Total Posts:11|Showing Posts:1-11
Jump to topic:

Is evolution a legitimate topic of debate?

Leugen9001
Posts: 495
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2015 8:38:25 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
In general, only controversial topics are discussed in debates, and non-controversial topics are seldom discussed at all, because they simply aren't debatable. There is, however, one notable exception: the theory of evolution. Despite the fact that the majority of biologists believe in evolution, as well as the fact that the theory is well-established, and most of the objections to it are based on a flawed understanding of it, evolution continues to be a topic of debate today. Evolution is, put simply, as controversial as gravity, and discussing such a non-controversial subject in debate can hinder productive discussion. As such, we should stop debating about evolution and start exploring all of the other topics that are actually worth discussing.

There is a plethora of scientific evidence for evolution that is hard to put in one single forum post. We know that evolution can happen; scientists have observed both microevolution and macroevolution, and the theoretical concepts within the theory of evolution are consistent with the phenomena we observe in the real world. We know that evolution did happen; transitional fossils, species distributions, and other such facts all point to it. Debating about an established fact does not lead to any new discoveries, since no amount of passionate talk can change reality.
:) nac
janesix
Posts: 3,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2015 8:54:11 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/31/2015 8:38:25 PM, Leugen9001 wrote:
In general, only controversial topics are discussed in debates, and non-controversial topics are seldom discussed at all, because they simply aren't debatable. There is, however, one notable exception: the theory of evolution. Despite the fact that the majority of biologists believe in evolution, as well as the fact that the theory is well-established, and most of the objections to it are based on a flawed understanding of it, evolution continues to be a topic of debate today. Evolution is, put simply, as controversial as gravity, and discussing such a non-controversial subject in debate can hinder productive discussion. As such, we should stop debating about evolution and start exploring all of the other topics that are actually worth discussing.

There is a plethora of scientific evidence for evolution that is hard to put in one single forum post. We know that evolution can happen; scientists have observed both microevolution and macroevolution, and the theoretical concepts within the theory of evolution are consistent with the phenomena we observe in the real world. We know that evolution did happen; transitional fossils, species distributions, and other such facts all point to it. Debating about an established fact does not lead to any new discoveries, since no amount of passionate talk can change reality.

Scientists like to pretend evolution is a "fact" with no controversy, but of course they are only pretending. Only a fool would suggest we stop doing science.
Evidence
Posts: 843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2016 12:34:57 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/31/2015 8:38:25 PM, Leugen9001 wrote:
In general, only controversial topics are discussed in debates, and non-controversial topics are seldom discussed at all, because they simply aren't debatable. There is, however, one notable exception: the theory of evolution. Despite the fact that the majority of biologists believe in evolution, as well as the fact that the theory is well-established, and most of the objections to it are based on a flawed understanding of it, evolution continues to be a topic of debate today. Evolution is, put simply, as controversial as gravity, and discussing such a non-controversial subject in debate can hinder productive discussion. :

I can drop a hammer on your feet, and whatever controversies you had about gravity will be eliminated. Now you can do the same for me, show me ONE animal evolving into another species, there are about 8 million species that you believe have been and are evolving for the past 4.2 billion years as we speak, there are about 6 million scientists, so this should be easy. Even if there is one scientist observing a potential animal just about to make that step, we should have daily speciation's, recorded live as it happens showing the billions of Believers in silly concepts like a Creator God, that evolution/speciation is real. There it is, that point in space and time where one species goes one way, and the other the other way.
We have the technology, MRI's, CAT-Scans, 3-D ultrasound where we could see the crocodile siting on her eggs, and observe the inside of the egg as a croc-a-duck is ready to come out. Show this live via satellite, and the entire world could be a witness to it, cheering on as each speciation occurs.

As such, we should stop debating about evolution and start exploring all of the other topics that are actually worth discussing.

Oh man, I would love that sooo much. I mean we alone in the US can produce enough food to feed the world 5-time over, imagine discussing this to make it a reality?

Or wars, how many of us here want to start a war huh? Look how we can monitor each other even in heated debates, so how about tracking down those warmongers who only think of making money by turning us against each other. How about rigging up those tanks with a backhoe and plow some African farms into existence, irrigation and all!?

But oh no, teaching children that they are not really human but animals is more important, because it is passed off as science. By making them believe they are animals, it will be easier to control them when they put them in the tanks, they will see even starving children as enemies and blow them off the face of the earth, .. I mean hey, they are just apes, no biggie, right?

There is a plethora of scientific evidence for evolution that is hard to put in one single forum post. :

Sure you can, here let me show you. Here is the summary of Biological Evolution:

"God doesn't exist, we have dug up many graves, and have a plethora of skull&bones to prove that this here dried up bones has over 'millions and billions' (always remember "millions and billions Sagan") of years evolved into that there fossil!"

We know that evolution can happen; scientists have observed both microevolution and macroevolution, and the theoretical concepts within the theory of evolution are consistent with the phenomena we observe in the real world. :

Like I said, just one actual speciation, One, and before you know it you'd have the entire population of 7 billion people looking out for those potential animals just about to speciate. It would be the new Thing, and before you know it, all religions would just die out all because of scientific evidence.

I mean just think, how many monkeys could have speciated to humans, or maybe even some more advanced forms, like blue skinned yellow eyed Mohawk haired iron-fisted superman, .. but because they couldn't find a mate, died out, .. huh? Why? Because Evolutionists are too busy making up ridiculous stories out of cave paintings that some teenagers drew there partying, rather than keeping an eye out for potential speciations. This is why the croc-a-ducks died out, they couldn't mate neither with a croc, or a duck. Think about that for a second!

We know that evolution did happen; transitional fossils, species distributions, and other such facts all point to it. Debating about an established fact does not lead to any new discoveries, since no amount of passionate talk can change reality. :

Yeah, I love how those fossils can transition from lizard to birds, all you need is a good fairytale: "Millions and billions of years ago (in memory of Millions and billions-Sagan) these lizard fossils, very slowly where even if you were a lizard yourself couldn't notice, and before you know it, one morning the lizard noticed he was covered with wings, lost a few ounces and started to fly!" - OK, so I'm not an Evolutionist, their stories are more rhetorical.
There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root. - Henry David Thoreau
distraff
Posts: 1,004
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2016 7:05:19 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/2/2016 12:34:57 AM, Evidence wrote:

I can drop a hammer on your feet, and whatever controversies you had about gravity will be eliminated. Now you can do the same for me, show me ONE animal evolving into another species, there are about 8 million species that you believe have been and are evolving for the past 4.2 billion years as we speak, there are about 6 million scientists, so this should be easy. Even if there is one scientist observing a potential animal just about to make that step, we should have daily speciation's

Even if we did see a new species how would we even know it has recently evolved and it wasn't just another pre-existing species we didn't find yet.

But oh no, teaching children that they are not really human but animals is more important, because it is passed off as science.

Wrong, they are taught that humans are very very advanced animals.

By making them believe they are animals, it will be easier to control them when they put them in the tanks, they will see even starving children as enemies and blow them off the face of the earth,

Scientists also believe in critical thinking and you will hear a lot of evolutionists espousing it. It is hard to control critical thinkers.

.. I mean hey, they are just apes, no biggie, right?

How does one's ancestry determine what is right and wrong and what rights that person has?

Sure you can, here let me show you. Here is the summary of Biological Evolution:

"God doesn't exist, we have dug up many graves, and have a plethora of skull&bones to prove that this here dried up bones has over 'millions and billions' (always remember "millions and billions Sagan") of years evolved into that there fossil!"

Evolution says that all live is related by a common ancestor. It does not claim there is no God. Many evolutionists are Christian.
Joshua_Verum
Posts: 55
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2016 9:44:09 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
Evidence for Creation

Everything Has a Cause

In ordinary experience, one knows intuitively that nothing happens in isolation. Every event can be traced to one or more events which preceded it and that, in fact, caused it. We ask: "How did this happen?" "What caused this?" "Where did this come from?" "When did it start?" Or, more incisively, "Why did this happen?"

When we try to trace the event to its cause, or causes, we find that we never seem to reach a stopping point. The cause of the event was itself caused by a prior cause, which was affected by a previous cause, and so on back.

Police investigators on an accident scene, for instance, use the principles of cause and effect every day to determine who was ultimately responsible and how it happened.

Eventually, we must face the question of the original cause"and uncaused First Cause.

A scientific experiment specifically tries to relate effects to causes, in the form of quantitative equations if possible. Thus, if one repeats the same experiment with exactly the same factors, then exactly the same results will be reproduced. The very basis of the highly reputed "scientific method" is this very law of causality"that effects are in and like their causes, and that like causes produce like effects. Science in the modern sense would be altogether impossible if cause and effect should cease.

This law inevitably leads to a choice between two alternatives: (1) an infinite chain of nonprimary causes (nothing ultimately responsible for all observable causes and effects); or (2) an uncaused primary Cause of all causes (the One absolute Cause that initiated everything).

The Effect Problem

There are two other "Universal Laws" that we see demonstrated in everything we examine in the world around us.

1. There is no new mass/energy coming into existence anywhere in the universe, and every bit of that original mass/energy is still here.

2. Every time something happens (an event takes place), some of the energy becomes unavailable.

The First Law tells us that matter (mass/energy) can be changed, but can neither be created nor destroyed. The Second Law tells us that all phenomena (mass/energy) continually proceed to lower levels of usefulness.

In simple terms, every cause must be at least as great as the effect that it produces"and will, in reality, produce an effect that is less than the cause. That is, any effect must have a greater cause.

When this universal law is traced backwards, one is faced again with the possibility that there is an ongoing chain of ever-decreasing effects, resulting from an infinite chain of nonprimary ever-increasing causes. However, what appears more probable is the existence of an uncaused Source, an omnipotent, omniscient, eternal, and Primary, First Cause.

God Caused Love

Unlike affection, only humans are capable of receiving, giving, refusing, and rejecting love.

Animals (including chimps) are not able to provide any assistance to other creatures they are not related to, and even seem to be unable to recognize the needs of other animals. Although some animals (especially mammals like dogs, cats, and horses) can and do appreciate affection, only humans are capable of receiving, giving, refusing, and rejecting love.

Humans are driven by an entirely different kind of love. We love our children when they are disobedient. We can love our enemies and sacrifice our lives for our friends (like soldiers do). The highest, truest kind of love is that which consciously seeks and takes practical action to do good for someone else, valuing that other person as higher than one's self, even if providing such good requires self-sacrifice. This is what separates us, practically, from love expressed by animals.

Of course, if God did not create us, how would we ever know what real love is, much less learn to practice love ourselves? The very fact that we can love and be loved (by God and by others) is yet another proof of a Creator's love. Because of His own nature of infinite love and grace, it was God's good pleasure to create things in whom He could bestow His love and grace and who, being made in His image, would be capable of reciprocating and responding to that love.

"But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us" (Romans 5:8).

God Caused Wisdom

Wisdom is, essentially, the effective understanding and use of information. Humans discover information; we do not invent it. Through wisdom, humanity has developed (i.e. used information effectively) a set of scientific laws that elegantly express reality in the language of mathematics. Johann Kepler, the noted founder of physical astronomy, is said to have considered his science to be "thinking God's thoughts after Him."

The unfathomable intelligence that was used to invent the universe, and to pre-program its interactive workings, is a source of "wisdom" beyond-the-imagination. In particular, the cause of our universe coming into being, and of its continuing to operate as it does, is a dynamic display of the Creator's wisdom, some of which we can scientifically understand and effectively apply. When we do, we are (as Kepler) "thinking God's thoughts after Him."

To the extent that humans have any wisdom at all, much less the wisdom necessary to understand a meaningful amount of the working of the universe, the very fact that we can understand at all is more amazing than the marvelous physics of the universe! How can an immaterial mind, residing inside a human body, made mostly of water (along with other constituent elements of the earth), comprehend anything, even this sentence?

It is only by God's creative grace that human being can think any thoughts at all, much less thoughts that are logical and analytical enough to be called "scientific."

http://www.icr.org...
(Matthew 24:14:) And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.

The Kingdom message is reaching all corners of the globe. In 2010 alone, Jehovah"s Witnesses spent over 1.6 billion hours proclaiming this good news in 236 lands. Over the past decade, they have produced and distributed more than 20 billion items of literature.

https://www.jw.org...
Dirty.Harry
Posts: 1,585
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2016 8:53:26 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/31/2015 8:38:25 PM, Leugen9001 wrote:
In general, only controversial topics are discussed in debates, and non-controversial topics are seldom discussed at all, because they simply aren't debatable. There is, however, one notable exception: the theory of evolution. Despite the fact that the majority of biologists believe in evolution, as well as the fact that the theory is well-established, and most of the objections to it are based on a flawed understanding of it, evolution continues to be a topic of debate today. Evolution is, put simply, as controversial as gravity, and discussing such a non-controversial subject in debate can hinder productive discussion. As such, we should stop debating about evolution and start exploring all of the other topics that are actually worth discussing.

There is a plethora of scientific evidence for evolution that is hard to put in one single forum post. We know that evolution can happen; scientists have observed both microevolution and macroevolution, and the theoretical concepts within the theory of evolution are consistent with the phenomena we observe in the real world. We know that evolution did happen; transitional fossils, species distributions, and other such facts all point to it. Debating about an established fact does not lead to any new discoveries, since no amount of passionate talk can change reality.

If we take a serious look at the scientific objections to evolution, raised by educated scientists and professors and teachers, we don't find a cacophony of religious "arguments" or a multitude of references to the Bible or theology. No we find instead deep questions about the assumptions made by evolutionists, masses of contradictory evidence, apparently insurmountable problems of a statistical, chemical or physical nature.

Being skeptical of the claims made by people like Dawkins isn't being a crank (though evolutionists love to falsely portray it as such) but rather is being scientific, weighing the evidence, questioning unprovable claims, challenging prevailing dogmatic opinion.

Very few evolutionists I've dealt with have EVER bothered to seriously look into these scientific detractors and the few that do often do so with an intention of simply dismissing the arguments anyway, not with a truly open mind.

A theory (if we allow evolution such an elevated description) stands or falls not by the evidence for it but by the evidence against it and there is a huge array of serious evidential shortcomings with evolution.

I once believed evolution and hammered anyone who dared suggest it was false, so I know a bit more than most about this.

Listen to Berlinki's list of objections and he's just one among thousands of educated critically thinking scientists who refuse to simplye "believe" the evolution dogma:

https://www.youtube.com...

Harry.
Dirty.Harry
Posts: 1,585
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2016 8:59:13 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
Or if the preamble in the above video bothers you (its nothing to do with Berlinski) here's a raw clip from his interview:

https://www.youtube.com...

Harry.
distraff
Posts: 1,004
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2016 9:53:59 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/2/2016 8:53:26 PM, Dirty.Harry wrote:
At 12/31/2015 8:38:25 PM, Leugen9001 wrote:
In general, only controversial topics are discussed in debates, and non-controversial topics are seldom discussed at all, because they simply aren't debatable. There is, however, one notable exception: the theory of evolution. Despite the fact that the majority of biologists believe in evolution, as well as the fact that the theory is well-established, and most of the objections to it are based on a flawed understanding of it, evolution continues to be a topic of debate today. Evolution is, put simply, as controversial as gravity, and discussing such a non-controversial subject in debate can hinder productive discussion. As such, we should stop debating about evolution and start exploring all of the other topics that are actually worth discussing.

There is a plethora of scientific evidence for evolution that is hard to put in one single forum post. We know that evolution can happen; scientists have observed both microevolution and macroevolution, and the theoretical concepts within the theory of evolution are consistent with the phenomena we observe in the real world. We know that evolution did happen; transitional fossils, species distributions, and other such facts all point to it. Debating about an established fact does not lead to any new discoveries, since no amount of passionate talk can change reality.

If we take a serious look at the scientific objections to evolution, raised by educated scientists and professors and teachers, we don't find a cacophony of religious "arguments" or a multitude of references to the Bible or theology. No we find instead deep questions about the assumptions made by evolutionists, masses of contradictory evidence, apparently insurmountable problems of a statistical, chemical or physical nature.

Being skeptical of the claims made by people like Dawkins isn't being a crank (though evolutionists love to falsely portray it as such) but rather is being scientific, weighing the evidence, questioning unprovable claims, challenging prevailing dogmatic opinion.

Very few evolutionists I've dealt with have EVER bothered to seriously look into these scientific detractors and the few that do often do so with an intention of simply dismissing the arguments anyway, not with a truly open mind.

A theory (if we allow evolution such an elevated description) stands or falls not by the evidence for it but by the evidence against it and there is a huge array of serious evidential shortcomings with evolution.

I once believed evolution and hammered anyone who dared suggest it was false, so I know a bit more than most about this.

Listen to Berlinki's list of objections and he's just one among thousands of educated critically thinking scientists who refuse to simplye "believe" the evolution dogma:

https://www.youtube.com...

Harry.

I recommend you post your argument so it is easy to see what they are without going to your link. This will be better in convincing people that evolution is false.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,603
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2016 12:05:03 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/2/2016 8:53:26 PM, Dirty.Harry wrote:
At 12/31/2015 8:38:25 PM, Leugen9001 wrote:
In general, only controversial topics are discussed in debates, and non-controversial topics are seldom discussed at all, because they simply aren't debatable. There is, however, one notable exception: the theory of evolution. Despite the fact that the majority of biologists believe in evolution, as well as the fact that the theory is well-established, and most of the objections to it are based on a flawed understanding of it, evolution continues to be a topic of debate today. Evolution is, put simply, as controversial as gravity, and discussing such a non-controversial subject in debate can hinder productive discussion. As such, we should stop debating about evolution and start exploring all of the other topics that are actually worth discussing.

There is a plethora of scientific evidence for evolution that is hard to put in one single forum post. We know that evolution can happen; scientists have observed both microevolution and macroevolution, and the theoretical concepts within the theory of evolution are consistent with the phenomena we observe in the real world. We know that evolution did happen; transitional fossils, species distributions, and other such facts all point to it. Debating about an established fact does not lead to any new discoveries, since no amount of passionate talk can change reality.

If we take a serious look at the scientific objections to evolution, raised by educated scientists and professors and teachers, we don't find a cacophony of religious "arguments" or a multitude of references to the Bible or theology. No we find instead deep questions about the assumptions made by evolutionists, masses of contradictory evidence, apparently insurmountable problems of a statistical, chemical or physical nature.

LOL. Wow, when you serve up the bs, you do it with large wide shovels. No, we don't see those kind of questions at all, nor have any "insurmountable problems" been pointed out. This is the problem with the lazy and ignorant, they are easily fooled by the gibberish spouted by their idiotic heroes.

Being skeptical of the claims made by people like Dawkins isn't being a crank (though evolutionists love to falsely portray it as such) but rather is being scientific, weighing the evidence, questioning unprovable claims, challenging prevailing dogmatic opinion.

LOL. That couldn't be further from the truth. Complete rubbish.

Very few evolutionists I've dealt with have EVER bothered to seriously look into these scientific detractors and the few that do often do so with an intention of simply dismissing the arguments anyway, not with a truly open mind.

A theory (if we allow evolution such an elevated description) stands or falls not by the evidence for it but by the evidence against it and there is a huge array of serious evidential shortcomings with evolution.

None that anyone has ever brought forward, you are lying.

I once believed evolution and hammered anyone who dared suggest it was false, so I know a bit more than most about this.

Yeah, sure you did. LOL.

Listen to Berlinki's list of objections and he's just one among thousands of educated critically thinking scientists who refuse to simplye "believe" the evolution dogma:

https://www.youtube.com...

Harry.

Berlinki is an idiot when it comes to evolution.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Evidence
Posts: 843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2016 8:10:24 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/2/2016 7:05:19 AM, distraff wrote:
At 1/2/2016 12:34:57 AM, Evidence wrote:

I can drop a hammer on your feet, and whatever controversies you had about gravity will be eliminated. Now you can do the same for me, show me ONE animal evolving into another species, there are about 8 million species that you believe have been and are evolving for the past 4.2 billion years as we speak, there are about 6 million scientists, so this should be easy. Even if there is one scientist observing a potential animal just about to make that step, we should have daily speciation's

Even if we did see a new species how would we even know it has recently evolved and it wasn't just another pre-existing species we didn't find yet.


Thanks distraff!
That's why I ask why aren't they looking for 'potential' candidates for speciation? 8 million species, billions that evolved, then died out, 4.2 billion years brewing/evolving/speciating, don't you think they could find a species right at the point of speciating?
No, then help them. Put some pairs on a plane and change their environment. Put a bunch of zebras where there is little grazing grass but plenty of lush high trees, where either they speciate some long necks soon or they go extinct. Remember Mother nature will find a way for them, she always has. If they don't grow long necks, they'll evolve to some other creature, maybe grow wings and get the hell out of there and go back to where they came from?

I mean if single celled bacteria could grow legs, lungs, reproductive organs one for male and the other for the complementing the male, a female all by themselves with absolutely no plan or help from anyone, then with the help of all knowing Evolutionists that can create Parallel universes, it should be no problem, right?

Stop making up stories how this evolved to that, prove it, find those animals that are just about ready to speciate and prove there is no Creator! Or, stop telling our creator what he can and cannot do, like you said there are these Christian Evolutionists. God is an awesome Designer, an artist, who not only creates, but makes it interesting by creating diversity and allowing deviations in all those different kind of species.
(Remember that my argument is against Evolution, not you personally. I love you and everyone here.)

But oh no, teaching children that they are not really human but animals is more important, because it is passed off as science.

Wrong, they are taught that humans are very very advanced animals.

So why not just let them be humans, 5,900 years as humans, and now the last hundred years they are rats and monkeys.
What does 'advanced' mean in terms of Evolution anyways, when it all began with no will or purpose of anything or anyone? Who in evolution determines what's advanced and what isn't, what is good and what's not, and then decide to kill the bad, or what doesn't work very good? Sounds like a lot of intelligence is behind all this 'selection' don't you think my friend?

I know all about 'selection', 6 million of my ancestors on my Mothers side were selected, and then exterminated, only it wasn't Mother Nature. They were branded as rats, by a nation that was into this evolution theory, so to help Mother Nature out, they speeded up the process.
The next step in evolution is already planned out in "Agenda 21", the slow and methodical extermination of all non-white, or non-pure races, please refer to the Georgia Guide Stones for a quick summary.

By making them believe they are animals, it will be easier to control them when they put them in the tanks, they will see even starving children as enemies and blow them off the face of the earth,

Scientists also believe in critical thinking and you will hear a lot of evolutionists espousing it. It is hard to control critical thinkers.


You still don't get it, .. ESPECIALLY this 'critical thinking' stuff. What is 'critical thinking' when EVERYTHING is evolving with no plan or will or purpose?? Tell me, how much of the 13.75 billion year of evolution was Intelligently Designed??
Believe me, if you want to hold on to your Evolution Religion's beliefs and don't want to be criticized by your Elders like Richard Dawkins who will call you all kind of names should you backslide, you don't want to go there. This is just the tip of the huge iceberg of contradictions within your religious beliefs.

First, show me a solid foundation to build on, not some religious epiphany like the BB story.

.. I mean hey, they are just apes, no biggie, right?

How does one's ancestry determine what is right and wrong and what rights that person has?

Again; "What is right and wrong" in evolutionary terms?
Tell me, what 'right' does a lion cub have after a pride takeover? Or now you are making yourself exempt from being just an animal, to "something special"? Remember that your religion teaches that the human-ape is nothing special, that you, like those lions and your cousin apes and rats evolved from the same rock, same primordial soup, for the exact same time by no plan, no will of anything or anyone and for absolutely no purpose. Because a 'purpose' would indicate some kind of plan, which would indicate Intelligent Design.
Stick with either Evolution, or Intelligent design!?

Sure you can, here let me show you. Here is the summary of Biological Evolution:

"God doesn't exist, we have dug up many graves, and have a plethora of skull&bones to prove that this here dried up bones has over 'millions and billions' (always remember "millions and billions Sagan") of years evolved into that there fossil!"

Evolution says that all live is related by a common ancestor. It does not claim there is no God. :
Many evolutionists are Christian.

Exactly, because they don't know God our Creator. If they did, they wouldn't serve theistic gods, or have 40,000 versions of their religion, and sure as there is a hell wouldn't believe and serve in the Evolution Religion.

My 'common ancestor' is Adam and Eve, my spiritual Father is God, .. and not a single celled bacteria abandoned to survive by chance in some muddy soup from some careless parents like Mother Nature and Father time who never even wanted me, nor even had me or any biological being in mind.

Take care my friend, remember Jesus loves you and God cares, very much, unlike those other parents like Mother Nature and Father Time. They'll just sit there and watch you mutate into some horrific creature and let you die slowly, over millions and billions of years.
There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root. - Henry David Thoreau
distraff
Posts: 1,004
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2016 8:38:07 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/3/2016 8:10:24 PM, Evidence wrote:
At 1/2/2016 7:05:19 AM, distraff wrote:
At 1/2/2016 12:34:57 AM, Evidence wrote:

I can drop a hammer on your feet, and whatever controversies you had about gravity will be eliminated. Now you can do the same for me, show me ONE animal evolving into another species, there are about 8 million species that you believe have been and are evolving for the past 4.2 billion years as we speak, there are about 6 million scientists, so this should be easy. Even if there is one scientist observing a potential animal just about to make that step, we should have daily speciation's

Even if we did see a new species how would we even know it has recently evolved and it wasn't just another pre-existing species we didn't find yet.


Thanks distraff!
That's why I ask why aren't they looking for 'potential' candidates for speciation? 8 million species, billions that evolved, then died out, 4.2 billion years brewing/evolving/speciating, don't you think they could find a species right at the point of speciating?
No, then help them. Put some pairs on a plane and change their environment. Put a bunch of zebras where there is little grazing grass but plenty of lush high trees, where either they speciate some long necks soon or they go extinct. Remember Mother nature will find a way for them, she always has. If they don't grow long necks, they'll evolve to some other creature, maybe grow wings and get the hell out of there and go back to where they came from?

I don't think that experiment has ever been done. You would have to do this with thousands of species and wait around for hundreds of years (since this is only thousands not billions of species) and do careful intense observation to find an example of speciation that way. You would have to have one of the few out of billions of the right species at the exact time of speciation which is a very tiny moment of their evolution. That sounds really hard to do and prohibitively expensive. Scientists can find other ways of confirming evolution.

Without an experiment like this it would be very hard to know a new species was actually a new species and not just a similar species we didn't know about before. So it is very hard to confirm or deny evolution through the experiment you suggested. We need another way of doing this.

I mean if single celled bacteria could grow legs, lungs, reproductive organs one for male and the other for the complementing the male, a female all by themselves with absolutely no plan or help from anyone, then with the help of all knowing Evolutionists that can create Parallel universes, it should be no problem, right?

We don't even know if parallel universes are possible. Plus evolution doesn't claim that bacteria ever grew these things. It claims their descendants developed these features from naturally selected mutations.

But oh no, teaching children that they are not really human but animals is more important, because it is passed off as science.

Wrong, they are taught that humans are very very advanced animals.

So why not just let them be humans, 5,900 years as humans, and now the last hundred years they are rats and monkeys.
What does 'advanced' mean in terms of Evolution anyways, when it all began with no will or purpose of anything or anyone? Who in evolution determines what's advanced and what isn't, what is good and what's not, and then decide to kill the bad, or what doesn't work very good? Sounds like a lot of intelligence is behind all this 'selection' don't you think my friend?

Well humans are more advanced than a dog because we are smarter and can make better decisions. A change in the DNA can affect how smart a brain is without any of God's intervention.

I know all about 'selection', 6 million of my ancestors on my Mothers side were selected, and then exterminated, only it wasn't Mother Nature. They were branded as rats, by a nation that was into this evolution theory, so to help Mother Nature out, they speeded up the process.
The next step in evolution is already planned out in "Agenda 21", the slow and methodical extermination of all non-white, or non-pure races, please refer to the Georgia Guide Stones for a quick summary.

That is not natural selection, that is human selection. The holocaust was an example of humans incorrectly trying to replicate natural selection with horrendous consequences based on unproven racist theories.

By making them believe they are animals, it will be easier to control them when they put them in the tanks, they will see even starving children as enemies and blow them off the face of the earth,

Scientists also believe in critical thinking and you will hear a lot of evolutionists espousing it. It is hard to control critical thinkers.


You still don't get it, .. ESPECIALLY this 'critical thinking' stuff. What is 'critical thinking' when EVERYTHING is evolving with no plan or will or purpose?? Tell me, how much of the 13.75 billion year of evolution was Intelligently Designed??

Scientists don't say that there was no designer. They simply posit scientific theories to explain some things.

.. I mean hey, they are just apes, no biggie, right?

How does one's ancestry determine what is right and wrong and what rights that person has?

Again; "What is right and wrong" in evolutionary terms?
Tell me, what 'right' does a lion cub have after a pride takeover? Or now you are making yourself exempt from being just an animal, to "something special"? Remember that your religion teaches that the human-ape is nothing special, that you, like those lions and your cousin apes and rats evolved from the same rock, same primordial soup, for the exact same time by no plan, no will of anything or anyone and for absolutely no purpose. Because a 'purpose' would indicate some kind of plan, which would indicate Intelligent Design.
Stick with either Evolution, or Intelligent design!?

Well, how do you know right and wrong even exist if there is a creator?

Sure you can, here let me show you. Here is the summary of Biological Evolution:

"God doesn't exist, we have dug up many graves, and have a plethora of skull&bones to prove that this here dried up bones has over 'millions and billions' (always remember "millions and billions Sagan") of years evolved into that there fossil!"

Evolution says that all live is related by a common ancestor. It does not claim there is no God. :
Many evolutionists are Christian.

Exactly, because they don't know God our Creator. If they did, they wouldn't serve theistic gods, or have 40,000 versions of their religion, and sure as there is a hell wouldn't believe and serve in the Evolution Religion.

They see evolution as God's tool for making life. Evolution does not make any claim to the supernatural so it is not a religion in the same way Christianity is.