustrated in Revelation, wouldnt that be a terrible end? Wouldn't you wish you had given God a chance?

Which God? And what do you think the odds are of picking the "right" God from all the thousands of gods that have been proposed throughout human history?

Is there anything dishonest about my view on this?

I don't know about that. But I know that Pascal's Wager is bunk.

As far as I see it,
if Christians are wrong, we end up the same as you...so what is there to lose exactly?

It's not an either or, here. That's the problem. As mentioned above, human beings have believed in many thousands of different gods throughout the course of our time on this earth. The odds that you've chosen the right one out of all of those are pretty slim. It's definitely not a 50/50 proposition.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Claims of Pascal's water does not resolve the dilema that non Christians face. In any case I can answer the question for those who like to throw red herrings as evidence...many atheists buy lotto tickets in the hope they might win whilst knowing they are funding the gain of a 1%'er (for want of a better description).

Hey, you're the one who presented Pascal's wager, not us atheists. We're just responding to the poor argument presented.

I have no idea what lotto tickets have to do with anything.

I am of the opinion that largely, society has fallen into the trap of "buying good health" because it is not willing to make lifestyle changes to achieve that outcome of good health.

When applied to this topic, it means most atheists cannot bring themselves to put in the effort...they are too lazy to study the issues, instead relying on muttonhead answers like "oh this is Pascal's Wager"...not realising that said criticism does not actually resolve the underlying dilemma!

I just put in the effort of rebutting your Pascal's Wager argument. All you've done here is complain about it and attempted to call me lazy. That's not going to cut it.

You just asked me to think on your claim about Pascal's wager. So how about maybe you think on my response instead of whining and dismissing it out of hand?

 

[Valjean]

So you say. But so far the best I've heard is that humans have an "Unknown Common Ancestor" producing gorillas, monkeys, etc. and humans but scientists just can't find it and maybe there weren't too many of them. Going back to my days before I really learned what the Genesis account says, my response would have been in response to the theory(?) about the UCA, "Yeah, right." But now I'll just say...no evidence supporting the idea.

Primate cladogram

This diagram shows the evolutionary relationships between members of the primate family.

www.sciencelearn.org.nz

1 minute ago

 

[Valjean]

Revelation 11:18
But the nations became wrathful, and your own wrath came, and the appointed time came for the dead to be judged and to reward your slaves the prophets and the holy ones and those fearing your name, the small and the great, and to bring to ruin those ruining the earth.”

But that's not evidence, just a quotation from an ancient book written bypeople who didn't have a clue how the world works.
How is it any more believable than a quotation from The Chronicles of Narnia?

 

[YoursTrue]

Primate cladogram

This diagram shows the evolutionary relationships between members of the primate family.

www.sciencelearn.org.nz

1 minute ago

Regardless of how the diagram is formulated, it's conjecture.

 

[YoursTrue]

But that's not evidence, just a quotation from an ancient book written bypeople who didn't have a clue how the world works.
How is it any more believable than a quotation from The Chronicles of Narnia?

Many people now who don't know the Bible that well are realizing things are not getting better. Just as it has been foretold.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Regardless of how the diagram is formulated, it's conjecture.

How are you going to prove that? Do you realize that if you can't that you j you st broke the Ninth Commandment?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Many people now who don't know the Bible that well are realizing things are not getting better. Just as it has been foretold.

Many people that know the Bible better know that things are getting better.

How are things getting worse?

 

[Valjean]

Regardless of how the diagram is formulated, it's conjecture.

Deny the evidence all you want, but it won't go away.

Many people now who don't know the Bible that well are realizing things are not getting better. Just as it has been foretold.

Many people who "know the Bible" don't seem to realize it's largely religious mythology, replete with factual errors and contradictions.

This is why we find you so exasperating, YT. You accept poorly evidenced mythology unquestioningly, but stubbornly deny extensively supported, tested, peer reviewed facts.