Creationists

[LOki]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWGJ3ydBQiE"]The Origin of the Universe[/ame]

This "theory" of the "Origin of the Universe" has all the verifiable evidence and valid logic (and then some) that the Christian Bible Creationist "theory" has for support. Clearly everything Creationists believe is false, they are baffled by this obvious truth, they just can't explain this, ... it's INEXPLICABLE!

 

[Youwerecreated]

Lol the only thing i copied was the URL for that link you fool. Cool little dance around my rebuttal, though.

Typical. State something that isnt true to avoid factual debate.

Oh that wasn't you copying and pasting graphs and comments from the sites. Do i need check all your postings and see which sites they come from because many times you don't give credit either.

You do Plagiarize I have noticed.

With graphs? Really?

Wow what a petty argument.

Ive seen you plagiarize more than once. Where your MLA format fool?

Pathetic.

The truth is i have seen you do it but it's no big deal to me you are just regurgitating what you have been taught.

Everything I know has been taught to me and some things I have learned on my own in the job I held for 11 years.

I have been totally honest with you guys and when you know you are standing on a weak argument you get all nasty.

When I present you with evidence from the bible you get even nastier but I guess you don't have a clue why.

 

[Youwerecreated]

How many times do i have to explain the same things to you over and over. If you would have read my point by point refutation of your idiocy you would have read the part about living fossils.

Evolution says some fish evolved into terapods. It does not say all fish evolve into terapods, that would be strange.

Besides, living fossils usually live in isolated environments. If a fish lives in an underwater cavern, it wont evolve into an air breathing terapod in a billion years. The environment necessary is just not there for it to happen.

Living fossils are wonderful evidence of evolution, because we find them in environments evolution predicts we should!

Giving an opinion is not refutation do you understand this ?

What? Thats just a general discussion on evolution. Its not an opinion because i didnt take the time to explain the entire theory to you so you could understand it.

What of these is wrong?

Evolution would claim that only a small portion of fish became terapods.

A school of fish in a deep underwater cavern cannot turn into a marsupial, even in a billion years, because the environment would prevent it.

If you think either of those statements is wrong, you should stop debating evolution.

Some claims you make are factual but it is not evidence of your theory and a conclusion is made by opinion get it ? How many opinions have been proven wrong in the past that the whole science community accepted at one time ?

If what I am saying is not true they would not have to revise their text books and did you know there are known things in the text books that have been refuted and they still teach them.

When I have time some day I will point them out to you.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Well, since claiming they are an honest and ethical person when I know that not to be true, I do not believe the rest either.

But you can believe what my signature say's and really none of you are tackling what has been presented.

Just admit it, you don't want to believe.

No, i dont want to believe.

Why would i believe in just another massive fairy tale that as consumed mankind for a few centuries.

There is no point in believing anything. Facts my friend, facts.

The fact is that DNA controls the organism, the organism does not control DNA. A strand of prokaryotic genome, or maybe many strands, did indeed become all of life on earth.

Evolution would claim every living organism is the continuation of the same 3.8 billion year self replication chemical reaction, in a very basic sense.

From a religious perspective, thats a much more moral story than christianity.

What do you think you believe now if it never happened ?

What proof do you have that what I believe is a fairytale ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

We wont be able to have a coherent discussion until you watch this video and understand things from about 18+ minutes. Essential. Learn about proteins

http://www.khanacademy.org/video/dna?playlist=Biology

feel free to watch the next one, on variation of species.

I'll watch it when I have time what makes you think I know nothing about proteins ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

then that would mean all creation dogma is false... as you've never tested or observed or studied reading a badly written compendium of fairy tales and drawing false conclusions from them is not science

The bible says 10 times in genesis kinds will bring forth after their kind that has been put to the test,studied,and observed.

The bible says we were created from the dust of the groud that has been put to the test,studied,and observed.

The bible says there are springs in the oceans,that has been put to the test,studied,and observed.

Mind you this was written over 3,500 years ago by people who had no way of knowing some of these things.

You were saying ?

who did the tests and observations?
what was their methodology, where are their peer reviewed papers?
and most important of all where is the empirical evidence?
if and until that is presented : all creation dogma is false... as you've never tested or observed or studied, reading a badly written compendium of fairy tales and drawing false conclusions from them is not science

ignorance is bliss

 

[cbirch2]

Oh that wasn't you copying and pasting graphs and comments from the sites. Do i need check all your postings and see which sites they come from because many times you don't give credit either.

You do Plagiarize I have noticed.

With graphs? Really?

Wow what a petty argument.

Ive seen you plagiarize more than once. Where your MLA format fool?

Pathetic.

The truth is i have seen you do it but it's no big deal to me you are just regurgitating what you have been taught.

Everything I know has been taught to me and some things I have learned on my own in the job I held for 11 years.

I have been totally honest with you guys and when you know you are standing on a weak argument you get all nasty.

When I present you with evidence from the bible you get even nastier but I guess you don't have a clue why.

The difference is that you post massive walls of text from creationist websites to explain things you cant with your own words. I post images to prove and supplement what ive already said.

If you want me to source every single graph i post id be glad to do that. Although it would probably be easier for you to right-click and hit view image to get the url.

Wow.

 

[cbirch2]

Giving an opinion is not refutation do you understand this ?

What? Thats just a general discussion on evolution. Its not an opinion because i didnt take the time to explain the entire theory to you so you could understand it.

What of these is wrong?

Evolution would claim that only a small portion of fish became terapods.

A school of fish in a deep underwater cavern cannot turn into a marsupial, even in a billion years, because the environment would prevent it.

If you think either of those statements is wrong, you should stop debating evolution.

Some claims you make are factual but it is not evidence of your theory and a conclusion is made by opinion get it ? How many opinions have been proven wrong in the past that the whole science community accepted at one time ?

If what I am saying is not true they would not have to revise their text books and did you know there are known things in the text books that have been refuted and they still teach them.

When I have time some day I will point them out to you.

Dude im not making giant leaps here god damnit.

According to natural selection, only some fish would evolve into terapods.

Some environments wont see the evolution of some species. For example, a bird will not evolve under the ocean.

Are either of those wrong in any sense? In an evolutionary sense? In a creationist sense? In a common-sense sense?

 

[cbirch2]

But you can believe what my signature say's and really none of you are tackling what has been presented.

Just admit it, you don't want to believe.

No, i dont want to believe.

Why would i believe in just another massive fairy tale that as consumed mankind for a few centuries.

There is no point in believing anything. Facts my friend, facts.

The fact is that DNA controls the organism, the organism does not control DNA. A strand of prokaryotic genome, or maybe many strands, did indeed become all of life on earth.

Evolution would claim every living organism is the continuation of the same 3.8 billion year self replication chemical reaction, in a very basic sense.

From a religious perspective, thats a much more moral story than christianity.

What do you think you believe now if it never happened ?

What proof do you have that what I believe is a fairytale ?

The same proof i have that santa clause is a fairy tale.

What do you think you believe now if it never happened?

Huh? Well i dont exactly buy into christianity. When you look back over the years, especially the intellectuals of the last 200 years, there is an almost uniform rejection of at least mainstream christianity. Nearly none of the greatest physicists of the 20th century believed in the traditional christian god.

I believe that the 12 fermions in the standard model and 4 the gauge bosons that mediate forces between them ultimately necessitate the creation of life on earth like planets. The traditional concept of life is a lie; all we are is a very complex arrangement of matter.

The properties of these 16 particles of the standard model (17 with higgs) might be the work of god, directly or indirectly.

When you die there is nothing, im sorry to say. What would lead you believe otherwise? Before you were born, you werent there. Your mind is an intense electrical cascade between millions of neurons that began when you were born and grew as your brain grew. When you die that will stop.

Its the only logical conclusion to arrive at.

 

[cbirch2]

We wont be able to have a coherent discussion until you watch this video and understand things from about 18+ minutes. Essential. Learn about proteins

http://www.khanacademy.org/video/dna?playlist=Biology

feel free to watch the next one, on variation of species.

I'll watch it when I have time what makes you think I know nothing about proteins ?

The words you type and the things you say.

 

[cbirch2]

And im sick of this "disprove god" bullshit.

Its not on me to prove that your belief is a fairy tale. If your going to believe something thats fine but dont state it as fact because it doesnt even exist in the same category.

Did you go through every mythology that has historically and does presently consume mankind and disprove it, before you came to embrace christianity? Or were you just born in a christian nation and did the norm?

Moron.

 

[Youwerecreated]

No, i dont want to believe.

Why would i believe in just another massive fairy tale that as consumed mankind for a few centuries.

There is no point in believing anything. Facts my friend, facts.

The fact is that DNA controls the organism, the organism does not control DNA. A strand of prokaryotic genome, or maybe many strands, did indeed become all of life on earth.

Evolution would claim every living organism is the continuation of the same 3.8 billion year self replication chemical reaction, in a very basic sense.

From a religious perspective, thats a much more moral story than christianity.

What do you think you believe now if it never happened ?

What proof do you have that what I believe is a fairytale ?

The same proof i have that santa clause is a fairy tale.

What do you think you believe now if it never happened?

Huh? Well i dont exactly buy into christianity. When you look back over the years, especially the intellectuals of the last 200 years, there is an almost uniform rejection of at least mainstream christianity. Nearly none of the greatest physicists of the 20th century believed in the traditional christian god.

I believe that the 12 fermions in the standard model and 4 the gauge bosons that mediate forces between them ultimately necessitate the creation of life on earth like planets. The traditional concept of life is a lie; all we are is a very complex arrangement of matter.

The properties of these 16 particles of the standard model (17 with higgs) might be the work of god, directly or indirectly.

When you die there is nothing, im sorry to say. What would lead you believe otherwise? Before you were born, you werent there. Your mind is an intense electrical cascade between millions of neurons that began when you were born and grew as your brain grew. When you die that will stop.

Its the only logical conclusion to arrive at.

Isa 44:24 So says Jehovah, your Redeemer, and He who formed you from the womb, I am Jehovah who makes all things; who stretches out the heavens alone; who spreads out the earth; who was with Me?

Death is the end unitl the resurrection.

Thank you for acknowledging this,Which was predicted for the last days.

2Th 2:3 Give no belief to false words: because there will first be a falling away from the faith, and the revelation of the man of sin, the son of destruction

2Th 2:8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the breath of His mouth and shall destroy with the brightness of His coming,

 

[Youwerecreated]

We wont be able to have a coherent discussion until you watch this video and understand things from about 18+ minutes. Essential. Learn about proteins

http://www.khanacademy.org/video/dna?playlist=Biology

feel free to watch the next one, on variation of species.

I'll watch it when I have time what makes you think I know nothing about proteins ?

The words you type and the things you say.

Think what you like.

 

[Youwerecreated]

And im sick of this "disprove god" bullshit.

Its not on me to prove that your belief is a fairy tale. If your going to believe something thats fine but dont state it as fact because it doesnt even exist in the same category.

Did you go through every mythology that has historically and does presently consume mankind and disprove it, before you came to embrace christianity? Or were you just born in a christian nation and did the norm?

Moron.

If you make a claim then prove it ,that is how it works.

 

[Youwerecreated]

And im sick of this "disprove god" bullshit.

Its not on me to prove that your belief is a fairy tale. If your going to believe something thats fine but dont state it as fact because it doesnt even exist in the same category.

Did you go through every mythology that has historically and does presently consume mankind and disprove it, before you came to embrace christianity? Or were you just born in a christian nation and did the norm?

Moron.

I didn't need to after a thourough study of the bible.

 

[Youwerecreated]

There are limits to adaptations and that means there are limits to change. If we go beyond the limits of adaptation the organism suffers and or dies.

Really?

[T]here is the one question that you, or any Creationist, simply cannot answer. Rational people like me are not even asking for "proof" from intellectually incompetent and dishonest asshats like you, as [you] ask of us. It is the foundation of your "theory" yet you are just baffled by the request for an explanation for it--you have NO EXPLANATION! IT'S INEXPLICABLE!

What verifiable evidence and/or valid logic do you have for asserting the objective reality of this "Creator" or "Designer" or "God" of yours?​

The verifiable evidence of your paucity of intellectual integrity very strongly suggests that you are simply incapable of doing so; I'll take it as certain that you just won't.

And when you fail again to produce, I will again claim to have delivered yet another headshot to your superstitious creation myth.

An insurmountable

delivered to Youwerecreated and his superstitious "theory." POW!

It is also evidence of Youwerecreated's "solid understanding" of Evolutionary Theory and Creation "Science."

An unambiguous

delivered to Youwerecreated. POW!



Another example of CHRISTIAN Creationist intellectual dishonesty and a

delivered to Youwerecreated.

Another example of Youwerecreated's gross misunderstanding of the nature and role of selection in altering a population's genome, and the relationship that alteration has on morphology and/or phenoype; a

delivered to Youwerecreated.



A

delivered to Youwerecreated; and his refusal to accept ring species as definitive evidence of macro-evolution is yet another example of CHRISTIAN Creationist intellectual dishonesty. A double

, if you will.



Another example of Youwerecreated's egregious lack of understanding and intellectual dishonesty; a

delivered to Youwerecreated. POW!

Lions and tigers are not different sub-species, or breed, of a species ... they are DIFFERENT species, and the lack of reproductive potency between ligers due to their genetics literally PROVES it.

Is this from mutations or evolution or simply cross breeding ?

CHRIST! AGAIN? Obviously what we're looking at is the result of a hybrid cross between different species; a lion and a tiger in this case.

No problem at all for evolution, completely expected and thoroughly consistent with the theory; but another insurmountable problem for Creationism as ligers fail to "bring forth in ... ahem ... "kind""--that is to say that though male lions and female tigers ARE the same ... ahem ... "kind" of cat, apparently male ligers and female ligers are strangely NOT the same ... ahem ... "kind" of cat.

Care to explain that, Youwerecreated? You've had plenty of opportunity.

Apparently not.

Another example of Youwerecreated's gross misunderstanding of genetics and taxonomy, a prime example of CHRISTIAN Creationist intellectual dishonesty, and a definitive

to Youwerecreated and his superstitious "theory." POW!

So you think Sir Isaac Newton one of the two best scientist who ever lived was a superstitious retard for decoding the bible ?

Look you are showing ignorance by suggesting that ring species are evidence of macro-evolution

Don't waste my time with your ignorance.

Do you even know who and what Sir Isaac Newton is famous for ?

 

[LOki]

So you think Sir Isaac Newton one of the two best scientist who ever lived was a superstitious retard for decoding the bible ?

No. He was a superstitious retard for asserting as certain fact that "God governs all things and knows all that is or can be done."

There is this one question that you, Sir Isaac Newton, or any Creationist, simply cannot answer. Rational people like me are not even asking for "proof" from intellectually incompetent and dishonest asshats like you (as you ask of us). The question is to the essential point of the foundation of your "theory," yet you are just baffled by the request for an explanation for it--you have NO EXPLANATION! IT'S INEXPLICABLE!

What verifiable evidence and/or valid logic do you have for asserting the objective reality of this "Creator" or "Designer" or "God" of yours?​

The verifiable evidence of your paucity of intellectual integrity very strongly suggests that you are simply incapable of doing so; I'll take it as certain that you just won't.

And when you fail again to produce, I will again claim to have delivered yet another headshot to your superstitious creation myth.

EDIT: Or cbirch2 will deliver the headshot when you make the demand that, "If you make a claim then prove it ,that is how it works." :LOL:​

Look you are showing ignorance by suggesting that ring species are evidence of macro-evolution

And it is. Look
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pb6Z6NVmLt8"]RING-*******-SPECIES[/ame]

Your assertion that micro-evolution cannot result in speciation is unambiguously refuted by the verifiable evidence; and your refusal to accept ring species as definitive evidence of macro-evolution is yet another example of Christian Creationist intellectual dishonesty.

Don't waste my time with your ignorance.

Ignorance? Really? LOLsome!

Didn't your ignorant ass get punked right here?:

Why does your side make many different family trees if we are all related ? why not just one tree since you believe DNA similarity proves ancestry.

Proponents of the Theory of Evolution do not assert that there are or "... make many different family trees."

It is in fact creationists who (in stolidly retarded denial of the genetic evidence) make many family trees based on their dopey baraminology.

ANSWER: Most certainly YES!​

Didn't your ignorant ass also get punked right here?:

Still no one offering a list of beneficial mutations that did not lead to a loss of the origional genetic information.

Mutation DOES NOT necessarily, in EACH AND EVERY CASE, "lead to a loss of the original genetic information" from a species' gene pool.

When a mutation is not lethal and inheritable, that mutation NECESSARILY INCREASES GENETIC DIVERSITY in the species' gene pool; since you equate increased genetic diversity with increased genetic information, for you this NECESSARILY means that non-lethal MUTATION NECESSARILY INCREASES GENETIC INFORMATION in the species' gene pool.

ANSWER: Most certainly YES!​

Didn't your ignorant ass get punked right here?:

Is [the phenotype observed in ligers] from mutations or evolution or simply cross breeding ?

CHRIST! AGAIN? Obviously what we're looking at is the result of a hybrid cross between different species; a lion and a tiger in this case.

No problem at all for evolution, completely expected and thoroughly consistent with the theory; but another insurmountable problem for Creationism as ligers fail to "bring forth in ... ahem ... "kind""--that is to say that though male lions and female tigers ARE the same ... ahem ... "kind" of cat, apparently male ligers and female ligers are strangely NOT the same ... ahem ... "kind" of cat.

ANSWER: Most certainly YES!​

Do you even know who and what Sir Isaac Newton is famous for ?

I am aware of Newton, and his theory of gravity, and his heresies. What of it? Despite his superstitions, Sir Isaac Newton's brilliance does not make you any less stupid or less intellectually dishonest.

 

[cbirch2]

What do you think you believe now if it never happened ?

What proof do you have that what I believe is a fairytale ?

The same proof i have that santa clause is a fairy tale.

What do you think you believe now if it never happened?

Huh? Well i dont exactly buy into christianity. When you look back over the years, especially the intellectuals of the last 200 years, there is an almost uniform rejection of at least mainstream christianity. Nearly none of the greatest physicists of the 20th century believed in the traditional christian god.

I believe that the 12 fermions in the standard model and 4 the gauge bosons that mediate forces between them ultimately necessitate the creation of life on earth like planets. The traditional concept of life is a lie; all we are is a very complex arrangement of matter.

The properties of these 16 particles of the standard model (17 with higgs) might be the work of god, directly or indirectly.

When you die there is nothing, im sorry to say. What would lead you believe otherwise? Before you were born, you werent there. Your mind is an intense electrical cascade between millions of neurons that began when you were born and grew as your brain grew. When you die that will stop.

Its the only logical conclusion to arrive at.

Isa 44:24 So says Jehovah, your Redeemer, and He who formed you from the womb, I am Jehovah who makes all things; who stretches out the heavens alone; who spreads out the earth; who was with Me?

Death is the end unitl the resurrection.

Thank you for acknowledging this,Which was predicted for the last days.

2Th 2:3 Give no belief to false words: because there will first be a falling away from the faith, and the revelation of the man of sin, the son of destruction

2Th 2:8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the breath of His mouth and shall destroy with the brightness of His coming,

K so tell me when you discover a particle that exists outside the standard model, mmk?

Bible verses are cool and all, but the fact is that we know what matter is made of. We can literally see it. How do you argue with the standard model??

 

[cbirch2]

And im sick of this "disprove god" bullshit.

Its not on me to prove that your belief is a fairy tale. If your going to believe something thats fine but dont state it as fact because it doesnt even exist in the same category.

Did you go through every mythology that has historically and does presently consume mankind and disprove it, before you came to embrace christianity? Or were you just born in a christian nation and did the norm?

Moron.

If you make a claim then prove it ,that is how it works.

Exactly so you should stop all references to your god immediately and until you can provide evidence of his existence.

 

[cbirch2]

And im sick of this "disprove god" bullshit.

Its not on me to prove that your belief is a fairy tale. If your going to believe something thats fine but dont state it as fact because it doesnt even exist in the same category.

Did you go through every mythology that has historically and does presently consume mankind and disprove it, before you came to embrace christianity? Or were you just born in a christian nation and did the norm?

Moron.

I didn't need to after a thorough study of the bible.

Yup thats pretty much my point exactly.

For about one thousand and six hundred years after christ people thought like you do. they all got their teachings from the bible. people thought diseases were caused by sin, the world was flat, and at the the center of the universe.

Only as a select few people began to think for themselves and threw aside idiotic christian dogma did humanity make any progress toward a modern society. religion is a cancer and ignorance is both the cause and the symptom. Each one is a self-feeding and self-fulfilling lie that has passed from gullible generation to gullible generation. its obvious everywhere in the world today.

I cant wait until your all gone. how about you go rapture yourself and all your friends? the world would be better