The Four Dirty Secrets Against Darwin Evolution

[Dan From Smithville]

He didn't deceive you. He told you clearly in his word. You just don't believe him.

So, you fully understand the Bible without flaw and know the meaning in every word? That there is no chance that your interpretation is off or wrong or incomplete?

 

[TrueBeliever37]

That has not been the model I've witnessed here. It is ask a question. Get several people answering it. Ignore the answers. Ask the questions over and over again as if never answered.

It is a tactic and doesn't represent sincere interest in getting answers in my opinion.

Like repeating the chicken and the egg and declaring is infallible proof against evolution when it was easily and readily explained how it is not by many people answering.

SEE you have to avoid giving the answer.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

So, you fully understand the Bible without flaw and know the meaning in every word? That there is no chance that your interpretation is off or wrong or incomplete?

Never said that once. But I do understand that he created things. Are you unable to understand that part?

 

[Revoltingest]

25 pages.
Still nothing either secret or dirty against evolution.
I wonder if anyone learned anything?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

SEE you have to avoid giving the answer.

I didn't avoid giving an answer. I provided a counter claim with evidence regarding your claim not to get answers.

As to the chicken and the egg, I have answered that previously, yet here you are asking it again as if it were never answered.

I find this to be typical example of a what I consider to be a diversionary tactic.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Never said that once.

The implication is pretty obvious and followed here with a question that assumes I don't know the Bible or believe it.

But I do understand that he created things.

If by "he" you mean God, I believe He did, but I don't pretend to know how or that we cannot learn from observation, study and experiment of the natural world. Are you claiming to know how God created. I see that as another example of how creationists express a view of total understanding. Even of things not written in the Bible.

Are you unable to understand that part?

Are able to understand that this gives all the appearance of refuting your own denial of a claim of full and complete understanding?

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Oddly, here you are asking another to repeat something.

I asked you numerous questions and have yet to receive answers relevant to those questions. Response? Sure. But not answers.

Why do we need to know the origin of the simplest cell to establish that living things change over time?

Evolution occurs when their is reproduction, heritable variation and selection by the environment. I've answered this question numerous times.

Demonstrate that you cannot have DNA with proteins? How do you explain ribozymes and show that they had no role in evolution?

Where is it demonstrated that the entire fossil record is necessary to show that evolution takes place?

Same from you - response not an answer. Why are you so afraid to tell me what laid the first egg?

You can't have evolution without having creatures to reproduce and evolve. Where did you get those creatures?

If there was truly as much evolution as you claim - where are the smooth intermediate fossil records? For instance, show some pictures of fossil records with the transitions that the giraffe went through. That would be some actual evidence.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

25 pages.
Still nothing either secret or dirty against evolution.
I wonder if anyone learned anything?

Mostly what I have observed are empty claims, misinformation and diversionary tactics.

 

[Revoltingest]

Mostly what I have observed are empty claims, misinformation and diversionary tactics.

Ahah!
The Bible.

 

[exchemist]

Same from you - response not an answer. Why are you so afraid to tell me what laid the first egg?

You can't have evolution without having creatures to reproduce and evolve. Where did you get those creatures?

If there was truly as much evolution as you claim - where are the smooth intermediate fossil records? For instance, show some pictures of fossil records with the transitions that the giraffe went through. That would be some actual evidence.

Why do you expect smooth intermediates to be available, or important?

 

[TrueBeliever37]

I didn't avoid giving an answer. I provided a counter claim with evidence regarding your claim not to get answers.

As to the chicken and the egg, I have answered that previously, yet here you are asking it again as if it were never answered.

I find this to be typical example of a what I consider to be a diversionary tactic.

Don't be scared to repeat your supposed answer. Or refer me to the post. You responded but didn't provide an answer. I CHALLENGE you to repeat your answer.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Why do you expect smooth intermediates to be available, or important?

Because that would be some actual evidence that what you claim is true.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Same from you - response not an answer. Why are you so afraid to tell me what laid the first egg?

Why are you so insistent that the answers you got were not given. There is a record here you know.

You can't have evolution without having creatures to reproduce and evolve.

No one has ever said otherwise. But those creatures need only exist and not exist by some specific means. Unless you can show otherwise and I'm confident that you cannot give what I have seen.

Where did you get those creatures?

I didn't get them anywhere? I have believe, but no knowledge of the means to the existence of the first living things. Since you know the answers to all of this with absolute certainty, you will no doubt explain in detail so that all of the rest of us can know it too.

If there was truly as much evolution as you claim - where are the smooth intermediate fossil records?

I have challenges in understanding your writing. But where is your evidence that all these conclusions about evolution using the fossil record require that fossils of every generation of a line of living things needs to be available?

For instance, show some pictures of fossil records with the transitions that the giraffe went through. That would be some actual evidence.

I'm still waiting for your demonstrations and evidence. We are back to your efforts to try and switch the burden of proof to others that would like you to demonstrate your claims. Can you provide biblical support that this is a sound and sincere means of discussion and demonstration?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Ahah!
The Bible.

Mostly, allusions to complete and full understanding of the Bible and absolute certainty that there is only one true interpretation and only some people have it.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Because that would be some actual evidence that what you claim is true.

What evidence have you used to show anything you claimed? Why is the fossil record that exists now insufficient as evidence demonstrating evolution?

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Why are you so insistent that the answers you got were not given. There is a record here you know.

No one has ever said otherwise. But those creatures need only exist and not exist by some specific means. Unless you can show otherwise and I'm confident that you cannot give what I have seen.

I didn't get them anywhere? I have believe, but no knowledge of the means to the existence of the first living things. Since you know the answers to all of this with absolute certainty, you will no doubt explain in detail so that all of the rest of us can know it too.

I have challenges in understanding your writing. But where is your evidence that all these conclusions about evolution using the fossil record require that fossils of every generation of a line of living things needs to be available?

I'm still waiting for your demonstrations and evidence. We are back to your efforts to try and switch the burden of proof to others that would like you to demonstrate your claims. Can you provide biblical support that this is a sound and sincere means of discussion and demonstration?

You are the one trying to switch the burden of proof. This is about evolution. You are the one that believes it not me. The burden is on you.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

You are the one trying to switch the burden of proof. This is about evolution. You are the one that believes it not me. The burden is on you.

This is about your claims regarding evolution and the burden in supporting those claims is your and yours only.

I thought you were running off. I guess you couldn't support that claim either.

 

[exchemist]

Because that would be some actual evidence that what you claim is true.

The fossil record we have is excellent evidence as it stands, surely? All one has to do is join the dots.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Why do you expect smooth intermediates to be available, or important?

I've asked about that claim too. Still no answer.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The fossil record we have is excellent evidence as it stands, surely?

That assumes an awareness and understanding of the fossil record that has not been demonstrated by those rejecting out of hand or because they were told to.