Question about Noah.

[Tuatara]

I would like the human being and any other creationist to see this series of videos.



I have links to all 17 videos.

 

[Tuatara]

If evolution is correct we should be walking on the bones of the transition species.

Every species is a transition species. You are a transtition species.

And just what do you think I am going to transition into, a bear? A watermelon? A kitty?

I see. You do not understand the process of evolution. Perhaps you've seen to many croco-duck videos. The mutations are very slight. Un-noticable between each generation but after thousands of generations there is enough difference that a new spieces emerges from the original after many variations. Look at this colour graph. Imagine the first green line is a spieces. The last blue line represents another spieces. You can't pinpoint the exact time green became blue. It happened over a long period of time with minute variations between the gererations of offspring.

Thousands and thousands and thousands and millions and millions of years. It's actually so slow it never even happened.

Is this how the creationist wins the debate. With bad humour.

 

[the_human_being]

I would like the human being and any other creationist to see this series of videos.



I have links to all 1

I would like the human being and any other creationist to see this series of videos.



I have links to all 17 videos.

The Human Being is not interested. The Human Being has far more than 17 supporting Creationism. You guys don't have a lock on the video business.

 

[The Irish Ram]

a-m-i-n-o a-c-i-d-s
Tell me, how do they know if they are right or left handed and where specifically, they should adhere?

Which ones need to attach for your eyes to read this, right or left? How do they know that? How do they know that a left handed one needs to be next to 2 right handed amino acid strands to create protein?

And who made this statement?"The eye to this day, gives me a cold shudder because it is an organ of extreme perfection."

I do wish you religious extremists would actually confirm your phony "quotes".

Your all-seeing, all-powerful "eye" quote is a staple of fundie Christian ministries and like so much that comes out of your madrasahs, it's a fake.

Here is the actual material:

Cretinism or Evilution Darwin Quotations on Complexity

You have offered nothing for us to research. You have actually posted nothing that actually contradicts any of our claims.

Our claims? You're a member of Team Zealot?

I've actually posted the content of a letter written by Charles Darwin to Asa Gray (the second bulleted item) which identifies the fraudulent "quote-mine" used by Team Zealot

Don't be an accomplice to fraud.

By Charles Darwin? Really?? LOL!! Charles Darwin is a fossil himself. He even made the title of his work "The Origin of the Species" in order to avoid the Biblical "each after his own kind" which would have lost his case for him.

Shouldn't you go outside and play in traffic?

Ministers don't do DNA research. Those are "your" people, and they say that the odds of one living cell happening by chance is out of the realm of possibility. Random never happened. For life to begin, and before it begins, acids need to be encoded and directed to specific areas in the correct order. And they have to be aware of whether they are right handed or left handed. How does a right handed amino acid know which it is, and when and where to take it's place, and how does the left know it's a lefty?
There is no such thing as a simple cell, you simple ton.

 

[Ellipsis]

To each his own. My Mom was Eve. I am The Human Being.

Adam and Eve weren't even the first humans. Adam and Eve were the first on team Sons Of God, but other humans on team Daughters Of Men were already well established, as Adam and Eve discovered after leaving the garden.

You must have performed some fancy reserch if you can trace your heratage all the way back to Canaan.

...there I go analyzing again....

 

[The Irish Ram]

Some creationists actually believe the argument for evolution is that one spieces will give birth to another spieces.

None that I know. If they do, I would direct them to the Bible, because even science doesn't believe that premise since the discovery of DNA. That is what we use to win the debate.
Not one person here has addressed the scientific understanding, that it is impossible for chance to create a protein molecule. Molecular biology crippled the random theory. I have already provided the mathematical odds of your scenario. And it is far outside of the realm of possibility. Not one person on this thread can explain how amino acids were programed to create the complex life of a single cell. Random is an impossibility, no longer supported by science. They know better.

You just pretend they haven't reached that conclusion. If that is your stance, then you have to offer a viable explanation as to how amino acids know the difference between right and left, know which one they are, and where they fit into the program. Because we know for a fact they do. And that a specific code does exist to create life. The code created life. Life didn't create the code. So who did?
Fundie, fundie fundie is Hollie's explanation. Do you have a better explanation of how amino acids were programed to create life, because without that code there would be no life.

 

[Ellipsis]

Not one person here has addressed the scientific understanding, that it is impossible for chance to create a protein molecule. Molecular biology crippled the random theory. I have already provided the mathematical odds of your scenario. And it is far outside of the realm of possibility. Not one person on this thread can explain how amino acids were programed to create the complex life of a single cell.

MBE

Amino Acids Evolution Learn Science at Scitable

Happy reading

 

[Tuatara]

Some creationists actually believe the argument for evolution is that one spieces will give birth to another spieces.

None that I know.

Guess you never heard of Ray Comfort, Kirk Cameron, Ken Hamm, Kent Hovind Etc...

If they do, I would direct them to the Bible, because even science doesn't believe that premise since the discovery of DNA.

All these people ever do is quote scripture from the bible. Where have you been? Science has never supported that premise before or after DNA.

That is what we use to win the debate.

Debate on what. We are talking about evolution but you keep switching back to Abiogenesis.

Not one person here has addressed the scientific understanding, that it is impossible for chance to create a protein molecule. Molecular biology crippled the random theory. I have already provided the mathematical odds of your scenario. And it is far outside of the realm of possibility. Not one person on this thread can explain how amino acids were programed to create the complex life of a single cell. Random is an impossibility, no longer supported by science.

Explained in post #787

They know better.

Yes, we do know better. We also don't pretend that we will have all the answers surrounding Abiogenesis, but we acknowlege the best answers we have so far and we keep working on them to discover more mysteries.

 

[The Irish Ram]

"Pezz, post: 10026129, member: 51970"]

Not one person here has addressed the scientific understanding, that it is impossible for chance to create a protein molecule. Molecular biology crippled the random theory. I have already provided the mathematical odds of your scenario. And it is far outside of the realm of possibility. Not one person on this thread can explain how amino acids were programed to create the complex life of a single cell.

MBE

Amino Acids Evolution Learn Science at Scitable

Happy reading

Am aware and also know the problem they have. It is a perspective that still can't provide an answer to what programed the amino acids. That is why they say, "it may have", or "it probably reacted this way".
But here is their obstacle. After many long years of trying to get RNA to produce, all they have been able to do is get a very few partial molecules, and never a complete one in their soup. The RNA world has failed to produce. It is not responsible for coding amino acids.

 

[Ellipsis]

Am aware and also know the problem they have. It is a perspective that still can't provide an answer to what programed the amino acids. That is why they say, "it may have", or "it probably reacted this way".
But here is their obstacle. After many long years of trying to get RNA to produce, all they have been able to do is get a very few partial molecules, and never a complete one in their soup. The RNA world has failed to produce. It is not responsible for coding amino acids.

We have no evidence that any external influence at all 'programed' them. So far as we can tell, amino acids turned into proteins all on their own.

 

[Hollie]

I do wish you religious extremists would actually confirm your phony "quotes".

Your all-seeing, all-powerful "eye" quote is a staple of fundie Christian ministries and like so much that comes out of your madrasahs, it's a fake.

Here is the actual material:

Cretinism or Evilution Darwin Quotations on Complexity

You have offered nothing for us to research. You have actually posted nothing that actually contradicts any of our claims.

Our claims? You're a member of Team Zealot?

I've actually posted the content of a letter written by Charles Darwin to Asa Gray (the second bulleted item) which identifies the fraudulent "quote-mine" used by Team Zealot

Don't be an accomplice to fraud.

By Charles Darwin? Really?? LOL!! Charles Darwin is a fossil himself. He even made the title of his work "The Origin of the Species" in order to avoid the Biblical "each after his own kind" which would have lost his case for him.

Shouldn't you go outside and play in traffic?

Ministers don't do DNA research. Those are "your" people, and they say that the odds of one living cell happening by chance is out of the realm of possibility. Random never happened. For life to begin, and before it begins, acids need to be encoded and directed to specific areas in the correct order. And they have to be aware of whether they are right handed or left handed. How does a right handed amino acid know which it is, and when and where to take it's place, and how does the left know it's a lefty?
There is no such thing as a simple cell, you simple ton.

I'm glad to see at least your tacit acceptance of the fraudulent "quote" you posted. With that in mind, do you get your biology from the same fraudulent christian ministries you get your "quotes" from?

 

[Hollie]

"Pezz, post: 10026129, member: 51970"]

Not one person here has addressed the scientific understanding, that it is impossible for chance to create a protein molecule. Molecular biology crippled the random theory. I have already provided the mathematical odds of your scenario. And it is far outside of the realm of possibility. Not one person on this thread can explain how amino acids were programed to create the complex life of a single cell.

MBE

Amino Acids Evolution Learn Science at Scitable

Happy reading

Am aware and also know the problem they have. It is a perspective that still can't provide an answer to what programed the amino acids. That is why they say, "it may have", or "it probably reacted this way".
But here is their obstacle. After many long years of trying to get RNA to produce, all they have been able to do is get a very few partial molecules, and never a complete one in their soup. The RNA world has failed to produce. It is not responsible for coding amino acids.

The article you linked to actually refutes the contention you, and your creation ministries are hoping to make.

What you also fail to realize is that you're just a typical christian extremist in that nothing you have presented suggests "the gawds did it".

As we learned with the exposure of the fraudulent "quote" you stole from your creation ministries, you should avoid mindless cutting and pasting.

If you want science data, go to real scientists, not fundie Christian ministries.

Speaking of soup:

Primordial Soup - It s Still Mmm-mmm Good - The Panda s Thumb

 

[Hollie]

I do wish you religious extremists would actually confirm your phony "quotes".

Your all-seeing, all-powerful "eye" quote is a staple of fundie Christian ministries and like so much that comes out of your madrasahs, it's a fake.

Here is the actual material:

Cretinism or Evilution Darwin Quotations on Complexity

You have offered nothing for us to research. You have actually posted nothing that actually contradicts any of our claims.

Our claims? You're a member of Team Zealot?

I've actually posted the content of a letter written by Charles Darwin to Asa Gray (the second bulleted item) which identifies the fraudulent "quote-mine" used by Team Zealot

Don't be an accomplice to fraud.

By Charles Darwin? Really?? LOL!! Charles Darwin is a fossil himself. He even made the title of his work "The Origin of the Species" in order to avoid the Biblical "each after his own kind" which would have lost his case for him.

Shouldn't you go outside and play in traffic?

Ministers don't do DNA research. Those are "your" people, and they say that the odds of one living cell happening by chance is out of the realm of possibility. Random never happened. For life to begin, and before it begins, acids need to be encoded and directed to specific areas in the correct order. And they have to be aware of whether they are right handed or left handed. How does a right handed amino acid know which it is, and when and where to take it's place, and how does the left know it's a lefty?
There is no such thing as a simple cell, you simple ton.

Your banter has the unpleasant odor of Christian fundamentalist ministries.

It's true that ministers don't do DNA research. None of the fundamentalist Christian warehouses: ICR, Disco' tute, etc., do any actual research, either. That's why the best refutation to Christian fundamentalists is to let the scientists who actually do the research post their works in peer reviewed journals.

Chirality of life Another false positive - The Panda s Thumb

 

[PostmodernProph]

Is Eve your mother or is a rock your mother?

"By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return."
Genesis 3:19

.....so I guess that means the rock is my mother.

or that there is a lot of dust beneath your brow......

 

[PostmodernProph]

If you are trying to be funny, it's not working. Some creationists actually believe the argument for evolution is that one spieces will give birth to another spieces.

well somebody has to give birth to the first that qualifies as a new species......and logically, the mother of the first of a new species has to be a different species......

 

[PostmodernProph]

I would like the human being and any other creationist to see this series of videos.



I have links to all 17 videos.

Is this how the evolutionizer wins the debate. With bad video?

 

[Hollie]

If you are trying to be funny, it's not working. Some creationists actually believe the argument for evolution is that one spieces will give birth to another spieces.

well somebody has to give birth to the first that qualifies as a new species......and logically, the mother of the first of a new species has to be a different species......

This is the unfortunate result of YEC'ists getting their science from fundamentalist Christian madrassah's.

Unlike in the fundamentalist worldview where magic and supernaturalism are the source of instant humans, talking snakes and other such absurdities, biology works differently. New species don't happen instantly, or by magic, or by the birth of a new species. BTW fundie boy, you can't even correctly spell "spieces" let alone define what that is.

For the science illiterate / YEC'ists, evolution is defined as change in populations over time. The time frames are typically geologic, not magically overnight. In spite of your revulsion for science and in spite of attempts to define biological science as some grand, worldwide conspiracy, evolution remains incontestably the basis for any credible explanation for the diversity in living species.

The fact is, it doesn’t make any difference what the personal beliefs of thumpers is regarding evolutionary science. It’s the strength of the theory that extremist Christian nut-bars take issue with. The theory of evolution has only been better supported and confirmed as the methods of scientific testing have become more exacting. I’ve always found it laughable that creationist spend such enormous amounts of time and energy attacking Charles Darwin as a cover for their wholly inadequate appeals to gawds and supernaturalism.

 

[Taz]

It all began with a BIG BANG. Everything was concentrated into an area the size of a pin head. Something unknown caused a huge explosion. Everything flew off in random directions. Why some planets rev.olve in opposite directions is unexplained as well. Where the energy that caused the Big Bang came into being in the first place is also unexplained. By chance, one world came out of the Bang and was able to sustain life. This life sprang from inorganic material. The evolution religion proclaims all life came from a rock. Christians claim an intelligent God created all life as well as everything else. Now, I must ask you: Is Eve your mother or is a rock your mother?

It's possible that when a black hole gets too full, it explodes into another universe by ripping the fabric of time/space and creating a new one with a big bang. Could be very common, given the number of black holes in this universe.

 

[Taz]

The bible says otherwise. Please try again.

Well no, the bible doesn't say that. Christians just don't know how to read, and Atheists are to caught up trolling Christians to consider the truth. Here's a point-by-point breakdown of what the bible says: Yes Noah s Flood May Have Happened But Not Over the Whole Earth NCSE

Anyway, I think this is a bait thread so since I'm not your target audience a link to the truth is all I have to say about this topic.

From your link: "The Bible (Genesis 6–9) describes a worldwide flood (the Noachian Flood) covering even the highest mountains of the earth". So the bible describes a worldwide flood.

are you a bible literalist like Hollie?......

Is there a general agreement between Christians that the bible isn't true? I'm mean, if you're saying that the world wasn't made in 6 days, no flood, no talking snake... then you probably aren't a Christian.

thank god that's up to God and not to you.......because you're dumber than a stump......

That's all you've got? Name calling? Because your bible only works if the flood wasn't global? And didn't kill all humans except for Noah and his peeps? And let's you cherry pick a little bit of evolution?

 

[Taz]

I see you are taking a while. To save you some time searching: Dictionary and Thesaurus - Merriam-Webster Online

obviously its the 'why' that's giving him the most trouble.....

Randy asked a question that he couldn't answer himself. Why do people look different? Without looking it up scientifically, I'd say that a) evolution, and b) some kinds of variables in each species genes? Is there another answer?

if you already knew the answer, why ask it?......the problem seems to be that you don't realize Christians have no problem recognizing that evolution explains why we have both yellow and blue butterflies and Swedes as well as Samoans.......the silly part comes in when you folks try to say that evolution means human beings and lemurs have a common ancestor.......(or that they WERE our ancestor)......

Do you have a link to a credible source?

wtf.....you've never heard of mitochondrial eve?.......
will you consider Scientific American to be a credible source.....here's an article about DNA studies about both the genetic Adam and the genetic Eve....
Genetic Adam and Eve did not live too far apart in time Nature News Comment

From your link: "this Adam was by no means the only man alive at his time." How do you explain this?

drowning.......

So when Adam and Eve were kicked out of Eden, there were already other people on earth? Ummm. no.

......what on earth are you going on about......Adam and Eve had left Eden before the flood.......

I asked: From your link: "this Adam was by no means the only man alive at his time." How do you explain this?
And you said "drowning". What I'm asking is when god kicked adam and eve out of eden, were there already people on earth when they got there?