Creationists' theory in detail

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
35,146
Reaction score
3,278
Points
1,115
Then you are on a wild goose chase, because the gaps in the fossil record diminish every day and are easily explained by the fact that most creatures do not end up fossilized. So your pile of "evidence" is ever diminishing. On the other hand, the evidence for evolution grows every single day. So you see where this is going.
:aug08_031:Atheists are wrong again. The atheist scientists cannot explain the Cambrian Explosion. They are done in so many ways with the fossil evidence.
Fundies are always wrong. Science explains the Cambrian Explosion
With what observational proof Hollie?

We do not agree with creationists on some of their beliefs so I don't know if you would but us in the fundie species classification. From our literature:

Excerpt:

"The Bulletin of Chicago’s Field Museum of Natural History pointed out: “Darwin’s theory of [evolution] has always been closely linked to evidence from fossils, and probably most people assume that fossils provide a very important part of the general argument that is made in favor of darwinian interpretations of the history of life. Unfortunately, this is not strictly true. . . . the geologic record did not then and still does not yield a finely graduated chain of slow and progressive evolution.”—January 1979, Vol. 50, No. 1, pp. 22, 23.

A View of Life states: “Beginning at the base of the Cambrian period and extending for about 10 million years, all the major groups of skeletonized invertebrates made their first appearance in the most spectacular rise in diversity ever recorded on our planet.”—(California, 1981), Salvador E. Luria, Stephen Jay Gould, Sam Singer, p. 649.

Paleontologist Alfred Romer wrote: “Below this [Cambrian period], there are vast thicknesses of sediments in which the progenitors of the Cambrian forms would be expected. But we do not find them; these older beds are almost barren of evidence of life, and the general picture could reasonably be said to be consistent with the idea of a special creation at the beginning of Cambrian times.”—Natural History, October 1959, p. 467.

Zoologist Harold Coffin states: “If progressive evolution from simple to complex is correct, the ancestors of these full-blown living creatures in the Cambrian should be found; but they have not been found and scientists admit there is little prospect of their ever being found. On the basis of the facts alone, on the basis of what is actually found in the earth, the theory of a sudden creative act in which the major forms of life were established fits best.”—Liberty, September/October 1975, p. 12.

Carl Sagan, in his book Cosmos, candidly acknowledged: “The fossil evidence could be consistent with the idea of a Great Designer.”—(New York, 1980), p. 29."

From our more recent "Origin of Life" brochure after noting scientists acknowledgement of the "Cambrian Explosion" explains here:


The relatively sudden appearance of these diverse life forms is causing some evolutionary researchers to question the traditional version of Darwin’s theory. For example, in an interview in 2008, evolutionary biologist Stuart Newman discussed the need for a new theory of evolution that could explain the sudden appearance of novel forms of life. He said: “The Darwinian mechanism that’s used to explain all evolutionary change will be relegated, I believe, to being just one of several mechanisms—maybe not even the most important when it comes to understanding macroevolution, the evolution of major transitions in body type.”33

Reference 33:
33. Archaeology, “The Origin of Form Was Abrupt Not Gradual,” by Suzan Mazur, October 11, 2008, (www.archaeology.org/online/ interviews/newman.html), accessed 2/23/2009.
I note your “quote” here:Natural History, October 1959, p. 467., is a publication of the Watchtower Bible Society and not a peer reviewed document, rather a document with a predefined agenda.
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
7,684
Reaction score
570
Points
155
This is a prayer for the medical people on the front lines of war against this demon and death virus.

“Dear gods, why the hell did you not consult an expert on supernatural design before you negligently and carelessly designed viruses.”
No, the brave medical people on the front lines need our thoughts, prayers, and whatever help we can provide. Not your blasphemous, snide, and loathsome words and thoughts that continually run through your decrepit, warped, and hateful brain.

You are praying to Satan and his demons with the lower case 'g' as there is only one true God. We find that Satan through mutation, that the evos falsely worship, has turned SARS-Cov-2 into COVID-19 that is a stronger and deadlier respiratory virus in that it is harder to create a vaccine against it. The believers pray that God help us by coming up with a way to create this vaccine through using the best knowledge and findings that we can come up with to kill this deadly virus.
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
35,146
Reaction score
3,278
Points
1,115
This is a prayer for the medical people on the front lines of war against this demon and death virus.

“Dear gods, why the hell did you not consult an expert on supernatural design before you negligently and carelessly designed viruses.”
No, the brave medical people on the front lines need our thoughts, prayers, and whatever help we can provide. Not your blasphemous, snide, and loathsome words and thoughts that continually run through your decrepit, warped, and hateful brain.

You are praying to Satan and his demons with the lower case 'g' as there is only one true God. We find that Satan through mutation, that the evos falsely worship, has turned SARS-Cov-2 into COVID-19 that is a stronger and deadlier respiratory virus in that it is harder to create a vaccine against it. The believers pray that God help us by coming up with a way to create this vaccine through using the best knowledge and findings that we can come up with to kill this deadly virus.
You're not being honest with yourself or others. As the "designer" of all, the gods are thus responsible for their "design".

Why do the gods hate humanity with such a passion?
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
35,146
Reaction score
3,278
Points
1,115
This is a prayer for the medical people on the front lines of war against this demon and death virus.

“Dear gods, why the hell did you not consult an expert on supernatural design before you negligently and carelessly designed viruses.”
No, the brave medical people on the front lines need our thoughts, prayers, and whatever help we can provide. Not your blasphemous, snide, and loathsome words and thoughts that continually run through your decrepit, warped, and hateful brain.

You are praying to Satan and his demons with the lower case 'g' as there is only one true God. We find that Satan through mutation, that the evos falsely worship, has turned SARS-Cov-2 into COVID-19 that is a stronger and deadlier respiratory virus in that it is harder to create a vaccine against it. The believers pray that God help us by coming up with a way to create this vaccine through using the best knowledge and findings that we can come up with to kill this deadly virus.
Such an angry fundie. Why hate me for questioning the acts of the gods?
 

BreezeWood

VIP Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
9,288
Reaction score
435
Points
85
I do not know why posters keeping posting off topic - I have taken the bait and joined them - but I prefer to stay on topic:

Evolutionist Dobzhansky studied radiation induced mutations in Drosophila (fruit fly). In his observations he noted the phenomenon of equilibrium = variation about a mean/average and that the tendency was to return to the 'wild' type or become sterile.

Evolutionist Gould noted this phenomenon in the fossil record as well - and he coined the term "macro-evolution" in his Punctuated Equilibrium model of evolution to explain the gaps in the fossil record.

We reject this model and believe the gaps in the fossil record are real and constitute evidence of direct creation.

Hopefully someone will respond on topic.
We reject this model and believe the gaps in the fossil record are real and constitute evidence of direct creation.
there are no gaps in evolution - the end product is a metaphysical, spiritual endeavor culminating in a physical transformation.

View attachment 317362

the transformation can occur from one parent to offspring in a single procedure when the metaphysical process is completed where the offspring reproduces the desired physical change from that point forward without intermediate stages - or more commonly through tractable physical steps as trial runs to the conclusion.
And your scientific evidence for your conclusion?

Darwin noted accurately the micro-evolution of finches on the Galapagos Islands due to survival of the fittest and natural selection. Dobzhansky accurately noted radiation induced mutations in Drosophila (fruit fly) produced variation (including speciation?) but also that the variation was limited by the phenomenon of equilibrium which is variation about a mean (average).

Gould accurately noted the gaps in the fossil record between 'kinds' of animals and explained this in his "punctuated equilibrium" model of macro-evolution (I think he originated the term?). The scientific evidence for micro-evolution is abundant but the theory of macro-evolution is not proven but is speculation back by no observational proof.

In short, if you plant a carrot seed, you are not going to get lettuce seedlings - as the Bible accurately states - all animals and plants "reproduce after their own kind." (Genesis chapter 1)

You are wrong in your metaphysical transformation theory - a carrot seed cannot be changed (=evolve) into a lettuce plant, etc. Unless by genetic engineering by God or man.
.
You are wrong in your metaphysical transformation theory - a carrot seed cannot be changed (=evolve) into a lettuce plant, etc. Unless by genetic engineering by God or man.
your reasoning is surely without a shadow of doubt -

1585748305463.png


without visual conformation and the logic of a book of forgeries. the spoken religion of antiquity is also the visual representation of existence without an intermediary - third world translations.

a carrot seed cannot be changed (=evolve) into a lettuce plant

engineering can change a seed - in nature it is the parent that makes the change through its metaphysical, spiritual identity into the seed and the new offspring is embedded for all future generations. is why the religion of antiquity, the triumph of good vs evil is imperative and mutations such as newtonian's are restricted.



In short, if you plant a carrot seed, you are not going to get lettuce seedlings - as the Bible accurately states - all animals and plants "reproduce after their own kind." (Genesis chapter 1)
again you are using an already "created" seed to make your point, evolution is the study of the seeds development - parent to offspring - and the metaphysical properties the spiritual content involved in the seeds production.

the book of forgeries purposely states generalities to protect its minions and the books evil intent - the history of christianity.
 

Newtonian

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2020
Messages
938
Reaction score
148
Points
53
I do not know why posters keeping posting off topic - I have taken the bait and joined them - but I prefer to stay on topic:

Evolutionist Dobzhansky studied radiation induced mutations in Drosophila (fruit fly). In his observations he noted the phenomenon of equilibrium = variation about a mean/average and that the tendency was to return to the 'wild' type or become sterile.

Evolutionist Gould noted this phenomenon in the fossil record as well - and he coined the term "macro-evolution" in his Punctuated Equilibrium model of evolution to explain the gaps in the fossil record.

We reject this model and believe the gaps in the fossil record are real and constitute evidence of direct creation.

Hopefully someone will respond on topic.
We reject this model and believe the gaps in the fossil record are real and constitute evidence of direct creation.
there are no gaps in evolution - the end product is a metaphysical, spiritual endeavor culminating in a physical transformation.

View attachment 317362

the transformation can occur from one parent to offspring in a single procedure when the metaphysical process is completed where the offspring reproduces the desired physical change from that point forward without intermediate stages - or more commonly through tractable physical steps as trial runs to the conclusion.
And your scientific evidence for your conclusion?

Darwin noted accurately the micro-evolution of finches on the Galapagos Islands due to survival of the fittest and natural selection. Dobzhansky accurately noted radiation induced mutations in Drosophila (fruit fly) produced variation (including speciation?) but also that the variation was limited by the phenomenon of equilibrium which is variation about a mean (average).

Gould accurately noted the gaps in the fossil record between 'kinds' of animals and explained this in his "punctuated equilibrium" model of macro-evolution (I think he originated the term?). The scientific evidence for micro-evolution is abundant but the theory of macro-evolution is not proven but is speculation back by no observational proof.

In short, if you plant a carrot seed, you are not going to get lettuce seedlings - as the Bible accurately states - all animals and plants "reproduce after their own kind." (Genesis chapter 1)

You are wrong in your metaphysical transformation theory - a carrot seed cannot be changed (=evolve) into a lettuce plant, etc. Unless by genetic engineering by God or man.
.
You are wrong in your metaphysical transformation theory - a carrot seed cannot be changed (=evolve) into a lettuce plant, etc. Unless by genetic engineering by God or man.
your reasoning is surely without a shadow of doubt -

View attachment 317898

without visual conformation and the logic of a book of forgeries. the spoken religion of antiquity is also the visual representation of existence without an intermediary - third world translations.

a carrot seed cannot be changed (=evolve) into a lettuce plant

engineering can change a seed - in nature it is the parent that makes the change through its metaphysical, spiritual identity into the seed and the new offspring is embedded for all future generations. is why the religion of antiquity, the triumph of good vs evil is imperative and mutations such as newtonian's are restricted.



In short, if you plant a carrot seed, you are not going to get lettuce seedlings - as the Bible accurately states - all animals and plants "reproduce after their own kind." (Genesis chapter 1)
again you are using an already "created" seed to make your point, evolution is the study of the seeds development - parent to offspring - and the metaphysical properties the spiritual content involved in the seeds production.

the book of forgeries purposely states generalities to protect its minions and the books evil intent - the history of christianity.
Yes, the history of Christendom has been evil but that is off topic. What book are you referring to?

A carrot seed is the result of parent to offspring, and the offspring is always a variety of carrot not lettuce.
 

Newtonian

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2020
Messages
938
Reaction score
148
Points
53
Then you are on a wild goose chase, because the gaps in the fossil record diminish every day and are easily explained by the fact that most creatures do not end up fossilized. So your pile of "evidence" is ever diminishing. On the other hand, the evidence for evolution grows every single day. So you see where this is going.
:aug08_031:Atheists are wrong again. The atheist scientists cannot explain the Cambrian Explosion. They are done in so many ways with the fossil evidence.
Fundies are always wrong. Science explains the Cambrian Explosion
With what observational proof Hollie?

We do not agree with creationists on some of their beliefs so I don't know if you would but us in the fundie species classification. From our literature:

Excerpt:

"The Bulletin of Chicago’s Field Museum of Natural History pointed out: “Darwin’s theory of [evolution] has always been closely linked to evidence from fossils, and probably most people assume that fossils provide a very important part of the general argument that is made in favor of darwinian interpretations of the history of life. Unfortunately, this is not strictly true. . . . the geologic record did not then and still does not yield a finely graduated chain of slow and progressive evolution.”—January 1979, Vol. 50, No. 1, pp. 22, 23.

A View of Life states: “Beginning at the base of the Cambrian period and extending for about 10 million years, all the major groups of skeletonized invertebrates made their first appearance in the most spectacular rise in diversity ever recorded on our planet.”—(California, 1981), Salvador E. Luria, Stephen Jay Gould, Sam Singer, p. 649.

Paleontologist Alfred Romer wrote: “Below this [Cambrian period], there are vast thicknesses of sediments in which the progenitors of the Cambrian forms would be expected. But we do not find them; these older beds are almost barren of evidence of life, and the general picture could reasonably be said to be consistent with the idea of a special creation at the beginning of Cambrian times.”—Natural History, October 1959, p. 467.

Zoologist Harold Coffin states: “If progressive evolution from simple to complex is correct, the ancestors of these full-blown living creatures in the Cambrian should be found; but they have not been found and scientists admit there is little prospect of their ever being found. On the basis of the facts alone, on the basis of what is actually found in the earth, the theory of a sudden creative act in which the major forms of life were established fits best.”—Liberty, September/October 1975, p. 12.

Carl Sagan, in his book Cosmos, candidly acknowledged: “The fossil evidence could be consistent with the idea of a Great Designer.”—(New York, 1980), p. 29."

From our more recent "Origin of Life" brochure after noting scientists acknowledgement of the "Cambrian Explosion" explains here:


The relatively sudden appearance of these diverse life forms is causing some evolutionary researchers to question the traditional version of Darwin’s theory. For example, in an interview in 2008, evolutionary biologist Stuart Newman discussed the need for a new theory of evolution that could explain the sudden appearance of novel forms of life. He said: “The Darwinian mechanism that’s used to explain all evolutionary change will be relegated, I believe, to being just one of several mechanisms—maybe not even the most important when it comes to understanding macroevolution, the evolution of major transitions in body type.”33

Reference 33:
33. Archaeology, “The Origin of Form Was Abrupt Not Gradual,” by Suzan Mazur, October 11, 2008, (www.archaeology.org/online/ interviews/newman.html), accessed 2/23/2009.
I note your “quote” here:Natural History, October 1959, p. 467., is a publication of the Watchtower Bible Society and not a peer reviewed document, rather a document with a predefined agenda.
"Natural History" is not a publication of Jehovah's Witnesses and I gave you a number of other references. Yes, we quoted those sources - however you have not responded on those quotes.

For example:

Archaeology, “The Origin of Form Was Abrupt Not Gradual,” by Suzan Mazur, October 11, 2008, (www.archaeology.org/online/ interviews/newman.html), accessed 2/23/2009.

On peer review - did you realize many scientific discoveries were found by those who thought 'outside the box?' Not to mention you have not given evidence the sources quoted are not peer reviewed.
 

BreezeWood

VIP Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
9,288
Reaction score
435
Points
85
Then you are on a wild goose chase, because the gaps in the fossil record diminish every day and are easily explained by the fact that most creatures do not end up fossilized. So your pile of "evidence" is ever diminishing. On the other hand, the evidence for evolution grows every single day. So you see where this is going.
:aug08_031:Atheists are wrong again. The atheist scientists cannot explain the Cambrian Explosion. They are done in so many ways with the fossil evidence.
Fundies are always wrong. Science explains the Cambrian Explosion
With what observational proof Hollie?

We do not agree with creationists on some of their beliefs so I don't know if you would but us in the fundie species classification. From our literature:

Excerpt:

"The Bulletin of Chicago’s Field Museum of Natural History pointed out: “Darwin’s theory of [evolution] has always been closely linked to evidence from fossils, and probably most people assume that fossils provide a very important part of the general argument that is made in favor of darwinian interpretations of the history of life. Unfortunately, this is not strictly true. . . . the geologic record did not then and still does not yield a finely graduated chain of slow and progressive evolution.”—January 1979, Vol. 50, No. 1, pp. 22, 23.

A View of Life states: “Beginning at the base of the Cambrian period and extending for about 10 million years, all the major groups of skeletonized invertebrates made their first appearance in the most spectacular rise in diversity ever recorded on our planet.”—(California, 1981), Salvador E. Luria, Stephen Jay Gould, Sam Singer, p. 649.

Paleontologist Alfred Romer wrote: “Below this [Cambrian period], there are vast thicknesses of sediments in which the progenitors of the Cambrian forms would be expected. But we do not find them; these older beds are almost barren of evidence of life, and the general picture could reasonably be said to be consistent with the idea of a special creation at the beginning of Cambrian times.”—Natural History, October 1959, p. 467.

Zoologist Harold Coffin states: “If progressive evolution from simple to complex is correct, the ancestors of these full-blown living creatures in the Cambrian should be found; but they have not been found and scientists admit there is little prospect of their ever being found. On the basis of the facts alone, on the basis of what is actually found in the earth, the theory of a sudden creative act in which the major forms of life were established fits best.”—Liberty, September/October 1975, p. 12.

Carl Sagan, in his book Cosmos, candidly acknowledged: “The fossil evidence could be consistent with the idea of a Great Designer.”—(New York, 1980), p. 29."

From our more recent "Origin of Life" brochure after noting scientists acknowledgement of the "Cambrian Explosion" explains here:


The relatively sudden appearance of these diverse life forms is causing some evolutionary researchers to question the traditional version of Darwin’s theory. For example, in an interview in 2008, evolutionary biologist Stuart Newman discussed the need for a new theory of evolution that could explain the sudden appearance of novel forms of life. He said: “The Darwinian mechanism that’s used to explain all evolutionary change will be relegated, I believe, to being just one of several mechanisms—maybe not even the most important when it comes to understanding macroevolution, the evolution of major transitions in body type.”33

Reference 33:
33. Archaeology, “The Origin of Form Was Abrupt Not Gradual,” by Suzan Mazur, October 11, 2008, (www.archaeology.org/online/ interviews/newman.html), accessed 2/23/2009.
Paleontologist Alfred Romer wrote: “Below this [Cambrian period], there are vast thicknesses of sediments in which the progenitors of the Cambrian forms would be expected. But we do not find them;
they are not found because they are being processed by the metaphysical, spiritual content of the individual organisms and their aspirations for a more sophisticated existence as proven by the cambrion explosion - you do not witness the stages of metamorphosis, only the transformation of one being into a new one - the same process of speciation from parent to offspring without intermediary physical representations.

from holy's web site:

2.0 Species Definitions

A discussion of speciation requires a definition of what constitutes a species. This is a topic of considerable debate within the biological community. Three recent reviews in the Journal of Phycology give some idea of the scope of the debate (Castenholz 1992, Manhart and McCourt 1992, Wood and Leatham 1992). There are a variety of different species concept currently in use by biologists. These include folk, biological, morphological, genetic, paleontological, evolutionary, phylogenetic and biosystematic definitions. In the interest of brevity, I'll only discuss four of these -- folk, biological, morphological and phylogenetic. A good review of species definitions is given in Stuessy 1990.

numerous means for the organism to transform from one state to another ... the program is first made then run in a single instance.

Carl Sagan, in his book Cosmos, candidly acknowledged: “The fossil evidence could be consistent with the idea of a Great Designer.”
or a logical and desired set of rules, the religion of antiquity - purity of spirit to make the changes - nothing about being sinners needing a messiah as being relevant for anything of actual value. there is no value to 4th century christianity, it is disabled by its forgeries.
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
35,146
Reaction score
3,278
Points
1,115
Then you are on a wild goose chase, because the gaps in the fossil record diminish every day and are easily explained by the fact that most creatures do not end up fossilized. So your pile of "evidence" is ever diminishing. On the other hand, the evidence for evolution grows every single day. So you see where this is going.
:aug08_031:Atheists are wrong again. The atheist scientists cannot explain the Cambrian Explosion. They are done in so many ways with the fossil evidence.
Fundies are always wrong. Science explains the Cambrian Explosion
With what observational proof Hollie?

We do not agree with creationists on some of their beliefs so I don't know if you would but us in the fundie species classification. From our literature:

Excerpt:

"The Bulletin of Chicago’s Field Museum of Natural History pointed out: “Darwin’s theory of [evolution] has always been closely linked to evidence from fossils, and probably most people assume that fossils provide a very important part of the general argument that is made in favor of darwinian interpretations of the history of life. Unfortunately, this is not strictly true. . . . the geologic record did not then and still does not yield a finely graduated chain of slow and progressive evolution.”—January 1979, Vol. 50, No. 1, pp. 22, 23.

A View of Life states: “Beginning at the base of the Cambrian period and extending for about 10 million years, all the major groups of skeletonized invertebrates made their first appearance in the most spectacular rise in diversity ever recorded on our planet.”—(California, 1981), Salvador E. Luria, Stephen Jay Gould, Sam Singer, p. 649.

Paleontologist Alfred Romer wrote: “Below this [Cambrian period], there are vast thicknesses of sediments in which the progenitors of the Cambrian forms would be expected. But we do not find them; these older beds are almost barren of evidence of life, and the general picture could reasonably be said to be consistent with the idea of a special creation at the beginning of Cambrian times.”—Natural History, October 1959, p. 467.

Zoologist Harold Coffin states: “If progressive evolution from simple to complex is correct, the ancestors of these full-blown living creatures in the Cambrian should be found; but they have not been found and scientists admit there is little prospect of their ever being found. On the basis of the facts alone, on the basis of what is actually found in the earth, the theory of a sudden creative act in which the major forms of life were established fits best.”—Liberty, September/October 1975, p. 12.

Carl Sagan, in his book Cosmos, candidly acknowledged: “The fossil evidence could be consistent with the idea of a Great Designer.”—(New York, 1980), p. 29."

From our more recent "Origin of Life" brochure after noting scientists acknowledgement of the "Cambrian Explosion" explains here:


The relatively sudden appearance of these diverse life forms is causing some evolutionary researchers to question the traditional version of Darwin’s theory. For example, in an interview in 2008, evolutionary biologist Stuart Newman discussed the need for a new theory of evolution that could explain the sudden appearance of novel forms of life. He said: “The Darwinian mechanism that’s used to explain all evolutionary change will be relegated, I believe, to being just one of several mechanisms—maybe not even the most important when it comes to understanding macroevolution, the evolution of major transitions in body type.”33

Reference 33:
33. Archaeology, “The Origin of Form Was Abrupt Not Gradual,” by Suzan Mazur, October 11, 2008, (www.archaeology.org/online/ interviews/newman.html), accessed 2/23/2009.
I note your “quote” here:Natural History, October 1959, p. 467., is a publication of the Watchtower Bible Society and not a peer reviewed document, rather a document with a predefined agenda.
"Natural History" is not a publication of Jehovah's Witnesses and I gave you a number of other references. Yes, we quoted those sources - however you have not responded on those quotes.

For example:

Archaeology, “The Origin of Form Was Abrupt Not Gradual,” by Suzan Mazur, October 11, 2008, (www.archaeology.org/online/ interviews/newman.html), accessed 2/23/2009.

On peer review - did you realize many scientific discoveries were found by those who thought 'outside the box?' Not to mention you have not given evidence the sources quoted are not peer reviewed.
I'm not obligated to chase down every phony "quote" used by the creation ministries. The first two were posted were complete fabrications.
 

BreezeWood

VIP Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
9,288
Reaction score
435
Points
85
This is a prayer for the medical people on the front lines of war against this demon and death virus. Dear God, thanks for the courage and conviction of these fine people in our times of trouble and need. May we take from them the same courage and conviction in these dangerous times so that we, too, do our part in withstanding quarantine and sanitation and taking heed of the message they send us. May we do what we can to help others when the moment presents us. Give us our daily breath and bread. Thy will be done on Earth as it is in heaven, forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us. Lead us not into temptation and deliver us from evil and this virus. For thine is the kingdom, power, and glory forever. Amen.
.
We're not wrong. We use God's word. Science explains the Cambrian Explosion and thus backs up the Bible once more.
So what does it mean for Satan's evolution?
forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us.
- forgive us our trespasses

where does that come from bond - do you seek forgiveness for accusing evolutionary science as an evil religion ... your disinformation for a book of forgeries against the religion of the Almighty is unworthy of forgiveness and an assault against humanity itself.

forgiveness is earned not given.
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
35,146
Reaction score
3,278
Points
1,115
Then you are on a wild goose chase, because the gaps in the fossil record diminish every day and are easily explained by the fact that most creatures do not end up fossilized. So your pile of "evidence" is ever diminishing. On the other hand, the evidence for evolution grows every single day. So you see where this is going.
:aug08_031:Atheists are wrong again. The atheist scientists cannot explain the Cambrian Explosion. They are done in so many ways with the fossil evidence.
Fundies are always wrong. Science explains the Cambrian Explosion
With what observational proof Hollie?

We do not agree with creationists on some of their beliefs so I don't know if you would but us in the fundie species classification. From our literature:

Excerpt:

"The Bulletin of Chicago’s Field Museum of Natural History pointed out: “Darwin’s theory of [evolution] has always been closely linked to evidence from fossils, and probably most people assume that fossils provide a very important part of the general argument that is made in favor of darwinian interpretations of the history of life. Unfortunately, this is not strictly true. . . . the geologic record did not then and still does not yield a finely graduated chain of slow and progressive evolution.”—January 1979, Vol. 50, No. 1, pp. 22, 23.

A View of Life states: “Beginning at the base of the Cambrian period and extending for about 10 million years, all the major groups of skeletonized invertebrates made their first appearance in the most spectacular rise in diversity ever recorded on our planet.”—(California, 1981), Salvador E. Luria, Stephen Jay Gould, Sam Singer, p. 649.

Paleontologist Alfred Romer wrote: “Below this [Cambrian period], there are vast thicknesses of sediments in which the progenitors of the Cambrian forms would be expected. But we do not find them; these older beds are almost barren of evidence of life, and the general picture could reasonably be said to be consistent with the idea of a special creation at the beginning of Cambrian times.”—Natural History, October 1959, p. 467.

Zoologist Harold Coffin states: “If progressive evolution from simple to complex is correct, the ancestors of these full-blown living creatures in the Cambrian should be found; but they have not been found and scientists admit there is little prospect of their ever being found. On the basis of the facts alone, on the basis of what is actually found in the earth, the theory of a sudden creative act in which the major forms of life were established fits best.”—Liberty, September/October 1975, p. 12.

Carl Sagan, in his book Cosmos, candidly acknowledged: “The fossil evidence could be consistent with the idea of a Great Designer.”—(New York, 1980), p. 29."

From our more recent "Origin of Life" brochure after noting scientists acknowledgement of the "Cambrian Explosion" explains here:


The relatively sudden appearance of these diverse life forms is causing some evolutionary researchers to question the traditional version of Darwin’s theory. For example, in an interview in 2008, evolutionary biologist Stuart Newman discussed the need for a new theory of evolution that could explain the sudden appearance of novel forms of life. He said: “The Darwinian mechanism that’s used to explain all evolutionary change will be relegated, I believe, to being just one of several mechanisms—maybe not even the most important when it comes to understanding macroevolution, the evolution of major transitions in body type.”33

Reference 33:
33. Archaeology, “The Origin of Form Was Abrupt Not Gradual,” by Suzan Mazur, October 11, 2008, (www.archaeology.org/online/ interviews/newman.html), accessed 2/23/2009.
I note your “quote” here:Natural History, October 1959, p. 467., is a publication of the Watchtower Bible Society and not a peer reviewed document, rather a document with a predefined agenda.
"Natural History" is not a publication of Jehovah's Witnesses and I gave you a number of other references. Yes, we quoted those sources - however you have not responded on those quotes.

For example:

Archaeology, “The Origin of Form Was Abrupt Not Gradual,” by Suzan Mazur, October 11, 2008, (www.archaeology.org/online/ interviews/newman.html), accessed 2/23/2009.

On peer review - did you realize many scientific discoveries were found by those who thought 'outside the box?' Not to mention you have not given evidence the sources quoted are not peer reviewed.
Susan Mazur is a reporter.
 

Newtonian

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2020
Messages
938
Reaction score
148
Points
53
Breezewood - I am not quoting your post - metaphysics is a branch of philosophy - discussed here:


We do not base our beliefs on philosophy - the Bible warns against philosophy:

Colossians 2:8 - New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures
8 Look out that no one takes you captive* by means of the philosophy and empty deception+ according to human tradition, according to the elementary things of the world and not according to Christ;
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
7,684
Reaction score
570
Points
155
or a logical and desired set of rules, the religion of antiquity - purity of spirit to make the changes - nothing about being sinners needing a messiah as being relevant for anything of actual value. there is no value to 4th century christianity, it is disabled by its forgeries.
Meh. You are trying to have your cake and eat it, too. It just goes to show the hypocrisy and lies of Satan's Antible of evolution. You can't have it both ways. Thus, let's just say you are wrong on both counts. There is no need to present an argument because you have contradicted yourself.

where does that come from bond - do you seek forgiveness for accusing evolutionary science as an evil religion ... your disinformation for a book of forgeries against the religion of the Almighty is unworthy of forgiveness and an assault against humanity itself.

forgiveness is earned not given.
You should take your own advice. We find that Satan's Antibible of evolution is a religion instead of science. It's based on false beliefs in long time (defies common sense and evidence), common ancestry (if true, then we should see thousands of transitional fossils), wacky macroevolution ideas that no one can observe, and some kind of twisted faith in that it's real science. It is based on the lie that there is no God. Instead, we can see the supernatural of life spirit (God's breath) exist next to the natural. Once life dies, then it can't be brought back. Life cannot be created outside the cell. We find through real science that only life begets life. Thus, the supernatural is right in front of your nose, but Satan's Antibible of evolution has pulled the wool over your eyes.
 
Last edited:

Newtonian

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2020
Messages
938
Reaction score
148
Points
53
This is a prayer for the medical people on the front lines of war against this demon and death virus. Dear God, thanks for the courage and conviction of these fine people in our times of trouble and need. May we take from them the same courage and conviction in these dangerous times so that we, too, do our part in withstanding quarantine and sanitation and taking heed of the message they send us. May we do what we can to help others when the moment presents us. Give us our daily breath and bread. Thy will be done on Earth as it is in heaven, forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us. Lead us not into temptation and deliver us from evil and this virus. For thine is the kingdom, power, and glory forever. Amen.
.
We're not wrong. We use God's word. Science explains the Cambrian Explosion and thus backs up the Bible once more.
So what does it mean for Satan's evolution?
forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us.
- forgive us our trespasses

where does that come from bond - do you seek forgiveness for accusing evolutionary science as an evil religion ... your disinformation for a book of forgeries against the religion of the Almighty is unworthy of forgiveness and an assault against humanity itself.

forgiveness is earned not given.
Forgiveness is given - at least by those who follow what Jesus next said in his sermon on the mount:

Matthew 6:14, 15 - New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (Study Edition)
14 “For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you;+ 15 whereas if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.+

Are you deliberately posting opposite to truth?
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
7,684
Reaction score
570
Points
155
Such an angry fundie. Why hate me for questioning the acts of the gods?
It wasn't me that spewed your emotional and hateful words. You even swore against Satan, but I suppose he relishes it coming from his followers.
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
35,146
Reaction score
3,278
Points
1,115
Then you are on a wild goose chase, because the gaps in the fossil record diminish every day and are easily explained by the fact that most creatures do not end up fossilized. So your pile of "evidence" is ever diminishing. On the other hand, the evidence for evolution grows every single day. So you see where this is going.
:aug08_031:Atheists are wrong again. The atheist scientists cannot explain the Cambrian Explosion. They are done in so many ways with the fossil evidence.
Fundies are always wrong. Science explains the Cambrian Explosion
With what observational proof Hollie?

We do not agree with creationists on some of their beliefs so I don't know if you would but us in the fundie species classification. From our literature:

Excerpt:

"The Bulletin of Chicago’s Field Museum of Natural History pointed out: “Darwin’s theory of [evolution] has always been closely linked to evidence from fossils, and probably most people assume that fossils provide a very important part of the general argument that is made in favor of darwinian interpretations of the history of life. Unfortunately, this is not strictly true. . . . the geologic record did not then and still does not yield a finely graduated chain of slow and progressive evolution.”—January 1979, Vol. 50, No. 1, pp. 22, 23.

A View of Life states: “Beginning at the base of the Cambrian period and extending for about 10 million years, all the major groups of skeletonized invertebrates made their first appearance in the most spectacular rise in diversity ever recorded on our planet.”—(California, 1981), Salvador E. Luria, Stephen Jay Gould, Sam Singer, p. 649.

Paleontologist Alfred Romer wrote: “Below this [Cambrian period], there are vast thicknesses of sediments in which the progenitors of the Cambrian forms would be expected. But we do not find them; these older beds are almost barren of evidence of life, and the general picture could reasonably be said to be consistent with the idea of a special creation at the beginning of Cambrian times.”—Natural History, October 1959, p. 467.

Zoologist Harold Coffin states: “If progressive evolution from simple to complex is correct, the ancestors of these full-blown living creatures in the Cambrian should be found; but they have not been found and scientists admit there is little prospect of their ever being found. On the basis of the facts alone, on the basis of what is actually found in the earth, the theory of a sudden creative act in which the major forms of life were established fits best.”—Liberty, September/October 1975, p. 12.

Carl Sagan, in his book Cosmos, candidly acknowledged: “The fossil evidence could be consistent with the idea of a Great Designer.”—(New York, 1980), p. 29."

From our more recent "Origin of Life" brochure after noting scientists acknowledgement of the "Cambrian Explosion" explains here:


The relatively sudden appearance of these diverse life forms is causing some evolutionary researchers to question the traditional version of Darwin’s theory. For example, in an interview in 2008, evolutionary biologist Stuart Newman discussed the need for a new theory of evolution that could explain the sudden appearance of novel forms of life. He said: “The Darwinian mechanism that’s used to explain all evolutionary change will be relegated, I believe, to being just one of several mechanisms—maybe not even the most important when it comes to understanding macroevolution, the evolution of major transitions in body type.”33

Reference 33:
33. Archaeology, “The Origin of Form Was Abrupt Not Gradual,” by Suzan Mazur, October 11, 2008, (www.archaeology.org/online/ interviews/newman.html), accessed 2/23/2009.
It’s a tactic for “quote miners” to selectively cut portions of a “quote” as a way to purposefully misrepresent the author.

Here is the fuller Sagan “quote”:

“The fossil evidence could be consistent with the idea of a Great Designer; perhaps some species are destoryed when the Designer becomes dissatisfied with them, and new experiments are attempted on an improved design. But this notion is a little disconcerting. Each plant and animal is exquisitely made; should not a supremely competent Designer have been able to make the intended variety from the start?

The fossil record implies trial and error, an inability to anticipate the future, features inconsistent with an efficient Great Designer
(although not with a Designer of a more remote and indirect temperament)."

Quite a bit differ in intent than your edited portion.
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
35,146
Reaction score
3,278
Points
1,115
Then you are on a wild goose chase, because the gaps in the fossil record diminish every day and are easily explained by the fact that most creatures do not end up fossilized. So your pile of "evidence" is ever diminishing. On the other hand, the evidence for evolution grows every single day. So you see where this is going.
:aug08_031:Atheists are wrong again. The atheist scientists cannot explain the Cambrian Explosion. They are done in so many ways with the fossil evidence.
Fundies are always wrong. Science explains the Cambrian Explosion
With what observational proof Hollie?

We do not agree with creationists on some of their beliefs so I don't know if you would but us in the fundie species classification. From our literature:

Excerpt:

"The Bulletin of Chicago’s Field Museum of Natural History pointed out: “Darwin’s theory of [evolution] has always been closely linked to evidence from fossils, and probably most people assume that fossils provide a very important part of the general argument that is made in favor of darwinian interpretations of the history of life. Unfortunately, this is not strictly true. . . . the geologic record did not then and still does not yield a finely graduated chain of slow and progressive evolution.”—January 1979, Vol. 50, No. 1, pp. 22, 23.

A View of Life states: “Beginning at the base of the Cambrian period and extending for about 10 million years, all the major groups of skeletonized invertebrates made their first appearance in the most spectacular rise in diversity ever recorded on our planet.”—(California, 1981), Salvador E. Luria, Stephen Jay Gould, Sam Singer, p. 649.

Paleontologist Alfred Romer wrote: “Below this [Cambrian period], there are vast thicknesses of sediments in which the progenitors of the Cambrian forms would be expected. But we do not find them; these older beds are almost barren of evidence of life, and the general picture could reasonably be said to be consistent with the idea of a special creation at the beginning of Cambrian times.”—Natural History, October 1959, p. 467.

Zoologist Harold Coffin states: “If progressive evolution from simple to complex is correct, the ancestors of these full-blown living creatures in the Cambrian should be found; but they have not been found and scientists admit there is little prospect of their ever being found. On the basis of the facts alone, on the basis of what is actually found in the earth, the theory of a sudden creative act in which the major forms of life were established fits best.”—Liberty, September/October 1975, p. 12.

Carl Sagan, in his book Cosmos, candidly acknowledged: “The fossil evidence could be consistent with the idea of a Great Designer.”—(New York, 1980), p. 29."

From our more recent "Origin of Life" brochure after noting scientists acknowledgement of the "Cambrian Explosion" explains here:


The relatively sudden appearance of these diverse life forms is causing some evolutionary researchers to question the traditional version of Darwin’s theory. For example, in an interview in 2008, evolutionary biologist Stuart Newman discussed the need for a new theory of evolution that could explain the sudden appearance of novel forms of life. He said: “The Darwinian mechanism that’s used to explain all evolutionary change will be relegated, I believe, to being just one of several mechanisms—maybe not even the most important when it comes to understanding macroevolution, the evolution of major transitions in body type.”33

Reference 33:
33. Archaeology, “The Origin of Form Was Abrupt Not Gradual,” by Suzan Mazur, October 11, 2008, (www.archaeology.org/online/ interviews/newman.html), accessed 2/23/2009.
You “quoted”:
“Zoologist Harold Coffin states: “If progressive evolution from simple to complex is correct, the ancestors of these full-blown living creatures in the Cambrian should be found; but they have not been found and scientists admit there is little prospect of their ever being found. On the basis of the facts alone, on the basis of what is actually found in the earth, the theory of a sudden creative act in which the major forms of life were established fits best.”—Liberty, September/October 1975, p. 12.”

“...scientists admit there is little prospect of their ever being found.”

What scientists is the “quote” referring to?
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
7,684
Reaction score
570
Points
155
I was commenting on your emotional outburst.
Not I. Let's not be an April Fool :abgg2q.jpg:.

I prayed for the brave and courageous medical people on the front lines and for a way to help them. OTOH, you became jealous and angry because God would help these people and instead accused him to be the bad guy. Trust me, God will help. That said, inadvertently you gave credit to Satan as the bad guy, your lord and master of evolution. Evolution is pagan materialism. He tricks you especially when you become angry and emotional.
 

Newtonian

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2020
Messages
938
Reaction score
148
Points
53
Then you are on a wild goose chase, because the gaps in the fossil record diminish every day and are easily explained by the fact that most creatures do not end up fossilized. So your pile of "evidence" is ever diminishing. On the other hand, the evidence for evolution grows every single day. So you see where this is going.
:aug08_031:Atheists are wrong again. The atheist scientists cannot explain the Cambrian Explosion. They are done in so many ways with the fossil evidence.
Fundies are always wrong. Science explains the Cambrian Explosion
With what observational proof Hollie?

We do not agree with creationists on some of their beliefs so I don't know if you would but us in the fundie species classification. From our literature:

Excerpt:

"The Bulletin of Chicago’s Field Museum of Natural History pointed out: “Darwin’s theory of [evolution] has always been closely linked to evidence from fossils, and probably most people assume that fossils provide a very important part of the general argument that is made in favor of darwinian interpretations of the history of life. Unfortunately, this is not strictly true. . . . the geologic record did not then and still does not yield a finely graduated chain of slow and progressive evolution.”—January 1979, Vol. 50, No. 1, pp. 22, 23.

A View of Life states: “Beginning at the base of the Cambrian period and extending for about 10 million years, all the major groups of skeletonized invertebrates made their first appearance in the most spectacular rise in diversity ever recorded on our planet.”—(California, 1981), Salvador E. Luria, Stephen Jay Gould, Sam Singer, p. 649.

Paleontologist Alfred Romer wrote: “Below this [Cambrian period], there are vast thicknesses of sediments in which the progenitors of the Cambrian forms would be expected. But we do not find them; these older beds are almost barren of evidence of life, and the general picture could reasonably be said to be consistent with the idea of a special creation at the beginning of Cambrian times.”—Natural History, October 1959, p. 467.

Zoologist Harold Coffin states: “If progressive evolution from simple to complex is correct, the ancestors of these full-blown living creatures in the Cambrian should be found; but they have not been found and scientists admit there is little prospect of their ever being found. On the basis of the facts alone, on the basis of what is actually found in the earth, the theory of a sudden creative act in which the major forms of life were established fits best.”—Liberty, September/October 1975, p. 12.

Carl Sagan, in his book Cosmos, candidly acknowledged: “The fossil evidence could be consistent with the idea of a Great Designer.”—(New York, 1980), p. 29."

From our more recent "Origin of Life" brochure after noting scientists acknowledgement of the "Cambrian Explosion" explains here:


The relatively sudden appearance of these diverse life forms is causing some evolutionary researchers to question the traditional version of Darwin’s theory. For example, in an interview in 2008, evolutionary biologist Stuart Newman discussed the need for a new theory of evolution that could explain the sudden appearance of novel forms of life. He said: “The Darwinian mechanism that’s used to explain all evolutionary change will be relegated, I believe, to being just one of several mechanisms—maybe not even the most important when it comes to understanding macroevolution, the evolution of major transitions in body type.”33

Reference 33:
33. Archaeology, “The Origin of Form Was Abrupt Not Gradual,” by Suzan Mazur, October 11, 2008, (www.archaeology.org/online/ interviews/newman.html), accessed 2/23/2009.
I note your “quote” here:Natural History, October 1959, p. 467., is a publication of the Watchtower Bible Society and not a peer reviewed document, rather a document with a predefined agenda.
"Natural History" is not a publication of Jehovah's Witnesses and I gave you a number of other references. Yes, we quoted those sources - however you have not responded on those quotes.

For example:

Archaeology, “The Origin of Form Was Abrupt Not Gradual,” by Suzan Mazur, October 11, 2008, (www.archaeology.org/online/ interviews/newman.html), accessed 2/23/2009.

On peer review - did you realize many scientific discoveries were found by those who thought 'outside the box?' Not to mention you have not given evidence the sources quoted are not peer reviewed.
Susan Mazur is a reporter.
And Archaelogy.org?

The link is now in archive:


Did you actually read the link? It involves many branches of scientific research - note also this excerpt:

"The impetus for the Extended Synthesis, a graft onto, or a major departure from, the Modern Synthesis (depending on who is describing it), was the overwhelming data generated in recent years that just didn't fit the old formula. Phenomena like self-organization, epigenetics and plasticity intruded in ways that were complementary to, and sometimes contradictory to, natural selection. Then there was niche construction to consider--where organisms invent their habitats (burrows, bird nests, bee hives, etc.) rather than being selected by their fitness to pre-existing ones. And also punctuated evolution, abrupt transitions in the fossil record, and the even more puzzling episodes of stasis."

Epigenetic variation is just one example of micro-evolution not macro-evolution. For example, methyl and acetyl links to histones on the chromatin (formerly thought to be the inert backbone of the chromosome. It is c. 100,000 times faster than point mutations on the DNA.

From our literature on epigenetic research:


Excerpt:

"What is epigenetics?

Living cells contain genetic information, which is needed for the production of new cells. Much of this information is found in the genome, a term that refers to all the DNA in a cell. In recent times, however, scientists have delved deeper into another array of mechanisms within the cell—the epigenome, a word that can mean “above the genome.” Epigenetics is the study of this amazing group of mechanisms and their chemical reactions.

The molecules that make up the epigenome look nothing like DNA. Whereas DNA resembles a twisted ladder, or double helix, the epigenome is essentially a system of chemical marks, or tags, that attach to DNA. What is the role of the epigenome? Like a conductor directing an orchestra, the epigenome directs the way genetic information in the DNA is expressed. The molecular tags turn sets of genes on or off in response to both the needs of the cell and environmental factors, such as diet, stress, and toxins. Recent discoveries involving the epigenome have caused a revolution in the biological sciences...."

But what observed mechanism can you point to as evidence of macro-evolution?
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Top