Mr Cheese
Well-Known Member
He sounds like Vin... they could be sisters
-
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!
The Darwin Delusion
- Thread starter Carico
- Start date
He sounds like Vin... they could be sisters
camanintx
Well-Known Member
Evolution generally involves one species dividing into two separate species so I don't really see what point you are trying to make here.Sorry but humans only "naturally" select other humans, not a different species with whom to breed.
And so do other animals. A tiger doesn't "naturally" select a giraffe as a mate.He only selects tigers as mates unless man interferes and tries to mate him with a different animal. So sorry, but animals and humans were programmed to breed their own species and with their own species (thus the term reproduction) which is why humans can't breed lions, tigers, or bears as descendants any more than apes can breed, lions, tigers, bears, or humans as descendants either.
You also seem to have a poor understanding of the concept of species as well. Lions and Tigers are different species yet they are capable of breeding and often do.
I know that the imagination can make up any story it wants such as one species "dividing' into another. But since that doesn't happen in the real world, it is only imagined when one looks at an animal. So "Mommy, that zebra once used to be an elephant" isn't science, it's science fiction. And humans and apes are not capable of breeding offspring together so one cannot be the descendant of the other. Sorry.
camanintx
Well-Known Member
They always say, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.
29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: the Scientific Case for Common Descent
Delusional people aren't capable of even acknowledging the water since they live in their imaginations.
So since no one knows who the common ancestor is, then he's as imaginary as the Flying Spaghetti Monster because he exists only in the imaginations of men. That makes the story of evolution a delusion. End of story. 
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
Enter "Carico" in the "Fundie:" box.
He has a long, established history of being impervious to logic.
Last edited:
Magic Man
Reaper of Conversation
Delusional people aren't capable of even acknowledging the water since they live in their imaginations.
That's true, but something tells me you think you're talking about other people with this comment, when in reality you're only describing yourself.
OmarKhayyam
Well-Known Member
THAT is his argument. And his only argument. His entire "case" is based on theology not science.
Such views are foolish.
The ignore feature works.
Gharib
I want Khilafah back
When writing a story, an author has to make up his characters before he can go on with his story. Since Darwin had no evidence of his characters in the real world, he had to conjure them up in his imagination. He simply looked for an alternative to the biblical account of the creation of man and said; "If man wasn't created by God, then where could he have come from? I know, something that already exists like...another animal. Hey, yeah...which animal looks like a human? An ape!"
So here's how the story of evolution began:
Once upon a time 500,000 years ago... no 750,000 years ago... no 2,000,000 years ago...I'll skip the setting and go on.
Once upon a long time ago, an ape,..no a monkey, no a half-human- half monkey...I'll skip that part too and just call him an ancestor common to...humans...no monkeys..no humans and monkeys...no, humans and some other unknown animal.
Once upon a long time ago a common ancestor, no many common ancestors, yeah, I'll stick with that...mated with a monkey..no an ape...
Needless to say, a story that didn't start well can't end well either.Nevertheless, because people were eagerly looking for an alternate explanation to God's creation, it wouldn't be hard at all for them to accept even a badly written fiction story that never got started.
Since Darwin never described his main characters, then he can't possibly know what they were capable of breeding.But again, since the public wanted even a badly written story, then Darwin left it to the imaginations of his readers to finish the story. But as expected, one can't finish a story that never even began which is why of course, no one today still knows the main characters (common ancestors) of Darwin's story.
But what makes his story a delusion, is that Darwin actually believed that his characters existed!It's bad enough when an author believes that characters he can describe existed, but when he believes that characters that he himself can't describe existed, then his story is even more delusional.
When God says that the wisdom of the world is foolishness in His sight, nothing proves Him right better than the story of evolution.
oh man i love this post, too bad i'm out of frubals. i can;t stop laughing.
Magic Man
Reaper of Conversation
Me either.
Anti-thesisofreason
Explorer
The only difference is, I know why it's impossible and most of you don't.
Please explain why evolution is impossible.
Giving references would help also so we can look up this information ourselves and also be enlightened.
A troll by atheist's standards is someone who tells the truth and convicts them.
"Social Darwinism" and eugenics are based on false assumptions, and even if you take every tenet of them as true, they still make no sense: it'd be like saying that we have a moral obligation to pump water downhill.Hitler had an idea of "fit" which is why he tried to kill of the "weak." In fact, he justified his idealogy through social Darwinism. But that's what happens when one tries to define "fit." He begins to play God and determines who lives or dies. And when his beliefs are based on false assumptions like natural selection instead of basic reproduction, that's when he becomes as delusional as Hitler was.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
A troll by atheist's standards is someone who tells the truth and convicts them.
In order for something to be truth, it has to 1.) make logical sense and 2.) be substantiated by evidence.
You fail miserably on both accounts.
Gharib
I want Khilafah back
very simple question.
the so called 'transitional fossils' that are put forwards by evolutionists do not suppor the features of the 2 cretures that it is supposedly evolving from and evolving into. for example a bird that has half a dinosaur lung and half a bird lung.
no such fossil has been found that supports visual changes but rather, they support 'magic poofing'
Gharib
I want Khilafah back
so an ape becoming a human is logic according to you right?
Gharib
I want Khilafah back
that opening post is really something i must admit
Since what's considered "logical" to atheists is imaginary animals turning into people, then of course, they can't understand logic. That's why they reject the biblical account of creation for making up stories of their imaginations which don't happen in reality.
Anti-thesisofreason
Explorer
Can you provide references for this claim?