Creationists

[ilia25]

Nothing created gets better on it's own it is up to the designer to make things better. Your view defies logic.

What defies logic is your alleging that you never heard of the natural selection. Do you really think someone will believe it?

 

[daws101]

I'm waiting for you to back your claim.

Clearly the Earth is not flat (resting on foundations) with a solid dome (with windows to let out the waters of the firmament) over it.

Clearly you once again don't know what you are talking about.

It actually is a myth from a few Christians that your side used as evidence to put all Christians in one group on this issue.

Contra Mundum: The Flat-Earth Myth | MandM

The Myth of the Flat Earth

Myth of the Flat Earth

Who invented the idea of a flat Earth?

Still waiting.

again that's bullshit ALL CULTURES BELIEVED THE EARTH WAS FLAT AT ONE TIME OR ANOTHER .
FOR CHRISTIANITY IT ONLY BECAME ROUND AFTER COLUMBUS AND THE POPE SAID IT WAS.
IT'S laughable that people who claim to be christians, don't know shit about what they purport is the truth!

 

[UltimateReality]

Nothing created gets better on it's own it is up to the designer to make things better. Your view defies logic.

What defies logic is your alleging that you never heard of the natural selection. Do you really think someone will believe it?

Do you understand the difference between vertical and horizontal? Your claims for NS defy logic.

 

[LOki]

So you are disputing the claim that somewhere between the early hominids, claimed to be ancestors of homo sapien by your Darwinist spin doctors, and homo sapien himself, there did not exist a species that was a single gradual step between the two distinct hominids at specific points in earth's history that had an a) smaller brain? b) more body hair? and c) a larger brow bone?

Like how you conveniently dodged this question. You are like Loki... a bunch of words and no substance.

Seriously dude? Then step up.

Youwerecreated asked all of his dumb questions, and I answered them ... repeatedly. His only rebuttal is a denial of reality. He just can't accept that he's been thoroughly punked.

This is your chance. Ask away. Let me have them ALL!

But before you start, let me give you a heads up on what will simply not work:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQQrTZ1x2EM"]The regular Shit You Asshats Post Will Not Work[/ame]
Remember: What will not work is you submitting your-made-up-nonsense, and then proving that your-made-up-nonsense is made-up-nonsense, and then saying that doing so somehow refutes anything I assert. My answer to your-made-up-nonsense is that no one but you and your retarded tribe believes that I or anyone else asserts your-made-up-nonsense. OK ?

Rock out or STFU!

I have no illusions that this intellectually dishonest retard is any different than any other. He has no "stumpers" that are not based upon a fundamental misrepresentation or misunderstanding of evolutionary theory or scientific method, or BOTH. He'll refuse on some dumbass grounds, and then consider himself absolved of having to actually support his assertions with verifiable evidence and/or valid logic.​

 

[daws101]

Nothing created gets better on it's own it is up to the designer to make things better. Your view defies logic.

What defies logic is your alleging that you never heard of the natural selection. Do you really think someone will believe it?

in his cult they all do!

 

[Youwerecreated]

No -- first much simpler RNA molecules appeared. Then the combine into DNA.

Prove it.

Can't you google?
Life’s First Spark Re-Created in the Laboratory | Wired Science | Wired.com

You may need google but I don't.

Ok let me point out once again the problem with your so called evidence. It was done in a lab.it didn't prove it could form life. it was done by intelligent human beings. They the intelligent beings do not know what the earth was like when they say this supposedly happened. Really life was formed in warm water where ? well you have a major problem because RNA and DNA are soluble in water oops.

 

[Youwerecreated]

They do not kill off the unchanged species, at least not directly. But the offspring of the unchanged species has a VERY VERY slightly lower chance of surviving. Or they produce slightly less offspring. Over time (thousand generations) these factors lead to a complete replacement of the original species with the more advanced ones.

You still don't get it. Transitional organisms should have been better adapted to the enviornment if they were to pass on their traits ,get it ?

So?

Why are we having this discussion when you don't see the importance of my question ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

Yes, they have reproduced this in the lab not long ago.

Do you realize what they needed was an enviornment absent of oxygen and had electricity,and it was intelligence that actually performed the experiment ?

All they did was re-creating the environment that was present then.

How would they know that ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

There is no way DNA molecules could have formed with oxygen present

That is what baffles me. Like before shouting "A-ha!", have you even tried to think it out? Why do you believe that of all things it was the presence of oxygen that should have prevented DNA from assembling itself?

Because without oxygen there would be no life,cells need oxygen.

 

[ilia25]

Nothing created gets better on it's own it is up to the designer to make things better. Your view defies logic.

What defies logic is your alleging that you never heard of the natural selection. Do you really think someone will believe it?

Do you understand the difference between vertical and horizontal? Your claims for NS defy logic.

That's how it always ends -- you have nothing to say, so you reply with random words.

 

[Youwerecreated]

There is no way DNA molecules could have formed with oxygen present

That is what baffles me. Like before shouting "A-ha!", have you even tried to think it out? Why do you believe that of all things it was the presence of oxygen that should have prevented DNA from assembling itself?

Especially since every study done indicates that Earth did not form oxygen until the appearance of cyanobacteria.

Oxygen was needed for life that is why we needed a designer.

 

[ilia25]

There is no way DNA molecules could have formed with oxygen present

That is what baffles me. Like before shouting "A-ha!", have you even tried to think it out? Why do you believe that of all things it was the presence of oxygen that should have prevented DNA from assembling itself?

Because without oxygen there would be no life,cells need oxygen.

No -- plants do not need oxygen.

 

[ilia25]

That is what baffles me. Like before shouting "A-ha!", have you even tried to think it out? Why do you believe that of all things it was the presence of oxygen that should have prevented DNA from assembling itself?

Especially since every study done indicates that Earth did not form oxygen until the appearance of cyanobacteria.

Oxygen was needed for life that is why we needed a designer.

Oxygen is not needed for life, it is a byproduct of photosynthetic plants and bacteria. Only after they filled the Earth atmosphere with oxygen some other living things had evolved to make use of it.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Nothing created gets better on it's own it is up to the designer to make things better. Your view defies logic.

What defies logic is your alleging that you never heard of the natural selection. Do you really think someone will believe it?

When did I say that

 

[daws101]

There is no way DNA molecules could have formed with oxygen present

That is what baffles me. Like before shouting "A-ha!", have you even tried to think it out? Why do you believe that of all things it was the presence of oxygen that should have prevented DNA from assembling itself?

Because without oxygen there would be no life,cells need oxygen.

(cue buzzer) wrong the first life on earth was anaerobic : living, active, occurring, or existing in the absence of free oxygen <anaerobic respiration> <anaerobic bacteria> b : of, relating to, or being activity in which the body incurs an oxygen debt <anaerobic exercise>

Eubacteria and Archaebacteria: the oldest forms of life
Written by Dr. T. M. Wassenaar
Tuesday, 06 January 2009


Bacteria have an extremely important place in the evolution of life. Our knowledge of bacteria helps us understand, observe, and investigate evolution. This exhibits explains what we know about the origin of life on Earth and the role bacteria played and still play in this. As described in this Lecture on the Origin of Life all life originated from a common ancestor (Source: UTDallas). Our other exhibit explains how we can observe mutations in bacteria directly.
Archaeabacteria are a diverse group of bacteria (prokaryotes that do not have a nucleus) and are considered a major group unto themselves. This group is called the Archaea (from Greek, 'old') for short and to distinguish them from the other prokaryotes, all other bacteria are then called Eubacteria.

What are Archaea? They look like bacteria and are genetically similar to bacteria, but in some aspect they are more similar to eukaryotes than to bacteria. For instance, their cell-wall does not contain peptidoglycan (a component of each bacterial cell). There are other characteristics that Archaea share with eukaryotes, however they do not have a nucleus (which all Eukaryotes have). They form a group by themselves.
All prokaryotes thus belong to either the Eubacteria or the Archaebacteria; what is the difference? Add the domain of the eukaryotic organisms (protists, fungi, plants, and animals) and you can classify all living organisms on Earth. Archaebacteria emerged at least 3.5 billion years ago and are amongst the oldest life forms.There are several theories about the exact phylogenetic relationship (what was derived from what) between archaea, eukaryotes, and eubacteria, as can be seen in two versions of the Tree-of-Life. New insights dictate that eubacteria and archaebacteria diverged from one another near the time of the origin of life, and that eukaryotes were derived from archaea that had eubacteria living inside them.
Let's ignore the details. Important is that bacteria (Eu and Archae) have been on earth much longer than eukaryotes; they are probably the oldest forms of life and have populated Earth for most of the time our planet exists. Going back in evolutionary history, the Archaea evolved some 3500 million years ago. Fossiles are mostly not quite as old as that, but occasionally we do find bacterial fossiles. Compare that to the age of the first eukaryotes, 1800 million years ago, or the first animals, 600 million years. Earth is truly the planet of bacteria in this respect!

Eubacteria and Archaebacteria: the oldest forms of life | Evolution

Pink Lake
Why Call a Green Lake “Pink”?
In spite of its name, this lake is not pink. It inherited its name from a family who settled in the region in 1826.

What Exactly Is a Meromictic Lake?
In most lakes, the water mixes completely each year during the spring and fall, under the influence of water density, water and air temperature, and the wind; nutrients and oxygen are distributed evenly.

However, because of it's sheltered position (surrounded by steep cliffs that protect it from the wind) and its shape (small surface area, average depth and bowl-like shape), the lake’s waters do not mix. This is why it is called “meromictic.” Of particular note is the fact that the deepest seven metres of the lake remain without oxygen.

Life in the Lake
In the depths of the lake, an anaerobic prehistoric organism has been able to survive. It is a pink photosynthetic bacterium that uses sulphur instead of oxygen when it transforms sunlight into energy. To maximize the amount of light it captures, without being in contact with oxygen, the colony forms a dense layer that floats seven metres from the bottom.

After the glaciers melted, the region was covered by an arm of the Atlantic Ocean: the Champlain Sea. When it retreated it left the three-spined stickleback. This little saltwater fish (three to five centimetres long) adapted slowly to the lake’s gradual desalination. In fact, it adapted so well that today it lives in the fresh water of the lake. Desalination usually takes about thirty years. However, Pink Lake is fed only by runoff waters (unique in its watershed area), and so its desalination took place over three thousand years!
Source: Discover Ottawa & Gatineau | Canada's Capital Region...

 

[Youwerecreated]

That is what baffles me. Like before shouting "A-ha!", have you even tried to think it out? Why do you believe that of all things it was the presence of oxygen that should have prevented DNA from assembling itself?

Because without oxygen there would be no life,cells need oxygen.

No -- plants do not need oxygen.

That is correct your point ?

 

[ilia25]

You still don't get it. Transitional organisms should have been better adapted to the enviornment if they were to pass on their traits ,get it ?

So?

Why are we having this discussion when you don't see the importance of my question ?

Your question did not make sense to me, so I asked you to elaborate on that.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Clearly the Earth is not flat (resting on foundations) with a solid dome (with windows to let out the waters of the firmament) over it.

Clearly you once again don't know what you are talking about.

It actually is a myth from a few Christians that your side used as evidence to put all Christians in one group on this issue.

Contra Mundum: The Flat-Earth Myth | MandM

The Myth of the Flat Earth

Myth of the Flat Earth

Who invented the idea of a flat Earth?

Still waiting.

again that's bullshit ALL CULTURES BELIEVED THE EARTH WAS FLAT AT ONE TIME OR ANOTHER .
FOR CHRISTIANITY IT ONLY BECAME ROUND AFTER COLUMBUS AND THE POPE SAID IT WAS.
IT'S laughable that people who claim to be christians, don't know shit about what they purport is the truth!

I guess you can't read.

 

[daws101]

Nothing created gets better on it's own it is up to the designer to make things better. Your view defies logic.

What defies logic is your alleging that you never heard of the natural selection. Do you really think someone will believe it?

When did I say that

you said it and implied it, your belief system denies it and you spew it..what more do you need.

 

[daws101]

Clearly you once again don't know what you are talking about.

It actually is a myth from a few Christians that your side used as evidence to put all Christians in one group on this issue.

Contra Mundum: The Flat-Earth Myth | MandM

The Myth of the Flat Earth

Myth of the Flat Earth

Who invented the idea of a flat Earth?

Still waiting.

again that's bullshit ALL CULTURES BELIEVED THE EARTH WAS FLAT AT ONE TIME OR ANOTHER .
FOR CHRISTIANITY IT ONLY BECAME ROUND AFTER COLUMBUS AND THE POPE SAID IT WAS.
IT'S laughable that people who claim to be christians, don't know shit about what they purport is the truth!

I guess you can't read.

funny, coming from you.