The Reality of Evolution?

Home Help Search Login Register

Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.

OverUnity Research > General - Free Energy Related > Miscellaneous Discussions (Moderator: Allcanadian) > The Reality of Evolution?

2024-04-18, 02:04:34
News: Registration with the OUR forum is by admin approval.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

« previous next »

Author Topic: The Reality of Evolution? (Read 19668 times)

TinMan	Re: The Myth of Evolution « Reply #75 on: 2019-05-26, 01:52:30 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 4600	author=muDped link=topic=3776.msg74806#msg74806 date=1558819306] Quote Evolution has indeed become a faith based religion. Is just another Religious Cult. It is neither a religion nor a faith based cult. Quote Evolution (Darwin/Dawkins et al) overlooks the incredible complexities of Life and how living organisms function in their true to the tiniest detail processes to sustain and prolong life. Actually no. Science looks very closely to the complexities of life,down to the microscopic level. That is how they confirm the fact that evolution is how life developed to this day. Quote Evolution remains to this day 100% theoretical. This is where so many people are confused. There is a difference in the meaning of theory in how we(the public)use it,and what it means scientifically. In science,fact is commonly used to refer to the observable changes in organisms' traits over generations while the word "theory" is reserved for the mechanisms that cause these changes: So evolution is fact,and the theories of evolution are to explain the observable facts. Quote Evolution is a temporary deviance from the Path of Truth but will eventually find Complete Truth providing it proceeds in its search for Truth by diligently applying the Scientific Process. Evolution became fact by applying scientific process. The theory of evolution provides an explanation to those facts. Quote Evolution, simply put, wants there to be no God. It is an Agenda. Evolution wants nothing. Evolution is just a !fact! of life. Quote All who have eyes to see and minds to comprehend look upon what surrounds us in this Natural World with admiration and appreciation. As they should. Nothing compares with the beauty of mother nature Quote Our Living World is incredibly complex all the way from the tiniest of living things to the greatest of living things. Evolution does not understand Life. Evolution is why life today exists. Quote Evolution is really another facet of Mind Control/Behavior Modification. No,evolution really couldnt care whether man existed or not. Life on earth would continue on without man,probably for the better. Quote Events will occur Worldwide in the not too distant future which will shake the Earth as Truth is revealed. The Forces of Good will overcome the Forces of Badness as their time over the Planet has expired. The process has begun already. Just one part of the evolutionary process--natural selection. Quote There will be one last great war. Then Peace. Death too is only temporary. As above--natural selection. Over 300 animal species have become extinct in the last 100 year's,and most because of us humans. Humans will probably be the only species to become extinct due to there own actions--how smart are we Quote True Science would not have sought to develop the Atom Bomb. True Science would not develop weapons of warfare. True Science would not be in the Business of Death and Destruction. It was man that did all the above,and used science to do it. No bombs have ever been dropped,no weapons have ever been used,and no death or destruction has been to defend science--this is all in the name of mans control and greed. Quote That seems to be a teaching of Christendom but is inaccurate. The Israelites (House of Israel) that departed Egypt with Moses along with a crowd of Egyptians who chose to accompany them, were pre-Jewish. The nation of Israel in Palestine had not yet been formed and the land of Judea did not yet exist. The House of Judah came later. The Israelites and the Jews are distinctly different in that the House of Judah was but one of the tribes within the family. The practice of lumping them all together as Jews is a modern political deception, unfortunately. No two religious groups will ever agree,that is why there have been so many religious wars. Evolution on the other hand is as peaceful as the humming bird eating nectar. The fact that you have electricity to power your home,gasoline for your car,or oil for your engine,is only possible because of evolution--unless you have found a quick way to produce !!fossil!! fuels . Brad --------------------------- Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.

muDped	Re: The Myth of Evolution « Reply #76 on: 2019-05-26, 08:26:18 »
Group: Tinkerer Hero Member Posts: 3055	The discussion gets more and more interesting as it goes on! Two videos which confirm historical evidence relative to our discussion: The real man whom Christianity is about The Shroud and the Jew and one more: A more detailed accounting of the Shroud Examination When I was small Art Linkletter had a popular TV program called "Kids say the darndest things!" In discussions such as these we find that "Grownups believe the darndest things!" A famous person once said: "It is easier to get someone to believe a lie than it is to later convince them that it is not true." Or words to that effect. « Last Edit: 2019-05-26, 09:22:56 by muDped » --------------------------- For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open.

muDped	Re: The Myth of Evolution « Reply #77 on: 2019-05-26, 10:24:23 »
Group: Tinkerer Hero Member Posts: 3055	TinMan, I appreciate your responses to my statements. Your thoughts are quite interesting. I held many of those same beliefs as you many years ago. Evolutionists are today placing more emphasis on Natural Adaptability for the species rather than Natural Selection or Survival of the Fittest. In a few more years many more in Science who are studying Evolution will come to the Truthful Conclusion that Creation is the only possibility. In due time. All of our minds are being changed over time. Not because of the efforts or abilities of others since nobody but ourselves has that power. But, when we're ready, something awakens within us that turns the light on and opens our eyes. It's simply a matter of time. And the Love of our Creator. --------------------------- For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open.

TinMan	Re: The Myth of Evolution « Reply #78 on: 2019-05-26, 12:51:08 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 4600	Quote from: muDped on 2019-05-26, 10:24:23 TinMan, I appreciate your responses to my statements. Your thoughts are quite interesting. I held many of those same beliefs as you many years ago. Evolutionists are today placing more emphasis on Natural Adaptability for the species rather than Natural Selection or Survival of the Fittest. In a few more years many more in Science who are studying Evolution will come to the Truthful Conclusion that Creation is the only possibility. In due time. All of our minds are being changed over time. Not because of the efforts or abilities of others since nobody but ourselves has that power. But, when we're ready, something awakens within us that turns the light on and opens our eyes. It's simply a matter of time. And the Love of our Creator. I have no trouble with the fact that life was created. If it were not,then there would be no life. What i strongly object to is that some believe that a mythical magic being created all life,space and the earth as we know it today in 7 days. Life was created through millions of years of what would be call trial and error,where it took millions of years to find the right combination in a chemical soup just to produce the first microbe. It's just like winning the lotto,where almost everyone looses every time,--but every week some one wins. I do not need time,and i have love without !god! I already love the creator--mother nature,who made me who i am today. There is a big !!BIG!! difference in a faith or belief and scientific proof. Here are some of the proofs i offer https://www.khanacademy.org/science/biology/her/evolution-and-natural-selection/a/lines-of-evidence-for-evolution http://www.vce.bioninja.com.au/aos-4-change-over-time/evolution/evidence-for-evolution.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_common_descent http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence https://futurism.com/three-main-pieces-of-evidence-supporting-evolution Quote:For over 150 years—since the time of Charles Darwin—the Theory of Evolution has been through more scrutiny and rigorous investigation than just about any other scientific claim. And the theory has only been strengthened as more evidence has been accrued. While there are many that people who, for ideological reasons, want to make it seem like evolution is not widely accepted within the scientific community, this is not actually the case. https://necsi.edu/evidence-for-evolution https://www2.palomar.edu/anthro/evolve/evolve_3.htm Quote: Science does this by continuously comparing its theories objectively with evidence in the natural world. When theories no longer conform to the evidence, they are modified or rejected in favor of new theories that do conform. In other words, science constantly tries to prove its assumptions to be false and rejects implausible explanations. In this way, scientific knowledge and understanding grow over time. Quote:Religious explanations for the order of things are not science because they are based primarily on faith and do not subject themselves to be objectively falsified. Because of this fundamental difference in the approach to understanding our natural world, the U.S. Supreme Court in effect decided in 1987 that the Biblically based "creation science" is not a science and cannot be taught as such in public schools as an alternative or in addition to the mainstream evolutionary theory of the biological sciences. I could keep posting page after page of actual scientific proofs of evolution,but i could not post a single page providing any sort of scientific proof toward the religious account for life,as it just dose not exist. I did know that there was some form of religious based beliefs here on this forum,but i am stupefied as to how quickly physics,science,and scientific proofs are tossed aside in the name of religion. If this subject was about a claimed OU machine or device,we !all! would demand proof,and said device would need to be replicated,and both visually and scientifically tested over and over until absolute evidence was presented that said device was actually OU. Then after that,we would also still want to see it for our self. Then after all that,a theory would have to be developed as to how that machine dose what it dose,and from where the extra energy was entering the device or system. But,as soon as it comes to evolution V religion,all science and scientific proof,along with a theory in every area of that science that explains the facts,science and physics is simply tossed aside like it means nothing at all. We are told that 100's of years of science is wrong,and you need only faith To this point,i have offered page upon page of evidence and facts that support evolution.' As of yet,not one single piece of evidence has been produced that would stand up against all know science and physics that supports creation. In fact,the great flood has not even made it past go yet. This is suppose to be a forum of scientific fact,where the laws of physics always apply--until it comes to religion--then we can throw all that aside. This forum has a very strict set of guidelines,where even the thread title may not make or insinuate extraordinary claims. But here we see that the thread title is aloud to remain,even though it go's against all scientific fact and proof provided by all sections of science. In this case,the thread title is not only misleading,it is false,as evolution is a fact,not a myth. This is why the U.S. Supreme Court decided in 1987 that the Biblically based "creation science" is not a science,and cannot be taught as such in public schools. They did this because not one single biblical account can be scientifically tested and proven to be fact-->which means it's fiction or an untruth. Is there really any point in continuing on with this thread? It is very obvious that none of the believers are even remotely interested in science,or should i say the science and physics that proves them wrong. Carroll has already said that nothing will change his mind--facts no longer matter,evidence is no opposition. I even provided a very simple experiment,one which not one of the believers will take on,because they know that no amount of water sitting on top of rock and sand will push that rock and sand above the water level,so as the water may recede into the !now displaced! sea bed. Simple physics say it cannot and did not happen. Brad --------------------------- Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.

TinMan	Re: The Myth of Evolution « Reply #79 on: 2019-05-26, 13:15:12 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 4600	Quote from: muDped on 2019-05-26, 08:26:18 A more detailed accounting of the Shroud Examination Or words to that effect. It is truly amazing that out of the millions of people living in that time,they decided that it was Jesus who was wrapped in this cloth. We'll look past the fact that the carbon dating dated this cloth to be about 1200 years to young. The church was all for the carbon dating until it came back with a date that did not match up to the date of jesus living.The cloth tested was then said to be contaminated Quote A famous person once said: "It is easier to get someone to believe a lie than it is to later convince them that it is not true."Or words to that effect. Robert Lynd once said:It is easier to believe a lie that one has heard a thousand times than to believe a fact that one has never heard before. He started life as a protestant,but guess what happened-->see above. Brad --------------------------- Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.

muDped	Re: The Myth of Evolution « Reply #80 on: 2019-05-26, 23:34:33 »
Group: Tinkerer Hero Member Posts: 3055	Quote from: TinMan What i strongly object to is that some believe that a mythical magic being created all life,space and the earth as we know it today in 7 days. It is true that some "Christians" insist that Creation was done is seven 24 hour Earth Days. This has never made sense to me. Others believe that each Creation Day was 1000 of our Earth Years. I believe that the Creation Day is an unspecified length of time which could in fact be thousands or millions or even billions of years of Earth Time. It is very difficult to speculate without knowing more about how Time and Space were brought into existence. The Book tells us that for our Creator all things are possible. What does that mean and what does it encompass? There are so many things that we presently just do not know. A significant portion of Scientific Knowledge is in reality guesswork. The Book does promise that one day we shall know all of the things we can only speculate about now with our limited understandings. What I find most amazing about our Human Family is that we were Created with a thirst for knowledge, we want to know about everything. Other qualities too. We have been endowed with many gifts. --------------------------- For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open.

Magluvin	Re: The Myth of Evolution « Reply #81 on: 2019-05-27, 00:01:23 »
Group: Mad Scientist Hero Member Posts: 546	The probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the probability of the Unabridged Dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop. ~ Prof. Edwin Conklin Mags

TinMan	Re: The Myth of Evolution « Reply #82 on: 2019-05-27, 00:23:25 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 4600	Quote from: Magluvin on 2019-05-27, 00:01:23 The probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the probability of the Unabridged Dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop. ~ Prof. Edwin Conklin Mags But just a little more probable than a magical being creating us from dust and water=mud,due to there being far more chemicals in the ocean than there is in mud. Brad --------------------------- Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.

Magluvin	Re: The Myth of Evolution « Reply #83 on: 2019-05-27, 01:40:16 »
Group: Mad Scientist Hero Member Posts: 546	"What i strongly object to is that some believe that a mythical magic being created all life,space and the earth as we know it today in 7 days." "I do not need time,and i have love without !god! I already love the creator--mother nature,who made me who i am today." "I could keep posting page after page of actual scientific proofs of evolution,but i could not post a single page providing any sort of scientific proof toward the religious account for life,as it just dose not exist." "I did know that there was some form of religious based beliefs here on this forum,but i am stupefied as to how quickly physics,science,and scientific proofs are tossed aside in the name of religion." http://creationsciencetoday.com/32-Days_Noah-Second_Coming.html “Know this first of all, that in the last days mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lusts, and saying, ‘Where is the promise of His coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation.’ For when they maintain this, it escapes their notice [“deliberately forget,” NIV] that by the word of God the heavens existed long ago and the earth was formed out of water and by water, through which the world at that time was destroyed, being flooded with water. But the present heavens and earth by His word are being reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.” (2 Peter 3:3–7, NAS) [Bold, emphasis added] http://creationsciencetoday.com/09-Catastrophic_Worldwide_Flood.html http://creationsciencetoday.com/31-Belief-False_Doctrine.html http://creationsciencetoday.com/05-Law_of_Biogenesis-Origins.html http://creationsciencetoday.com/..... Evolution is contrary to natural laws (without exception) whereas creation is consistent with natural laws—for example, creation is consistent with the laws of thermodynamics and law of biogenesis. There are no known biological processes for evolution to higher levels of organization and complexity—mutations are overwhelmingly degenerative and none are “uphill” (that is, unequivocally beneficial) in the sense of adding new genetic information to the gene pool. Geologic landforms and sedimentary features are completely consistent with a worldwide flood as described in the Book of Genesis. Enormous limestone formations, huge coal and oil formations, and immense underground salt layers are indicative of a worldwide flood—not slow and gradual processes over billions of years. Such features are satisfactorily explained by a worldwide flood and known geophysical and geochemical processes. A worldwide flood as described in Genesis 6–8 is within the boundaries of known geophysics—see phase diagram in chapter 4 and Pangaea Flood Video at CreationScienceToday.com. There is no credible technique for establishing the age of sedimentary rock—fossil dating used to establish the age of sedimentary rock suffers from circular reasoning and guesswork, all based on the assumption of evolution. The standard geologic column with transitional creatures evolving toward more complex forms, as depicted in most science textbooks, is utterly fictitious and misleading, and does not represent the real world. In reality, it perfectly represents the aftermath of a worldwide flood. There are no transitional fossils or living forms—there is not one single example of evolution! Evolutionists look for “the” missing link—ironically, they are in desperate search for just one! But there should be billions of examples of transitional forms with transitional structures if evolution were true, but there are none. The bottom line, evolution has never been observed within fossils or living populations. Contrary to popular belief, evidence indicates that early man was intelligent and highly skilled with an advanced social structure. There is also evidence suggesting their belief in the existence of an afterlife. Soft tissues and traces of blood cells have been found in dinosaur fossils supposedly 70 to 250 million years old. (Soft tissues and red blood cells have relatively short life spans.) Carbon-14 has been found in coal and diamonds supposedly hundreds of millions of years old. (C-14 has a relatively short life-span.) Radioisotope dating suffers from multiple unprovable assumptions—the technique is “fatally flawed”—yet scientists contend as fact what they cannot prove. Abundant daughter isotopes are indicative of accelerated nuclear decay associated with creation (expansion, stretching out, or acceleration of the universe from an extremely hot, dense phase when matter and energy were concentrated) and a worldwide flood with massive restructuring of the earth’s lithosphere, not slow and gradual processes over billions of years. Evidences of accelerated nuclear decay in igneous rocks found worldwide are helium in zircon crystals, radiohalos and fission tracks, and rapid magnetic field reversals and decay. Over a hundred geochronometers indicate a young earth and universe. Mags

giantkiller	Re: The Myth of Evolution « Reply #84 on: 2019-05-27, 02:28:34 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 1567 Frequency equals matter...	Climate change is sprung from the evolution mold. This worked before and we can make it happen again. Anything to go against what God has stated as Truth.The main object is that any and all Truths shall be vanquished in time through the indoctrination of possible geniuses into useful idiots. --------------------------- http://purco.qc.ca/ftp/

TinMan	Re: The Myth of Evolution « Reply #85 on: 2019-05-27, 05:44:42 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 4600	Quote from: Magluvin on 2019-05-27, 01:40:16 "What i strongly object to is that some believe that a mythical magic being created all life,space and the earth as we know it today in 7 days." "I do not need time,and i have love without !god! I already love the creator--mother nature,who made me who i am today." "I could keep posting page after page of actual scientific proofs of evolution,but i could not post a single page providing any sort of scientific proof toward the religious account for life,as it just dose not exist." "I did know that there was some form of religious based beliefs here on this forum,but i am stupefied as to how quickly physics,science,and scientific proofs are tossed aside in the name of religion." http://creationsciencetoday.com/32-Days_Noah-Second_Coming.html “Know this first of all, that in the last days mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lusts, and saying, ‘Where is the promise of His coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation.’ For when they maintain this, it escapes their notice [“deliberately forget,” NIV] that by the word of God the heavens existed long ago and the earth was formed out of water and by water, through which the world at that time was destroyed, being flooded with water. But the present heavens and earth by His word are being reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.” (2 Peter 3:3–7, NAS) [Bold, emphasis added] http://creationsciencetoday.com/09-Catastrophic_Worldwide_Flood.html http://creationsciencetoday.com/31-Belief-False_Doctrine.html http://creationsciencetoday.com/05-Law_of_Biogenesis-Origins.html http://creationsciencetoday.com/..... Evolution is contrary to natural laws (without exception) whereas creation is consistent with natural laws—for example, creation is consistent with the laws of thermodynamics and law of biogenesis. There are no known biological processes for evolution to higher levels of organization and complexity—mutations are overwhelmingly degenerative and none are “uphill” (that is, unequivocally beneficial) in the sense of adding new genetic information to the gene pool. Geologic landforms and sedimentary features are completely consistent with a worldwide flood as described in the Book of Genesis. Enormous limestone formations, huge coal and oil formations, and immense underground salt layers are indicative of a worldwide flood—not slow and gradual processes over billions of years. Such features are satisfactorily explained by a worldwide flood and known geophysical and geochemical processes. A worldwide flood as described in Genesis 6–8 is within the boundaries of known geophysics—see phase diagram in chapter 4 and Pangaea Flood Video at CreationScienceToday.com. There is no credible technique for establishing the age of sedimentary rock—fossil dating used to establish the age of sedimentary rock suffers from circular reasoning and guesswork, all based on the assumption of evolution. The standard geologic column with transitional creatures evolving toward more complex forms, as depicted in most science textbooks, is utterly fictitious and misleading, and does not represent the real world. In reality, it perfectly represents the aftermath of a worldwide flood. There are no transitional fossils or living forms—there is not one single example of evolution! Evolutionists look for “the” missing link—ironically, they are in desperate search for just one! But there should be billions of examples of transitional forms with transitional structures if evolution were true, but there are none. The bottom line, evolution has never been observed within fossils or living populations. Contrary to popular belief, evidence indicates that early man was intelligent and highly skilled with an advanced social structure. There is also evidence suggesting their belief in the existence of an afterlife. Soft tissues and traces of blood cells have been found in dinosaur fossils supposedly 70 to 250 million years old. (Soft tissues and red blood cells have relatively short life spans.) Carbon-14 has been found in coal and diamonds supposedly hundreds of millions of years old. (C-14 has a relatively short life-span.) Radioisotope dating suffers from multiple unprovable assumptions—the technique is “fatally flawed”—yet scientists contend as fact what they cannot prove. Abundant daughter isotopes are indicative of accelerated nuclear decay associated with creation (expansion, stretching out, or acceleration of the universe from an extremely hot, dense phase when matter and energy were concentrated) and a worldwide flood with massive restructuring of the earth’s lithosphere, not slow and gradual processes over billions of years. Evidences of accelerated nuclear decay in igneous rocks found worldwide are helium in zircon crystals, radiohalos and fission tracks, and rapid magnetic field reversals and decay. Over a hundred geochronometers indicate a young earth and universe. Mags And that is why the courts of America banned creation science from being taught in schools-all totally wrong,and not actual science. Everything you just listed has been proven beyound doubt by both science and physics to be wrong. Brad --------------------------- Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.

muDped	Re: The Myth of Evolution « Reply #86 on: 2019-05-27, 09:52:41 »
Group: Tinkerer Hero Member Posts: 3055	Some may find this series of lectures by Richard Dawkins rather interesting. Richard is a devout Darwinian well steeped in the Theoreticals of Evolution: Dawkins' lectures are from 1991. How much of what was believed in 1991 regarding Life and Evolution has remained unchanged? --------------------------- For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open.

CITFTA	Re: The Myth of Evolution « Reply #87 on: 2019-05-27, 12:17:28 »
Group: Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 763 Believing in something false doesn't make it true.	Quote from: TinMan on 2019-05-27, 05:44:42 And that is why the courts of America banned creation science from being taught in schools-all totally wrong,and not actual science. Everything you just listed has been proven beyound doubt by both science and physics to be wrong. Brad HI Brad, Using the courts of America as an excuse for the belief in evolution is a very poor excuse. Those same courts decided it was ok to kill babies before they were born. Both of those decisions were against the Constitution of the United States but unfortunately they have not been challenged properly. An interesting quote from a former very famous atheist: "Once we see, however, that the probability of life origination at random is so utterly minuscule as to make it absurd, it becomes sensible to think that the favorable properties of physics, on which life depends, are in every respect deliberate. It is, therefore almost inevitable that our own measure of intelligence must reflect higher intelligence . . . even to the limit of God." - Sir Fred Hoyle, British mathematician and astrophysicist, an atheist for much of his life, until he finally admitted the truth. The Chance of Evolution Ever Occurring is so Remote as to be Mathematically Impossible. The theory of evolution is like placing a monkey at a keyboard and having him start typing. Assume the monkey never dies and give him 5 billion years to type. What are the chances the monkey will type out the entire works of the Encyclopedia Brittanica volumes A-Z in the exact order with no spelling or grammar errors? The chances of that happening are actually BETTER than the theory of evolution ever happening! Respectfully, Carroll --------------------------- Just because it is on YouTube does not make it real.

CITFTA	Re: The Myth of Evolution « Reply #88 on: 2019-05-27, 12:43:30 »
Group: Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 763 Believing in something false doesn't make it true.	Here is a link to a clear example of the very flawed thinking needed to believe in evolution: https://phys.org/news/2010-12-mathematics-plenty-evolution.html Now at first this seems to be a reasonable argument. Except for one small detail. In the example they used they decided a single mutation would give a butterfly a functioning eye. That is absurd. Even the simple eye of a butterfly would require hundreds of DNA changes that would all have to happen at the same time or the butterfly's eye wouldn't work. Change over time simply cannot explain how complex organs such as eyes or ears could have developed. Without all the different parts working together none of the parts are of any use. Some real scientific information about the complexity of life: 9/27/2010 – Babu G. Ranganathan – The scientific method is used every day in forensic science to determine whether an event in a crime scene was an accident or by design and intention. Mathematical probability is a scientific argument and is frequently used in determining many issues of scientific inquiry. The scientific method cannot be used to prove events which occurred outside of human observation. No one observed the origin of the universe by either chance or design, but scientific evidence via mathematical probability can be used to support either a chance or design origins for the universe. If you went to an uninhabited planet and discovered only one thing, a cliff carved with images of persons similar to what we find on Mt. Rushmore, you cannot use the scientific method to prove that these images came about by design or by chance processes of erosion. The odds of an average protein molecule coming into existence by chance is 10 to the 65th power. Mathematicians have said that any event with odds of 10 to the 50th power (1050) or over is impossible even within the entire time frame of the supposed billions of years popularly assigned for the age of the universe. The odds of an average protein molecule coming into existence by chance is 10 to the 65th power (1065) . That’s just one protein molecule! Even the simplest cell is composed of millions of them. Protein molecules are made of smaller molecules known as amino acids. In order for a protein molecule to work the amino acids have to be together in a precise sequence, just like the letters in a sentence. If they are not in the right sequence then the protein molecule won’t work. It has been shown that the basic building blocks of life, such as amino acid molecules, can come into existence by chance, but it has never been shown that these basic building blocks can come together into a sequence by chance to form protein molecules. Once there is a complete and living cell then the genetic code (or program) and biological mechanisms exist to direct the formation of more cells with their own DNA and protein molecules. The problem is how did DNA, proteins, and life come about when there was no already existing directing code and mechanisms in nature. It seems that the cell is irreducibly complex. For example, without DNA there can be no RNA, and without RNA there can be no DNA. And without either DNA or RNA there can be no proteins, and without proteins there can be no DNA or RNA. They’re all mutually dependent upon each other for existence! It could not have gradually evolved! Evolutionists generally believe that it took one billion years for the first life form or cell to have evolved. That belief, although still taught as gospel in many elementary and secondary schools, cannot be sustained by modern science. An amazing fact is that there are left-handed and right-handed amino acids. In life all the protein molecules have to be made up of left-handed amino acids as well as be in the right sequence. If a right-handed amino acid gets into the mix the protein won’t work. DNA, the genetic code, also is made up of various smaller molecules (nucleic acids) that have to be together in a precise sequence in order for the DNA to work. There are left-handed and right-handed sugar molecules making-up nucleic acids. In order to get a working DNA molecule the various nucleic acids have to be not only in a precise sequence but they also have to contain only right-handed sugar molecules. If a nucleic acid with a left-handed sugar molecule gets into the mix then the DNA won’t work. The great and well-known British scientist Frederick Hoyle showed that the probability of the simplest form of life coming into being by chance is 10 to the 40,000th power. You don’t have to be a theologian to respect such numbers! In the midst of arguments over evolution and intelligent design, it is amazing how many in society, including the very educated, believe that scientists had already created life in the laboratory. No such thing has ever happened. All that scientists have done is genetically engineer already existing forms of life in the laboratory, and by doing this scientists have been able to produce new forms of life, but they did not produce these new life forms from non-living matter. Even if scientists ever do produce life from non-living matter it will only be through intelligent design or planning so it still wouldn’t help support any theory of life originating by chance or evolution. If the cell had evolved it would have had to be all at once. A partially evolved cell cannot wait millions of years to become complete because it would be highly unstable and quickly disintegrate in the open environment, especially without the protection of a complete and fully functioning cell membrane. Natural laws are adequate to explain how the order in life, the universe, and even a microwave oven operates, but mere undirected natural laws cannot fully explain the origin of such order. Natural selection is a passive process in nature. What about natural selection? Natural selection cannot produce anything. It can only “select” from what is produced. Furthermore, natural selection can only operate once there is life and not before. Natural selection is a passive process in nature. Even the recent news of artificial life is not creation of any life. In artificial life, scientists, through intelligent design, build a DNA molecule from “scratch” and then implant that DNA into an already living cell. Genetic engineering and artificial life projects all happen by intelligent design – not by chance. Just ask the scientists behind the projects! Science cannot prove that we are here by either chance or design, but the scientific evidence can be used to support one or the other. It is only fair that evidence supporting intelligent design be presented to students alongside of evolutionary theory. No one is being forced to believe in God so there’s no real violation of separation of church and state. But, when all the evidence is presented it should show beyond all reasonable doubt that life didn’t originate by chance but by design. The Institute for Creation Research (www.icr.org) offers excellent articles, books, and resources from Master’s or Ph.D degreed scientists showing how true science supports creation. HT: Pravda --------------------------- Just because it is on YouTube does not make it real.

TinMan	Re: The Myth of Evolution « Reply #89 on: 2019-05-27, 13:14:22 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 4600	author=Magluvin link=topic=3776.msg74824#msg74824 date=1558917616] Quote creation is consistent with natural laws—for example, creation is consistent with the laws of thermodynamics and the law of biogenesis. Really biogenesis--> the synthesis of substances by living organisms. HISTORICAL the hypothesis that living matter arises only from other living matter. And Adam was made from dust-->non living matter. Fail. Quote creation is consistent with natural laws Natural law--> 1-a body of unchanging moral principles regarded as a basis for all human conduct 2-an observable law relating to natural phenomena So the bible tells us that human conduct got that bad that god had to flood the earth,and kill almost all of them. So much for unchanging moral principles,if we assume god made man in his own image The !creation! of man from dust was not natural,it was super natural. 3- Quote creation is consistent with the law of biogenesis Biogenesis--> Conceptually, biogenesis is primarily attributed to Louis Pasteur and encompasses the belief that complex living things come only from other living things, by means of reproduction. That is, life does not spontaneously arise from non-living material So once again,we see that biogenesis disproves the bible,as Adam was !apparently made from non living material-dust,and we find that biogenesis adheres to evolution,where complex living things came from other living things. Perhaps you are mixed up with how life started,and the evolutionary process from that life. Both of which are two different subjects. So a fail on all three accounts there as well for the creationist. Quote Evolution is contrary to the laws of thermodynamics The 2nd law of thermodynamics--> The second law of thermodynamics states that the total entropy of an isolated system can never decrease over time. And your argument ends right there,as the earth is not an isolated system. The sun continues to add energy to earth every single day. Lets see how long life on earth lasts without the sun. Infact, the sun delivers in excess of--are you ready for this-->Each hour 430 quintillion Joules of energy from the sun hits the Earth But wait,there's more-->Every day, Quote Earth is bombarded with more than 100 tons of dust and meteorites. I have not calculated the combined energy of 100 tons hitting the earth at about 30,000kph,but i would think it quite substantial,and that can also be added to the system,along with the fact that the earths mas also increases by this amount each day. So much for your laws of thermodynamics. Quote There are no known biological processes for evolution to higher levels of organization and complexity—mutations are overwhelmingly degenerative and none are “uphill” Below are two pictures of two different people,but !apparently! both are Noah's descendant's One is from europe,and the other from Australia. One is Dirk Hartog,who landed in Western Australia in 1616 One is the people he found here when he arrived,the Original founders of Australia--as they look today. Dirk Hartogs peoples level of organization and complexities was high enough to build houses,factories,and ships large enough to sail across the oceans of the world. The Aboriginals level of organization and complexities was at a level of living in grass and stick hut's,catching food with sharpened wooden spears. But they both had the same time to develope. I guess all men were not created equal Quote Geologic landforms and sedimentary features are completely consistent with a worldwide flood as described in the Book of Genesis. Non are consistent with a world wide flood. Quote Enormous limestone formations, huge coal and oil formations, and immense underground salt layers are indicative of a worldwide flood—not slow and gradual processes over billions of years. Such features are satisfactorily explained by a worldwide flood and known geophysical and geochemical processes. Once again incorrect. A single flood cannot and did not create the layers found through the earths crust today,nor could it have placed different types of animals at different layer as we see today. All the animals would have been all mixed in together,and not placed in seperate layers as we see they are. Quote A worldwide flood as described in Genesis 6–8 is within the boundaries of known geophysics—see phase diagram in chapter 4 and Pangaea Flood Video at CreationScienceToday.com. A world wide flood conforms to no laws of geophysics,mathematics,or any physics at all. This has been proven beyond any doubt. I gave you a simple experiment to try,so try it and see how you go. Be the first man ever to make rocks and sand rise out of the water,using just water. Fact--> you would need 3.5 times the water we have on earth to cover all the hills and mountains as stated in the bible. Fact-->that water would have to go some where,and there was no where for it to go. Fact-->To displace 4.4 billion cubic kilometers of water,we would have to have 4.4 billion cubic kilometers of earth rise up,so as we end up with the volume of water we have today--which by the way is not 4.4 billion cubic kilometers,it is still only 1.37 billion cubic kilometers. So where is the other 3 billion odd cubic kilometers of water? Quote There is no credible technique for establishing the age of sedimentary rock—fossil dating used to establish the age of sedimentary rock suffers from circular reasoning and guesswork, all based on the assumption of evolution. Once again wrong. There a many dating methods that give very accurate dates,such as-- Amino acid dating[5][6][7][8] Archaeomagnetic dating[9] Argon–argon dating Uranium–lead dating Samarium–neodymium dating Potassium–argon dating Rubidium–strontium dating Uranium–thorium dating Radiocarbon dating Fission track dating Optically stimulated luminescence Luminescence dating Thermoluminescence dating (a type of luminescence dating) Iodine–xenon dating Lead–lead dating Oxidizable carbon ratio dating Rehydroxylation dating[10] Cementochronology (this method does not determine a precise moment in a scale of time but the age at death of a dead individual) Wiggle matching Datestone (exclusively used in archaeology) Obsidian hydration dating (exclusively used in archaeology) Tephrochronology Molecular clock (used mostly in phylogenetics and evolutionary biology) Dendrochronology Herbchronology Quote The standard geologic column with transitional creatures evolving toward more complex forms, as depicted in most science textbooks, is utterly fictitious and misleading, and does not represent the real world. In reality, it perfectly represents the aftermath of a worldwide flood. Once again,absolute garbage. No single flood can place different animal species at different stages of transition,in different layers within a geologic column. Do you actually read or listen to this stuff you are posting?. Simple experiment number two Take same container from first experiment. Fill with a mixture of different soils,dirt,and rocks. Add in 10 dead fly's,10 dead beatles,10 dead spiders,and 10 dead cockroaches. Mix altogether with large amount of water,and pour into clear transparent bucket with drain holes in the bottom. Once water has drained out,post pictures of all the different insects each in there own group in each there own layer formed. Yes,thats how stupid it is. Quote There are no transitional fossils or living forms—there is not one single example of evolution! Evolutionists look for “the” missing link—ironically, they are in desperate search for just one! But there should be billions of examples of transitional forms with transitional structures if evolution were true, but there are none. The bottom line, evolution has never been observed within fossils or living populations. Once again-wrong. Perhaps a simple video to explain as to how much proof we have so far. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROwKq3kxPEA Quote Contrary to popular belief, evidence indicates that early man was intelligent and highly skilled with an advanced social structure. There is also evidence suggesting their belief in the existence of an afterlife. Yes they were. But now there even smarter,more intelligent,and much more highly skilled. An example is our Australian Aboriginals. It is amazing what happens when there is a change in environment and intervention. Quote Soft tissues and traces of blood cells have been found in dinosaur fossils supposedly 70 to 250 million years old. (Soft tissues and red blood cells have relatively short life spans.) Lol,another attempt by the creationist to distort the truth. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/dinosaur-shocker-115306469/ Quote:Meanwhile, Schweitzer’s research has been hijacked by “young earth” creationists, who insist that dinosaur soft tissue couldn’t possibly survive millions of years. They claim her discoveries support their belief, based on their interpretation of Genesis, that the earth is only a few thousand years old. Of course, it’s not unusual for a paleontologist to differ with creationists. But when creationists misrepresent Schweitzer’s data, she takes it personally: A video from Mary. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vU4FSPHfMw So as we see,a new technique was tried using acid,and she gives the results,while fully disclosing that the bones are indeed from a Trex of millions of years ago. Another attempt from creationist to distort the truth to suit there own agenda--but you got sprung-again. Quote Carbon-14 has been found in coal and diamonds supposedly hundreds of millions of years old. (C-14 has a relatively short life-span.) Radioisotope dating suffers from multiple unprovable assumptions—the technique is “fatally flawed”—yet scientists contend as fact what they cannot prove. Abundant daughter isotopes are indicative of accelerated nuclear decay associated with creation (expansion, stretching out, or acceleration of the universe from an extremely hot, dense phase when matter and energy were concentrated) and a worldwide flood with massive restructuring of the earth’s lithosphere, not slow and gradual processes over billions of years. Evidences of accelerated nuclear decay in igneous rocks found worldwide are helium in zircon crystals, radiohalos and fission tracks, and rapid magnetic field reversals and decay. Over a hundred geochronometers indicate a young earth and universe. Odd that when i look up any part of the supplied information,it always leads to creationist science sites. Whats the chances of that Quote But the present heavens and earth by His word are being reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men. Well i must say,your god is a bit of a jerk. Last time he drowned all but a few,even innocent children and animals. This time he is going to burn us all to death,just because we dont believe in him. So my children and grandchildren are all going to die,just because they do not believe in god. Not only are you lot off with the !fairies!,you believe that a god who commits armageddon against his own creation is a loving god. You think evolutionist's are nuts. You lot need to get back on your med's. And lets me take a guess at some more twisting and turning here with this one. If God created the heavens and earth some 6000 years ago,how is it we can see the Andromeda galaxy that is 2.5 million light years away,or the Triangulum Galaxy at about 3 million light years ? Oh let me guess,the speed of light was much faster back then--right What i will say is,i am so glade i got out of the religious delusion at a young age. And the thread title says that evolution is a myth lol. Brad ------------------------ The Reality of Evolution? Saint-Alouarn.jpg (102.36 kB, 704x1023 - viewed 255 times.) The Reality of Evolution? download (1).jpg (10.84 kB, 278x181 - viewed 204 times.) --------------------------- Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.

TinMan	Re: The Myth of Evolution « Reply #90 on: 2019-05-27, 13:16:21 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 4600	Quote from: CITFTA on 2019-05-27, 12:17:28 HI Brad, Using the courts of America as an excuse for the belief in evolution is a very poor excuse. Both of those decisions were against the Constitution of the United States but unfortunately they have not been challenged properly. An interesting quote from a former very famous atheist: "Once we see, however, that the probability of life origination at random is so utterly minuscule as to make it absurd, it becomes sensible to think that the favorable properties of physics, on which life depends, are in every respect deliberate. It is, therefore almost inevitable that our own measure of intelligence must reflect higher intelligence . . . even to the limit of God." - Sir Fred Hoyle, British mathematician and astrophysicist, an atheist for much of his life, until he finally admitted the truth. The Chance of Evolution Ever Occurring is so Remote as to be Mathematically Impossible. The theory of evolution is like placing a monkey at a keyboard and having him start typing. Assume the monkey never dies and give him 5 billion years to type. What are the chances the monkey will type out the entire works of the Encyclopedia Brittanica volumes A-Z in the exact order with no spelling or grammar errors? The chances of that happening are actually BETTER than the theory of evolution ever happening! Respectfully, Carroll . --------------------------- Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.

TinMan	Re: The Myth of Evolution « Reply #91 on: 2019-05-27, 13:34:37 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 4600	Quote from: CITFTA on 2019-05-27, 12:17:28 HI Brad, Respectfully, Carroll Quote Using the courts of America as an excuse for the belief in evolution is a very poor excuse. No,it was to remove untrue science. Quote Those same courts decided it was ok to kill babies before they were born. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/apr/13/followers-of-christ-idaho-religious-sect-child-mortality-refusing-medical-help Quote: Letting them die: parents refuse medical help for children in the name of Christ Quote Both of those decisions were against the Constitution of the United States but unfortunately they have not been challenged properly. And letting your children die because god didnt heel them is constitutional ? Quote An interesting quote from a former very famous atheist: "Once we see, however, that the probability of life origination at random is so utterly minuscule as to make it absurd, it becomes sensible to think that the favorable properties of physics, on which life depends, are in every respect deliberate. It is, therefore almost inevitable that our own measure of intelligence must reflect higher intelligence . . . even to the limit of God." - Sir Fred Hoyle, British mathematician and astrophysicist, an atheist for much of his life, until he finally admitted the truth. Oh great,an astrophysicist. What dose he say in relation to being able to see a galaxy that is 2.5 billion light years away,when heaven and earth was only created 6000 years ago ?. Quote The Chance of Evolution Ever Occurring is so Remote as to be Mathematically Impossible. No it's not. Who told you that. Quote The theory of evolution is like placing a monkey at a keyboard and having him start typing. And yet here we are,doing just that. Quote Assume the monkey never dies and give him 5 billion years to type. What are the chances the monkey will type out the entire works of the Encyclopedia Brittanica volumes A-Z in the exact order with no spelling or grammar errors? The chances of that happening are actually BETTER than the theory of evolution ever happening! Only the monkey dose die,and in about 30-40 years. Funny how man is living longer now than he was 200 years ago.But 4000 years ago,he lived until he was 900 years old. Funny how he is becoming more intelligent each generation. Have you tried my experiment,and managed to get rock and sand to rise up out of water yet?. Brad --------------------------- Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.

TinMan	Re: The Myth of Evolution « Reply #92 on: 2019-05-27, 15:02:53 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 4600	author=CITFTA link=topic=3776.msg74831#msg74831 date=1558957410] . The Institute for Creation Research (www.icr.org) offers excellent articles, books, and resources from Master’s or Ph.D degreed scientists showing how true science supports creation. HT: Pravda [/quote] Quote Now at first this seems to be a reasonable argument. Except for one small detail. In the example they used they decided a single mutation would give a butterfly a functioning eye. That is absurd. Even the simple eye of a butterfly would require hundreds of DNA changes that would all have to happen at the same time or the butterfly's eye wouldn't work. Change over time simply cannot explain how complex organs such as eyes or ears could have developed. Without all the different parts working together none of the parts are of any use. I really do not think you grasp the complexities of mother nature,nor the time scales we are talking about here--which is billions(billions) of years. There are many animals that live in deep dark water caves that have eyes,but are as blind as a bat--along with the bat. We make camera's that see better than the human eye--how's that for complex. Quote The scientific method cannot be used to prove events which occurred outside of human observation. No one observed the origin of the universe by either chance or design, but scientific evidence via mathematical probability can be used to support either a chance or design origins for the universe. So who made God ? Quote The odds of an average protein molecule coming into existence by chance is 10 to the 65th power. And yet in 2010 scientists created life using chemicals only to create DNA,which grew into bacteria which could replicate and !!evolve! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y17FhDTY2bc So,your 10 to the 65th power is a rather small number when you consider the amount of chemicals and proteins in the oceans 4 billion years ago,and it took 3 billion years to get the right mix. I know it must be hard to imagine a time span of 3 billion years,when you think earths time span is only 6000 years. Quote Mathematicians have said that any event with odds of 10 to the 50th power (1050) or over is impossible even within the entire time frame of the supposed billions of years popularly assigned for the age of the universe. And as i posted above,man managed it in just a short time,when compared with billions of years. Quote The odds of an average protein molecule coming into existence by chance is 10 to the 65th power (1065) . That’s just one protein molecule! Even the simplest cell is composed of millions of them. Like i said,we are talking billions of years of trial and error,in a sea full of chemicals and proteins mixing together. Quote Protein molecules are made of smaller molecules known as amino acids. In order for a protein molecule to work the amino acids have to be together in a precise sequence, just like the letters in a sentence. If they are not in the right sequence then the protein molecule won’t work. Trial and error over 3 billion years. Quote It has been shown that the basic building blocks of life, such as amino acid molecules, can come into existence by chance, but it has never been shown that these basic building blocks can come together into a sequence by chance to form protein molecules. Yes it has. You are living proof. Quote Once there is a complete and living cell then the genetic code (or program) and biological mechanisms exist to direct the formation of more cells with their own DNA and protein molecules. The problem is how did DNA, proteins, and life come about when there was no already existing directing code and mechanisms in nature. I dont know. How did God come into existence ? Quote It seems that the cell is irreducibly complex. For example, without DNA there can be no RNA, and without RNA there can be no DNA. And without either DNA or RNA there can be no proteins, and without proteins there can be no DNA or RNA. They’re all mutually dependent upon each other for existence! It could not have gradually evolved! Evolutionists generally believe that it took one billion years for the first life form or cell to have evolved. That belief, although still taught as gospel in many elementary and secondary schools, cannot be sustained by modern science. Well,as you know,creationist science was ruled out by the courts,as non of what the bible claims can be verified by modern science. Quote In the midst of arguments over evolution and intelligent design, it is amazing how many in society, including the very educated, believe that scientists had already created life in the laboratory. No such thing has ever happened. Oh but it has--see video above. Quote All that scientists have done is genetically engineer already existing forms of life in the laboratory, and by doing this scientists have been able to produce new forms of life, but they did not produce these new life forms from non-living matter. Even if scientists ever do produce life from non-living matter it will only be through intelligent design or planning so it still wouldn’t help support any theory of life originating by chance or evolution. Yes,from nothing more than chemicals,just like those in the oceans billions of years ago. Quote It is only fair that evidence supporting intelligent design be presented to students alongside of evolutionary theory. No one is being forced to believe in God so there’s no real violation of separation of church and state. We owe it to our children to present them with the truth and facts that can be backed by science. You keep telling me that the chances of live emerging from a vast mixture of chemicals and proteins is impossible,but then you expect us to believe that a magical being made man from nothing but dust,just after he made the earth and universe from nothing at all. Which sounds more plausible ?. Quote But, when all the evidence is presented it should show beyond all reasonable doubt that life didn’t originate by chance but by design. Well as we have seen on this thread,every bit of evidence you(or others) supplied,strongly refuted the bibles accounts. And there is no science(other than that from religious science sites) that says anything the bible states is true. These facts i have presented,which are clear and precise. The earth is much older than 6000 years old,it's billions of years older. The great flood never could have,and did not happen. I gave you a simple experiment to try,but as of yet,not one single believer has tried it--why is that? There is no proof what so ever that noah's ark ever existed. Man cannot be made from dust. The paper you posted clearly shows man and animals to be over 100,000 to 200,000 years old at the youngest. That alone rules out the 6000 year option,and that is a paper you posted. And to top it off,this thread is about evolution,which is not about the beginning of life,or how it came about. Evolution is about the changes,diversity, and advancement of life through time--millions of years through time. What i have seen in this thread,is a total disregard for science and physics when it shows that non of the biblical event could have taken place. The idea that the grand canyon was carved out by the big flood is nothing short of impossible. There has never been another flood that carved out rocky landscape like that before. In fact,i had no idea as to just how far the creationist actually went in order to maintain there delusion. And to think,you Carroll of all people,feel you had the right to call !what i know to be true! a myth. Sad times indeed. Brad --------------------------- Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.

TinMan	Re: The Myth of Evolution « Reply #93 on: 2019-05-27, 15:53:55 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 4600	author=CITFTA link=topic=3776.msg74831#msg74831 date=1558957410] Quote It seems that the cell is irreducibly complex. For example, without DNA there can be no RNA, and without RNA there can be no DNA. Thats incorrect. It is activated RNA that builds DNA Some viruses have RNA but no DNA. Brad --------------------------- Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.

CITFTA	Re: The Reality of Evolution? « Reply #94 on: 2019-05-27, 17:52:21 »
Group: Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 763 Believing in something false doesn't make it true.	Since it seems the title of this thread was offensive to some, I have changed it. If someone wants to suggest a better title I am willing to change it again. It was never my intention to offend anyone with this discussion. If I personally have offended anyone, I apologize for that. I of course can not control what others may have posted. They have to answer for themselves for what they have posted. I don't see any need for me to continue to post anymore about this subject. I have presented clear scientific evidence for how creation could have happened. I have also posted clear reasons why evolution is not possible even including the math from a very famous and well-know atheist who came to the conclusion that mathematically evolution was not possible. Even that has been rejected with no explanation except to say that math didn't prove evolution was not possible. So I guess math is not part of real science now. Anyone that wants to continue the discussion is welcome to do so. But I think it is pretty obvious people are only going to believe what they want to believe. And of course that includes myself. Respectfully, Carroll --------------------------- Just because it is on YouTube does not make it real.

Grumage	Re: The Reality of Evolution? « Reply #95 on: 2019-05-27, 19:07:55 »
Group: Renaissance Man Hero Member Posts: 2734	Hi Carroll. Non taken.... I just opened asking if a question mark should have been used, making the subject title feel less biased. Just before I started my working career my Dad said " there's two things you should avoid talking about at work, religion and politics, guaranteed to start a fight " I guess we all have our ideas.... Each to their own eh? Cheers Graham. --------------------------- Nanny state ? Left at the gate !!

TinMan	Re: The Reality of Evolution? « Reply #96 on: 2019-05-27, 23:27:08 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 4600	Quote from: CITFTA on 2019-05-27, 17:52:21 Anyone that wants to continue the discussion is welcome to do so. But I think it is pretty obvious people are only going to believe what they want to believe. And of course that includes myself. Respectfully, Carroll Quote I have presented clear scientific evidence for how creation could have happened. Carroll You,nor anyone else has presented no such evidence. In fact,what was presented as evidence actually proved creation wrong. Quote I have also posted clear reasons why evolution is not possible even including the math from a very famous and well-know atheist who came to the conclusion that mathematically evolution was not possible. No,what you did was get the starting of life mixed up with evolution. Evolution is about how living things can and do evolve over time,and has nothing to do with how life started. Quote Even that has been rejected with no explanation except to say that math didn't prove evolution was not possible. And it dose not. The math you provided stated how improbable it was that life came into existence,and nothing to do with the evolution of already existing life over time. Quote So I guess math is not part of real science now. Yes it is--unless we use it to confirm the great flood,then it can be rejected. Brad --------------------------- Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.

muDped	Re: The Reality of Evolution? « Reply #97 on: 2019-05-28, 00:36:01 »
Group: Tinkerer Hero Member Posts: 3055	We all believe what we choose to believe for a variety of reasons. Partially because of our first 13 years of life and what we had been exposed to within that timeframe. Our Creator is not too worried about our beliefs, even though for Christendom that seems a large issue. He is more concerned about whether we choose to do bad things and whether we decide to join the forces of evil. Whether we develop a love for Truth and strive to reveal deception. Whether we show love and compassion towards our whole family of human life no matter what their beliefs may be. Whether we choose good or bad. Our Creator is very much aware of the trials and tribulations we face and experience in our present World. The end of Evil and Wickedness is forthcoming. That is our present struggle until the final battle where the Forces of Good prevail. Not one will be lost. All will be restored to Life and cleansed of all desire to do what is bad. Our Creator knows why it is that some have chosen to believe that He doesn't exist. He knows why we have a yearning for Peace and Tranquility. His plan is to restore what has been lost in the Rebellion. All will be made good in due time. We are here to learn how to live. Quote from: TinMan ...what you did was get the starting of life mixed up with evolution. There are many questions which Evolution has no answer for. The lack of Scientific Answers does not, however, prevent the use of Guesswork to support their underlying Agenda. The Evolution Agenda is merely a temporary distraction. It is not necessarily a bad thing that Evolutionists seek answers while supporting erroneous beliefs. If they are sincere in their research they will ultimately find Truth. Many have already done so. Their eyes have been opened to see how all life has been wonderfully designed. They are able to see the enormous intelligence which all life demonstrates in its complexity and diversity. In the future Evolution will fade away as just another case of the folly of man. Once our eyes are fully opened. --------------------------- For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open.

Magluvin	Re: The Reality of Evolution? « Reply #98 on: 2019-05-28, 04:42:59 »
Group: Mad Scientist Hero Member Posts: 546	Quote from: muDped on 2019-05-28, 00:36:01 Our Creator is not too worried about our beliefs, even though for Christendom that seems a large issue..... John 3:15 “That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.” King James Version (KJV) Mags

muDped	Re: The Reality of Evolution? « Reply #99 on: 2019-05-28, 05:19:42 »
Group: Tinkerer Hero Member Posts: 3055	Quote from: TinMan Well i must say,your god is a bit of a jerk. Last time he drowned all but a few,even innocent children and animals. This time he is going to burn us all to death,just because we dont believe in him. So my children and grandchildren are all going to die,just because they do not believe in god. The Story of the Flood is misunderstood by many. When Noah was told what was to happen he was instructed to build the first ship upon dry land. A large one. While the construction was going on Noah and his family also had the responsibility to warn all the Earth about the coming flood. In order for any to avoid the flood to save their lives all they had to do was stop doing badness and repent of their wicked ways. Despite several years of warning and seeing with their own eyes the large ship under construction the people refused to give up their badness. The people were invited to participate in the construction but none were desirous of letting go of their wicked lifestyles. The coming flood was no surprise but strangely, not one of the people at that time outside Noah's family responded to the call for refuge. Did any follow Noah's example by building ships of their own in order to survive? We do not know. Many wonder. It is true that many people died in the flood, including the numerous giants who were upon the Earth at that time. Not to worry, all of those people will be restored to life and made whole and good. None will be forgotten or left out. As we learn our lessons about how to live good, productive and peaceful lives we are rewarded with life which will never end. It is not about believing in God. It is about doing what is good and forsaking all that is bad. Belief will come. We all die because we do bad things. After we are given life again we will be healed and made wholesome. We will be made perfect. When that day comes in the not too distant future all will be thankful, appreciative and filled with love. Just wait and see! Quote from: Magluvin John 3:15 “That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.” King James Version (KJV) Presently there are not many in our World who sincerely believe. They are not forced or pressured to believe by our Creator, but they are encouraged to believe and are helped to develop faith by asking. In due time ALL will believe. Not because they are forced to but because they will want to. They will finally see Truth and will be overcome with gratitude and Love. --------------------------- For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

« previous next »

Home Help Search Login Register

Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u

2024-04-18, 02:04:34

SMF 2.0.18 | SMF © 2021, Simple Machines
XHTML
RSS
WAP2