Hill, you slay me!
Really though, there's no need for anyone to have a fall-out over creation or the other thing - abiogenesis, I believe?
Life exists. Period. Let's all lay down our swords and enjoy it!
Sylvia
Another fossil link found
by Caedes 98 Replies latest social current
-
-
ninja
funky derek?.....grumpy derek more like....lighten up a bit.....don't take life so seriously mate.........grumpy old men---grumpier old men----funky derek......funky derek evolution.....muhahahahaha
-
ninja
I'm just in from watching scotland play argentina....so updated evolutionary scale....grumpy old men---grumpier old men----funky derek-----scotland fan ninja.....harumph
-
Caedes
Or, as demonstrated by Socrates, better yet is the answerer who learns from the questioner.
Sylvia
Snowbird,
If you could give me an example of one piece of factual information regarding evolutionary theory that you have learned from all of your questions?
-
Caedes
so......... did the turtle come from a non-turtle?
Now you are just being obtuse. Evolutionary theory does NOT state that turtles give birth to apes, sea horses, dragons or humans. If you really know so little about evolutionary theory why parade such ignorance for all to see?
-
Caedes
I do wonder if anyone commenting on this thread has actually read the report published in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. Without pre-empting what the report actually says (as I have been unable to obtain it), there does seem to be far more uncertainty about these findings than contributors to this thread suggest.
Certainty belongs to the fundamentalists not to science, no science is certain. The evidence gathered so far points to certain conclusions, further evidence may change that position. In my opinion that is what makes science so interesting.
-
snowbird
Snowbird,
If you could give me an example of one piece of factual information regarding evolutionary theory that you have learned from all of your questions?
Let me reiterate that I believe in the Creation account as recounted in Genesis. Thank you.
Now, let it be clear to all that I don't discount evolution, per se. Bacteria, for instance, is in a constant state of evolution.
What I do discount, however, is the notion that life does not have a Source - which notion non-creationists heartily embrace.
I hope that is as clear as my head is on this Thursday morning.
Sylvia
-
jaguarbass
How many 'missing' links does science have to find before the creationists admit that they are wrong.
The missing link they are talking about is between man and ape.
Your going to do what your going to do but I suggest reading more things like forbidden history and forbidden archeology.
You are choosing between two wrong choices evolution and creationsim.
There are more choices and better choices.
Like UFO's, aliens.
What your getting from the universities is just like religion.
Its to keep you dumb and down on the farm, a good consumer.
The universites are run by the controllers, your sheppards the same beings that sold you the watchtower.
They dont care what you believe or how you waste your life. As long as you dont find the truth.
They, the controllers, shadow government, do not want man to know what is really going on or they will not be able to controll man.
Your just buying into evolution because you are mad you were screwed by religion.
And you have to jump out of the frying pan into the fire.
Its time to put on your thinking cap and start thinking.
And by evolution I mean the world view you are advocating. Materialism.
Material is all there is and it evolves.
Thats not whats going on.
There was a world wide flood.
Plato wrote of Atlantis.
Atlantis cant be found because it was the world like the bible describes.
They do find parts of the world underwater, but Atlantis was the whole world.
There was no ice age. There was a flood like the bible describes. Glaciers cant go up hills.
That is why they have found saber tooth tigers and elephants and lions in the north and south pole and in Alaska because there was a world wide flood.
-
Tuesday
How are we ignoring the issue? Abiogenesis has been discussed many times on this board. The fact that science doesn't have evidence of abiogenesis is not ignoring the issue, it's called being honest. Science has no theory of abiogenesis since it has no evidence, unlike the theory of evolution for which there is an overwhelming wealth of evidence.
If I may make a comment here, I think you're confusing First Cause and Abiogenesis. There are several expiriments that show abiogenesis. Mainly look at the Miller-Urey expiriments. No one has a theory on First Cause, why a big bang happened, or what caused the start of the universe. Abiogenesis is life coming from non-life and it is pretty well proven that in the right conditions that organic material can form from non-organic material.
-
inkling
I do understand that Creation and evolution are two distinct parts to the argument. Succintly stated, neither posistion will ever have a factual basis to slam dunk the other...
Maybe, but that doesn't change the fact that (while not slam
dunking anything) "evolution" is busy making 8 out of 10 baskets
from the free throw line, while "creation" is standing in the corner
bouncing the ball off the wall with it's face while humming to itself.[inkling]