Creationists

[daws101]

I'll let you figure it out Daws. You decide. Am I a 13 year old or a 46 year old?

you're a 46 year male with the emotional development of a 13 year old.

At least I'm not a bitter, hating, angry old atheist.

no you're a bitter, hating ,angry fundie who drive a penis envy truck and shoot guns .
at 46 that's highly juvenile
might want to watch who you're calling old I'm just 6 short years older then you physically
but emotionally light years ahead of you !

 

[UltimateReality]

you're a 46 year male with the emotional development of a 13 year old.

At least I'm not a bitter, hating, angry old atheist.

no you're a bitter, hating ,angry fundie who drive a penis envy truck and shoot guns .
at 46 that's highly juvenile
might want to watch who you're calling old I'm just 6 short years older then you physically
but emotionally light years ahead of you !

Emotionally maybe. Intellectually? Well...

 

[daws101]

At least I'm not a bitter, hating, angry old atheist.

no you're a bitter, hating ,angry fundie who drive a penis envy truck and shoot guns .
at 46 that's highly juvenile
might want to watch who you're calling old I'm just 6 short years older then you physically
but emotionally light years ahead of you !

Emotionally maybe. Intellectually? Well...

intellectually I've lapped you twice and working on a third pass.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Among the most basic precepts of evolution is fitness for survival. I've spent considerable time detailing this subject elsewhere but that was among people who had a much more honest and knowledgeable approach. In no way are humans "far superior to any organism on the planet".

Yours was a misunderstanding and/or a purposeful falsification of the facts.

May I suggest DR.Lee Spetners book,you will learn more about genetics and mutations then you will in any college class.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Not-Chance-Shattering-Modern-Evolution/dp/1880582244]Amazon.com: Not by Chance!: Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution (9781880582244): Lee M. Spetner, P.h.d., Lee M. Spetner: Books[/ame]






Also checkout Dr. Lee Spetner
continuing an exchange with Dr. Edward E. Max


Dr. Lee Spetner's continued exchange with Dr. Edward E. Max

Now this is a pretty deep dialogue between the two but you can learn something.

bullshit! it's more creationist propaganda

DR. Lee Spetner is well respected by evolutionist.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Have you ever heard someone say that if there is a nuclear war, roaches will be the only things that survive? Now, that's obviously a bit silly, but the idea isn't entirely without merit. There are organisms that can survive environments humans cannot. It's not likely, but certainly possible, that we could kill ourselves off in a nuclear war, but that other creatures would survive. Wouldn't that make them, in that situation, better than humanity?

Better is a terrible word to use, especially as you two are. Being the top of the food chain doesn't make a creature better. It makes them the top of the food chain. Other links in the chain are just as necessary. Being more intelligent doesn't make us better. Perhaps it could, say if we were to populate another planet and then life on earth were wiped out. But just because we have technology doesn't make us better than a bacteria from an evolutionary standpoint. Bacteria don't seem to have any particular problems surviving and reproducing.

As I've said multiple times, better is too subjective a term. You could look at the stars and say, 'White dwarf stars are better than all the others'. It makes as much sense. By some standards that may be true, but only in the right context. If you are explaining what we know about the movement of stars, no particular one would be better. In the same way, it's hard to say that one species is better than all others when speaking of evolution. Too many variables, too subjective.

Raid kills roaches.

 

[Youwerecreated]

now you're trying to dodge your original statement .
so why the large lettering?
there are no pics of Boothe in act of shooting Lincoln but their is however the gun used, the wound in Lincolns head several blood soaked pieces of clothing (some of which are in Smithsonian) there's boothe's statement (death to tyrants) when he fled the theatre ..etc...there is no evidence eyewitness or other wise to corroborate this statement:God loves you and sent his Son to die for you."( post # 5364 this thread UR)

No but there are numerous eyewitness accounts of Jesus being crucified and then appearing to more than 500 people after his death.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/The-Case-Christ-Journalists-Investigation/dp/0310209307/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1342550342&sr=8-1&keywords=Lee+strobels+case+for+christ]Amazon.com: The Case for Christ: A Journalist's Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus (9780310209300): Lee Strobel: Books[/ame]

so what? lots of people were crucified.. it was a spectator sport at that time.
as to this: then appearing to more than 500 people after his death.

it's hearsay at best there are no non biblical sources to verify it.
since the bible is error ridden highly edited and bias, it can't be considered as evidence.

Oh boy

 

[Youwerecreated]

you're a 46 year male with the emotional development of a 13 year old.

At least I'm not a bitter, hating, angry old atheist.

no you're a bitter, hating ,angry fundie who drive a penis envy truck and shoot guns .
at 46 that's highly juvenile
might want to watch who you're calling old I'm just 6 short years older then you physically
but emotionally light years ahead of you !

You are under developed from what I can see.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Among the most basic precepts of evolution is fitness for survival. I've spent considerable time detailing this subject elsewhere but that was among people who had a much more honest and knowledgeable approach. In no way are humans "far superior to any organism on the planet".

Yours was a misunderstanding and/or a purposeful falsification of the facts.

May I suggest DR.Lee Spetners book,you will learn more about genetics and mutations then you will in any college class.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Not-Chance-Shattering-Modern-Evolution/dp/1880582244]Amazon.com: Not by Chance!: Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution (9781880582244): Lee M. Spetner, P.h.d., Lee M. Spetner: Books[/ame]






Also checkout Dr. Lee Spetner
continuing an exchange with Dr. Edward E. Max


Dr. Lee Spetner's continued exchange with Dr. Edward E. Max

Now this is a pretty deep dialogue between the two but you can learn something.

bullshit! it's more creationist propaganda

Look at what the evolutionist admits to,exactly what i have said in the past.


Max: I agree that there are no definitive examples where a macroevolutionary change (such as the development of cetaceans from terrestrial mammals) has been shown to result from a specific chain of mutations. And I agree with your further comment that “we have no way of observing a long series of mutations.” But you go on to say that “our inability to observe such series cannot be used as a justification for the assumption that the series Darwinian theory requires indeed exist.” An equally reasonable conclusion, in my view, would be that our inability to observe such series cannot be used as a justification for the assumption that such a series of mutations did NOT occur.

Spetner: Now Ed, that’s ridiculous! Those two statements are not symmetrical. I don’t have to assume the series did not occur to make a case for the inadequacy of NDT. You, who are basing your theory of evolution on the occurrence of such a series, are required to show that it exists, or at least that it is likely to exist. You are obliged to show an existence. I am not obliged to prove a non-existence.
[LMS: IN MAX’S POSTING HE MOVED THIS REMARK OF MINE TO A LATER POINT IN THE DIALOGUE. I ORIGINALLY HAD IT HERE, AND HERE IS WHERE IT BELONGS.]

Max: In the absence of conclusive data defining such a series, if we want to distinguish between various hypotheses to explain the origin of species we must rely on other data, such as from various laboratory model systems that show adaptations in short enough timeframes that we can observe them. Then we must extrapolate as best we can the information learned from these model systems to the questions of species origins.

Notice the admissions DR. Max makes Daws.

 

[Hollie]

May I suggest DR.Lee Spetners book,you will learn more about genetics and mutations then you will in any college class.

Amazon.com: Not by Chance!: Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution (9781880582244): Lee M. Spetner, P.h.d., Lee M. Spetner: Books






Also checkout Dr. Lee Spetner
continuing an exchange with Dr. Edward E. Max


Dr. Lee Spetner's continued exchange with Dr. Edward E. Max

Now this is a pretty deep dialogue between the two but you can learn something.

bullshit! it's more creationist propaganda

DR. Lee Spetner is well respected by evolutionist.

Actually, he's thought to be a quack.

 

[Youwerecreated]

bullshit! it's more creationist propaganda

DR. Lee Spetner is well respected by evolutionist.

Actually, he's thought to be a quack.

Only by morons that pretend to know science.

 

[Hollie]

DR. Lee Spetner is well respected by evolutionist.

Actually, he's thought to be a quack.

Only by morons that pretend to know science.

That would define the fundie creationist cabal.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I would like to point something out to you people. DR. Max participates on the talk origins website a favorite site for evolutionists. On that site they try to show 29 cases of macro evolution by DR. Theobald but yet DR. Max admits there are no observed cases for macro evolution someone is lying and I don't think it is DR.Max nor DR.Spetner. I would avoid that site if I were you.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Actually, he's thought to be a quack.

Only by morons that pretend to know science.

That would define the fundie creationist cabal.

No response for DR.Max admissions ? fundie.

 

[Youwerecreated]

DR. Max also made the admission that i said here before,that evolutionist extrapolate from micro adaptations as evidence for macro evolution,why ? because there is no evidence for macro evolution.

 

[UltimateReality]

Only by morons that pretend to know science.

That would define the fundie creationist cabal.

No response for DR.Max admissions ? fundie.

YWC, you would be making the false assumption that Holly actually reads anything on here or explores any links. She just responds with the same repetitive drivel, regardless of where it comes from, because she isn't bothering to check anything out. That's why she keeps replying the same way even when you are putting up links from scientists who are respected in the evolutionists community.

 

[Hollie]

I would like to point something out to you people. DR. Max participates on the talk origins website a favorite site for evolutionists. On that site they try to show 29 cases of macro evolution by DR. Theobald but yet DR. Max admits there are no observed cases for macro evolution someone is lying and I don't think it is DR.Max nor DR.Spetner. I would avoid that site if I were you.

I think you're still suffering from an inability to distinguish truth from lies.

FromTalkorigins:

This article directly addresses the scientific evidence in favor of common descent and macroevolution. This article is specifically intended for those who are scientifically minded but, for one reason or another, have come to believe that macroevolutionary theory explains little, makes few or no testable predictions, is unfalsifiable, or has not been scientifically demonstrated.

Certainly, you would avoid the site because it offers fact and evidence as opposed to your simpleton claims for supernaturalism.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I would like to point something out to you people. DR. Max participates on the talk origins website a favorite site for evolutionists. On that site they try to show 29 cases of macro evolution by DR. Theobald but yet DR. Max admits there are no observed cases for macro evolution someone is lying and I don't think it is DR.Max nor DR.Spetner. I would avoid that site if I were you.

I think you're still suffering from an inability to distinguish truth from lies.

FromTalkorigins:

This article directly addresses the scientific evidence in favor of common descent and macroevolution. This article is specifically intended for those who are scientifically minded but, for one reason or another, have come to believe that macroevolutionary theory explains little, makes few or no testable predictions, is unfalsifiable, or has not been scientifically demonstrated.

Certainly, you would avoid the site because it offers fact and evidence as opposed to your simpleton claims for supernaturalism.

Put your dunce hat on and go sit in the corner.

 

[daws101]

May I suggest DR.Lee Spetners book,you will learn more about genetics and mutations then you will in any college class.

Amazon.com: Not by Chance!: Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution (9781880582244): Lee M. Spetner, P.h.d., Lee M. Spetner: Books






Also checkout Dr. Lee Spetner
continuing an exchange with Dr. Edward E. Max


Dr. Lee Spetner's continued exchange with Dr. Edward E. Max

Now this is a pretty deep dialogue between the two but you can learn something.

bullshit! it's more creationist propaganda

DR. Lee Spetner is well respected by evolutionist.

just one? or is evolutionists?

 

[daws101]

No but there are numerous eyewitness accounts of Jesus being crucified and then appearing to more than 500 people after his death.

Amazon.com: The Case for Christ: A Journalist's Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus (9780310209300): Lee Strobel: Books

so what? lots of people were crucified.. it was a spectator sport at that time.
as to this: then appearing to more than 500 people after his death.

it's hearsay at best there are no non biblical sources to verify it.
since the bible is error ridden highly edited and bias, it can't be considered as evidence.

Oh boy

fine retort potsey!
prove me wrong!

 

[daws101]

May I suggest DR.Lee Spetners book,you will learn more about genetics and mutations then you will in any college class.

Amazon.com: Not by Chance!: Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution (9781880582244): Lee M. Spetner, P.h.d., Lee M. Spetner: Books






Also checkout Dr. Lee Spetner
continuing an exchange with Dr. Edward E. Max


Dr. Lee Spetner's continued exchange with Dr. Edward E. Max

Now this is a pretty deep dialogue between the two but you can learn something.

bullshit! it's more creationist propaganda

Look at what the evolutionist admits to,exactly what i have said in the past.


Max: I agree that there are no definitive examples where a macroevolutionary change (such as the development of cetaceans from terrestrial mammals) has been shown to result from a specific chain of mutations. And I agree with your further comment that “we have no way of observing a long series of mutations.” But you go on to say that “our inability to observe such series cannot be used as a justification for the assumption that the series Darwinian theory requires indeed exist.” An equally reasonable conclusion, in my view, would be that our inability to observe such series cannot be used as a justification for the assumption that such a series of mutations did NOT occur.

Spetner: Now Ed, that’s ridiculous! Those two statements are not symmetrical. I don’t have to assume the series did not occur to make a case for the inadequacy of NDT. You, who are basing your theory of evolution on the occurrence of such a series, are required to show that it exists, or at least that it is likely to exist. You are obliged to show an existence. I am not obliged to prove a non-existence.
[LMS: IN MAX’S POSTING HE MOVED THIS REMARK OF MINE TO A LATER POINT IN THE DIALOGUE. I ORIGINALLY HAD IT HERE, AND HERE IS WHERE IT BELONGS.]

Max: In the absence of conclusive data defining such a series, if we want to distinguish between various hypotheses to explain the origin of species we must rely on other data, such as from various laboratory model systems that show adaptations in short enough timeframes that we can observe them. Then we must extrapolate as best we can the information learned from these model systems to the questions of species origins.

Notice the admissions DR. Max makes Daws.

there is only one relevant one :Then we must extrapolate as best we can the information learned from these model systems to the questions of species origins.....

whatever else you wish it to suggest is not relevant..