Verifiable evidence for creationism?

[Parsimony]

You mentioned mutation. Mutation is negative or neutral. It is never positive except in comics books or movies and such as the X-Men.

Oh yes they can be.

 

[McBell]

Evolutionists do not claim that vastly complex organisms were created by evolution from infinitely simple ones ? Doesn't seem quite right to me. Do you tell fortunes ?

Wallowing in ignorance does not help you either.

Though it does seem to make the choir proud of you.

 

[McBell]

Many people, including scientists, who have found a single cell is complex. That beauty isn't a mutation. Those who recognize as such in nature and appreciate the wonders of something, living or not living, and how they were designed by an intelligence. As humans, we all strive for perfection and appreciate perfection. It's our inner call to what once we had and lost. How can those who study common bacterium realize it and are amazed? They know that it doesn't just come together from amino acids. Your question should be how does evolution start when it cannot create anything? Can your worldview explain why you are here?

your being stuck on the word "create" is your problem, not mine.

I have no problem saying "I do not know".
Why do you?

 

[shmogie]

Wallowing in ignorance does not help you either.

Though it does seem to make the choir proud of you.

lol, dude you are doing the wallowing. tarot cards ?

 

[McBell]

lol, dude you are doing the wallowing. tarot cards ?

"I know you are but what am I" does not help you.

Care to try again?
Might I suggest you try bringing your replies up to at least high school level?

 

[jonathan180iq]

To the contrary, science and the scientific method started with Christianity.

You need to rethink this.

 

[leibowde84]

you get to ask God about your ignorance when you meet Him
and maybe He will ask about yours

Your reply here is incoherent, as I never made any claims or spoke to God being ignorant in any way. An argument from ignorance, in this context, is using a current lack of scientific explanation or theory as evidence that God is responsible for something. It is a logical fallacy or a "cop-out", which doesn't actually bolster an argument in any way.

 

[Sapiens]

Okey dokey, but since evolution has created bacteria, as you claim, where are all the other bacteria they created? The answer isn't just blowing in the solar wind in outer space or in the nether.

Yes evolution "created" bacteria. They are all (those that are extant) here. Your question is more than a bit odd.

 

[shmogie]

"I know you are but what am I" does not help you.

Care to try again?
Might I suggest you try bringing your replies up to at least high school level?

Ooooooooooh. Try bringing your comments up to grade school level. Ouija boards ?

 

[Zosimus]

You need to rethink this.

Yeah. Everyone knows it was the Muslims.

 

[McBell]

Ooooooooooh. Try bringing your comments up to grade school level. Ouija boards ?

Now the only question is whether it is you are unable or unwilling to have an adult conversation.

 

[gnostic]

Do you believe the universe and life exist ? Doesn't that make them evidence of creation ? Their very nature is evidence

The existence of life and that of the universe, are not evidences for the creator, designer or god, shmogie. It just your personal belief that you believe in such superstitious nonsense.

You are doing exactly the same thing as Neolithic man, who thought there were spirits in the trees, streams, rain, sun or moon. The Neolithic man didn't understand the mechanisms of nature, so they attributed to some sorts of spirits.

The authors of Genesis and JOB had no more understanding of nature and how they than the Neolithic man; the authors used their superstitions, and say God did it.

That Christians in this day and age still believe in literal interpretations of Genesis and JOB, and not allegories, only demonstrate that these Christians are still living in the Dark Ages.

Note that not all Christians are like the creationists. There are many Christians, as well as Jews, who believed that events in Genesis 1 to 11, are not history, but a metaphoric analogy or allegory that is used to teach people about morals and ethics, pretty much like Jesus' many parables, not meant to be taken literally as creationists do.

There are wisdoms in some of Jesus' parables come from teaching his disciples, using stories with meanings, but these parables were never meant to be taken as literal as in historicity. The value of his parables come from the meanings Jesus tried to illustrate, not from any historical accuracies.

The same is true with the stories of creation, Adam and Eve, Noah and the Flood. They were meant to have social significances, like teaching the ability to distinguish right from wrong, and the consequences of making the wrong choices. The values of these stories dropped considerably when creationists attempt to turn these stories into history or into science.

 

[Thief]

Your reply here is incoherent, as I never made any claims or spoke to God being ignorant in any way. An argument from ignorance, in this context, is using a current lack of scientific explanation or theory as evidence that God is responsible for something. It is a logical fallacy or a "cop-out", which doesn't actually bolster an argument in any way.

aren't you the one who insists?....we don't know

I am not uncertain

 

[shmogie]

The existence of life and that of the universe, are not evidences for the creator, designer or god, shmogie. It just your personal belief that you believe in such superstitious nonsense.

You are doing exactly the same thing as Neolithic man, who thought there were spirits in the trees, streams, rain, sun or moon. The Neolithic man didn't understand the mechanisms of nature, so they attributed to some sorts of spirits.

The authors of Genesis and JOB had no more understanding of nature and how they than the Neolithic man; the authors used their superstitions, and say God did it.

That Christians in this day and age still believe in literal interpretations of Genesis and JOB, and not allegories, only demonstrate that these Christians are still living in the Dark Ages.

Note that not all Christians are like the creationists. There are many Christians, as well as Jews, who believed that events in Genesis 1 to 11, are not history, but a metaphoric analogy or allegory that is used to teach people about morals and ethics, pretty much like Jesus' many parables, not meant to be taken literally as creationists do.

There are wisdoms in some of Jesus' parables come from teaching his disciples, using stories with meanings, but these parables were never meant to be taken as literal as in historicity. The value of his parables come from the meanings Jesus tried to illustrate, not from any historical accuracies.

The same is true with the stories of creation, Adam and Eve, Noah and the Flood. They were meant to have social significances, like teaching the ability to distinguish right from wrong, and the consequences of making the wrong choices. The values of these stories dropped considerably when creationists attempt to turn these stories into history or into science.

So you don't believe creation exists, and was created ? You are not grasping this very well. There was a Creation, true, or false ? It is a very simple question. You want to drift all about, make literary and social, and anthropological commentary. The issue is, was everything there is created, or not ?

 

[shmogie]

Now the only question is whether it is you are unable or unwilling to have an adult conversation.

I have heard nothing from you to indicate you are an adult. Cynical one sentence statements aren't conversing, they are the ploy of a teenager

 

[gnostic]

So you don't believe creation exists, and was created ? You are not grasping this very well. There was a Creation, true, or false ?

No, shmogie. I gave you my answer, that obviously don't agree with you, but you keep insisting on asking the same question over and over again, which is bloody irritating.

So one more time, I believe that life and universe both existing.

But there are no evidences for creator, designer or god existing, let alone being involved with creation. A deity don't exist except in the minds of the believers. A personal belief of believer is not the same thing as evidence; it is just faith.

The whole basis of religion are based on belief and faith alone, not on fact or evidence.

Until you have real evidences for your non-existing god, I don't have to agree with you on matter of your superstitious faith.

Your superstition are your own, shmogie. Stop trying to make YOUR blind faith and YOUR make-believe fantasy, mine.

 

[shmogie]

No, shmogie. I gave you my answer, that obviously don't agree with you, but you keep insisting on asking the same question over and over again, which is bloody irritating.

So one more time, I believe that life and universe both existing.

But there are no evidences for creator, designer or god existing, let alone being involved with creation. A deity don't exist except in the minds of the believers. A personal belief of believer is not the same thing as evidence; it is just faith.

The whole basis of religion are based on belief and faith alone, not on fact or evidence.

Until you have real evidences for your non-existing god, I don't have to agree with you on matter of your superstitious faith.

Your superstition are your own, shmogie. Stop trying to make YOUR blind faith and YOUR make-believe fantasy, mine.

You do what is called projecting. You are so concerned with what you think I might believe, and your hostility toward that, you project it into what you read and say. Doing so causes you to not grasp a simple issue. Was the universe created, or has it always been ? You are so hell bent to spew your ignorance you don't recognize that before I can discuss science, I have know to your stand on this simple issue. If you are a steady stater, that has to be destroyed with science before intelligent design can be addressed with science. If you accept the BB, then the science of that needs to be discussed and evidence examined. You are only concerned about peripheral issues. Whether the book of Job is literal or allegorical addresses the creation how ? I am making no effort to convert your pitiful self to anything, don't give yourself more importance than you have. You want to critically pontificate and draw irrelevant conclusions instead of looking at the science. Does that prospect intimidate or worry you ? ( "A diety don't exist" ) English 101

 

[fantome profane]

Evolutionists do not claim that vastly complex organisms were created by evolution from infinitely simple ones ? Doesn't seem quite right to me. Do you tell fortunes ?

Argument from incredulity.

 

[McBell]

I have heard nothing from you to indicate you are an adult. Cynical one sentence statements aren't conversing, they are the ploy of a teenager

you are well versed in deflection.
To bad that does not help you either.

 

[McBell]

You do what is called projecting.

Interesting how the rest of your post is a text book example....