Creationists' theory in detail

[harmonica]

..you have been brainwashed big time
''consequences''' hahahahahah--what would those be?
hahahhahahahahaha
I'M SO SCARED hahhahahahahahahahaha

The consequences are pain and suffering and reaping what you sow. The Lake of Fire does not sound pleasant at all. If you believe in millions and billions of years, then I think you learn about it first hand by watching a rock to see if it lasts that long. If it crumbles, then you get another to baby sit. That seems about your level. Fire and sulfur isn't good for Christians' health so following the greatest commandment is best for us ..

you prove my point perfectly ---you believe in fairy tales--plain and simple
Lake of Fire????!! what is that? pelase give me some details on that

 

[harmonica]

....so. I'm asking YOU NOW--final--give me a detailed creation theory--about a paragraph is ok
...also, if you believe in creation, you must believe a fully formed human just ''appeared'' like a Star Trek Energizer--which is a lot more unbelievable than evolution

I never said I did and is why I said "they" say its based on faith,,,

but the evos do claim one animal changing magically into another as a scientific fact with no proof,,,

so you don't or do believe a fully formed human just appeared/or ''came to be''/etc??

theres no proof one way or the other,,,just like theres no proof we came from primates or a sponge in the ocean,,,

....so you don't want to answer the question!!!!!!! = I know why you don't want to answer = you don't believe in creation

I did answer it,,,

if you did, you did it in an ambiguous way
--now--last time--tell me, do you believe in creation of man or evolution of man?
yes or no--answer it plainly---yes or no --now--or else you are being disingenuous/etc
OR give me your concise theory on how man was created

 

[harmonica]

I truly hope there is a god...

because if the god of the bible exists you and trump and limbaugh and hannity are all going to go join roger ailles in hell.

There is a god, but that is "the god of the world and prince of the power of the air" or Satan. He's the one who has tricked you in going down the wrong path and believing what you believe. It's like you have to repent in order to shake it. Not an easy task. The righteous God gave you free will to choose and the commandment to not put false gods before him. The atheists and their scientists have put the fake science of evolution above him and it will mean doom for their religion and followers.

there is no god--you have no proof

 

[james bond]

''god did it''
''it's in the bible ''

that's all folks--that's all they have...
I constantly ask for details and that's what I get
no theory, nothing

Well we agree on one thing.... you have theories. Lots of theories. Tons of unprovable, unsupportable, never ending, and many not even scientifically accurate theories.

But you do have theories. So I will grant you that.

it has a lot more facts than the creationists' ''theory'' , that's for sure

And that is a statement which ironically, is entirely opinion.

evolution deals with DNA/etc--those are facts
please--please give me the facts of creation of man

God created a sophisticated system in designing the human body and reused the parts, so much of the DNA are the same. The difference is in the molecules. Even a small difference of molecules means a big difference in the species. They could be different species.

The beauty and complexity of the human body shows God and creation by a designer with vast intelligence. You are of such low IQ that you cannot accept this. Nothing about what you post is beautiful or complex.

Why don't your scientists explain how it came together? Creation scientists can explain it happened in seven days. You scientists can't even explain how sexual reproduction came to be. It is impossible for a single cell to do that. If one had common sense, then they would see how bogus Satan's Antibible of evolution is.

there is no god--you have no proof

More of your ugliness. You just cannot accept the evidence of a supreme God. That's why your posts break down to doo doo in no time.

 

[Andylusion]

''god did it''
''it's in the bible ''

that's all folks--that's all they have...
I constantly ask for details and that's what I get
no theory, nothing

Well we agree on one thing.... you have theories. Lots of theories. Tons of unprovable, unsupportable, never ending, and many not even scientifically accurate theories.

But you do have theories. So I will grant you that.

it has a lot more facts than the creationists' ''theory'' , that's for sure

And that is a statement which ironically, is entirely opinion.

evolution deals with DNA/etc--those are facts
please--please give me the facts of creation of man

Sure.

So DNA can only be created, as far as we know scientifically, from RNA.
However, there is no known method in nature for RNA to be created, except in a living cell. RNA is too fragile to exist for more than a few microseconds, when exposed to nature. Meaning, it requires the most controlled and pure environment that man can produce, to make RNA and keep it from being destroyed.

In nature of course, this is impossible, except.... in a living cell, which requires DNA to function.

So how did this happen scientifically in nature? Since the only way to produce any DNA is with RNA, and the only thing that can produce RNA, is a living cell which requires DNA..... using evolution, please explain how the first living cell was ever created?

See, this poses no problems for the creationist, since we believe in a G-d, through which all things are possible.

But without a G-d, how does the first cell ever create itself? RNA would barely exist for a few microseconds, even if there was some natural way for it to be created at all. And without RNA, DNA is impossible.

So by all means... since you are Mr Science, and you believe in empirical, demonstrable, and repeatable experiments.... please feel free to demonstrate the creation of RNA, without DNA, or DNA without RNA.

If you can do that, your Nobel prize is guaranteed.

 

[harmonica]

''god did it''
''it's in the bible ''

that's all folks--that's all they have...
I constantly ask for details and that's what I get
no theory, nothing

Well we agree on one thing.... you have theories. Lots of theories. Tons of unprovable, unsupportable, never ending, and many not even scientifically accurate theories.

But you do have theories. So I will grant you that.

it has a lot more facts than the creationists' ''theory'' , that's for sure

And that is a statement which ironically, is entirely opinion.

evolution deals with DNA/etc--those are facts
please--please give me the facts of creation of man

God created a sophisticated system in designing the human body and reused the parts, so much of the DNA are the same. The difference is in the molecules. Even a small difference of molecules means a big difference in the species. They could be different species.

The beauty and complexity of the human body shows God and creation by a designer with vast intelligence. You are of such low IQ that you cannot accept this. Nothing about what you post is beautiful or complex.

Why don't your scientists explain how it came together? Creation scientists can explain it happened in seven days. You scientists can't even explain how sexual reproduction came to be. It is impossible for a single cell to do that. If one had common sense, then they would see how bogus Satan's Antibible of evolution is.

humans are VERY imperfect !! = god created something imperfect!!!????
humans are the MOST imperfect
so god is a shithead designer????!!!!!!!!?
hahahhahahahahahhahaha

 

[harmonica]

''god did it''
''it's in the bible ''

that's all folks--that's all they have...
I constantly ask for details and that's what I get
no theory, nothing

Well we agree on one thing.... you have theories. Lots of theories. Tons of unprovable, unsupportable, never ending, and many not even scientifically accurate theories.

But you do have theories. So I will grant you that.

it has a lot more facts than the creationists' ''theory'' , that's for sure

And that is a statement which ironically, is entirely opinion.

evolution deals with DNA/etc--those are facts
please--please give me the facts of creation of man

Sure.

So DNA can only be created, as far as we know scientifically, from RNA.
However, there is no known method in nature for RNA to be created, except in a living cell. RNA is too fragile to exist for more than a few microseconds, when exposed to nature. Meaning, it requires the most controlled and pure environment that man can produce, to make RNA and keep it from being destroyed.

In nature of course, this is impossible, except.... in a living cell, which requires DNA to function.

So how did this happen scientifically in nature? Since the only way to produce any DNA is with RNA, and the only thing that can produce RNA, is a living cell which requires DNA..... using evolution, please explain how the first living cell was ever created?

See, this poses no problems for the creationist, since we believe in a G-d, through which all things are possible.

But without a G-d, how does the first cell ever create itself? RNA would barely exist for a few microseconds, even if there was some natural way for it to be created at all. And without RNA, DNA is impossible.

So by all means... since you are Mr Science, and you believe in empirical, demonstrable, and repeatable experiments.... please feel free to demonstrate the creation of RNA, without DNA, or DNA without RNA.

If you can do that, your Nobel prize is guaranteed.

so I ask YOU, also, -do you believe a fully formed human just appeared? you HAVE to believe it ---that's your ''theory'''
....hahahhahah--'''it poses no problems for creationists'''--yes--that's exactly what I meant in the OP--god just did it-----hahahahhahahahahah..that's your ''theory'' of how man was created....

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

So DNA can only be created, as far as we know scientifically, from RNA.
However, there is no known method in nature for RNA to be created, except in a living cell.

You can stop right there. Allow me to destroy this tired, dusty creationist talking point.

Symbiosis occurs in nature. Some bacteria will not survive without the symbiotic host, and vice versa. These two organism evolved to be symbiotic from two organisms that were not symbiotic. Noting their current symbiosis is not reason to assume the two organisms could not have evolved independently.

Furthermore, many viruses are RNA based. They replicate and create RNA constantly, with no help from DNA. They use enzymes and lipids as docking points. So the statement you plagiarized from a creationist nutball site, without actually understanding it, is false anyway.

 

[Andylusion]

Well we agree on one thing.... you have theories. Lots of theories. Tons of unprovable, unsupportable, never ending, and many not even scientifically accurate theories.

But you do have theories. So I will grant you that.

it has a lot more facts than the creationists' ''theory'' , that's for sure

And that is a statement which ironically, is entirely opinion.

evolution deals with DNA/etc--those are facts
please--please give me the facts of creation of man

Sure.

So DNA can only be created, as far as we know scientifically, from RNA.
However, there is no known method in nature for RNA to be created, except in a living cell. RNA is too fragile to exist for more than a few microseconds, when exposed to nature. Meaning, it requires the most controlled and pure environment that man can produce, to make RNA and keep it from being destroyed.

In nature of course, this is impossible, except.... in a living cell, which requires DNA to function.

So how did this happen scientifically in nature? Since the only way to produce any DNA is with RNA, and the only thing that can produce RNA, is a living cell which requires DNA..... using evolution, please explain how the first living cell was ever created?

See, this poses no problems for the creationist, since we believe in a G-d, through which all things are possible.

But without a G-d, how does the first cell ever create itself? RNA would barely exist for a few microseconds, even if there was some natural way for it to be created at all. And without RNA, DNA is impossible.

So by all means... since you are Mr Science, and you believe in empirical, demonstrable, and repeatable experiments.... please feel free to demonstrate the creation of RNA, without DNA, or DNA without RNA.

If you can do that, your Nobel prize is guaranteed.

so I ask YOU, also, -do you believe a fully formed human just appeared? you HAVE to believe it ---that's your ''theory'''
....hahahhahah--'''it poses no problems for creationists'''--yes--that's exactly what I meant in the OP--god just did it-----hahahahhahahahahah..that's your ''theory'' of how man was created....

Sure. I believe G-d created human beings, yes.

That doesn't change anything of what I posted, or your complete and total failure to refute it, address it, or even make a logical reply to it.

 

[Andylusion]

So DNA can only be created, as far as we know scientifically, from RNA.
However, there is no known method in nature for RNA to be created, except in a living cell.

You can stop right there. Allow me to destroy this tired, dusty creationist talking point.

Symbiosis occurs in nature. Some bacteria will not survive without the symbiotic host, and vice versa. These two organism evolved to be symbiotic from two organisms that were not symbiotic. Noting their current symbiosis is not reason to assume the two organisms could not have evolved independently.

Furthermore, many viruses are RNA based. They replicate and create RNA constantly, with no help from DNA. They use enzymes and lipids as docking points. So the statement you plagiarized from a creationist nutball site, without actually understanding it, is false anyway.

As I said before, RNA does not replicate outside of a living cell. Are you suggesting that viruses create RNA outside of a living cell? Please provide evidence of this. I'll be glad to consider whatever information you post.

My understanding is that while virions exist outside a living, and they can contain RNA and DNA, the virus is only able to replicate inside a living cell.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

As I said before, RNA does not replicate outside of a living cell.

Which, again, does not mean it never could. No actual scientist assumes this. In fact, the RNA world hypothesis is the leading hypothesis for ancestors to DNA life. This is evidenced by its continued presence in our cells.

 

[progressive hunter]

I never said I did and is why I said "they" say its based on faith,,,

but the evos do claim one animal changing magically into another as a scientific fact with no proof,,,

so you don't or do believe a fully formed human just appeared/or ''came to be''/etc??

theres no proof one way or the other,,,just like theres no proof we came from primates or a sponge in the ocean,,,

....so you don't want to answer the question!!!!!!! = I know why you don't want to answer = you don't believe in creation

I did answer it,,,

if you did, you did it in an ambiguous way
--now--last time--tell me, do you believe in creation of man or evolution of man?
yes or no--answer it plainly---yes or no --now--or else you are being disingenuous/etc
OR give me your concise theory on how man was created

since both have no proof I dont believe either is true,,,
as for how man was created,,, the jury is still out and waiting for proof,,,

 

[Hollie]

''god did it''
''it's in the bible ''

that's all folks--that's all they have...
I constantly ask for details and that's what I get
no theory, nothing

Well we agree on one thing.... you have theories. Lots of theories. Tons of unprovable, unsupportable, never ending, and many not even scientifically accurate theories.

But you do have theories. So I will grant you that.

it has a lot more facts than the creationists' ''theory'' , that's for sure

And that is a statement which ironically, is entirely opinion.

evolution deals with DNA/etc--those are facts
please--please give me the facts of creation of man

Sure.

So DNA can only be created, as far as we know scientifically, from RNA.
However, there is no known method in nature for RNA to be created, except in a living cell. RNA is too fragile to exist for more than a few microseconds, when exposed to nature. Meaning, it requires the most controlled and pure environment that man can produce, to make RNA and keep it from being destroyed.

In nature of course, this is impossible, except.... in a living cell, which requires DNA to function.

So how did this happen scientifically in nature? Since the only way to produce any DNA is with RNA, and the only thing that can produce RNA, is a living cell which requires DNA..... using evolution, please explain how the first living cell was ever created?

See, this poses no problems for the creationist, since we believe in a G-d, through which all things are possible.

But without a G-d, how does the first cell ever create itself? RNA would barely exist for a few microseconds, even if there was some natural way for it to be created at all. And without RNA, DNA is impossible.

So by all means... since you are Mr Science, and you believe in empirical, demonstrable, and repeatable experiments.... please feel free to demonstrate the creation of RNA, without DNA, or DNA without RNA.

If you can do that, your Nobel prize is guaranteed.

You might want to pass the following on to your friends at the Harun Yahya madrassah

The Origin of Life


So, what empirical, demonstrable, and repeatable experiments can you provide to test for your various gods?

 

[Hollie]

so you don't or do believe a fully formed human just appeared/or ''came to be''/etc??

theres no proof one way or the other,,,just like theres no proof we came from primates or a sponge in the ocean,,,

....so you don't want to answer the question!!!!!!! = I know why you don't want to answer = you don't believe in creation

I did answer it,,,

if you did, you did it in an ambiguous way
--now--last time--tell me, do you believe in creation of man or evolution of man?
yes or no--answer it plainly---yes or no --now--or else you are being disingenuous/etc
OR give me your concise theory on how man was created

since both have no proof I dont believe either is true,,,
as for how man was created,,, the jury is still out and waiting for proof,,,

What jury,,,?,,,,

 

[RWS]

bond, post: 24270154, member: 55937"

So you're back from your self imposed hiatus?

Cool, ding needs help!

 

[james bond]

humans are VERY imperfect !! = god created something imperfect!!!????
humans are the MOST imperfect
so god is a shithead designer????!!!!!!!!?
hahahhahahahahahhahaha

Like I keep saying atheists are usually wrong. God created us perfect. Then Adam's sin made everyone imperfect and have to die. The sure death and taxes thing. Afterward, he found a way to give us back our perfection and it has happened.

However, you and the atheists are one of the groups who chose imperfection. Took the wide gate and not look back. It's not who laughs that counts. It's he who laughs last, laughs longest.

 

[RWS]

" I'm not wrong, you are... "

We can have this pit for pat all day long.

Thing is that religion will kill you for it to make it true...

 

[zaangalewa]

''god did it''
''it's in the bible ''

that's all folks--that's all they have...
I constantly ask for details and that's what I get
no theory, nothing ...

God created the possibility to make theories. So you are able to make a theory about the creation of the heavens and worlds. Tell me what had happened 15 billion years ago. What are we a able to say about this not existing time - except there was nothing? Absolutelly nothing - no idea what to say else about this not-time, not-space, ... . How was the universe be able to come from this nothing - not existing 15 billion years ago - and started "suddenly" to be in a first plank-time?

 

[zaangalewa]

No chain of evidence proving 'evolution' is a fact, so no need to keep lying about that to school kids, either, but of course irrational 'rationalists' insist on it.

Creation and evolution are totally different things. Evolution (a natural law without intentions) is creation - but creation is not evolution. Everything is created - but no everything evolves, school kid.

 

[zaangalewa]

Proofs are for mathematicians. Evolution is a natural process, creation is a supernatural process.

Creation is perhaps a metaphysical process - but it is not a metaphysical result. Take the big bang as an example. In this theory (a theory in physics is true as long as no one is able to prove it wrong) suddenly all energy of the universe was created - then this energy started to build structures - for example "froze out" not only suns and planets, but also the possibility for the structure of your current body.

There are mechanisms proposed for evolution that conform to natural laws, no mechanisms are known for creationism beyond 'breathed life' or the like.

To make this clear: All Christians believe in creation - but nearly not Christian worldwide believes in this, what the English speaking world is discussing under the expression "creationism" or under the very strange discussion "evolution vs creation" (only what's created is able to evolve, so evolution is part of creation).