The first creature could not have come into being by random chance. It is impossible.

[TagliatelliMonster]

All supposed similarity is not evidence for evolution at all. But the inexplicable differences and inexplicable similarities disprove evolution.

They are only "inexplicable" in your mind because you categorically refuse to learn the explanations.
Explanations you have been given in this very thread and which you categorically ignored.

What do you want me to tell you?
Your willful ignorance is your own choice. I can't help you with that.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Just because the science is far beyond your grasp does not mean that other people have been deceived.

I'ld suggest it's not at all beyond his grasp. Evolution in and of itself isn't exactly rocket science.

Sure, molecular genetics can get quite complicated, but the bigger evolutionary picture, the principles of evolution, are actually quite simple and easy to learn and understand.

I don't think it's "beyond his grasp" at all. The only problem here is his choice of being willfully ignorant.

That's his decision and there's not much we can do about that.
We can dumb the answers down all we want, we can explain it as clearly as we want, we can give him all the evidence in the world.

None of it will cure this behavior:

There is only one person that can turn this around and it's himself. As long as he continues to behave like in the gif, nothing will change.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'ld suggest it's not at all beyond his grasp. Evolution in and of itself isn't exactly rocket science.

Sure, molecular genetics can get quite complicated, but the bigger evolutionary picture, the principles of evolution, are actually quite simple and easy to learn and understand.

I don't think it's "beyond his grasp" at all. The only problem here is his choice of being willfully ignorant.

That's his decision and there's not much we can do about that.
We can dumb the answers down all we want, we can explain it as clearly as we want, we can give him all the evidence in the world.

None of it will cure this behavior:


View attachment 84103

There is only one person that can turn this around and it's himself. As long as he continues to behave like in the gif, nothing will change.

He clearly is afraid to learn. I wonder how the sect that he belongs to abused the Bible to drive a person to this sort of behavior.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Just because the science is far beyond your grasp does not mean that other people have been deceived.

All supposed similarity is not evidence for evolution at all. But the inexplicable differences and inexplicable similarities disprove evolution.
Trace each of these out from the latest common ancestor to the each of these species.
Please give very detailed information, dates, codes, numbers, etc.

Chromosome count
Mankind 46
Chimps 48

Chromosome counts for various fox species.
Red fox 34
Tibetan sand fox 36
Kit fox 50
Bengal fox 60
Fennec fox 64

Chromosome counts various species.
Butterfly 268
Gypsy moth 62
Japanese oak silk moth 31

Earth worm 36
Silk worm 56

Grape fern 90
Rattlesnake fern 184

Mankind 46
European olive 46

Amoeba dubia 670 billion base pairs
How did that happen?

 

[Subduction Zone]

All supposed similarity is not evidence for evolution at all. But the inexplicable differences and inexplicable similarities disprove evolution.
Trace each of these out from the latest common ancestor to the each of these species.
Please give very detailed information, dates, codes, numbers, etc.

Chromosome count
Mankind 46
Chimps 48

Chromosome counts for various fox species.
Red fox 34
Tibetan sand fox 36
Kit fox 50
Bengal fox 60
Fennec fox 64

Chromosome counts various species.
Butterfly 268
Gypsy moth 62
Japanese oak silk moth 31

Earth worm 36
Silk worm 56

Grape fern 90
Rattlesnake fern 184

Mankind 46
European olive 46

Amoeba dubia 670 billion base pairs
How did that happen?

All of that has been explained to you. When you start to pay attention to answers. When you admit when you have been refuted. Then you can demand answers. But if you keep running away when you lose or ignore the answers that show you to be wrong you cannot make demands.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

All of that has been explained to you. When you start to pay attention to answers. When you admit when you have been refuted. Then you can demand answers. But if you keep running away when you lose or ignore the answers that show you to be wrong you cannot make demands.

All supposed similarity is not evidence for evolution at all. Poof. That canard has been removed forever and ever.
But the inexplicable differences and inexplicable similarities disprove evolution.
Trace each of these out from the latest common ancestor to the each of these species.
Please give very detailed information, dates, codes, numbers, etc.

Chromosome count
Mankind 46
Chimps 48

Chromosome counts for various fox species.
Red fox 34
Tibetan sand fox 36
Kit fox 50
Bengal fox 60
Fennec fox 64

 

[Subduction Zone]

All supposed similarity is not evidence for evolution at all. Poof. That canard has been removed forever and ever.
But the inexplicable differences and inexplicable similarities disprove evolution.
Trace each of these out from the latest common ancestor to the each of these species.
Please give very detailed information, dates, codes, numbers, etc.

Chromosome count
Mankind 46
Chimps 48

Chromosome counts for various fox species.
Red fox 34
Tibetan sand fox 36
Kit fox 50
Bengal fox 60
Fennec fox 64

And once again all of that was explained to you. I went over the difference between you and other great apes in chromosome count and you made no comment at the time. In other words, you accepted it. If you want to claim that you ignored the answers to the questions that you demanded answers for I will still repost it if you apologize for your hypocrisy. It is still there.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

And once again all of that was explained to you. I went over the difference between you and other great apes in chromosome count and you made no comment at the time. In other words, you accepted it. If you want to claim that you ignored the answers to the questions that you demanded answers for I will still repost it if you apologize for your hypocrisy. It is still there.

And where are all the required details that I asked for?

All supposed similarity is not evidence for evolution at all. But the inexplicable differences and inexplicable similarities disprove evolution.
Trace each of these out from the latest common ancestor to the each of these species.
Please give very detailed information, dates, codes, numbers, etc.

Chromosome count
Mankind 46
Chimps 48

Chromosome counts for various fox species.
Red fox 34
Tibetan sand fox 36
Kit fox 50
Bengal fox 60
Fennec fox 64

Chromosome counts various species.
Butterfly 268
Gypsy moth 62
Japanese oak silk moth 31

Earth worm 36
Silk worm 56

Grape fern 90
Rattlesnake fern 184

Mankind 46
European olive 46

Amoeba dubia 670 billion base pairs
How did that happen?

 

[Subduction Zone]

And where are all the required details that I asked for?

All supposed similarity is not evidence for evolution at all. But the inexplicable differences and inexplicable similarities disprove evolution.
Trace each of these out from the latest common ancestor to the each of these species.
Please give very detailed information, dates, codes, numbers, etc.

Chromosome count
Mankind 46
Chimps 48

Chromosome counts for various fox species.
Red fox 34
Tibetan sand fox 36
Kit fox 50
Bengal fox 60
Fennec fox 64

Chromosome counts various species.
Butterfly 268
Gypsy moth 62
Japanese oak silk moth 31

Earth worm 36
Silk worm 56

Grape fern 90
Rattlesnake fern 184

Mankind 46
European olive 46

Amoeba dubia 670 billion base pairs
How did that happen?

Your memory is failing again. All of those have been answered. If you want I can find the post of mine that explains in detail how the difference in chromosomes are now evidence for evolution. But you have to apologize for not reading it when it was posted.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Your memory is failing again. All of those have been answered. If you want I can find the post of mine that explains in detail how the difference in chromosomes are now evidence for evolution. But you have to apologize for not reading it when it was posted.

Actually none have been given a real rational answer.

Can you explain your supposed cousin the sea urchin?

Surprise! Your Cousin's a Sea Urchin

They lack eyes, ears and a backbone, but sea urchins are more closely related to humans than once thought.

www.livescience.com

 

[Subduction Zone]

Actually none have been given a real rational answer.

Not true. You even accepted them at times because you did not say anything when real rational answers were given to you. You may be embarrassed because you could not understand the science, but that does not make the explanation irrational.

Can you explain your supposed cousin the sea urchin?

Yes, I can explain your cousin. It is too bad that you cannot follow the rules of debate or polite discussion. When you change your ways you can ask questions.

 

[shunyadragon]

The first creature could not have come into being by random chance. It is impossible.

It would have to have had at least 100,000 amino acids in a particular sequence. This is extremely generous. The smallest free-living thing has over 1,000,000 base pairs. I also have not included having over 500 million other atoms in it.
The odds against a sequence of 100,000 amino acids (20 types, 39 counting handedness) coming to be by random chance is (10 to the 160,000 power) to 1. That could never have happened anywhere in the universe over the supposed 13.7 billion years of its existence. It actually is impossible because no concentration of that amount of amino acids would happen by random chance. There are other factors that make it impossible. It would be a miracle.

And that is just to get to the first living thing. There would have to at least 1 trillion other miracles to produce all the living creatures by evolution. That would be about 70 miracles for each of the supposed 13.7 billion years.

That is impossible to have happened by random chance.
Therefore, God created all things.
A simple elegant proof.
Assume no God. Show the contradiction. Therefore, God exists.
The proof that the Bible is the true word of God is also easy.

The atheists have been deceived into believing that the first creature could come into existence by random chance.
Never has been observed. Simple analysis shows it is impossible. There is no record that it ever did.
So, the evolutionist has the burden of proof.

The first living organism did not come into being by chance or randomness. It came about by NAtural Laws and processes when the environmental conditions were suitable for life.

Atheism is a philosophical belief independent of science.

The rest is trash you repeat in many mindless threads. in a vain attempt to justify an ancient tribal agenda.

 

[shunyadragon]

Well science is never quite settled.

Fortunately, the knowledge of science evolves with new discoveries and research and it never claims to be 'quite settled.'

Now the OP has an irrefutable proof.
What is your opinion just looking at it/

Ridiculous beyond belief. There is no such thing as proof in science concerning the physical nature of our existence.

Of course, there is not proof for the existence of God(s) either.

 

[shunyadragon]

Actually none have been given a real rational answer.

The answer is science the problem is the vain attempts at a rational answer is it is often circular justifying a subjective belief.

Can you explain your supposed cousin the sea urchin?

Surprise! Your Cousin's a Sea Urchin

They lack eyes, ears and a backbone, but sea urchins are more closely related to humans than once thought.

www.livescience.com

The science of evolution and genetics which you are totally entrenched in self-imposed ignorance.

 

[shunyadragon]

All supposed similarity is not evidence for evolution at all. But the inexplicable differences and inexplicable similarities disprove evolution.
Trace each of these out from the latest common ancestor to the each of these species.
Please give very detailed information, dates, codes, numbers, etc.

Chromosome count
Mankind 46
Chimps 48

Chromosome counts for various fox species.
Red fox 34
Tibetan sand fox 36
Kit fox 50
Bengal fox 60
Fennec fox 64

Chromosome counts various species.
Butterfly 268
Gypsy moth 62
Japanese oak silk moth 31

Earth worm 36
Silk worm 56

Grape fern 90
Rattlesnake fern 184

Mankind 46
European olive 46

Amoeba dubia 670 billion base pairs
How did that happen?

Yes, you are illiterate, because you obviously do not understand the sources you cite, You perpetually take the position of justifying your ancient tribal agenda based on what you claim are the current limits of scientific knowledge. You fail to realize or refuse to acknowledge that 30 to 40 years ago science did not have enough information to make the hypothesis for LUCA, and they did not have the genetic, fossil, and geochemical knowledge we have today. This is how the proposal of hypotheses with prediction and falsification process takes place over time, and NOT determined by what science knows 'now.'

You like other fundamentalists stage your questions in a manner that you demand that science must know everything 'now'. If they do not know 'now' their hypotheses are false or unanswerable. Also, many of your questions and challenges like the one concerning Chromosome numbers are really ridiculous, because the explanation of variations in Chromosome numbers in the process of evolution has been known for many years, I learned the basics in genetic college courses over 50 years ago, Your only response was to repeat the ridiculous intentional ignorance over and over again ignoring the references provided that provided you with a detailed explanation.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Yes, you are illiterate, because you obviously do not understand the sources you cite, You perpetually take the position of justifying your ancient tribal agenda based on what you claim are the current limits of scientific knowledge. You fail to realize or refuse to acknowledge that 30 to 40 years ago science did not have enough information to make the hypothesis for LUCA, and they did not have the genetic, fossil, and geochemical knowledge we have today. This is how the proposal of hypotheses with prediction and falsification process takes place over time, and NOT determined by what science knows 'now.'

You like other fundamentalists stage your questions in a manner that you demand that science must know everything 'now'. If they do not know 'now' their hypotheses are false or unanswerable. Also, many of your questions and challenges like the one concerning Chromosome numbers are really ridiculous, because the explanation of variations in Chromosome numbers in the process of evolution has been known for many years, I learned the basics in genetic college courses over 50 years ago, Your only response was to repeat the ridiculous intentional ignorance over and over again ignoring the references provided that provided you with a detailed explanation.

Here is something that needs some explaining. It is about your cousin Urch.

Surprise! Your Cousin's a Sea Urchin

They lack eyes, ears and a backbone, but sea urchins are more closely related to humans than once thought.

www.livescience.com

All supposed similarity is not evidence for evolution at all. But the inexplicable differences and inexplicable similarities disprove evolution.
Trace each of these out from the latest common ancestor to the each of these species.
Please give very detailed information, dates, codes, numbers, etc.

Chromosome count
Mankind 46
Chimps 48

Chromosome counts for various fox species.
Red fox 34
Tibetan sand fox 36
Kit fox 50
Bengal fox 60
Fennec fox 64

Chromosome counts various species.
Butterfly 268
Gypsy moth 62
Japanese oak silk moth 31

Earth worm 36
Silk worm 56

Grape fern 90
Rattlesnake fern 184

Mankind 46
European olive 46

Amoeba dubia 670 billion base pairs
How did that happen?

 

[shunyadragon]

Here is something that needs some explaining. It is about your cousin Urch.

Surprise! Your Cousin's a Sea Urchin

They lack eyes, ears and a backbone, but sea urchins are more closely related to humans than once thought.

www.livescience.com

OK article, but more a layman's article. It does have references. You have never provided specific scientific references to support your assertions. This article supports science.

All supposed similarity is not evidence for evolution at all. But the inexplicable differences and inexplicable similarities disprove evolution.
Trace each of these out from the latest common ancestor to the each of these species.
Please give very detailed information, dates, codes, numbers, etc.

Chromosome count
Mankind 46
Chimps 48

Chromosome counts for various fox species.
Red fox 34
Tibetan sand fox 36
Kit fox 50
Bengal fox 60
Fennec fox 64

Chromosome counts various species.
Butterfly 268
Gypsy moth 62
Japanese oak silk moth 31

Earth worm 36
Silk worm 56

Grape fern 90
Rattlesnake fern 184

Mankind 46
European olive 46

Amoeba dubia 670 billion base pairs
How did that happen?

Yes, you are illiterate, because you obviously do not understand the sources you cite, You perpetually take the position of justifying your ancient tribal agenda based on what you claim are the current limits of scientific knowledge. You fail to realize or refuse to acknowledge that 30 to 40 years ago science did not have enough information to make the hypothesis for LUCA, and they did not have the genetic, fossil, and geochemical knowledge we have today. This is how the proposal of hypotheses with prediction and falsification process takes place over time, and NOT determined by what science knows 'now.'

You like other fundamentalists stage your questions in a manner that you demand that science must know everything 'now'. If they do not know 'now' their hypotheses are false or unanswerable. Also, many of your questions and challenges like the one concerning Chromosome numbers are really ridiculous, because the explanation of variations in Chromosome numbers in the process of evolution has been known for many years, I learned the basics in genetic college courses over 50 years ago, Your only response was to repeat the ridiculous intentional ignorance over and over again ignoring the references provided that provided you with a detailed explanation.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

OK article, but more a layman's article. It does have references. You have never provided specific scientific references to support your assertions. The articles support science.




Yes, you are illiterate, because you obviously do not understand the sources you cite, You perpetually take the position of justifying your ancient tribal agenda based on what you claim are the current limits of scientific knowledge. You fail to realize or refuse to acknowledge that 30 to 40 years ago science did not have enough information to make the hypothesis for LUCA, and they did not have the genetic, fossil, and geochemical knowledge we have today. This is how the proposal of hypotheses with prediction and falsification process takes place over time, and NOT determined by what science knows 'now.'

You like other fundamentalists stage your questions in a manner that you demand that science must know everything 'now'. If they do not know 'now' their hypotheses are false or unanswerable. Also, many of your questions and challenges like the one concerning Chromosome numbers are really ridiculous, because the explanation of variations in Chromosome numbers in the process of evolution has been known for many years, I learned the basics in genetic college courses over 50 years ago, Your only response was to repeat the ridiculous intentional ignorance over and over again ignoring the references provided that provided you with a detailed explanation.

What about your cousin Urch?

Surprise! Your Cousin's a Sea Urchin

They lack eyes, ears and a backbone, but sea urchins are more closely related to humans than once thought.

www.livescience.com

 

[Subduction Zone]

What about your cousin Urch?

Surprise! Your Cousin's a Sea Urchin

They lack eyes, ears and a backbone, but sea urchins are more closely related to humans than once thought.

www.livescience.com

You mean your cousin. If you want questions answered at the very least you need to ask them properly.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

You mean your cousin. If you want questions answered at the very least you need to ask them properly.

Nor mine.
Cousin urch, cousin nobody, cousin chemicals, cousin oneCell, cousin Phibian, cousin monkey are all your relatives.