"Bible Thumpers" - Darwinists

[ChemEngineer]

The hateful bile leveled against anyone who dares challenge Darwin's Tautology ALWAYS involves Darwinists thumping the Bible. You can try to discuss science, but THEY bring up religion, trying to change the subject.
You can point out the countless failures and errors from insuperable biochemical synthesis to the Cambrian Explosion to innumerable laboratory failures to create new species of houseflies. THEY ALWAYS call you a "creation scientist" when the subject is Darwin's failure NOT creation.
Science must be discussed specifically. Darwin's Bible thumpers cannot do this. Point it out to them every time they thump a Bible that WE didn't bring up.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

The hateful bile leveled against anyone who dares challenge Darwin's Tautology ALWAYS involves Darwinists thumping the Bible. You can try to discuss science, but THEY bring up religion, trying to change the subject.
You can point out the countless failures and errors from insuperable biochemical synthesis to the Cambrian Explosion to innumerable laboratory failures to create new species of houseflies. THEY ALWAYS call you a "creation scientist" when the subject is Darwin's failure NOT creation.
Science must be discussed specifically. Darwin's Bible thumpers cannot do this. Point it out to them every time they thump a Bible that WE didn't bring up.

Science is always about someone's theory. Evolution is a conglomeration of theories that until proven, remain just theories. Back when i was young, a Brontosaurus was the largest animal at the time, slow moving and cold blooded, today the theories are that it is warm blooded and not so slow. Until one is actually seen, the theory still remains.

 

[jwoodie]

Ad hominem arguments are the refuge of scoundrels and libtards.

 

[alang1216]

The hateful bile leveled against anyone who dares challenge Darwin's Tautology ALWAYS involves Darwinists thumping the Bible. You can try to discuss science, but THEY bring up religion, trying to change the subject.
You can point out the countless failures and errors from insuperable biochemical synthesis to the Cambrian Explosion to innumerable laboratory failures to create new species of houseflies. THEY ALWAYS call you a "creation scientist" when the subject is Darwin's failure NOT creation.
Science must be discussed specifically. Darwin's Bible thumpers cannot do this. Point it out to them every time they thump a Bible that WE didn't bring up.

Scientists don't discuss Darwin (except in historical terms), they talk about abiogenesis, descent from a common ancestor, natural selection, punctuated equilibrium, etc. It is only creationists that muddy the discussion by bringing up Darwin.

 

[Hollie]

The hateful bile leveled against anyone who dares challenge Darwin's Tautology ALWAYS involves Darwinists thumping the Bible. You can try to discuss science, but THEY bring up religion, trying to change the subject.
You can point out the countless failures and errors from insuperable biochemical synthesis to the Cambrian Explosion to innumerable laboratory failures to create new species of houseflies. THEY ALWAYS call you a "creation scientist" when the subject is Darwin's failure NOT creation.
Science must be discussed specifically. Darwin's Bible thumpers cannot do this. Point it out to them every time they thump a Bible that WE didn't bring up.

I think it's pretty obvious that the religious extremists attack "Darwinism'' and science because Darwin's theory of evolution and the science that directly supports Darwinian theory directly contradict supernaturalism and gods. It's actually comical to watch the religious extremists try to pick apart a 150 year old theory and the science knowledge that has accumulated since. You can point out the flaws in their counter argument, ''... the gods did it'', but they always retreat to attempts to vilify reason and rationality to protect their sacred cows.

A tactic common to religious extremists is to claim that the failure of laboratory experiments to create new species of houseflies somehow ''disproves'' biological evolution. This is then heralded as ''proof'' of the gods.

The fact is, common descent predicts a pattern of nested hierarchy , or groups within groups. Consistent with the prediction, we see those arrangement in unique, consistent, well-defined hierarchies, the so-called tree of life. Fossil animals fit in the same hierarchical tree of life. We find countless cases of transitional forms in the fossil record. All life shows similar patterns of basic unity in the mechanisms of replication, metabolism and heritability. Distribution of species across the planet is consistent with their evolutionary and biological history. Marsupials are largely limited to the Australian continent. Continental drift and the isolation as a result explain the exceptions. Isloated islands will have groups of species that are very diverse in adaptive behavior and general appearance but are closely related in terms of their genetics.

Let’s see the creationers present their “General Theory of Supernatural Creation”, present the evidence for their gods and we can compare theories for supporting evidence.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

The hateful bile leveled against anyone who dares challenge Darwin's Tautology ALWAYS involves Darwinists thumping the Bible. You can try to discuss science, but THEY bring up religion, trying to change the subject.
You can point out the countless failures and errors from insuperable biochemical synthesis to the Cambrian Explosion to innumerable laboratory failures to create new species of houseflies. THEY ALWAYS call you a "creation scientist" when the subject is Darwin's failure NOT creation.
Science must be discussed specifically. Darwin's Bible thumpers cannot do this. Point it out to them every time they thump a Bible that WE didn't bring up.

I think it's pretty obvious that the religious extremists attack "Darwinism'' and science because Darwin's theory of evolution and the science that directly supports Darwinian theory directly contradict supernaturalism and gods. It's actually comical to watch the religious extremists try to pick apart a 150 year old theory and the science knowledge that has accumulated since. You can point out the flaws in their counter argument, ''... the gods did it'', but they always retreat to attempts to vilify reason and rationality to protect their sacred cows.

A tactic common to religious extremists is to claim that the failure of laboratory experiments to create new species of houseflies somehow ''disproves'' biological evolution. This is then heralded as ''proof'' of the gods.

The fact is, common descent predicts a pattern of nested hierarchy , or groups within groups. Consistent with the prediction, we see those arrangement in unique, consistent, well-defined hierarchies, the so-called tree of life. Fossil animals fit in the same hierarchical tree of life. We find countless cases of transitional forms in the fossil record. All life shows similar patterns of basic unity in the mechanisms of replication, metabolism and heritability. Distribution of species across the planet is consistent with their evolutionary and biological history. Marsupials are largely limited to the Australian continent. Continental drift and the isolation as a result explain the exceptions. Isloated islands will have groups of species that are very diverse in adaptive behavior and general appearance but are closely related in terms of their genetics.

Let’s see the creationers present their “General Theory of Supernatural Creation”, present the evidence for their gods and we can compare theories for supporting evidence.

Do you think that man is just the luck of the draw and having reach where we are because of random events?

 

[Hollie]

The hateful bile leveled against anyone who dares challenge Darwin's Tautology ALWAYS involves Darwinists thumping the Bible. You can try to discuss science, but THEY bring up religion, trying to change the subject.
You can point out the countless failures and errors from insuperable biochemical synthesis to the Cambrian Explosion to innumerable laboratory failures to create new species of houseflies. THEY ALWAYS call you a "creation scientist" when the subject is Darwin's failure NOT creation.
Science must be discussed specifically. Darwin's Bible thumpers cannot do this. Point it out to them every time they thump a Bible that WE didn't bring up.

I think it's pretty obvious that the religious extremists attack "Darwinism'' and science because Darwin's theory of evolution and the science that directly supports Darwinian theory directly contradict supernaturalism and gods. It's actually comical to watch the religious extremists try to pick apart a 150 year old theory and the science knowledge that has accumulated since. You can point out the flaws in their counter argument, ''... the gods did it'', but they always retreat to attempts to vilify reason and rationality to protect their sacred cows.

A tactic common to religious extremists is to claim that the failure of laboratory experiments to create new species of houseflies somehow ''disproves'' biological evolution. This is then heralded as ''proof'' of the gods.

The fact is, common descent predicts a pattern of nested hierarchy , or groups within groups. Consistent with the prediction, we see those arrangement in unique, consistent, well-defined hierarchies, the so-called tree of life. Fossil animals fit in the same hierarchical tree of life. We find countless cases of transitional forms in the fossil record. All life shows similar patterns of basic unity in the mechanisms of replication, metabolism and heritability. Distribution of species across the planet is consistent with their evolutionary and biological history. Marsupials are largely limited to the Australian continent. Continental drift and the isolation as a result explain the exceptions. Isloated islands will have groups of species that are very diverse in adaptive behavior and general appearance but are closely related in terms of their genetics.

Let’s see the creationers present their “General Theory of Supernatural Creation”, present the evidence for their gods and we can compare theories for supporting evidence.

Do you think that man is just the luck of the draw and having reach where we are because of random events?

I don't see anything in nature as indicating supernatural design by any gods.

 

[Indeependent]

The hateful bile leveled against anyone who dares challenge Darwin's Tautology ALWAYS involves Darwinists thumping the Bible. You can try to discuss science, but THEY bring up religion, trying to change the subject.
You can point out the countless failures and errors from insuperable biochemical synthesis to the Cambrian Explosion to innumerable laboratory failures to create new species of houseflies. THEY ALWAYS call you a "creation scientist" when the subject is Darwin's failure NOT creation.
Science must be discussed specifically. Darwin's Bible thumpers cannot do this. Point it out to them every time they thump a Bible that WE didn't bring up.

Scientists don't discuss Darwin (except in historical terms), they talk about abiogenesis, descent from a common ancestor, natural selection, punctuated equilibrium, etc. It is only creationists that muddy the discussion by bringing up Darwin.

Nope!
It's up to you guys to provide proof that everything we see today is due to accidents and survival over hundreds of millions of years.

 

[alang1216]

The hateful bile leveled against anyone who dares challenge Darwin's Tautology ALWAYS involves Darwinists thumping the Bible. You can try to discuss science, but THEY bring up religion, trying to change the subject.
You can point out the countless failures and errors from insuperable biochemical synthesis to the Cambrian Explosion to innumerable laboratory failures to create new species of houseflies. THEY ALWAYS call you a "creation scientist" when the subject is Darwin's failure NOT creation.
Science must be discussed specifically. Darwin's Bible thumpers cannot do this. Point it out to them every time they thump a Bible that WE didn't bring up.

I think it's pretty obvious that the religious extremists attack "Darwinism'' and science because Darwin's theory of evolution and the science that directly supports Darwinian theory directly contradict supernaturalism and gods. It's actually comical to watch the religious extremists try to pick apart a 150 year old theory and the science knowledge that has accumulated since. You can point out the flaws in their counter argument, ''... the gods did it'', but they always retreat to attempts to vilify reason and rationality to protect their sacred cows.

A tactic common to religious extremists is to claim that the failure of laboratory experiments to create new species of houseflies somehow ''disproves'' biological evolution. This is then heralded as ''proof'' of the gods.

The fact is, common descent predicts a pattern of nested hierarchy , or groups within groups. Consistent with the prediction, we see those arrangement in unique, consistent, well-defined hierarchies, the so-called tree of life. Fossil animals fit in the same hierarchical tree of life. We find countless cases of transitional forms in the fossil record. All life shows similar patterns of basic unity in the mechanisms of replication, metabolism and heritability. Distribution of species across the planet is consistent with their evolutionary and biological history. Marsupials are largely limited to the Australian continent. Continental drift and the isolation as a result explain the exceptions. Isloated islands will have groups of species that are very diverse in adaptive behavior and general appearance but are closely related in terms of their genetics.

Let’s see the creationers present their “General Theory of Supernatural Creation”, present the evidence for their gods and we can compare theories for supporting evidence.

Do you think that man is just the luck of the draw and having reach where we are because of random events?

Evolution is not random.

 

[alang1216]

The hateful bile leveled against anyone who dares challenge Darwin's Tautology ALWAYS involves Darwinists thumping the Bible. You can try to discuss science, but THEY bring up religion, trying to change the subject.
You can point out the countless failures and errors from insuperable biochemical synthesis to the Cambrian Explosion to innumerable laboratory failures to create new species of houseflies. THEY ALWAYS call you a "creation scientist" when the subject is Darwin's failure NOT creation.
Science must be discussed specifically. Darwin's Bible thumpers cannot do this. Point it out to them every time they thump a Bible that WE didn't bring up.

Scientists don't discuss Darwin (except in historical terms), they talk about abiogenesis, descent from a common ancestor, natural selection, punctuated equilibrium, etc. It is only creationists that muddy the discussion by bringing up Darwin.

Nope!
It's up to you guys to provide proof that everything we see today is due to accidents and survival over hundreds of millions of years.

No proof, sorry. Mountains of evidence though.

 

[Indeependent]

The hateful bile leveled against anyone who dares challenge Darwin's Tautology ALWAYS involves Darwinists thumping the Bible. You can try to discuss science, but THEY bring up religion, trying to change the subject.
You can point out the countless failures and errors from insuperable biochemical synthesis to the Cambrian Explosion to innumerable laboratory failures to create new species of houseflies. THEY ALWAYS call you a "creation scientist" when the subject is Darwin's failure NOT creation.
Science must be discussed specifically. Darwin's Bible thumpers cannot do this. Point it out to them every time they thump a Bible that WE didn't bring up.

Scientists don't discuss Darwin (except in historical terms), they talk about abiogenesis, descent from a common ancestor, natural selection, punctuated equilibrium, etc. It is only creationists that muddy the discussion by bringing up Darwin.

Nope!
It's up to you guys to provide proof that everything we see today is due to accidents and survival over hundreds of millions of years.

No proof, sorry. Mountains of evidence though.

You do know that a human baby goes through 20+ organ reversals during the birth process.
If all are not successful within 3 minutes, the baby dies.
Evolution is a crock.

 

[alang1216]

The hateful bile leveled against anyone who dares challenge Darwin's Tautology ALWAYS involves Darwinists thumping the Bible. You can try to discuss science, but THEY bring up religion, trying to change the subject.
You can point out the countless failures and errors from insuperable biochemical synthesis to the Cambrian Explosion to innumerable laboratory failures to create new species of houseflies. THEY ALWAYS call you a "creation scientist" when the subject is Darwin's failure NOT creation.
Science must be discussed specifically. Darwin's Bible thumpers cannot do this. Point it out to them every time they thump a Bible that WE didn't bring up.

Scientists don't discuss Darwin (except in historical terms), they talk about abiogenesis, descent from a common ancestor, natural selection, punctuated equilibrium, etc. It is only creationists that muddy the discussion by bringing up Darwin.

Nope!
It's up to you guys to provide proof that everything we see today is due to accidents and survival over hundreds of millions of years.

No proof, sorry. Mountains of evidence though.

You do know that a human baby goes through 20+ organ reversals during the birth process.
If all are not successful within 3 minutes, the baby dies.
Evolution is a crock.

So an intelligent being purposely designed a human baby to go through 20+ organ reversals? Yeah that makes much more sense.

 

[Indeependent]

The hateful bile leveled against anyone who dares challenge Darwin's Tautology ALWAYS involves Darwinists thumping the Bible. You can try to discuss science, but THEY bring up religion, trying to change the subject.
You can point out the countless failures and errors from insuperable biochemical synthesis to the Cambrian Explosion to innumerable laboratory failures to create new species of houseflies. THEY ALWAYS call you a "creation scientist" when the subject is Darwin's failure NOT creation.
Science must be discussed specifically. Darwin's Bible thumpers cannot do this. Point it out to them every time they thump a Bible that WE didn't bring up.

Scientists don't discuss Darwin (except in historical terms), they talk about abiogenesis, descent from a common ancestor, natural selection, punctuated equilibrium, etc. It is only creationists that muddy the discussion by bringing up Darwin.

Nope!
It's up to you guys to provide proof that everything we see today is due to accidents and survival over hundreds of millions of years.

No proof, sorry. Mountains of evidence though.

You do know that a human baby goes through 20+ organ reversals during the birth process.
If all are not successful within 3 minutes, the baby dies.
Evolution is a crock.

So an intelligent being purposely designed a human baby to go through 20+ organ reversals? Yeah that makes much more sense.

Nice...you didn't address a scientific fact.
An intelligence designed it that way to make people who believe in evolution seem as stupid as they are.
Now address those designed reversals...

 

[alang1216]

The hateful bile leveled against anyone who dares challenge Darwin's Tautology ALWAYS involves Darwinists thumping the Bible. You can try to discuss science, but THEY bring up religion, trying to change the subject.
You can point out the countless failures and errors from insuperable biochemical synthesis to the Cambrian Explosion to innumerable laboratory failures to create new species of houseflies. THEY ALWAYS call you a "creation scientist" when the subject is Darwin's failure NOT creation.
Science must be discussed specifically. Darwin's Bible thumpers cannot do this. Point it out to them every time they thump a Bible that WE didn't bring up.

Scientists don't discuss Darwin (except in historical terms), they talk about abiogenesis, descent from a common ancestor, natural selection, punctuated equilibrium, etc. It is only creationists that muddy the discussion by bringing up Darwin.

Nope!
It's up to you guys to provide proof that everything we see today is due to accidents and survival over hundreds of millions of years.

No proof, sorry. Mountains of evidence though.

You do know that a human baby goes through 20+ organ reversals during the birth process.
If all are not successful within 3 minutes, the baby dies.
Evolution is a crock.

So an intelligent being purposely designed a human baby to go through 20+ organ reversals? Yeah that makes much more sense.

Nice...you didn't address a scientific fact.
An intelligence designed it that way to make people who believe in evolution seem as stupid as they are.
Now address those designed reversals...

Every living being is built on previous beings. Their designs are changed to create a new species. Organ reversals are just the roadmap to previous species and exactly what you'd expect to see as a result of evolution.

I answered you so please answer me. Why would an intelligent being purposely design a human baby to go through 20+ organ reversals?

 

[abu afak]

Nope!
It's up to you guys to provide proof that everything we see today is due to accidents and survival over hundreds of millions of years.

No
It's up to US guys to provide evidence: Overwhelming EVIDENCE.
160 Years of Uncontradicted evidence that many new sciences have only helped confirm.
So science HAS done so.
Religions/gods have shown NONE that their/any god exists.
10,000 religions/gods, 10,000 Years. NOTHING.

`

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

The hateful bile leveled against anyone who dares challenge Darwin's Tautology ALWAYS involves Darwinists thumping the Bible. You can try to discuss science, but THEY bring up religion, trying to change the subject.
You can point out the countless failures and errors from insuperable biochemical synthesis to the Cambrian Explosion to innumerable laboratory failures to create new species of houseflies. THEY ALWAYS call you a "creation scientist" when the subject is Darwin's failure NOT creation.
Science must be discussed specifically. Darwin's Bible thumpers cannot do this. Point it out to them every time they thump a Bible that WE didn't bring up.

I think it's pretty obvious that the religious extremists attack "Darwinism'' and science because Darwin's theory of evolution and the science that directly supports Darwinian theory directly contradict supernaturalism and gods. It's actually comical to watch the religious extremists try to pick apart a 150 year old theory and the science knowledge that has accumulated since. You can point out the flaws in their counter argument, ''... the gods did it'', but they always retreat to attempts to vilify reason and rationality to protect their sacred cows.

A tactic common to religious extremists is to claim that the failure of laboratory experiments to create new species of houseflies somehow ''disproves'' biological evolution. This is then heralded as ''proof'' of the gods.

The fact is, common descent predicts a pattern of nested hierarchy , or groups within groups. Consistent with the prediction, we see those arrangement in unique, consistent, well-defined hierarchies, the so-called tree of life. Fossil animals fit in the same hierarchical tree of life. We find countless cases of transitional forms in the fossil record. All life shows similar patterns of basic unity in the mechanisms of replication, metabolism and heritability. Distribution of species across the planet is consistent with their evolutionary and biological history. Marsupials are largely limited to the Australian continent. Continental drift and the isolation as a result explain the exceptions. Isloated islands will have groups of species that are very diverse in adaptive behavior and general appearance but are closely related in terms of their genetics.

Let’s see the creationers present their “General Theory of Supernatural Creation”, present the evidence for their gods and we can compare theories for supporting evidence.

Do you think that man is just the luck of the draw and having reach where we are because of random events?

I don't see anything in nature as indicating supernatural design by any gods.

Do you have any children?

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

The hateful bile leveled against anyone who dares challenge Darwin's Tautology ALWAYS involves Darwinists thumping the Bible. You can try to discuss science, but THEY bring up religion, trying to change the subject.
You can point out the countless failures and errors from insuperable biochemical synthesis to the Cambrian Explosion to innumerable laboratory failures to create new species of houseflies. THEY ALWAYS call you a "creation scientist" when the subject is Darwin's failure NOT creation.
Science must be discussed specifically. Darwin's Bible thumpers cannot do this. Point it out to them every time they thump a Bible that WE didn't bring up.

Scientists don't discuss Darwin (except in historical terms), they talk about abiogenesis, descent from a common ancestor, natural selection, punctuated equilibrium, etc. It is only creationists that muddy the discussion by bringing up Darwin.

Nope!
It's up to you guys to provide proof that everything we see today is due to accidents and survival over hundreds of millions of years.

No proof, sorry. Mountains of evidence though.

You do know that a human baby goes through 20+ organ reversals during the birth process.
If all are not successful within 3 minutes, the baby dies.
Evolution is a crock.

So an intelligent being purposely designed a human baby to go through 20+ organ reversals? Yeah that makes much more sense.

Nice...you didn't address a scientific fact.
An intelligence designed it that way to make people who believe in evolution seem as stupid as they are.
Now address those designed reversals...

Every living being is built on previous beings. Their designs are changed to create a new species. Organ reversals are just the roadmap to previous species and exactly what you'd expect to see as a result of evolution.

I answered you so please answer me. Why would an intelligent being purposely design a human baby to go through 20+ organ reversals?

Organ reversals are just the roadmap

And who drew that roadmap?

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Nope!
It's up to you guys to provide proof that everything we see today is due to accidents and survival over hundreds of millions of years.

No
It's up to US guys to provide evidence: Overwhelming EVIDENCE.
160 Years of Uncontradicted evidence that many new sciences have only helped confirm.
So science HAS done so.
Religions/gods have shown NONE that their/any god exists.
10,000 religions/gods, 10,000 Years. NOTHING.

`

Is that the same science that says, men with tits are women? Or there are now 75 genders when there are really only two?

 

[alang1216]

The hateful bile leveled against anyone who dares challenge Darwin's Tautology ALWAYS involves Darwinists thumping the Bible. You can try to discuss science, but THEY bring up religion, trying to change the subject.
You can point out the countless failures and errors from insuperable biochemical synthesis to the Cambrian Explosion to innumerable laboratory failures to create new species of houseflies. THEY ALWAYS call you a "creation scientist" when the subject is Darwin's failure NOT creation.
Science must be discussed specifically. Darwin's Bible thumpers cannot do this. Point it out to them every time they thump a Bible that WE didn't bring up.

Scientists don't discuss Darwin (except in historical terms), they talk about abiogenesis, descent from a common ancestor, natural selection, punctuated equilibrium, etc. It is only creationists that muddy the discussion by bringing up Darwin.

Nope!
It's up to you guys to provide proof that everything we see today is due to accidents and survival over hundreds of millions of years.

No proof, sorry. Mountains of evidence though.

You do know that a human baby goes through 20+ organ reversals during the birth process.
If all are not successful within 3 minutes, the baby dies.
Evolution is a crock.

So an intelligent being purposely designed a human baby to go through 20+ organ reversals? Yeah that makes much more sense.

Nice...you didn't address a scientific fact.
An intelligence designed it that way to make people who believe in evolution seem as stupid as they are.
Now address those designed reversals...

Every living being is built on previous beings. Their designs are changed to create a new species. Organ reversals are just the roadmap to previous species and exactly what you'd expect to see as a result of evolution.

I answered you so please answer me. Why would an intelligent being purposely design a human baby to go through 20+ organ reversals?

Organ reversals are just the roadmap

And who drew that roadmap?

Nature drew the map and science read it.

 

[alang1216]

Nope!
It's up to you guys to provide proof that everything we see today is due to accidents and survival over hundreds of millions of years.

No
It's up to US guys to provide evidence: Overwhelming EVIDENCE.
160 Years of Uncontradicted evidence that many new sciences have only helped confirm.
So science HAS done so.
Religions/gods have shown NONE that their/any god exists.
10,000 religions/gods, 10,000 Years. NOTHING.

`

Is that the same science that says, men with tits are women? Or there are now 75 genders when there are really only two?

Are there any other human traits that only have two expressions? Are there only two heights, IQs, races, etc. Every aspect is a continuous spectrum, why expect gender to be any different?