Thoughts on the Fall of Adam

[YoursTrue]

Once again it is an analogy. A teaching tool. You may understand how languages change. If you understand how languages change that can help you to understand how species evolve.

Do you know what a parable is? I am having my doubts.

Lol. Yikes. Is that an evolutionary expression? Lolol..

 

[Subduction Zone]

So you're saying there are proofs of genetic biological small changes where finally one population cannot biologically intermingle with a "close" earlier or later population. You know there are no proofs and so does everyone else whether you or they admit or not. Your continual statements that evolution is true based on fact does not make it so. In fact, it doesn't make you look real good.

Wrong, I know that there are "proofs". I gave you one such example. Here is another. Ring species show evolution in action. This very short video demonstrates the concept of ring species and shows how Kent Hovind's definition of "Kind" fails:

 

[YoursTrue]

Do you not know what an analogy is and how they can be useful teaching tools?

You are very confused about how evolution occurs and I used language as an analogy to help you to understand better.

The same way you said the fruit was a figurative apple? Lol. Get your own ideas straight first before you go off on the deep end.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You spoke about changing language as describing evolution. You are funny.

No, you are merely terribly ignorant. And that is sad. Worse yet ignorance can be cured by education, but you are afraid to learn

Do you think that you can drop your fear long enough to learn?

 

[Subduction Zone]

The same way you said the fruit was a figurative apple? Lol. Get your own ideas straight first before you go off on the deep end.

Sorry, no more apple questions until you answer this one:

Is English your first language??


People that grew up speaking English would understand immediately. Creationists often call it "the apple'.

 

[YoursTrue]

Wrong, I know that there are "proofs". I gave you one such example. Here is another. Ring species show evolution in action. This very short video demonstrates the concept of ring species and shows how Kent Hovind's definition of "Kind" fails:

Similarities and magnetic forces do not prove evolution. That animals, plants and humans have similar biological properties do not prove evolution. Fossils do not prove evolution. You may say they do, but to the truly honest analytical mind they do not. Again the more I think about your answers and insistence on the incredible, the more absurd the concept of evolution becomes. But that won't stop you from sticking to the absurdities.

 

[YoursTrue]

Sorry, no more apple questions until you answer this one:

Is English your first language??


People that grew up speaking English would understand immediately. Creationists often call it "the apple'.

Lolol...

 

[Subduction Zone]

Similarities and magnetic forces do not prove evolution. That animals, plants and humans have similar biological properties do not prove evolution. Fossils do not prove evolution. You may say they do, but to the truly honest analytical mind they do not. Again the more I think about your answers and insistence on the incredible, the more absurd the concept of evolution becomes. But that won't stop you from sticking to the absurdities.

You need to learn what is and what is not evidence. You have no clue as shown on your misuse of the word "prove". Beyond a reasonable doubt the theory of evolution has been proven, but until you learn what is and what is not evidence you will not be able to admit this.

 

[YoursTrue]

No, you are merely terribly ignorant. And that is sad. Worse yet ignorance can be cured by education, but you are afraid to learn

Do you think that you can drop your fear long enough to learn?

So far you have spoken illogical concepts, no use going into your ideas right now any further as if your bases are on a solid foundation. Why start building a road with a weak foundation? When you can show proof that the intermediary populations intermingled sexually and evolved I may listen to you. There is not one iota of proof beyond guesswork that one population grew into another. No matter how you call it. Hunched apes, dragging arms then to straighter spines, less hair, there is no proof. Growth or evolution, what you will. Until you can go beyond guesswork, there is no need to follow along your ideas in detail. Perhaps with someone else. It's guesswork and all your posturing in the world won't change it. Thanks for the conversation, though.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Lolol...

What is wrong? Afraid to answer a question again? It is easy for all to see that your education is a bit lacking. But there should be no reason that you cannot learn. Not being educated is probably not your fault. At least growing up. Now it is time for you to try to grow up mentally and learn what you should have been taught a long time ago.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So far you have spoken illogical concepts, no use going into your ideas right now any further as if your bases are on a solid foundation. Why start building a road with a weak foundation? When you can show proof that the intermediary populations intermingled sexually and evolved I may listen to you. There is not one iota of proof beyond guesswork that one population grew into another. No matter how you call it. Hunched apes, dragging arms then to straighter spines, less hair, there is no proof. Growth or evolution, what you will. Until you can go beyond guesswork, there is no need to follow along your ideas in detail. Perhaps with someone else. It's guesswork and all your posturing in the world won't change it. Thanks for the conversation, though.

Now you are back to spouting falsehoods. Just because you cannot understand does not mean that someone else was illogical. Your running away from even the basics of science tells all that I am not the one thinking illogically.

And once again you propose a strawman. That is not how evolution occurred so it would be illogical to show you that. You are accusing others of your sins.

 

[YoursTrue]

Now you are back to spouting falsehoods. Just because you cannot understand does not mean that someone else was illogical. Your running away from even the basics of science tells all that I am not the one thinking illogically.

And once again you propose a strawman. That is not how evolution occurred so it would be illogical to show you that. You are accusing others of your sins.

No strawman. You are the one producing false doctrine, SUCH AS "figurative apple," a population producing by evolution another "population," yet no procreation between "populations" evidenced except in the imaginations of men.(Ridiculous. And unproven, and illogical. Ridiclous.)

 

[YoursTrue]

Sorry, no more apple questions until you answer this one:

Is English your first language??


People that grew up speaking English would understand immediately. Creationists often call it "the apple'.

So now you agree with creationists that say it is a figurative "apple"? (Like they know? or they guess?) How about just saying it was a fruit? That's too hard to do?? (again -- lol.) It almost sounds like populations...morphing...wonderful! Thanks for the conversation.

 

[YoursTrue]

No, you are merely terribly ignorant. And that is sad. Worse yet ignorance can be cured by education, but you are afraid to learn

Do you think that you can drop your fear long enough to learn?

Learning like what? How to build a bridge with substandard materials as a foundation??

 

[Subduction Zone]

No strawman. You are the one producing false doctrine, SUCH AS "figurative apple," a population producing by evolution another "population," yet no procreation between "populations" evidenced except in the imaginations of men.(Ridiculous. And unproven, and illogical. Ridiclous.)

I am sorry that you do not understand basic English.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Learning like what? How to build a bridge with substandard materials as a foundation??

No, that is all that you have. Do you see the computer, tablet or phone that you are using? The foundation that I rely on is the same one that made those possible.

Just because you rely on fairy tales does not mean that others do so as well.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So now you agree with creationists that say it is a figurative "apple"? (Like they know? or they guess?) How about just saying it was a fruit? That's too hard to do?? (again -- lol.) It almost sounds like populations...morphing...wonderful! Thanks for the conversation.

Since you appear to be having trouble with basic English there is no point in pursuing this matter.

 

[YoursTrue]

You need to learn what is and what is not evidence. You have no clue as shown on your misuse of the word "prove". Beyond a reasonable doubt the theory of evolution has been proven, but until you learn what is and what is not evidence you will not be able to admit this.

Proof is when you mix chocolate syrup with milk and then say it's chocolate milk. That's proof that it's chocolate milk. Made with chocolate and milk. Now do you want to argue it may not be syrup?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Proof is when you mix chocolate syrup with milk and then say it's chocolate milk. That's proof that it's chocolate milk. Made with chocolate and milk. Now do you want to argue it may not be syrup?

You do not understand basic concepts. Proof is a preponderance of evidence. When it comes to reliable evidence there is evidence only for evolution. There is no reliable evidence for creationism. All there is is a book of myths.

The concept of scientific evidence is easy to learn. Would you care to try?

 

[YoursTrue]

No, that is all that you have. Do you see the computer, tablet or phone that you are using? The foundation that I rely on is the same one that made those possible.

No, it's not. The FACT is that there historical and tangible realities leading up to the computer, tablet and phone. There are no evidences of anything materially cogent that leads up to populations morphing from one population to another. You have produced not one iota of evidence, no fossil evidence showing that there have been populations morphing from one to another. There are fossils. But they are not proving evolution. They are proving there were animals and "forms" that died, bones buried, sometimes not completely corroded, and may or may not be different than the animals today. If you have more than that, please -- just give one or two sentences demonstrating more than that. (Thanks.)