For a long time, Evolutionists have made up plenty of just-so stories, but I"m not really all that convinced that they are really doing any field research or laboratory work of their own. My thoughts are that they've been copying off of the Young Earth Creation Science works and claiming it as their own. I'm just asking for one piece of legitimate work from an Evolutionist that hasn't been stolen.
ok, fact based on something right? says alot does it?
Darwin couldnt explain the human eye Brother! Darwins Theory is Racist, did you know that? Common descent from where? How, i prefer the Genesis 11 explanation. So with missing Links apparently, evolution is now true and has been tested and verified?
Not really, look at the meaning of those words, i used many words to show you, you dismiss the meaning, it does say alot quiet frankly.
Science has made tremendous marks over time, funny they established those other findings and this one they call a theory!
Please explain the human eye to me. Were we blind at one stage, or are you going to say that the eye was the first thing that evolved and everything else followed?
[This ENTIRE thread is an overload of stupid!]
What is evolution? It's a religious cult. The same religion that fueled the Panet of the Apes type fantasy. Evos are hopeful that this "scientific" process will eventually take place, making chimps grow smarter to eventually use as servants.
The biggest problem I have with their religion is that this process would take a very, very long time to take place. Probably millions. Life would have no time for this, as existence has been here for roughly 6,000 years (give or take a few). It simply could not have happened.
Christian Holidays - Why do atheists keep them?
I've never seen an atheist who's hesitated to give his kids Christmas presents or send them on easter egg hunts. They remind me of spoiled kids who will eat dessert, but not dinner.
("Funny, why do you send your kids on a pagan (my Bible doesn't mention the easter bunny) easter egg hunt?")
I don't. Please do not speak lies about me.
I would never allow my children to participate in anything involving the pagan atheistic aspects that satan has brought into the Easter holiday. I and they celebrate only Jesus' resurection and the forgiveness of our sins.
Most abortions are from 9 to 12 weeks and according to recent studies from fetogolgiststhey do feel pain. Regardless, they are killing an innocent human being. Does that mean nothing do you? Aren't you glad weren't rip apart in the womb and thown away like disposable garbage.
i have one question. How is one to compete or try to reach out to people in all places especially school when all they feed us is huxley's " Brave New World" or Oscar Wilde's " Picture of Dorian Grey" . how is one to show the irrationality of those books and the message they potrary, to pinpoint the flaws and errors in thier secular philosophies? When the bible is not even mentioned or even thought of. We must have to battle intellectually just for the very existance of god! my point is thinking critically, or LOGICALLY in away that makes sense and point toward the CROSS
Atheist immorality.
An atheist can't speak to sexual sins. That is not a natturailst concept. Swaggart had snipers threats, bomb threats and all manner of satanic attack. It was sexual sin that made his fall. Atheism says sex is for the most powerful males of a species.
Swaggart has repented of his sin. Have you????
Worship is normal
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Billions in human history have believed in God or gods, supernatural powers, or have worshipped something or other.
Funny, that. Why would so many people do those things. We don't see animals do those things. Why would so many people do those things if there wasn't anything in it.
[This includes people who understand and are working in science and other intellectual pursuits so lack of intellect or understanding of science is not an explanation.]
__________________
[Humans are indeed animals, We are not plants or minerals, We are not fungii or viroids, We are animals,
We have all the characteristics of animals.]
You have been brainwashed and can only think inside your scientific box.
None of the beliefs of atheists can be verified anywhere in history. Nowhere. So why do they have beliefs that can't be verified? Where is their evidence that Jesus isn't the Son of God? The answer is that they don't have any. None. zero. Zip. So how do they think they have a case? They don't because the facts are on our side, not theirs.
Yet they are the first ones to clamor for evidence from others. There is no book, no document, no witnesses, nothing that says that anything else happened in Jerusalem during the time of Christ than what the bible claims. Nothing. All they need is even one person who lived in Jerusalem during the time of Christ who says that Jesus never performed any miracles and that would be evidence. But they don't even have that.
So until atheists understand that it's futile to try to change history, they're fighting a losing battle. And for what? Just to risk eternal torment. They only prove Jesus right when he said; "They hated me for no reason." There's no reason to try to change history when you have no proof that it happened any differently unless one simply wants to defame someone else. Absolutely none.
...but if these dinos are only a few thousand years old, then any and all other so-called "old" creatures must not be old at all. This means any and all radiometric dating must be flawed and the whole old-earth paradigm slides down the pipes of the intellectual toilet where it belongs with all the other excrement.
Homosexuality is totally illogical and totally evil because God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve. And the New Testament clearly states that homosexuals shall not inherit the Kingdom Of God. And thus logical and analytical thinking dictates that if homosexuals are not gaining entrance into Heaven then logically homosexual activity should be totally outlawed.
"why do evolutionists dig up animals' bones out of the ground and want so badly to call them "transitionals?" There are tons of different animals that exist on earth today.....take dogs, for example.....with evolutionists' mentality, they could dig up chihuahua bones and then dig up Great Dane bones and then say: "Oh, look...see there....it's evolution in action." In reality, it's just two different animals that existed at more or less the same time."
[Also, how were plants created before the Sun?]
plants were created before the sun and they lived because the days of genisis are literal days. and plants can live in darkness for a day or two.
my wife's wisdom teeth
...or lack of them.
My wife stands at 5'1 and, like most small/short people, has small features. Luckily for her she has no wisdom teeth...(probably because her head is small and has no room for them.) When she was 12, her dentist took xrays and informed her that she'd never have problems with wisdom teeth because she didn't have any to break through.
This is interesting to me, because both of her parents had their wisdom teeth taken out years ago.
Now if you're to listen and believe in ToE, you would believe that certain organisms just happen to be born with certain traits, and, if the said traits were beneficial (aka helped them breed more successfully) this is how the population evolves. And the thing is, "fit" parents are supposed to be passing on their "fit" traits to their offspring. If inheritance was not true and parents did not necessarily pass down specific traits according to whatever lucky genes they happened to possess, then ToE is thrown for a huge loop, as the offsprings' traits would be more of a biological crapshoot as opposed to a representation of their parents.
But my wife's parents both have wisdom teeth. So how and why did she end up with no wisdom teeth?
Also, everyone's heard the imaginary scenario that evos dreamed up about cheetahs, whereby faster cheetahs are more likely to breed, thereby supposedly having faster offspring...(which is how cheetahs came to be fast)..... But how does ToE -- or the laws of genetics -- stand if both parents have a physical trait, (such as speed or wisdom teeth), yet their offspring ends up not having it???
Coadie : The European union wants to make homophobia illegal. That has to bring in the thought police.
How can they measure someones thoughts or fears about something they oppose? What if they strongly oppose homosexuality and have zero fears?
Is there a meter to detect phobia? Gays have rights. Those are easier to detect violation. If a gay wants to casually toss a label on someone as being homophobic, they are guilty by accusasation? In civil cases there must be damage. That will be hard to prove.
Richard Lamb : I wonder will the same bill include hetero-phobia provisions.
Christdependent : The real issue behind this push for societal acceptance of homosexuality is the intention to silence anyone who says it is wrong. Control of the language is where all oppressive political regimes begin, and in light of the fact that Jesus is identified as the "living WORD," and Satan is the father of lies, no one should be surprised.
If I pray to God to kill you, naturally He's not going to listen to my prayer!
If I don't pray in accordance to His will, of course He's not going to answer my prayers!
If your kids ask for stupid things, will you give them what they want?
If your kids ask for things that are good for them, wouldn't you always try to give what's good to them?
Do you understand now, how God is like a parent or you still wish to see God as a Genie in the Bottle?
Well if you are not an atheist then you should agree that logical and analytical thinking dictate that there is a Supreme Intelligence governing the universe.
[Your original argument was a tautology. You claim that atheists don't think logically when they reject premise X, then you present their rejection of premise X as evidence for your claim that they lack logical thought.]
I accept God and Christianity because I utilized logical and analytical thinking to ascertain that God and Christianity are totally logical to believe in.
you can make all the excuses for evilutionary scientists you like, but the fact is, no one has ever seen an animal give birth to a different kind of animal, so evilution is, at best, a theory, but in reality, a tool of diabolical influence
Darwinism is about racial hygeine societies and abortions' goal is to weed undesirables. The pro deathers can't create life. They can destroy it.
And since Jesus was the first true fundamentalist and he was killed, then those who stand up for his word the most (fundamentalist) will be treated the same way he was as he tells us we will be and this forum shows.
So when will humans develp wings, a beak, or maybe alien traits since evolutionists claim that only fitter species survive?
And since they've already claimed that we came from our less fit ancestor apes, then what is more fit than humans? Aliens perhaps? So sorry, evolutionists, but your contradictions are exposed and your game is over even if you deny it. Claiming that animals turn into humans and explaining it by the survival of fitter species presupposes that humans will turn into a completely new and superior species than we are today.
So when will that be and what will that entail? A god perhaps? How anyone can adopt such a ludicrous and impossible notion that apes breed anything but apes & humans breed anything but humans not only contradicts biology and reality, but it is an embarrassment to humanity, not to mention those who consider themselves "experts" in biology. It only proves that "For the wisdom of the world is foolishness in God's sight." The theory of evolution is more impossible than anything in the bible. It would probably have been laughed out of science fiction books before the 19th century. That shows that humans are indeed in a state of decay, rather than more fit than the minds of previous generations.
*assuming here "intelligence" in species is something that can be measured, in some way
Think of the distribution of "intelligence" after billions of years of evolution. If you graphed it for every species excluding humans, sure some species would be smarter than others (e.g. circus animals smarter than my cat who's not the brightest), but not that much variation really.
Now add human beings, and you'd see a huge spike in your graph. It is reasonably to ask how evolution over billions of years could have produced one "species" that stands out so much. The only species to make its way to the moon. This species also has not even been challenged by another species for control of the earth (though the dinosaurs might have been a struggle).
Explain this one away evolutionists- doubt you can.
The gays took something that was God-Given and twisted it into something that should be despised in every quarter...the Rainbow...What was the rainbow given for and by whom? ...And now look ...Those whom God despises the actions of the most...to the point that He has from the beginning...called it an "abomination"...have God's Rainbow... taken it a twisted it into something representing the most vilest thing in the LORD'S sight...The emblem of their solidarity...Is not the Rainbow the tie that binds all lesbians and gays together? You can call me a homophobe or intolerant...it matters not...the one thing I can't be called is... a LIAR! Each time I see a Gay Pride Parade...awash in God's heavenly Rainbow...it sickens me...I can only imagine what it does to our LORD...These are my views...What are yours?
15.) The theory of evolution is supported almost completely by atheists...and atheists don't have just a great track record for telling the truth. Lying comes natural for them, as they don't believe in The 10 Commandments and see nothing wrong with lying, cheating, stealing, murdering, etc....because, hey, we're all just dumb machines that operate by random chemicals bouncing into each other. To them, (or many of them) telling lies and killing Christians is a good thing because they hate Christians and wish we were dead.
to deny God one has to abandon all common sense and truth....and that's what creationists are up against on this board from the likes of evolutionists: total abandonment of truth and common sense.
Since there seems to be confusion among atheists about what energy is. Energy is a potential and cannot be weighed because it has no parameters as no invisible force does and therefore cannot be weighed. An invisible force can, however, be measured as it reacts in resistance to mass, such as the wind. But like the wind, energy itself is weightless.
Mass on the other hand, which is any finite object, can be weighed when acted upon by gravity. So a weightless force cannot contain weight. But mass on the other can does contain potential energy which is why it can be released under the proper circumstances such as nuclear fission.
And neither can an explosion solidify mass. An explosion breaks up mass! So the "Big Bang" is impossible. It is another desperate attempt to deny God.
But, as Jesus tells us, we cannot enter the kingdom of God unless we become like little children. Children already know that explosions don't create and solidify mass but break up mass. But this is lost on "Scientists" who, in their rebellion against God come up with the most ludicrous and impossible arguments because they can't see basic simple concepts like those above.
So they first need to learn that the truth is always simple because it holds no contradictions. Truth affirms reality, it doesn't contradict it. But lies, on the other hand, are always convoluted, complex, and contradictory. And science always deals in the complex, convoluted and contradictory.
Tolerance is the furthest these schools promote. You get teachers and principals alike rattling out students whom openly state they don't condone homosexuality. What really occurs is the homosexual community silencing any whom oppose it. You say homosexuality is a sin or shameful and you're labeled bigoted and hateful.
Did you know that because it is impossible for atheism to exist, you as an atheist do not exist
I view homosexuality and arson equally.
The only difference is one has been glamourized by the media.
Now Christians that single out one pet sin to demonize should not be seen as role models.
If an angel was in a UFO that led the astrologers (the 'wise men') to the young child Jesus in that house (Mt 2:11), then it must have been a wicked angel. How so? We have these pagan astrologers (Greek, "magoi"; see De 18:10-12 and Isa 47:13,14) traveling along and they see a "star". (how convenient; astrologers.....stars.....) Does it lead them directly to Jesus? Nope. They next end up in front of the wicked King Herod in Jerusalem. (Mt 2:1,2) Herod lies to the astrologers and tells them to go find the Christ and report back to him so he can worship him also. (Mt 2:8) His real intention was to kill Jesus. (Mt 2:13) Now an assassination plot has been assembled and the astrologers are the dupes in this scheme. So the astrologers start to travel and see the "star" again. This time it leads them to Bethlehem and to not a baby, but the young child Jesus in his house. (Mt 2:9) After they pay their homage to Jesus, the astrologers are ready to head back to Jerusalem to report to Herod as instructed. So up to this point, following the "star" has just about got Jesus killed! How is God going to stop it? He warns them in a dream not to go back to Herod. (Mt 2:12) So who was using the "star" to help carry out an evil assassination plot? Who else, but the manslayer and opposer of God, Satan the Devil. Thus the next time you see a 'star' on top of a Christmas tree, remember that it represents a wicked angel who was determined to have Jesus, the Son of God, killed.
Why do evolutionists trust their own minds?
When creationists point out the glory of God's design haven't you heard them pick and choose examples of what they consider "bad design". But as they believe no God and believe in evolution this would show that evolution produces bad design. That could include their own brain which could be very flawed and require mutations to improve until it is adequate to comment on how it got there.
So, I don't see how evolutionists can trust their own minds or seriously convince anybody else that anyone else can trust their own minds or indeed if they themselves have adequate minds to make such a decision.
Evo/Atheist hypocrisy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I find it so very interesting how atheists are so sure of themselves that there is no God, and that all lifeforms somehow appeared and evolved randomly, without any sort of intelligence to either start or fuel the process. And even more interesting is how they seem so utterly confident in this illogical position.
Of course, this mindset is ludicrous...and here's why: Evos/atheists (Yes, they're one in the same on this forum) don't believe the universe was created by God, who by definition is a creator and thus capapble of creating........so essentially, what they don't believe in is an entity capable of creating existence.
So if that is the case, my question is this: if God (a capable entity) isn't responsible for existence, what is?....something not capable? And how are you so sure of yourself when you don't really know what this non-capable thing is?
Paradoxically, natural selection is claimed to be a creative entity (Darwin and his minions claim it's responsible for speciation and evolution as a whole), yet it's never been tested scientifically or proven to produce a single thing or adapt even one population.
So what we have is a small sect of people (10% of the population) who believe whole-heartedly via blind faith in a biological mechanism that has never been seen or proven to create or adapt anything, yet at the same time, they are so absolutely sure of themselves that no entity exists who is capable of creating existence.
Does anyone else see the hypocrisy and religiousness of this?
Morals exist, a moral Law Giver is necessary to explain this, this Moral Law Giver is God. Therefore, God exists.
Dating is not Biblical.
This is why so many relationships fail.
Dating is based on the person supposing to know what is best for them.
Provebs 14 states There is a way that seem right unto a man, but the end are the ways of death.
If Christian parents are allowed to participate in chosing their children's spouses things wouldn't be so messed up.
Dating tends more to promiscuity than purety and we all know it. And though we are Christian, out statistics on chasity is somtimes worse than the world.
If we do it the world's way, we get world's results.
Parents are better at chosing our mates than we are. Dating is a recipe for heart ache.
Oh, I do believe scientific facts. All of them.
I disagree with naturalistic interpretations of many facts.
But the facts are incontrovertible - any of us can observe and repeat
them in a lab.
Of course, evolution cannot be observed or repeated, but has been falsified many times
yet people still call it a 'fact' - which is very strange considering it doesn't even pass muster as a scientific theory.
There are lots of alternative explanations for the things we observe - naturalistic scientists simply pick the ones that agree with what they already believe.
Evoltion is a religion and the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on mankind.
So I disagree with religion in the public schools - it's pretty simple
Like I am willing to die in the place of a baby that would be aborted. If you know a young or old girl or woman that is considering an abortion I would gladly die in the baby's place. This is not an attempt to shock you, or anyone else, it is what Jesus did for me, and He said "Do what I did."
Scientists are on a search for the truth . They don't have the truth or they wouldn't keep searching for the truth and changing their minds all the time.
Therefore they can no more be trusted than those who are in the dark about the truth. So again, when scientists agree with God, they will always be right. When they disagree with God, they will always be wrong. So ultimately, all we need is God.
A) Has God recanted the Bible, or any part of the bible thus far? It it were not true, don't you think God would say something?
Natural selection- cruel or not?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is natural selection cruel?
Evos seem to be spinning it that natural selection's losers are those who are selfish and "immoral". So serves them right, huh? So natural selection is not really cruel, it's moral and just. The selfish competitive bad guys lose out, whilst the commie good guys survive and prosper.
They fail to cite other examples of the losers of natural selection. For some reason they don't want to give people the whole truth. Such as what goes on when there's limited resources.
The commies are giving an acceptable spin on evolution theory, making it seem moral and just. They don't talk about the competition, the disabled and weak losing out etc.
Am is right, the evos are commie spin doctors.
Evolution is a tool that the Academic Cartel uses to further hurt the esteem of students.
...
Students converted to accepting they are apes and animals, start resorting to lack of control and other animal behavior.
Worshipping homosexuals worship a different god
My God never changes. He asks me to repent and change. Having shared these thoughts from the bible, when I pray and read the bible it denounces homosexuality as an abomination and sin. It will keep two participants from heaven.
The Gay claims to pray and get endorsement. There are not two correct answers. Therefore we must conclude it is prayer to a different god that causes the answers to be different than Jesus (the Word that became flses and dwelt among us) tells us.
Pray to the Lord Jesus Christ, root and offspring of David and you will get the same answers every time. Pray to a pagan humanist deity and he will tell you what will give you pleasure.
[Women Who Dress Non-Biblically]
In Biblical Times, if a man came to town looking for a harlot, she could be easily spotted by her attire.
Go to a department store that has both men and women clothes. Women clothes outnumber men by as much 10 to 1, if not greater.
Go to the mall and you will pass be 10 or more women only clothing stores, before you find men only clothing store.
These are just everyday examples that clothes are more important to women that looking upon a man in the same manner as a man looks upon a woman.
The Britney Spears, J-Lo, Destiny Child... attire is just a prominent in the Church as it is in the world and it is unbiblical, because there is no way anyone can say that it is modest.
We are all called upon to not be stumbling blocks to one another, but women just dress any way they want and feel, think, act as if they have no responsibility.
For a woman to dress immodest and to ignore the responsibility of not being a stumbling block is Christian irresponsibility.
Thus the reason why promiscuity, immorality is no different in the church, than in the world.
Is this legalism or is this Christian love?
Is it only legalism if you feel forced?
It is Christian love when you care that your body will be used by Satan to cause you brother in Christ to stumble/to fall.
Hitler is a descendent of Darwin. Works for me.
The girly boy pansie he she sissy feminine softy man disease prevents pervert homos from seeing God has commanded his children to judge the wicked. The she he whorish lezbos and the girly men homosexuals teach the false doctrines I addressed in a previous post. This underscores my point. I posted the verses below in a previous post under this thread but yet still, the girly boy men and the he she manly lezbos still refuse to accept the whole counsel of God's word. Jesus called the lot of them "dogs" in Revelation 22:15. It is an accurate description because dogs eat their own fecal piles and the fecal piles of other dogs, have intercourse with young puppies, roll around in filth, driven by lust and mate in packs and hump even many other male dogs in large groups, and are driven to wallow in vile trash. It is no accident God chose the animal, the "dog", to describe the lifestyle of homosexuals.
Well considering the fact that I am a writer and have been told many, many times how articulate I am, even on FSTDT, then if I write in a hurry, and don't use correct grammar, then because I'm not God, then I am prone to mistakes, just as you are. But since you seem to focus on grammatical errors, then i can just as easily go through the posts and point out yours.
But since I have no interest in playing one-upmanship games, I don't stoop to the level that atheists do. But I could, any time I wanted to.
What's under all that ice?
What's under all that ice on both poles?
Could things be discovered there upon melting that may be problematic to the ToE?
Life on other planets:- abiogenesis & evolution
A question for the evolutionists- are there life on other planets?
If you answer "yes" then surely there are only two possible ways this could happen
1. God made it
2. Abiogenesis
So for those folks who say "yes" and believe in abogenesis, I'm afraid there's no evidence at all of such a process and the probabilites of such a thing happening has been shown to be so patently absurd that atheists are now thinking life came to earth in a comet or by aliens.
That is believing something without evidence at all. No observations, no known process... it's a fantasy, but atheist evolutionists sure do belive in aliens. Yet they have the audacity to say God doesn't exist and lie that there's "no evidence".
Don't be fooled- the atheist denial of God is nothing to do with the evidence. The atheist evolutionist is quite willing to believe in things with no evidence at all- such as aliens. Anything, as long as it's not God can be taken on faith by the atheist. No hard data or observations required. Plenty of blind faith.
Next time you hear a scientist positively speculate there's life out there, in effect that scientist believies in abiogenesis, going contrary to all the research and data on this topic. Believing in things without evidence. And they're suppose to be scientists?
Oh! It just hit me. The reason why we never hear about plant evolution is because plants don't have sexual intercourse...well, at least not in the way evolutionists like to envision it. See, evos are obsessed with sex, especially if it's forced sex or if it's between two different types of animals, like chimps and humans. But since plants don't do any of that, then they're just simply less sexy of a topic. Science only gets interested when animals have harems or multiple partners, or -- of course -- if they're's any homosexual activity going on...that as well gets them real excited. I suppose the ultimate zenith for science would be evidence of homosexual activity between a Neanderthal and a chimp.
It makes so much more sense than apes breeding humans and humans evolving into an entirely new species. But since atheists live in a fantasy world, they can't see how irrational that is and they are the last people to talk about what's rational and what is't. Their beliefs aren't even in the rhealm of reality.