Creation o Evolution.

[MarkDuffy]

Education leads to ----> Understanding the reality of evolution for which there is a mountain range of evidence and a rejection of ignorance
Ignorance leads to ----> Belief in an invisible magical entity for which there is no evidence and a rejection of education (no god need be named, insert any religion)


If in fact there is 'a god' responsible for the universe it is knowledge and science that would discover that. Religious people denigrate science and discovery because they are terrified of the outcome.

They also have the where did God come from problem.

Believing in God begs the creation question

Who begat God?

If God can spontaneously pop up from nothing, evolution has a much easier case. The God hypothesis is a waaaay bigger impossible dream.

 

[sealybobo]

The fact is we don't know. And the answer will come when we die. As for some it will be to late as for some it will be a day of rejoicing.

A Few Reasons an Evolutionary Origin of Life Is Impossible | The Institute for Creation Research

The human body with all of its magnificence could not have just evolved.

I bet all 5 arguments could be easily rebutted and I doubt even you can intelligently explain any of those 5 points.

Try the first one. The most interesting. Explain that one

 

[froggy]

The fact is we don't know. And the answer will come when we die. As for some it will be to late as for some it will be a day of rejoicing.

A Few Reasons an Evolutionary Origin of Life Is Impossible | The Institute for Creation Research

The human body with all of its magnificence could not have just evolved.

I bet all 5 arguments could be easily rebutted and I doubt even you can intelligently explain any of those 5 points.

Try the first one. The most interesting. Explain that one

lets hear it bobo.

 

[sealybobo]

The fact is we don't know. And the answer will come when we die. As for some it will be to late as for some it will be a day of rejoicing.

A Few Reasons an Evolutionary Origin of Life Is Impossible | The Institute for Creation Research

The human body with all of its magnificence could not have just evolved.

I bet all 5 arguments could be easily rebutted and I doubt even you can intelligently explain any of those 5 points.

Try the first one. The most interesting. Explain that one

lets hear it bobo.

You don't even understand the five points. How do I know? I read them and they made no sense to me. So I'm pretty sure you just provided a link to arguments you yourself don't even understand. Busted.

Now you want me to argue points you don't even understand

 

[froggy]

The fact is we don't know. And the answer will come when we die. As for some it will be to late as for some it will be a day of rejoicing.

A Few Reasons an Evolutionary Origin of Life Is Impossible | The Institute for Creation Research

The human body with all of its magnificence could not have just evolved.

I bet all 5 arguments could be easily rebutted and I doubt even you can intelligently explain any of those 5 points.

Try the first one. The most interesting. Explain that one

lets hear it bobo.

You don't even understand the five points. How do I know? I read them and they made no sense to me. So I'm pretty sure you just provided a link to arguments you yourself don't even understand. Busted.

Now you want me to argue points you don't even understand

They are pretty much self-explanatory in other words there could not be no evolution

 

[sealybobo]

The fact is we don't know. And the answer will come when we die. As for some it will be to late as for some it will be a day of rejoicing.

A Few Reasons an Evolutionary Origin of Life Is Impossible | The Institute for Creation Research

The human body with all of its magnificence could not have just evolved.

I bet all 5 arguments could be easily rebutted and I doubt even you can intelligently explain any of those 5 points.

Try the first one. The most interesting. Explain that one

lets hear it bobo.

You don't even understand the five points. How do I know? I read them and they made no sense to me. So I'm pretty sure you just provided a link to arguments you yourself don't even understand. Busted.

Now you want me to argue points you don't even understand

They are pretty much self-explanatory in other words there could not be no evolution

Ha ha. Busted you for posting a link you yourself don't even understand. Fucking priceless!

They aren't self explanatory if you can't quickly defend even one of the 5 points.

 

[OldLady]

The fact is we don't know. And the answer will come when we die. As for some it will be to late as for some it will be a day of rejoicing.

A Few Reasons an Evolutionary Origin of Life Is Impossible | The Institute for Creation Research

The human body with all of its magnificence could not have just evolved.

Does anyone know, how old do the Creationists say modern human beings are? When did they come into being, according to the Creationists? Scientists say 200,000 years ago, in Africa, right? So when do Creationists say they came into being? I know WHERE--the Garden of Eden which is in the Fertile Crescent between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in the ME.
I was planning on mentioning the two theories in a Soc Studies class, my lecture on the History of the World.
Don't get worked up--I'm very fair and I'm not going into any detail, but if I mention the 200,000 year old date, I should mention the other theory.

 

[froggy]

Education leads to ----> Understanding the reality of evolution for which there is a mountain range of evidence and a rejection of ignorance
Ignorance leads to ----> Belief in an invisible magical entity for which there is no evidence and a rejection of education (no god need be named, insert any religion)


If in fact there is 'a god' responsible for the universe it is knowledge and science that would discover that. Religious people denigrate science and discovery because they are terrified of the outcome.

They also have the where did God come from problem.

Believing in God begs the creation question

Who begat God?

If God can spontaneously pop up from nothing, evolution has a much easier case. The God hypothesis is a waaaay bigger impossible dream.

Where did anything come from

 

[froggy]

In the beginning God created the Heaven and Earth but millions of years could have passed before the second day came.

 

[task0778]

The fact is we don't know. And the answer will come when we die. As for some it will be to late as for some it will be a day of rejoicing.

A Few Reasons an Evolutionary Origin of Life Is Impossible | The Institute for Creation Research

The human body with all of its magnificence could not have just evolved.

Does anyone know, how old do the Creationists say modern human beings are? When did they come into being, according to the Creationists? Scientists say 200,000 years ago, in Africa, right? So when do Creationists say they came into being? I know WHERE--the Garden of Eden which is in the Fertile Crescent between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in the ME.
I was planning on mentioning the two theories in a Soc Studies class, my lecture on the History of the World.
Don't get worked up--I'm very fair and I'm not going into any detail, but if I mention the 200,000 year old date, I should mention the other theory.

FYI - that 200,000 old date is somewhat open to debate, some say modern human beings were around much longer than that. Depends maybe on exactly how you define 'modern human'. As for the creationists, I thought they dated the creation of humans to Adam and Eve, some 6 thousand years or so ago. Apparently there are several creationist theories though, others say creation occurred within the last 10,000 years by God. Still others seem to leave the question somewhat open as far as nailing down any dates. I.E., God did it but exactly when is irrelevant.

Oldest Homo sapiens fossils discovered - CNN

Moroccan fossil find rearranges Homo sapiens family tree

 

[MarkDuffy]

OK, you asked for the first one

A Few Reasons an Evolutionary Origin of Life Is Impossible | The Institute for Creation Research

1. The absence of the required atmosphere.

Our present atmosphere consists of 78% nitrogen (N2), 21% molecular oxygen (O2), and 1% of other gases, such as carbon dioxide CO2), argon (Ar), and water vapor H2O). An atmosphere containing free oxygen would be fatal to all origin of life schemes. While oxygen is necessary for life, free oxygen would oxidize and thus destroy all organic molecules required for the origin of life.

This is true. The primitive earth had a reducing atmosphere with little or no molecular oxygen.

Thus, in spite of much evidence that the earth has always had a significant quantity of free oxygen in the atmosphere,3 evolutionists persist in declaring that there was no oxygen in the earth's early atmosphere.

Wrong. Oxygen containing molecules were there, but not O2. Volcanic processes released oxygen from the rocks and this oxygen was quickly gobbled up in a reducing atmosphere.

Earth's Early Atmosphere - Astrobiology Magazine

However, this would also be fatal to an evolutionary origin of life. If there were no oxygen there would be no protective layer of ozone surrounding the earth. Ozone is produced by radiation from the sun on the oxygen in the atmosphere, converting the diatomic oxygen(O2) we breathe to triatomic oxygen O3), which is ozone. Thus if there were no oxygen there would be no ozone. The deadly destructive ultraviolet light from the sun would pour down on the surface of the earth unimpeded, destroying those organic molecules required for life, reducing them to simple gases, such as nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and water. Thus, evolutionists face an irresolvable dilemma: in the presence of oxygen, life could not evolve; without oxygen, thus no ozone, life could not evolve or exist.

Wrong. Those are the ionizing energy sources required for the abiogenesis of life. Early life was protected by water (water contains the oxygen you claim we claim was not there). The later ozone layer allowed plants and animals to colonize the land.

Life on land made possible by ozone layer | Earth Archives

2.5 million years ago, the first primitive life forms, blue-green bacteria, began producing oxygen through the process of photosynthesis. After a long time, oxygen began to accumulate in the atmosphere. After this accumulation occurred, and there was a supply of oxygen to work with, ozone began to be produced through the process above.

Which Came First???

 

[MarkDuffy]

The fact is we don't know. And the answer will come when we die. As for some it will be to late as for some it will be a day of rejoicing.

A Few Reasons an Evolutionary Origin of Life Is Impossible | The Institute for Creation Research

The human body with all of its magnificence could not have just evolved.

Does anyone know, how old do the Creationists say modern human beings are?

There are two types. Young Earth Creationists ~ YECs are just about the only creationists left ~ They believe in the 4004 BC creation date of Bishop Ussher. Reality is there are not that many of these left.

Intelligent Designers (they changed their name to this cuz even they know YECs are crazy and want nothing to do with them) ~ IDers ~They agree with the ages produced from science. They somewhat also believe in evolution. There are two types of these also. Most believe in evolution, but also God creation. God started it, and science took over. The other group believes in the former with also humans being special creation. This is the largest group of Intelligent Designers.

When did they come into being, according to the Creationists? Scientists say 200,000 years ago, in Africa, right? So when do Creationists say they came into being? I know WHERE--the Garden of Eden which is in the Fertile Crescent between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in the ME.
I was planning on mentioning the two theories in a Soc Studies class, my lecture on the History of the World.
Don't get worked up--I'm very fair and I'm not going into any detail, but if I mention the 200,000 year old date, I should mention the other theory.

YECs believe in the Garden of Eden in the fertile crescent as you posted in 4004 BC.

IDers ~ They can be all over the place, but most believe the Eden narrative with different dates. The Bible says Day Four for the sun, so they claim the first days can be much longer.

The key Biblical quote that allows the spinning over dates & ages

2 Peter 3:8–9 reads:

‘But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.’

 

[tecoyah]

Every single anti evolution thread ever created accomplishes nothing but allowing one creationist or another to spew senseless dogma while dodging and distracting from any and every question, comment, dispute or fact that disagrees with the pre-conceived mind f@ck they have infested their "Mind" with. When asked what alternate explanation they have it usually comes down to "God did it" or slithering under the nearest rock that offers protection from accepting an obvious reality.
Likely I will now be asked to provide a transitional animal on video or this will turn into an Abiogenesis debate. One way or another, nothing will be answered by the creationist and nothing but frustration accomplished.

 

[froggy]

OK, you asked for the first one

A Few Reasons an Evolutionary Origin of Life Is Impossible | The Institute for Creation Research

1. The absence of the required atmosphere.

Our present atmosphere consists of 78% nitrogen (N2), 21% molecular oxygen (O2), and 1% of other gases, such as carbon dioxide CO2), argon (Ar), and water vapor H2O). An atmosphere containing free oxygen would be fatal to all origin of life schemes. While oxygen is necessary for life, free oxygen would oxidize and thus destroy all organic molecules required for the origin of life.

This is true. The primitive earth had a reducing atmosphere with little or no molecular oxygen.

Thus, in spite of much evidence that the earth has always had a significant quantity of free oxygen in the atmosphere,3 evolutionists persist in declaring that there was no oxygen in the earth's early atmosphere.

Wrong. Oxygen containing molecules were there, but not O2. Volcanic processes released oxygen from the rocks and this oxygen was quickly gobbled up in a reducing atmosphere.

Earth's Early Atmosphere - Astrobiology Magazine

However, this would also be fatal to an evolutionary origin of life. If there were no oxygen there would be no protective layer of ozone surrounding the earth. Ozone is produced by radiation from the sun on the oxygen in the atmosphere, converting the diatomic oxygen(O2) we breathe to triatomic oxygen O3), which is ozone. Thus if there were no oxygen there would be no ozone. The deadly destructive ultraviolet light from the sun would pour down on the surface of the earth unimpeded, destroying those organic molecules required for life, reducing them to simple gases, such as nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and water. Thus, evolutionists face an irresolvable dilemma: in the presence of oxygen, life could not evolve; without oxygen, thus no ozone, life could not evolve or exist.

Wrong. Those are the ionizing energy sources required for the abiogenesis of life. Early life was protected by water (water contains the oxygen you claim we claim was not there). The later ozone layer allowed plants and animals to colonize the land.

Life on land made possible by ozone layer | Earth Archives

2.5 million years ago, the first primitive life forms, blue-green bacteria, began producing oxygen through the process of photosynthesis. After a long time, oxygen began to accumulate in the atmosphere. After this accumulation occurred, and there was a supply of oxygen to work with, ozone began to be produced through the process above.

Which Came First???

Where did the Earth come from

 

[LittleNipper]

Every single anti evolution thread ever created accomplishes nothing but allowing one creationist or another to spew senseless dogma while dodging and distracting from any and every question, comment, dispute or fact that disagrees with the pre-conceived mind f@ck they have infested their "Mind" with. When asked what alternate explanation they have it usually comes down to "God did it" or slithering under the nearest rock that offers protection from accepting an obvious reality.
Likely I will now be asked to provide a transitional animal on video or this will turn into an Abiogenesis debate. One way or another, nothing will be answered by the creationist and nothing but frustration accomplished.

Evolutionists FEEL they know the facts. Creationists BELIEVE they know the truth. The interpretation of the data is subjective at best.

 

[MarkDuffy]

OK, you asked for the first one

A Few Reasons an Evolutionary Origin of Life Is Impossible | The Institute for Creation Research

1. The absence of the required atmosphere.

Our present atmosphere consists of 78% nitrogen (N2), 21% molecular oxygen (O2), and 1% of other gases, such as carbon dioxide CO2), argon (Ar), and water vapor H2O). An atmosphere containing free oxygen would be fatal to all origin of life schemes. While oxygen is necessary for life, free oxygen would oxidize and thus destroy all organic molecules required for the origin of life.

This is true. The primitive earth had a reducing atmosphere with little or no molecular oxygen.

Thus, in spite of much evidence that the earth has always had a significant quantity of free oxygen in the atmosphere,3 evolutionists persist in declaring that there was no oxygen in the earth's early atmosphere.

Wrong. Oxygen containing molecules were there, but not O2. Volcanic processes released oxygen from the rocks and this oxygen was quickly gobbled up in a reducing atmosphere.

Earth's Early Atmosphere - Astrobiology Magazine

However, this would also be fatal to an evolutionary origin of life. If there were no oxygen there would be no protective layer of ozone surrounding the earth. Ozone is produced by radiation from the sun on the oxygen in the atmosphere, converting the diatomic oxygen(O2) we breathe to triatomic oxygen O3), which is ozone. Thus if there were no oxygen there would be no ozone. The deadly destructive ultraviolet light from the sun would pour down on the surface of the earth unimpeded, destroying those organic molecules required for life, reducing them to simple gases, such as nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and water. Thus, evolutionists face an irresolvable dilemma: in the presence of oxygen, life could not evolve; without oxygen, thus no ozone, life could not evolve or exist.

Wrong. Those are the ionizing energy sources required for the abiogenesis of life. Early life was protected by water (water contains the oxygen you claim we claim was not there). The later ozone layer allowed plants and animals to colonize the land.

Life on land made possible by ozone layer | Earth Archives

2.5 million years ago, the first primitive life forms, blue-green bacteria, began producing oxygen through the process of photosynthesis. After a long time, oxygen began to accumulate in the atmosphere. After this accumulation occurred, and there was a supply of oxygen to work with, ozone began to be produced through the process above.

Which Came First???

Where did the Earth come from

During the creation of a star, it always has an accretion disk and this disk creates planets.

How are planets formed?

 

[MarkDuffy]

Every single anti evolution thread ever created accomplishes nothing but allowing one creationist or another to spew senseless dogma while dodging and distracting from any and every question, comment, dispute or fact that disagrees with the pre-conceived mind f@ck they have infested their "Mind" with. When asked what alternate explanation they have it usually comes down to "God did it" or slithering under the nearest rock that offers protection from accepting an obvious reality.
Likely I will now be asked to provide a transitional animal on video or this will turn into an Abiogenesis debate. One way or another, nothing will be answered by the creationist and nothing but frustration accomplished.

Evolutionists FEEL they know the facts. Creationists BELIEVE they know the truth. The interpretation of the data is subjective at best.

More correctly

Evolutionists SEARCH for the facts, knowing today's theories might need to be updated with new data. Creationists KNOW they know the truth, so don't question at all.

In the war of faith vs science, faith always retreats while science continues to move forward.

 

[LittleNipper]

Every single anti evolution thread ever created accomplishes nothing but allowing one creationist or another to spew senseless dogma while dodging and distracting from any and every question, comment, dispute or fact that disagrees with the pre-conceived mind f@ck they have infested their "Mind" with. When asked what alternate explanation they have it usually comes down to "God did it" or slithering under the nearest rock that offers protection from accepting an obvious reality.
Likely I will now be asked to provide a transitional animal on video or this will turn into an Abiogenesis debate. One way or another, nothing will be answered by the creationist and nothing but frustration accomplished.

Evolutionists FEEL they know the facts. Creationists BELIEVE they know the truth. The interpretation of the data is subjective at best.

More correctly

Evolutionists SEARCH for the facts, knowing today's theories might need to be updated with new data. Creationists KNOW they know the truth, so don't question at all.

In the war of faith vs science, faith always retreats while science continues to move forward.

True Faith is God inspired. True science regards GOD. True faith never retreats, but it may go underground. On the other hand the scientific community has made science stale promoting exclusive secular control through the selective elimination of spiritual competition.

 

[Votto]