I am not the one that has based my beliefs on the writtings of a madman, you and your people are the one that made him' the Father of Evolution' not me. To me he is the father of one of the biggest travesties of history. And again yes he stole his ideas, and took credit for them...
with so much evidence against evolution, or the lack of evidence to support it i could say that evolutionists are unscientific. most evolutionists are remarkably closed minded, more so than creationists. the constant support for evolution even though there has been no tangeble facts to support it for the last 100 years looks closed minded to me.
Why God is not Santa Claus... For one thing, he isn't a he. We assign a gender to deity out of convenience or ignorance. For another, God neither wears a red suit, nor smokes a pipe. But mostly, God does not make a list of who's naughty and who's nice; nor does he reward good children and punish bad ones. God is not about judging and rewarding and punishing.
Most people here believe that the bible is total bullshit, while forgetting that it has many truths to it. Noah's ark and the flood, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, and several other events of the bible have been proven to be true by archeolgical digs.
im sure the us navy could build such a vessel. the point is the wouldnt because they see no need to do so. also, the biggest US navy aircraft carriers are of a similar size to what the ark was meant to be, so you are talking bullshit.
and then those wonderful gallapogos (cant be arsed to spell it properly) birds. evolved? nope. they are all finches. they have not evolved... dont say that im speaking out of my ass, because this article [from Scientific American, on creationist misconceptions] you have given me is speaking out of about 50million evolutionists asses, or however many there are on this planet. the article is FULL of mistakes, and bad research. if you want me to go through every single point...ask me.
We switched from man coming from monkeys to we are now just a common ancestor, because they were totally wrong, and now they are not even sure of that...
There is only one deity and that is God. And hopefully when you see Him, it will be right before He smites you. Ignorant Ass. Why don't ya just head down to your local trailor park and get smashed and think of some more stupid f{---}ing questions.
I believe that it is easier to believe because not believing would just be foolish
He didn't provide a 'mechanism' for anything, he hated God, and he set out to dis prove God... He stole ideas from others and twisted them into a therory that has no scienticfic proof, and is just another branch of religion, weither you worship tree elves, God, the starts or the big bang...
The therory of evolution IS based on Darwins written therories, and yes motive is ALWAYS a factor when someone says or writes some... If you hate God and you set out to prove he doesn't exist, yes your motives color you findings. For you to say other wise is a feeble attempt at getting away of the facts.
[Explaining how the carnivores would eat on a decimated post-flood world]...and grazing animals eat everyday, predators can go without food for several weeks without a kill...ever watch david attenbrough programs where a lion doesnt make a kill for ages? also the possbility of fish left on the land after the water drains away, eaily enough scavenging food for predators...maybe a whale left somewhere? the possbilities of food are endless
[On creationists]
At least theyre thinking beyond what school rams down their throat. If their scientific legacy is effectively disproving evolution, that still beats rehashing garbage criticism like any of you jackasses can offer science.
In fact, selective breeding is proof for Creationism, not evolution, because it does not happen naturally, and it can't happen naturally. You put a donkey and a horse togehter for years and nothing will happen, but in steps a ' intelligent force' and we get a Mule, but it took that intellegent force to do it.
there hasnt been a international survey of the area where the ark is. if there was, then national geographic would feature it. incidentally, national geographic is run by top scientists, who all make a lot of $$ by publishing there evolution theories and discoveries in such publications. there could easily be bias against such an expidtion...
The 'therory' of evolution is so full of holes it has to constantly revised and changed, it is based on the teaching and 'scientific' ravings of a man even evolutionist dont believe any more. That would be equivilent to a Christian saying, I am a Christian, but I dont believe in Christ.
almost all atheism, at least the snob self-righteous unyielding messianic complex kind exhibited by Freeman, springs from serious psychological issues that render one's opinion on just about anything irrelevant and unworthy of consideration, so, yes, I plead guilty to attacking their character, as it is relevant to the formation of their opinion and their asinine way of presenting it.
it must be millions of years old, but then the carbon dating techiniques are only accurate back 30 million years... the bible account of a flood some 4,000 or more years ago would easily compensate for the huge shift in carbon levels, and so putting our carbon dating systems well out.
if you take the story of the flood as true, and re-evaluate the history of man, and change the scientific views accordingly (eg carbon dating systems being well out...), then the flood account is easily true... you dont want to take into consideration that evolution maybe wrong... and im not using pseudo science, you are!!
im just wondering what u evolutionist think on the 3rd(or the 2nd, not sure) law of thermodynamics also called entropy, which is the tendancy for things to get worse instead of better... i see deasieses, plagues, famine. it seems like aids, cancer, diabedies, dounsyndrom and all these other things came out not too long ago. there r more mentally fucked up ppl in the world today than there was 200 years ago. even sane ppl r suffering with things like ADHD and stuff. this dont look like evolution to me.
your talking about [the 750,000 or so species of] insects....well they wouldnt take up much space in the ark would they? they could fly around and land on the walls, ceilings ect, like they do in houses.
Please stop using 'technical' terms to make your agruement sound convincing, its not. It is not porportionial in anyway.
[On atheists]
We used to think that the universe revolved around the earth, but later we learned better.
how come earth is the only planet that hasnt been bombarded with asteroids?
this is why i believe in god
i said it could of been held in space, like saturns rings. it is entirerly possible for the earth to have had saturn-like rings of ice all around it, and more water in the atmosphere, causing a warmer climate and less radiation from the sun coming to hit earth. this could be a factor in the people before the flood supposedly living much longer.
When Satan tempted Eve with the apple, he tempted her by saying the words 'Eritis sicut Deus, scientes bonum et malum,' which is Latin for 'You will be as God, knowing good and evil.'
You can do your drugs and cheat people and lie and steal and kill,(not you personnely) and do what ever you like because we are only a product of an accident, with no future. Dis-belief in God is a perfect compliment to a Hedonistic lifestyle, and you will grasp at any proof to keep God and morality away.It makes perfect sense.
... fallacies are based the the latin base of 'deciet'. Erroroneous is based on mistakes. The problem is that you dont know which big words are interchangable and are using them to impress instead of educate, thats the problem
sarcasm isnt going to make your shaky points any better. you evolutionist ideas are more shaky than bible ones. the reason is that you do not want to acknowledge the possibility that you are wrong. if the bible points are so shaky, then howcome i can use them to reply to everything you have said??
Also, the bible states of humans living close to 1,000 years... if people did live close to 1,000 years, then these rare fossils you dig up of men that scientists ASSUME had the same lifespan as us and say they are millions of years old-someone living close to 1,000 years would have a massivly increased carbon level in there bones... and without the scientists considering this possibility, the date of millions of years put on these fossils could be massivly out.
Do the recent studies in the Antartic prove that the release of Carbon is NOT constant, if this is true carbon dating is gone and with it most of the evolutionary dating.
plus as we get older, our reasoning does not deteriotate....our capacity for memory can detrioate, but thats only cos we aint using it. people with alzheimers can easily still reason, even if they cant remember anything for the whole of there lives accept the day there living in now...
there isnt a lack of evidence about the flood, its just that scientists choose not to acknowledge it, as it would prove much of our thinking today wrong. and scientists hate to be wrong
If you actully believe the theory is close to the facts, tell me, is it monkeys, rats, or 'sea apes',( yes people, 'sea apes' are the latest creatures now being proposed [as our ancestors] because of the problems with the therory).
Your problem, which also explains the way you believe, is that you have never done any indepth, and I mean really indepth research into the subject...
To have faith is to have strength. To wake up everyday to a world full of murderers, rapists and dime-a-dozen atheists and still believe in God is a true miracle.
Why do people count Judaism as one of the world's "Big Three" religions? (Thats rhetorical, I know its because they are raised with their heads up Jewish ass)
What tiny minority of the Earth is Jewish? They are probably outnumbered by Jehova's Witnesses, and yet its one of the earth's "main religions". I hate when people refer to it like that.
not only was a large wooden object found on top of mt ararat, this object also had alot of traces of a substance called mortar which the bible said noah used to build the ark (strange eh????)
There are two VERY LARGE holes missing in that theory. I choose to stick God in those holes.
i detect a hint of flame..... but then if i wasnt making any sense this thread would of died long ago. if i was talking crap you wouldnt need to continue...
I think you mean erroneous thinking, not fallacious, (stop using big words you dont know what they mean)...
Patially true... once a theory is proven it becomes a fact, you statment [that they're never proven] is like saying there is no such thing as tomarrow, because it never comes... Chemistry is not a theory, it is the study of chemical reactions... [which] are pretty easy to prove.
... you have not done any scientific investigation yourself, you have chosen to believe in the priests and the prophets of evolution, that are constantly proving themselves wrong but keep trying to prove the same therory. If there was proof, it wouldnt be a therory...
And then for SOME reason this ball of stuff [the Big Bang singularity] just explodes and flings things out in vectors from that point. (vectors didn't exist prior to the explosion, if you doubt you're retarded).
I dont tell my students everything, but give them reading assignments... It is so you learn and while your at it might actually learn something else along with the subject.
I do, however, hate Judaism, obviously not because of the fact that its called a major religion. Still, the reason its called major is one of the reasons I hate Jews, if that makes you feel better.
I consider atheism the greatest herd-driven sheep religion of contemporary America, and most who claim atheist are just trendy mindless drones.
and not all animals were taken on board the ark...eg wolly mammoths... and if you read the account where god gives noah the dimensions for the vessel (ark) then its easily big enough. and then why is there a HUGE WOODEN VESSEL buried under the snow atop of mount ararat? its far to big to be carried up there...oh these holes in the account just arent there! theres plenty of proof... you just dont look at it because the bible says it happened. i forgot, it isnt 'cool' to belive in the bible these days.
I guess you need to go back to Popular Science magazine where the cater to the idiot mentality, maybe a copy of '"Science of Dummies'...
many people also have talked about the suns radiation gradually mutating us throughout time...then why does our bodies create pigmentation (sun tan) to stop the suns radiation from damaging us? darker skinned peoples where the radiation is higher (eg africa)...if radiation helps us to evolve...then why does our bodies fight against it??