The Creation of Woman

[FearGod]

Not yet. You need to learn how to crawl before you learn how to run. No jumping ahead in the lesson plan.

The subject is evolution, not abiogenesis. By moving the goalposts you concede the earlier debate. Are you ready to concede that life is the product of evolution?

You failed to follow the scientific method to answer my scientific question.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Can it be like this?
How to create a baby? the intention is to create a baby, the method for the baby to be created
is a man to sleep with a woman, then if it worked, the product will be created within 9 months,
is't OK?

No, the goal is to have a baby.

Avoid loaded terms, it is not honest and detracts from the discussion.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You failed to follow the scientific method to answer my scientific question.

Your question was poorly formed. You are supposed to be learning here. The student does not get to steer the lesson plan.

 

[FearGod]

No, the goal is to have a baby.

Avoid loaded terms, it is not honest and detracts from the discussion.

Yes to have a baby, but the baby won't come by magic, the baby should be created in the womb.

 

[FearGod]

Your question was poorly formed. You are supposed to be learning here. The student does not get to steer the lesson plan.

LOL, you failed, shameful

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes to have a baby, but the baby won't come by magic, the baby should be created in the womb.

Nope, the womb has no intent.

Drop the loaded terminology. You lose every time that you do this since it shows dishonesty on your part.

 

[Subduction Zone]

LOL, you failed, shameful

Now you are merely lying about me. Once again, you are not ready for that yet. You do not get to drive the lesson. Since you have shown that you do not understand the scientific method we need to go over it.

 

[FearGod]

Now you are merely lying about me. Once again, you are not ready for that yet. You do not get to drive the lesson. Since you have shown that you do not understand the scientific method we need to go over it.

Should I ask a scientific question of your choice for the scientific method to work?

 

[FearGod]

Nope, the womb has no intent.

Drop the loaded terminology. You lose every time that you do this since it shows dishonesty on your part.

Unless that the womb is designed to be involved in the process of the creation, never heard the word automation.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Should I ask a scientific question of your choice for the scientific method to work?

That might be a wise move. I don't think that you can do so yet.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Unless that the womb is designed to be involved in the process of the creation, never heard the word automation.

But now you are assuming that the womb was designed. If you want to claim that the burden of proof is upon you. Until you do "grow" is a better word.

 

[Subduction Zone]

At this moments we're humans, I don't know what will be the case after one millions years.
if our kind changed then still we'll be created in the new evolved form, creation is past, present and future.

There is no "change of kinds" in evolution. Our descendants will still be humans. As I said there is no change in kinds. You share a common ancestor with other apes, you are still an ape. You share a common ancestor with other mammals, you are still a mammal. You share a common ancestor with other vertebrates you are still a vertebrate. Etc.. There is no "change in kind" that is a creationist misconception.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

In this case yes. The improper use of the word "creation" has already been used in a equivocation fallacy.

It all depends on a number of factors. It can be said that an individual member of a species who reproduces sexually, in the "normal sense" for simplicity's sake, was created in its mother's womb. You probably won't find the word often used in a biology book, but it's understood what is meant.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It all depends on a number of factors. It can be said that an individual member of a species who reproduces sexually, in the "normal sense" for simplicity's sake, was created in its mother's womb. You probably won't find the word often used in a biology book, but it's understood what is meant.

In every day use the term is fine. The problem is that this is a creation verses evolution debate and the use of that term was already used to make an equivocation fallacy for creationism

 

[FearGod]

There is no "change of kinds" in evolution. Our descendants will still be humans. As I said there is no change in kinds. You share a common ancestor with other apes, you are still an ape. You share a common ancestor with other mammals, you are still a mammal. You share a common ancestor with other vertebrates you are still a vertebrate. Etc.. There is no "change in kind" that is a creationist misconception.

I'm afraid that you know nothing, are we and the fish of the same kind, how you know what would we be after some millions of years.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'm afraid that you know nothing, are we and the fish of the same kind, how you know what would we be after some millions of years.

Because your definition of "kind" is based upon descent. After a million years our descendants will still be descended from us, that is what the word sort of means.

This may help:

Introduction to Cladistics

 

[FearGod]

Because your definition of "kind" is based upon descent. After a million years our descendants will still be descended from us, that is what the word sort of means.

This may help:

Introduction to Cladistics

Are humans and Chimps of the same kind?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Are humans and Chimps of the same kind?

Define kind.

We share a common ancestor.

The use of undefined terms makes a discussion impossible.

 

[FearGod]

But now you are assuming that the womb was designed. If you want to claim that the burden of proof is upon you. Until you do "grow" is a better word.

The baby have to be formed before growing, a baby will grow and become a child ..etc, but created in the
womb is the right word for the forming of a new baby in the womb.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The baby have to be formed before growing, a baby will grow and become a child ..etc, but created in the
womb is the right word for the forming of a new baby in the womb.

Nope, it is a loaded term and dishonest to use. There better words that you can use.