Zone1 Professor Arguing Against the Process of Evolution

[onefour1]

Watched this video and found it interesting regarding the lack of time that elements have to create life.

 

[BULLDOG]

If you can't dazzel them with brilliance then baffel them with bullshit. If we could answer the questions he asks, we would be able to create life. Obviously, we haven't been able to create life. Not knowing all the details doen't mean a god has to be the answer.

 

[rampart]

Watched this video and found it interesting regarding the lack of time that elements have to create life.

life is very complex, but even if a "creator" mixed the proteins up in a test tube the process by which species evolve is rather obvious from the fossil record.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Watched this video and found it interesting regarding the lack of time that elements have to create life.

Not really. What's fascinating is how Mr. Obsequious's nose remains free of brown buildup after plowing Mr. Hypocrite's bunghole so thoroughly and persistently.

 

[ActionJackson]

Watched this video and found it interesting regarding the lack of time that elements have to create life.

The fact of the matter is that it take just as much faith to believe many (if not most) of the claims of the Evolutionists and Big Bang Theorists as it does to believe in an Intelligent Designer.

 

[DGS49]

A "theory" is an explanation of events that cannot be proven by observation, according to the best logic, and consistent with the known fact. Evolution is a scientific theory. It has a lot of fundamental of flaws (things that it cannot explain) and it has a mountain of support with what we can observe. As a teaching device, it works.

The problem for critics of Evolution is that there is no other scientific explanation available for the diversity of species. The Bible is not science.

 

[ActionJackson]

A "theory" is an explanation of events that cannot be proven by observation, according to the best logic, and consistent with the known fact. Evolution is a scientific theory. It has a lot of fundamental of flaws (things that it cannot explain) and it has a mountain of support with what we can observe. As a teaching device, it works.

The problem for critics of Evolution is that there is no other scientific explanation available for the diversity of species. The Bible is not science.

A “theory” is a proposal or opinion, but is not “fact.”

There is nothing whatsoever in the “observable” universe that can even remotely suggest that nothing produced everything. That requires a mountain of faith.

 

[BreezeWood]

There is nothing whatsoever in the “observable” universe that can even remotely suggest that nothing produced everything.

what then produced nothing ... might be harder than you think.

evolution explains itself, what exists is the heavens - otherwise why would a creator not show themselves and take credit for what they have accomplished.

- do adults abandon their children when they are born.

 

[ActionJackson]

what then produced nothing ... might be harder than you think.

evolution explains itself, what exists is the heavens - otherwise why would a creator not show themselves and take credit for what they have accomplished.

- do adults abandon their children when they are born.

Evolution does NOT explain itself if it isn't observable. It's 100% hypothetical. Apart from evolution, show me exactly how nothing created everything. I realize that you have a lot of faith that nothing created everything, but I need something more “observable.”

 

[BreezeWood]

but I need something more “observable.”

you ignore the proof of the process that is observable ...

the spiritual content of the cicada transforms itself from a land dweller to an avian being ...

and is the same process used to make changes from one generation to another and eventually the ability to transform in a single instance from one type of being into an entirely different one that from that time forward is able to reproduce itself.

physical, metaphysical physiology and its unique metaphysical spiritual content are the ingredients responsible for evolutionary changes over time.

physiology is a metaphysical substance not native to planet earth and will dissipate into the atmosphere without its unique spiritual content.

 

[ActionJackson]

you ignore the proof of the process that is observable ...

View attachment 839998

the spiritual content of the cicada transforms itself from a land dweller to an avian being ...

and is the same process used to make changes from one generation to another and eventually the ability to transform in a single instance from one type of being into an entirely different one that from that time forward is able to reproduce itself.

physical, metaphysical physiology and its unique metaphysical spiritual content are the ingredients responsible for evolutionary changes over time.

physiology is a metaphysical substance not native to planet earth and will dissipate into the atmosphere without its unique spiritual content.

The "process" you've shown is a specific species remaining that exact species. It has remained that very species for its entire, known history, and there's no indication that it is morphing into a hummingbird or pinto pony.

 

[onefour1]

James Tour and Stephen Meyer team up to bring clarity to the origin of life:

 

[Leo123]

Evolution does NOT explain itself if it isn't observable. It's 100% hypothetical. Apart from evolution, show me exactly how nothing created everything. I realize that you have a lot of faith that nothing created everything, but I need something more “observable.”

Stephen Hawking himself could only point to something he called a 'singularity' which was a theory that the whole Universe was compressed into an infinitely small point. IMO an infinitely small point does not describe nothing but it may not be observable.

I find it interesting that through the Webb Telescope we are seeing formed galaxies closer to us than was previously thought. At these distances we should not have any real formations. That tells me that the Universe may not be as old as we once figured because there is an abundance of something where there should be nothing.

 

[BreezeWood]

The "process" you've shown is a specific species remaining that exact species.

and eventually the ability to transform in a single instance from one type of being into an entirely different one that from that time forward is able to reproduce itself.

you're just clueless w/ the observable evidence presented - the cicada with its ability may have already transformed / been responsible for one or more other species ...

 

[Leo123]

James Tour and Stephen Meyer team up to bring clarity to the origin of life:

Interesting

 

[ActionJackson]

you're just clueless w/ the observable evidence presented - the cicada with its ability may have already transformed / been responsible for one or more other species ...

A claim you can't back up. In other words, you can't even provide the clues necessary to prove your point. Clueless!!

 

[BreezeWood]

A claim you can't back up. In other words, you can't even provide the clues necessary to prove your point. Clueless!!

your time for you to respond -

to the proof provided than disguise your ignorance w/ meaningless denial.