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.
from a spiritual perspective society would be CLEANSED of it's impurities. Why do you think God ordered Joshua to kill all the men, women, and children of the land. It's not because God is bad, but rather ALL deserve to die, and the land which was given to the israelites had to be PURGED of its spiritual impurities.
You want to know why the war in Iraq is dragging, because we're fighting it according to our MODERN-DAY sensibilities about death, instead of wiping the land clean and purging the land just as they did in ancient times. ..
Tolerance is an immature almost cowardly response.
There is no love in tolerance
and no hate either
Tolerance is the slippery slope that opens the door to all manner of things
that the tolerant dont really want
but immaturely hadnt realised would automatically follow.
Small minded fools! I have seen and fought against things that will drive a lesser man insane should he lay eyes upon it. We are in a battle more horrifying then you could possibly imagine. Am are trying to save your souls! God help me for I do not have such patience for the damned. You are like children in a straw hut mocking the one that gazed outside the window to warn you of the wolves at your door!
Repent or be Damned for ever!
Let me explain it real sloooooooooooooooooowly:
1. YOU ARE GONNA DIE!!!!!! Surprise!
2. When you die, God will judge you.
3. If you don't believe in Him, God will send you to Hell.
This. is. not. complicated. Does anyone spot any gaping holes in my logic here? I thought not. So, given the inescapable logic of the situation:
WHY DO YOU WANT TO BURN???
Please Please Please just hear this and come to Jesus right now. I beg you. You might not have much time left.
I believe that if Atheists read everything on the internet, they'd have a hard time not being a Christian.
Pro-lifers will win. I'm convinced of it. As long as we hold to our values against the world’s dehumanizing trends we will counter this darkening culture with light and eventually prevail.
Here are a few reasons for my hope:
1) Pro-aborts can't call themselves what they are. They call themselves pro-choice. It's a not-so-subtle nomenclature shift meant to appeal to freedom-loving Americans. But in the end, I believe, if your rallying cry is a lie your supporters are going to figure it out after a while. They're not pro-choice. They're pro-abortion. But they can't admit to that. If you have to lie about what you're for, you're going to lose...eventually.
2) Improvements in science continues to enhance our knowledge of what's going on in the womb, putting pro-aborts on the side of being "anti-science." When Roe first became the law of the land pro-aborts argued that the baby wasn't a baby at all but just a clump of cells. Most people know that's not true anymore. People have seen 3-D Ultrasounds. People have seen the photo of the baby reaching out during an in-utero surgery. The numbers of the ignorant are dwindling and that aids our cause.
3) There are no great pro-choice speeches and there never will be any. You can't move people by speaking eloquently of the right to have consequence-less sex with someone you don't love. Think back - how many great speeches in the American pantheon have there been which include the words "rape and incest." I'm thinking it's a pretty low number. "Give me freedom or give me rape and incest" just doesn't work right. Even the great orator of our time Barack Obama could only come up with, "I don't want them punished with a baby" in support of abortion. Pro-lifers on the other hand speak about those things which move us -life, rights and God. In the end, our superior speechifying will win out.
4) We pro-lifers have more babies. It's simple. Those that don't believe in killing babies in the womb typically end up having more babies. Pro-lifers are more...prolific. Go to church some Sunday and you'll hear a chorus of babies attempting to drown out the sermon. You don't bring babies to a NARAL meeting. It's considered rude. In the end, demographics win.
I truly believe we'll win. We have to. We must. And we must never accept that some must die for convenience or that some must be selected to die for the greater good of society. And we must not accept that killing someone is a mercy to them because their life would be difficult due to illness. Until every life is legally esteemed as sacred we should never rest and never give up.
As an example of the shifting tide, ABC News (7/29) covered a heartwarming story of two unborn babies with a terrible problem. The twins were diagnosed with "Twin-to-Twin Transfusion Syndrome," a deadly complication that would likely kill both unborn children. The children were saved by a remarkable in utero surgery.
Almost as remarkable as the surgery, however, is the the fact the ABC decided to do a story which so clearly illustrates the humanity of the unborn. Add to that, this introduction by Charlie Gibson.
We have “Closer Look,” tonight, at some of the most awe-inspiring surgery that modern medicine has to offer. It is not an operation performed on a heart or a brain, as delicate as those procedures might be. This surgery is done on the tiniest, most fragile of patients imaginable. Babies yet to be born. ABC’s John McKenzie on a rare procedure done inside the womb. Not just on one fetus, but two.
Were that not enough, the piece included this exchange between John McKenzie and Dr. Kenneth Moise of the Texas Children's Hospital.
MCKENZIE: Using a kind of miniature telescope, doctors enter Kim’s amniotic sack. And there they are, the boys. Their perfectly formed feet and hands.
MOISE: You can see them moving sometimes they’ll reach up and grab the scope.
MCKENZIE: The fetus will grab the scope?
MOISE We’ve had it actually pull on the scope.
As we remember from the famous Michael Clancy photo, nothing illustrates the humanity of the unborn better than their little hands grasping just as newborns do.
Thinking Biblically about the appendix
Let’s assume that modern science knew of no function for the appendix. Would that show it was a useless left-over from our past evolution from the animals? Not at all. There would be at least two other possibilities, when our thinking is based upon the Bible:
It had a created function in people originally, but as a result of the Curse (consequent upon Adam’s sin) on all creation, humanity has degenerated. Thus, our body has lost some functions which it once had. Evolution requires a gain in information—new structures, new functions.
It has a created function, but we don’t know what it is yet.
I can see why atheists focus on God's wrath so much. They have the most to fear from it.
So do atheists really think that the more they call God a monster, a tyrant, cruel, evil, and immoral that that's going to manipulate God into changing his mind? Why do they think that slander and criticism will ever help them in any circumstance? Or do they just plain don't think?
So yes guys, God does destroy those who treat him and his creation with contempt. He does punish those who are arrogant enough to think they deserve the best that God has to offer without acknowledging him. And calling him name after name after name won't change that one bit.
But he also gives us a free pardon and our whole lives to acknowledge him. So why do atheists criticize him and reject his free pardon? Whose fault is that? Is anything ever the fault of atheists on their own eyes? No.
So since atheists aren't honest or intelligent enough to know why it's not wise to bite the hand that feeds them, then they'll have to learn by experience just how unwise that is.
So calling him evil, a monster, a tyrant, cruel, evil, unjust,and cursing his name and his creation will only seal your fate even more. After all the quotes that atheists use in the bible talking about what "atrocities' God does to those who disobey Him, they, of all people, should have learned by now what happens to those who continually mock him. But they haven't learned one thing. Unbelievable.
Dinosaurs didn't eat meat. They ate plants the Creator provided for them, no doubt in a form, texture and consistency befitting their tooth structure.
I reject your claim that the dinosaurs went extinct before mankind appeared.
This is mythology with no basis in fact, and assumes veracity of highly flawed dating methods.
For as many evolution-mongers as you say support the dating methods as accurate, there are as many evolution-mongers who say they are not.
The conclusion is that they cancel each other out (as usual) and we are back to interpretation of rocks and bones that cannot speak for themselves.
Ever seen a dinosaur eat meat? (I don't think so)
Lots of animals have "menacing teeth" but are not carnivores - carnivory is the exception in the animal kingdom..
Signs of Christian Persecution
You can see it on this very forum. It's starting out slowly, but it's there. Right on this board I've seen posts where non-Christians are criticizing the hiring practices of religious organizations, church discipline of members living in sin, as well as criticism of Christian stands against homosexuality. A sticky on homosexuality at the top of the board this evening notes the introduction of bills into legislatures around the nation mandating quotas and sensitivity training.
I've been called paranoid when I've stated persecution of Christians is on its way, but you can see the seeds of the enemy's activities being reported and stated right here.
Get ready Christians. Soon it'll be time to pay any price. Give it time. With the election of Barak Obama and leftist gains in the Congress the forces of evil are energized. They see a window of opportunity to advance satan's agenda, and it is almost sure to end in official sanction and unofficial persecution of Christians as we refuse to compromise the Biblical positions.
Chrisitians who voted democrat, you bear a measure of responsibility for what's coming.
Marrige is Gods union and until the church starts fighting for our marriages things will only get worse.
it will be a dark day when 2 men are united and seen exactly the same as a christian man and his wife by the godless govt who 'permitted' them to marry.
Sadly tho, we must get a license if we want to protect our spouses in the case of our death...kwim?
"Not natural"(inconsistent with or against the natural order of things) is indeed an argument. The best argument imo, because permitting gay marriage is essentially equalizing heterosexuality with homosexuality - and it doesn't take a scholar to see that the two are not equal.
[Not the best argument because we actually see homosexuality in nature. Ta da!]
There's a lot of unnatural things that occur in nature, hence the existence of the words "unnatural" and "abnormal" or even "freak" or "anomaly", and the list continues.... so what?
[It's the line "There's a lot of unnatural things that occur in nature" that gets me.]
Homosexuals claiming to be a GLBT Christians are actually Christphobics
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homosexuals claiming to be a Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, or Transgender Christians are not Christians. They are Chnristphobics and Biblephobics.
They are afraid of the true Jesus and hate His word. They do not want to accept what the true Jesus and His word says about them---that they are going to Hell.
Therefore from now on I will refer to a person claiming to be either a GLBT Christians as a Christphobic or Biblephobic or both.
I say this in the love of the Lord and call out to them to repent and be saved.
Stop following the secular
crowd if you want to be heard in this world!
If I were someone who didn't believe in God,or a god,yet when
I was sick or close to death,that might give me a reason to doubt
being an atheist,and wonder if it's the best choice.
I think this world was created indeed,but more than think it,I know it!
You don't have to be that smart to know that the world wasn't an
accident!!! Theists may excuse what they do,ect.... some of them, yet
they at least have hope. for an atheist,their only hope is this one life!
My God didn't need a creator simply because there had to be a first some-
where,and he is it,amen.
Thats such a silly question for today,I thought it was done away with by
now? Guess not?
Did God create a rock so big he can't lift it?
Well,If I could do that,why would i do it? Would I be against myself?
would I be trying to out do myself? Why would I want to do that?
better yet,why would God?
If you could burn your house down,would you?
I am sorry,but that is just too silly for me.
Yes,I believe atheists do feel moral responsibilities for what they
choose to believe,on their basis,and how they feel like accepting
them. I believe they feel they are free thinkers who don't have to
believe or accept what anyone says. This is why I get so confused
by so many atheists believing in evolution. It's not just some of them,
it's all of them that I know of!!! talk about Not being a free thinker!
what a contradiction that is!!! Where is the free thinking in that?
All anyone has to do,is think about what it would be like to be an
atheist for themselves. They will know why it seems like a good idea
at first too. Why would I find it attractive at first glance?
simply because I'd pretty much be my own God!!!
But,I am so glad I am not,amen.
We humans have an excellent track record of messing things up,and
making many mistakes!
It seems there is no evidence for atheism. No evidence of any sort- scientific or otherwise. It makes little sense for the truth to have no evidence at all to support it. Therefore atheism can't be truth. It has no supporting evidence, nothing at all.
Don't bother protesting you don't need evidence, and defining your beliefs in such a way that does not require any. Truth would have evidence to support it.
(1)portraying fundamentalist Christianity as sinister, dangerous, and antiquated, while (2) picking on those poor little homosexuals and trying to establish a theocracy to impose their moral values, like the Nazis, etc.
Just another appeal to emotions, the psychological strategy being to pit one emotion (fear) against the other (hatred), labelling those who oppose the homosexual agenda as the latter, who are actually to be feared. Middle-of-the-road Christians are the target of these appeals, as these activists have properly identified those who refuse to budge from WHAT IS WRITTEN as being beyond their sway.
Why do you just rail against those that oppose Homosexuality? Why not reail against those that fire pharmicists for not prescribing baby killer drugs. Rail against those that destroy forrests by not allowing roads to be built for fire fighters. Rail against those that destroy the business of pig and chicken farmers.
Do you just rail full time against those that are Christians and don't want homosexuality to rule our world? How closed minded.
Then why do atheists only quote the parts in the bible that describe God's wrath and never quote the parts that talk about his love? The answer is simple; to try to jsutify their hatred of God. So sorry, but again the actions of atheists contradict their words.
I have dismissed evolution as a fairytale and that entails ALL forms of your fairytale.
Do you have someone tuck you in at night and read you these stories?
Aaawweeeee, that's so cute.
It makes me ill and angry at the Canadian Government to have allowed the gay marriage law to pass. THis act of course was passed before the new Prime Minister came into office. Our current Prime Minister is a Christian, and recently they reopened the vote on gay marriage issue. Majority of course voted to keep the subject closed. What is done is done they said.
I cried when I heard that they passed the bill. I suppose it shouldn't be surprising that this world is getting worse.
Proofs are great, and evidence is great.
absence of evidence for Atheism is also evidence of absence of Atheism. Keep that in mind.
Did you know that the only reason why virtually every scientist in the world accepts evolution? It's because they are all in on one big conspiracy to undermine creationism.
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.
*Do you support the separation of church and state?*
You mean this one....
First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The one that says *nothing* about separation of church and state* and the mockery that our politicians have made of it?
I'm all for it.
yeap...so how do you explain that? And all the colors of the world are derived from 3 -- kinda like the Trinity...and?
[1) A supernova is observed. Scientists say the original event occurred 4000 years ago using various techniques. You'd accept that.
2) A supernova is observed. Scientists say it occurred 100,000 years ago using the same techniques. You'd reject that.]
I reject #2 as science as it is unobservable. In order to study something in science one must observe the associated event.
It sounds to me like you are dissapointed in how God has made and arranged things and you feel you could do better. Perhaps you could make a perfect world where no one gets sick and no one dies. No one would steal lie or get angry etc. You would have a perfect world. You would then have done a much better job than what God has done right?
Perhaps the child who experiences these physical shortcomings is blessed in other ways that are not obvious to you. Mentally retarded people often bless those around them in many wonderful ways. I have found in my life that I often don't accurately perceive situations and they appear to be one thing but then I find out they were actually something else. I think you may be seeing the limbs missing as the all in all when in fact there are other issues at work you are not seeing. Often times our sufferings humble us in a way that draws us closer to God. I hope you too will experience that closeness and love with God one day soon.
That's just it, atheists want 100% physical proof that God exists. Well, you can see it in nature, you can see it in the human body because there is no way the intelligent design of life can be seen any other way than God, you simply just don't buy it. That proof simply is not good enough for you. If Christ walked up, tapped you on the shoulder and told you He was Christ, you still wouldn't believe it, correct? Because you would not think it was Him.
There are tons more ways to talk to unsaved people without having to prove logic. Believers know that beyond the physical world and what is around us that it is difficult to prove God, we base most of what we believe on faith because things just don't add up otherwise.
atheistic faith herein never told that there are credible scientists who harbor significant skepticism towards Darwinism and even doubt that Darwinism creates a reasonable foundation for atheism?
Can the so-called intellectuals not see the deadly poisonous viper in the grass, the lawn of knowledge? Science is an ever changing field of expertise. Scripture is NEVER CHANGING, yet much of what was once considered absurd in scripture, has since been proven scientifically factual.
The same mindset required to follow a Hitler is required to buy into evolutionism. Evolutionism is the political activism of promoting evolution and fighting creationism.
What is required to follow a Hitler is what is required to follow the evolutionism: practically all have the same mindset, and the conscensus of their fellow evolutionists rules. They follow leaders easily, and agree to dogma even if it is false and unscientific, or downright harmful.
It's simple, Energy can't be created nor destroyed so your energy can't die. Also your energy states can't die.
So when you get married that's an energy state.
When you go to work that's an energy state.
If you love your wife that feeling survives death.
If you commit suicide and your angry at the world that feeling survives death.
Fact 1: Energy doesn't die.
Fact 2. Your Energy states don't die.
Fact 3. You survive death and everything you did while in the body survives death.
Everything that you do in the body requires energy and is a unique energy state. Energy states don't die.
The truth is;
1) the sun gives light by day
2) The moon and stars give light by night and mark days, months, seasons, and years
3) The earth is less than 10,000 years old
4) Man rules over the animals
5) Each species breeds its own kind
6) The bible even describes the first male and female
7) The genealogy of man can be traced back to Adam
Here are the lies:
1) Apes breed humans
2) The earth is 4.5 billion years old
3) There is no cause-effect, even though scientists base their mathematical formulas and theories on cause-effect through voluminous explanations
4) The ancestors of the Jews weren't Adam, cain, Seth, and David, but other people instead, even though they don't know which people
5) That there are accounts of our vine-swinging ancestors from ancient peoples
6) That Dinosaurs roamed the earth for millions of years before man came then suddenly died before there were any witnesses to them.
That just shows that denying God takes tremendous effort which means that unbelievers make a deliberate attempt at doing so which is demonstrated by the voluminous explanations of evolutionists trying to prove that apes bred human beings.
[Where did "communism" come from?]
Its what they propagate as Objectivism. Its Conceptualism...i.e. Liberalism....i.e. Communism in disguise.
first of all medicine, like evolutionary science is mostly political. There are very few medicines, if any, that cure anything. Any cures that happen do so because of the body's own ability to repair itself. Care to name me a disease in the past 40 years that's been cured on a widescale basis by medicine?
Another game atheists play
We don't buy the fact that atheists believe that God is imaginary. Do atheists complain about:
1) The Big bad wolf? No.
2) Scylla and Charybdus? No.
3) Sightings of Mary that one poster here keeps bringing up? No.
4) Darth Vader? No.
5) The wicked witch of the West? No.
6) The Borg from Star Trek? No.
Nor any other wicked character they believe is fictious. Atheists don't criticize, judge, or curse the above characters nor would they if other people believed they were real. And they certainly don't feel threatened by the acts of the above characters as they feel about God's warnings about hell. Would they be threatened if we tell them that the big bad wolf is going to come and eat them up? No. Oh, they might lie for the sake of debate and claim they would be, but then they would look even more foolish. But they have told us they consider hell a threat.
Everyone was born heterosexual. It's simple biology. So there is no choosing to be heterosexual. Even those sinning the sin of homosexuality are heterosexuals. Sinning the sin of homosexuality is an heterosexual abomination.
Homosexuality is a Heterosexual abomination
Biologists shoot themselves in the foot....again!
Conclusion: concerning some of the "advantages" that humans have over the lower primates as we have discussed above, the larger brain size, speech/language, communicative eyes, bipedal locomotion; how do each of these transfer to "an individual's reproductive success"? Especially if we are talking about many "micromutations" over a very long time period. What great advantage is 0.01% larger brain size, 0.01% greater speech capability, 0.01% more communicative eyes, 0.01% more bipedal locomotion?
Answer: NONE!Then we would seem to be left with "fortuitous mutations" or "macromutations"!