• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why Evolution Is Wrong In Biology And What is Right?

MrIntelligentDesign

Active Member
Ahh, so you have inoculated yourself against any objections. My objections are trying to get at what you are saying. If you refuse to respond to my objections or questions how can I ever understand what you are talking about? I spent about 3 months learning about evolution. I took an online course and every time I had a question about a topic I got real answers and discussion about the topic. When I was in college, it was the same way. learning Physics and Chemistry etc. Whatever I did not understand or had objections to the teachers engaged and answered and showed me where I was getting it wrong. If you want people to understand and be convinced of your ideas you need to answer legitimate questions.
If you understood my explanation, then, you do not have legitimate question since either you will agree with me or rebut me in writings. But if you cannot rebut me, then, what are your arguments?
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
If a first I'm your equal natural human no science exists is the truth.

Natural human argues first is against any other natural human.

As we are equals in presence... you human scientist are the liar.

Natural history man says if I don't argue science science says it's more intelligent.

Science is life's destroyer... natural humans first are correct not science.

You've been so false indoctrinated you don't believe in first human position anymore.

Science says I argue against creationists.

Evolution theory is a creationists theory.

Science says the nature of animals biology proves we are mutually living separately at the same time owning living with very similar biologies.

Is a natural life statement only.

As you chose to make a study of any one type of body that exists as it's one only type of body.

Stating life is mutual there is no thesis.

Science status.

It is science a human choice arguing science a human choice.

Your thoughts and your human chosen studies owns no reason why anything exists.

The term indoctrinated false preachers is the human as the scientist.

As healers knew natural medical advice not as science it was human to human and human living with nature.

Science was a humans money making scheme.

Science says I patent my thoughts to get and own money. Thinks about natural tries to patent it as science is just rich man's new scheme to get richer.

Hence is vying to make his thoughts God to patent owning everything.

His greed is so consuming now he wants cosmic thesis patented as if all resources are his to gain remove by access.

So when you say you know you want any resource consumed he pretends... no I will channel it exact so you won't claim I'm destroying. As his mind as science coerces always as the way of science.

The human conscious warning.

Science thought unnaturally as a natural human knows their human stories didn't invent the presence of any type of form.

The argument is direct to and about a humans destroyer thinking concepts.

Lightning not electricity comes via atmosphere heavens to the ground. As the channel power.
 

Clizby Wampuscat

Well-Known Member
If you understood my explanation, then, you do not have legitimate question since either you will agree with me or rebut me in writings. But if you cannot rebut me, then, what are your arguments?
I gave you 7 flaws earlier in this thread that you have ignored.

Why Evolution Is Wrong In Biology And What is Right?

You seem to have the idea that I must 100% understand and agree with you before you will engage in any conversation with me about your ideas. The fact is I think your ideas are flawed and I gave you 7 different reasons why, if you want to discuss them then respond, if you don't then I guess we are done.
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
Past tense. Looking back by science means from highest evolved biologies biological position. No evolution.

Evolved only would be the tense used by a scientist as intelligent human.

Using correct tense places science exactly by the word.

Science status observation first is the most intelligent as it sees exact precise.

As a human heals adapts it's sick or damaged biology by a healing status. Not an evolving status.

Tense meaning exact used worded explanations always existed before maths calculus was inferred.

Religious science human taught said you caused life sacrifice scientist you hence are proven wrong. As life should not change if you use past tense.

Gods word he taught human life are supported first. Not God is the word the human word use was correct first only. Not maths and numbers.

Science lied as they used applied tense in the presence new as a new conversion of mass. Which changes the old or past body. Original position itself.

Not predicted as God only predicted as the conversion only.

So the teacher that said the science of God was wrong being nuclear sciences stopped teaching the known teaching as the teacher.

As spiritual human. Now mis represents misreads a teaching natural human versus the scientist.

As the human mind had changed.

We lost our teacher.

As in schools the teaching said human science had been proven incorrect and life's destroyer. Because of the unnatural developed status sciences and human egotism.

Hence now family no longer identifies with nature's role play of our human parents.

As the correct teacher.

As when science confessed it was wrong they knew science is wrong.

A dinosaur proves that evolution is fake as the dinosaur living is exact a dinosaur the dinosaur.

So science said if I brought the evidence back to life a living dinosaur living on earth within the garden nature your creation theory is defunct creationist theist as evolution.

As only reactive earth attacks not natural out of life's control killed off dinosaurs. Living with nature's garden.

Which is not evolution.

As humans weren't living as dinosaurs.

Worded explanations the stated coercion of humans.

Hence if a planet by science is O one position. No heavenly causes or effects are scientific. You can't use them as an evolving thesis as a planets body O held the gas first.

So you can't thesis using a heavens. As the planet position one first is in space. Without a heavens.

Science is exact it says to state intelligent human advice as advised.

Science can't use the heavens as a thesis cosmic science beginnings. As it ended created as the O one planet as the science status.

Like you can't use a moon as cosmic science as it's not the term science. Exact to body status first.

Was the human correct science teaching against theists. Just human the whole time.

So it was a law of humans that said Satanism science was outlawed as evil against life existing.

Why a human atheist had been considered an evil thinker.

Always thinking about what they aren't or what they own to supersede status to families natural living presence.

Religious science taught to status only a planet was one. No human is God. No evolution thesis either.

The humanity teaching was accept the only position a one self was...the human.
 

Dan From Smithville

The Flying Elvises, Utah Chapter
Staff member
Premium Member
OK, it is very simple.

Here is the prediction that you never know since nobody told you. It will be your first time to see and learn, you need to thank me for this.

Evolution is change of frequency alleles that will lead to new generation.

So, if there is no change, then, there is no allele or new generation, right? A prediction, major prediction.

Now, since the change is intelligence, then, there is no change that could make new generation I explained that in my OP (as linked), thus, no Evolution. Thus, there are NO

  • If it could be shown that organisms with identical DNA have different genetic traits.
  • If it could be shown that mutations do not occur.
  • If it could be shown that when mutations do occur, they are not passed down through the generations.
  • If it could be shown that although mutations are passed down, no mutation could produce the sort of phenotypic changes that drive natural selection.
  • If it could be shown that selection or environmental pressures do not favor the reproductive success of better adapted individuals.
  • If it could be shown that even though selection or environmental pressures favor the reproductive success of better adapted individuals, "better adapted individuals" (at any one time) are not shown to change into other species.

-------------------------------
You don't have to cut all branches of the tree (Evolution) if you want that tree to be uprooted. All you have to do is uproot the main root... simple. Thus, you can see that I am a clever and a genius, and correct...
Do you know what an allele is?
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
If a human scientist stopped lying.

If you said I'm two human's in a new body there is no evolution thesis.

As a theist you don't use a scientific thinking lineage one adult back to baby. Two human separate bodies sperm ovary sex act.

In any used human thesis involving anything else first.

Which is non scientific ...it is destroyer human mentality.

But you don't as one mind of men invented as a human the thesis of science.

You are a human. You look at an allele as the human whole being...you then claim all the missing biologies expressions you own as one human.

Knowing you aren't personally non present. Egotism.

As if you built the other human into their being.

So a human man said maths science is my mother and lied.

As you pretended the other one human wasn't important as compared to Mr science.

The teaching was abused female life. As compared causes to man human the scientist.

I know I got brain prickled burnt as you thesis plasma biology in want of invented man of sciences electricity only.

So why you theory isn't even an argument God evolution it's for a new science study argument.
 

MrIntelligentDesign

Active Member
I gave you 7 flaws earlier in this thread that you have ignored.

Why Evolution Is Wrong In Biology And What is Right?

You seem to have the idea that I must 100% understand and agree with you before you will engage in any conversation with me about your ideas. The fact is I think your ideas are flawed and I gave you 7 different reasons why, if you want to discuss them then respond, if you don't then I guess we are done.
I had already told you that I do not have flaws so far since I used intelligence. Unless, you rediscover intelligence that is too different from mine, then, probably, I have flaws, and I will admit defeat. Thus, your argument is useless.
 

John53

I go leaps and bounds
Premium Member
I had already told you that I do not have flaws so far since I used intelligence. Unless, you rediscover intelligence that is too different from mine, then, probably, I have flaws, and I will admit defeat. Thus, your argument is useless.

I don't know if you have any flaws but your work has many flaws. You can't have a probability of greater than 1. That's just one of the glaring flaws.

You've been trying to peddle this for at least 11 years and not one person has agreed with you.
 

Clizby Wampuscat

Well-Known Member
I had already told you that I do not have flaws so far since I used intelligence. Unless, you rediscover intelligence that is too different from mine, then, probably, I have flaws, and I will admit defeat. Thus, your argument is useless.
Ok, I guess we are done then. Thanks for the conversation. I wish you luck in convincing the scientific community that evolution is false.
 

tas8831

Well-Known Member
Here is a thought to consider because there is nothing in the Bible to say that God did Not use some form of evolution where lower-life forms were involved, however Not where human life is involved.
Adam was formed or fashioned from the already existing dust of the ground. (Gen.2:7)
So, biblically speaking where humankind is concerned there was No evolution involved.
How did this dust become nucleic acids, lipids, amino acids, etc.?
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
The man's AD theme stated 0 .

0AD.

So zero was AD only not man.

As AiN in Hebrew was inferred mountain zero.

His temple sat atop the mount as they were transmitting buildings. As temple plan looks similar to modern man's radio transmitters.

Using less oxygen and colder cloud mass.

A mountain isn't the volcano where CH burning gases first arise.

Mountain gets O UFO mass hit melted as man virtually had theoried a mountains conversion into an O opened volcano was the science teaching.

As clouds are in one place only keeping life safe ...science used it.

Why mountains face blackened burnt. It disintegrated and fell. Piled dusts at its feet. So he taught a dust gets a dust. Equals equals equals results. Three term.

If you decide to take an earth face dust then convert it. Then you get life sacrificed as nuclear above is dealt with by vacuum. And it's extremely cold. Unlike warm ground heated life.

0AD.

The theme never do it again as man's image before science was already in the clouds as Satan's angels. With dead dinosaur images still today seen in clouds.

Voice of origin science man who has destroyed life on origin earth caused dinosaur life Inheritance. Age old advice man's earth history of science.

Man's mind said hence old earth passed away I inherited a new earth life.

It was known new man life heard old man's science voice visions. First human science.
 

MrIntelligentDesign

Active Member
I don't know if you have any flaws but your work has many flaws. You can't have a probability of greater than 1. That's just one of the glaring flaws.

You've been trying to peddle this for at least 11 years and not one person has agreed with you.
The new Probability is advanced. Assuming that person A and B are both intelligent, but they want to make a chair, then, by just looking at their finished chair, we can calculate the differences of intelligence between the two. If you reverse that, you can make a Probability of intelligence.
 
Top