The first living thing could not have come into being by random chance, therefore, God Almighty created all things. Just 1 proof.

[Sgt. Pepper]

Evolution is the Theory of Nothing because they cannot answer some very simple questions.

Where did the universe come from?

If the explanation is the Bing Bang with or without inflation, what was there before that?

If there was nothing before the Big Bang, then that breaks cause and effect.

It also violates every law of conservation too.

If there was something before that, what caused the thing that was before the Big Bang to come into being?

If that thing always, existed that violates the law of increasing entropy.

If that thing has not always existed what was there before the thing that was prior our universe to come into being?

Please continue this until you get something that has always been.

And then that will violate the law of increasing entropy.

Where did the laws of nature come from?

Where did all matter come from? Where did antimatter?

Where did all energy come from?

Where did all the protons come from? neutrons? photons? neutrinos? All the quarks? Gluons? Muons? All the anti-particles?

Where did the gravitation force come from? The strong force? The weak force? The electromagnetic force?

What was the first living thing made of? Was it DNA? Was it RNA? Was it just proteins? Was it some mix?

What was its code? How many codons was it? When did it come into being?

Where did it come into being? In space? In the atmosphere? In the ocean? In a tide pool?

In clay or mud? What protected it from UV rays? What was the composition of the atmosphere at that time?

If it was in water, how did the amino acids keep from being dissipated by the water?

What was the energy source for these reactions?

Where there any enzymes in it? Which ones? Certain required reactions need enzymes as catalysts. If not, the reaction may take a vast number of years. Surely the primitive thing could not last more than a minute much less than many years/

How did it survive? Where did the protective layer come from? What was the protected layer? How did that part get reproduced?

What was its food source? How did it remove waste? How did it repair itself?

Please explain how it was ever able to reproduce itself.

If the first living thing was just proteins, how did it ever get evolve to use RNA? It is irreducibly complex. You need all the parts to be working for it not to be destruction.

If it was RNA based, how did it to ever evolve to use DNA? It is irreducibly complex. You need all the parts to be working for it not to be destruction.

Gish gallop: The Gish gallop (/ˈɡɪʃ ˈɡæləp/) is a rhetorical technique in which a person in a debate attempts to overwhelm their opponent by providing an excessive number of arguments with no regard for the accuracy or strength of those arguments. Gish galloping prioritizes the quantity of the galloper's arguments at the expense of their quality. The term was coined in 1994 by anthropologist Eugenie Scott, who named it after American creationist Duane Gish and argued that Gish used the technique frequently when challenging the scientific fact of evolution.[1] - Gish gallop - Wikipedia

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Gish

They were C-14 dated, so each Dino figurine destroys evolution and billions of years.

Hapgood submitted the samples to the Laboratory of Isotopes Inc. in New Jersey. The results were as follows:

Sample No. 1	(I-3842) 3590 + - 100 (C.1640 BC)
Sample No. 2	(I-4015) 6480 + - 170 (C. 4530 BC)
Sample No. 3	(I-4031)3060 + - 120 (C. 1110 BC)

The Stegosaurus clobbers evolution and billions of years too.

Did Ancient Man See Dinosaurs? These Carvings and Artifacts Say Maybe​

What the farmer uncovered was an amazing collection of pieces, many of which appeared to be dinosaurs. If authentic, the figurines seemed to show that ancient people living in what is now Mexico had knowledge of a wide range of dinosaur species.

historydaily.org


But it is all over the world.

Ancient Dinosaur Depictions | Genesis Park​

www.genesispark.com

 

[shunyadragon]

Finding bones would have helped but only if they had dug them up and assembled them as are seen in a museum so not sure that ever happened. Also more than one kind of dinosaur is depicted, so they would have had to have done this a number of times.
Also it it would have had to be a complete skeleton because the figurines are of the full body of the creature

The figurines remain unbelievably bogus. There is no archaeological documentation for pristine, no wear, no breaks, and obviously made yesterday and bogusly dishonest. Probably to sell to gullible fundes as souvenirs. I grew up in Costa Rica, and silly little figurines like these are all over in the tourist markets in Central America

Yes, some complete skeletons, including scale and skin imprints in rock have been known for millennia, Common in some areas of China you can dig up near the surface. I lived there and saw them

There are not 33,000 total Neolithic or ancient figurines of animals found that are documented as genuine.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

The figurines remain unbelievably bogus. There is no archaeological documentation for pristine, no wear, no breaks, and obviously made yesterday and bogusly dishonest. Probably to sell to gullable fundes as suvineers

Yes, some complete skeletons, including scale and skin imprints in rock have been known for millennia, Common in some areas of China you can dig up near the surface. I lived there and saw them

There are not 33,000 total Neolithic or ancient figurines of animals found that are documented as genuine.

They were dated with C-14 to about 500 BC
The Stegosaurus etching was from 900 AD.
and of course all the other dino depictions.

There should be millions of chains of missing links. All are missing. Why?
They should be finding missing links every day. Why not?
There should be partially developed organs and systems in all individual creations that exist today and have eve existed. There are none. Why?
The odds against the above 2 facts are so vast that it is more than the odds against a very large specific amino acid sequence coming into being by natural processes.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

And for this and so many other reasons, I don't see it possible to have a rational discussion with you.

You have done nothing and nothing has happened to the theory of evolution or anything in science as a result of the nothing you have done.

The OP has repeatedly posted Gish Gallop, dismissed any answers that clearly debunk his arguments, and accused others of failing to accept his bogus challenge when the refutations undeniably contradict his beliefs. He has also pompously declared victory since he vehemently rejects any successful refutations that demonstrate that his beliefs are wrong and stubbornly refuses to admit that he has failed. And lastly, he has demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt that he is extremely ignorant of science and is adamantly opposed to learning differently, as doing so would require him to renounce his creationist beliefs and his interpretation of the Bible. He is like the other creationists I know, so I don't expect him to admit his failure anytime soon.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

The OP has ...

There should be millions of chains of missing links. All are missing. Why?

They should be finding missing links every day. Why not?

There should be partially developed organs and systems in all individual creations that exist today and have eve existed. There are none. Why?

The odds against the above 2 facts are so vast that it is more than the odds against a very large specific amino acid sequence coming into being by natural processes.

Please explain how asexual reproduction evolved into sexual reproduction. Without all things working the switch over leads to the destruction of the creature. But there is no survival advantage to the incomplete system.

Please explain how asexual reproduction evolved. It too is irreducibly complex.

Evolution the Theory of Nothing.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Abiogenesis is impossible, has never been observed and I have proved it could never happen.

That is both a false and random statement as a response to the quote you are supposedly responding to.

 

[shunyadragon]

They were dated with C-14 to about 500 BC
The Stegosaurus etching was from 900 AD.
and of course all the other dino depictions.

Unbelievably false, no scientific or archaeological documentation whatsoever.

There should be millions of chains of missing links. All are missing. Why?
They should be finding missing links every day. Why not?
There should be partially developed organs and systems in all individual creations that exist today and have eve existed. There are none. Why?
The odds against the above 2 facts are so vast that it is more than the odds against a very large specific amino acid sequence coming into being by natural processes.

These figurines are obviously entirely bogus,

 

[Jimmy]

You mean your own poor reasoning? I have seen worse.

I love poor reasoning

 

[Jimmy]

Not at all.

Aw

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

There should be millions of chains of missing links. All are missing. Why?

They should be finding missing links every day. Why not?

There should be partially developed organs and systems in all individual creations that exist today and have eve existed. There are none. Why?

The odds against the above 2 facts are so vast that it is more than the odds against a very large specific amino acid sequence coming into being by natural processes.

Please explain how asexual reproduction evolved into sexual reproduction. Without all things working the switch over leads to the destruction of the creature. But there is no survival advantage to the incomplete system.

Please explain how asexual reproduction evolved. It too is irreducibly complex.

Evolution the Theory of Nothing.

I have told you three separate times now that I'm not playing this game with you because I don't believe you are being honest when you respond to others who disagree with your creationist beliefs. You have consistently refused to accept any answer that clearly demonstrates that your beliefs are wrong. You have also stubbornly refused to acknowledge that you have failed to justify your personal vendetta against evolution. I have no reason to believe you will accept my answers, but I do have ample reason to believe you will promptly reject them and accuse me of failing to meet your bogus challenge.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Can you refute them at all?

Here is simple challenge for those that believe in billions of years for the age of things. Give real evidence of anything that is more than 6000 years old. NO ASSUMPTIONS ALLOWED.

"no assumptions allowed" makes it impossible to give any evidence.

For example, would you consider fingerprints of the suspect on the murder weapon as evidence that the suspect did it?
Likely you'll say yes. I agree.

However, when we agree it is evidence (ie: supports the claim that the suspect is the murderer), then we are assuming that there is no undetectable extra-dimensional trolling alien running around framing people by spraypainting their fingers prints on murderweapons with some high tech fingerprint-spraying gadget.

Right?

No, instead we assume that the normal flow of events of physics, chemistry, etc where at play. Meaning that if the suspect grabbed the knife, it left a fingerprint on it.
We assume the laws of nature where the same in the past as they were today.

It is impossible to even live your life, without making a bunch of assumptions.
That reality is real. That you can learn things. That things that work today will also work tomorrow.
That when you jump up and fall down again, that this will also happen tomorrow. That tomorrow you won't go shooting into space instead.

In other words, your challenge is stupid.
You always have to make a few assumptions. And that's okay as long as they are reasonable assumptions.
Considering everything we know about physics, we can reasonably assume gravity worked the same in the past and will work the same in the future.
We won't have to change the constants of gravity into a variable in equations to calculate trajectories of falling objects or to calculate how much energy is needed for getting to escape velocity.

SO....

You didn't think this through, did you?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I love poor reasoning

We can tell.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

so everyone is lying who disagrees with the theory of nothing, aka, evolution.

No not at all.

It's just... if you dig the sewers for information, all you will come up with is more sewage.
You might want to up your game and get proper scientific sources when you wish to make a scientific point.

Arguing strawmen and using even more strawmen to supposedly support the original strawmen...
It's not going to accomplish anything.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

"no assumptions allowed" makes it impossible to give any evidence.

For example, would you consider fingerprints of the suspect on the murder weapon as evidence that the suspect did it?
Likely you'll say yes. I agree.

However, when we agree it is evidence (ie: supports the claim that the suspect is the murderer), then we are assuming that there is no undetectable extra-dimensional trolling alien running around framing people by spraypainting their fingers prints on murderweapons with some high tech fingerprint-spraying gadget.

Right?

No, instead we assume that the normal flow of events of physics, chemistry, etc where at play. Meaning that if the suspect grabbed the knife, it left a fingerprint on it.
We assume the laws of nature where the same in the past as they were today.

It is impossible to even live your life, without making a bunch of assumptions.
That reality is real. That you can learn things. That things that work today will also work tomorrow.
That when you jump up and fall down again, that this will also happen tomorrow. That tomorrow you won't go shooting into space instead.

In other words, your challenge is stupid.
You always have to make a few assumptions. And that's okay as long as they are reasonable assumptions.
Considering everything we know about physics, we can reasonably assume gravity worked the same in the past and will work the same in the future.
We won't have to change the constants of gravity into a variable in equations to calculate trajectories of falling objects or to calculate how much energy is needed for getting to escape velocity.

SO....

You didn't think this through, did you?

So no one can meet the challenge

 

[F1fan]

There should be millions of chains of missing links. All are missing. Why?

They should be finding missing links every day. Why not?

"Missing link" is a misnomer. Arguably all organisms are links. In the fossil record there are gaps of samples, and that is because we can't expect to find a sample of every species that ever evolved. Scientists have found enough fossils to create an obvious pattern that shows life on this planet has evolved over many billions of years.

We do see creationists try to undermine evolution by misusing this phrase, as if there could be enough fossils that would convince those with an extremist belief like creationism. The important thing now is teaching children to ignore creationism and accept science. This is only a problem with certain types of Christian families and communities.

There should be partially developed organs and systems in all individual creations that exist today and have eve existed. There are none. Why?

Why assume this? Do you have a bogus creationist source or did you make this us via your lack of knowledge and expertise?

The odds against the above 2 facts are so vast that it is more than the odds against a very large specific amino acid sequence coming into being by natural processes.

Where is your source? You lack knowledge and expertise so we can't take your word for it.

Please explain how asexual reproduction evolved into sexual reproduction. Without all things working the switch over leads to the destruction of the creature. But there is no survival advantage to the incomplete system.

If you have questions about nature you can access answers by using expert and reputable science source that are available for free on the internet. If you ask questions but lack the interest to look them up yourself you risk being seen as a fraud.

Please explain how asexual reproduction evolved. It too is irreducibly complex.

Look it up.

Evolution the Theory of Nothing.

Careful, you don't want Seinfeld to sue you for copyright infringement.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So no one can meet the challenge

You can't meet your "challenge". It was not a proper challenge. It only "prove" the ignorance of the author.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

"Missing link" is …

No science or answers in your post

 

[Jimmy]

We can tell.

I would hope so

 

[F1fan]

No science or answers in your post

You have contempt for science, so you should be happy. And you reject valid answers.

I did call your religious belief system extremist, and you didn't disagree. Do you understand you have extremist religious beliefs that are inconsistent with reality? We know this, do you?