Creationists

[Hollie]

you did notice it's mostly me I and me again.
maybe UR is a teenage girl, sure posts like one!

Her fascination with me leads me to believe that she has mistaken this site for her "alternate lifestyle" dating service.

you mean christian mingle . com.

That site or maybe:

Christian mingle for singles who are emotional vortexes of want and need.com

 

[UltimateReality]

why does this matter to you:" no one even knows if you are a man or woman, and you never confirmed nor denied whether or not you were raised in a christian home."ur

you pull this little gem out of each and every time your ass is in a crack .

Hollie's sex /or religious upbringing, like mine ,are not relevant to this conversation.
It's a cheap childish maneuver to bolster your bigotry and it's chicken shit.

wow, aren't you the clueless one. The relevance of it is hollie goes around calling everyone liars and saying they twist the truth, yet she has represented herself on this forum as a woman and on another one as a man. Bascially, by her continual lying, he/she has robbed herself of all credibility. When you come to his/her defense, you just wind up looking stupid when you don't have all the facts.

that's funny because it's a spot on discription of you!

Yeah, because I've been posing as Ultimeana Reality on another forum.

 

[UltimateReality]

Omigosh was that an enlightening 5 pages. I would love to keep it going because it was really getting under her skin but I have to get to the gym.

Did you guys just see what happened there? I became Holly!!!! I employed all of her tactics and techniques and baited her into a frenzy. She was cutting and pasting like mad trying to teach me and I was just repeating the same thing over and over again like she does.

Technique 1: Continually accuse me of getting my info from the ICR website. Truth is I have never been to the ICR website. So I picked the IHEU website and just mentioned it over and over and over again, not bothering to really read any of her posts.

Technique 2: Continually quote this character Haran Yahya. I had no clue who that was and I doubt many ID Theorists or Creationist do since the guy is a Muslim trying to prove the existence of Allah. It's not really like Christians use the same sources as Muslims since for the most part, they want us Christians dead.

So I picked Lawrence Krauss and just kept accusing her of using him as a source over and over again. Lawrence Krauss is a Dawkins crony and atheist philosopher. The most disturbing thing about Holly is she never once denies that is where she is getting her info. I really think something is wrong with her. Maybe she is trying to manage hating on multiple forums at one time but it is like she isn't reading anything. She doesn't even question who Krauss is or what the IHEU is. Weird.

Tehnigue 3: Attribute some belief someone has explained numerous times they don't believe in just to aggravate them. Holly has repeatedly stated I believe in a 6000 year old earth when I have told her numerous times I do not. So for the last 5 or 10 posts, I keep talking about her belief in an eternal universe. Hollie has never said she believes in an eternal universe and if she believes current thought, more like believes the big bang and a universe that is approx 14 billion years old. Again, really weird she never denies that. It's like she isn't reading anything.

Technique 4: Continually accuse your opponent of being dishonest and misquoting. Did you see how I didn't even bother to read what she posted but just kept saying over and over again she was quoting out of context or intentionally leaving parts out? I kept using her phrase on her over and over,"intellectual dishonesty".

Technique 5: Aggravate your opponent by using subtle word games. Know your audience only believes in ONE God, continually refer to gods.

Bravo Hollie!! Your own techniques beat you at your own game!!

Omigosh Hollie. You were cutting and pasting like a mad woman. It is funny that you accused me of lashing out when I was just following your posting methodology. Did this little experience enlighten you at all to how frustrating your posts are, or how people could take you as the one who is attacking?

All that just as a cover for your inability to respond to specific points?

 

[UltimateReality]

Her fascination with me leads me to believe that she has mistaken this site for her "alternate lifestyle" dating service.

you mean christian mingle . com.

That site or maybe:

Christian mingle for singles who are emotional vortexes of want and need.com

 

[UltimateReality]

All that just as a cover for your inability to respond to specific points?

you did notice it's mostly me I and me again.
maybe UR is a teenage girl, sure posts like one!

Her fascination with me leads me to believe that she has mistaken this site for her "alternate lifestyle" dating service.

I actually found a video of Rugged Hollie Touch online. I think this is going to explain a lot. His/Her realy name is Pat...

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwT1kp0C3Ss[/URL]

 

[Youwerecreated]

another bullshit statement, humans (not just men,) were never perfect. I understand that your fairy says different, but as always you have no evidence proving your "believed" claim.
2. there is no credible proof that genetic disorders are on the rise..

What we have proof of is since the fall of adam lifespans of humans greatly decreased. Through research and medicine we increased lifespans but not near what it once was.

bullshit! since you have no proof that Adam lived any conclusion drawn from that false premise by defintion is false.
so my answer stands :there is no credible proof that genetic disorders are on the rise

Researchers have identified more than 4,000 diseases that are caused by genetic variants.



The Basics on Genes and Genetic Disorders




There are over 6,000 genetic disorders that can be passed down through the generations, many of which are fatal or severely debilitating. Since 1997, the GDF has worked with Mount Sinai to help provide funding for research to improve early detection and treatment options for many of these disorders.

Genetic Disease Foundation: Hope Through Knowledge

It looks like the number of genetic disorders are on the rise.

 

[Youwerecreated]

HE'S A CREATION PSEUDO SCIENTIST.

You are clueless as UR said.

 

[Youwerecreated]

oh, so now it an opinion not fact !

What do you think scientific explanations are Daws ?

a report based on evidence objective testing and observation.
THEY ARE NOT based on belief in the supernatural as a causation.

Here i will help you out since you can't be honest,they are opinions.

 

[Youwerecreated]

you did notice it's mostly me I and me again.
maybe UR is a teenage girl, sure posts like one!

Her fascination with me leads me to believe that she has mistaken this site for her "alternate lifestyle" dating service.

I actually found a video of Rugged Hollie Touch online. I think this is going to explain a lot. His/Her realy name is Pat...

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwT1kp0C3Ss[/URL]

 

[Hollie]

What we have proof of is since the fall of adam lifespans of humans greatly decreased. Through research and medicine we increased lifespans but not near what it once was.

bullshit! since you have no proof that Adam lived any conclusion drawn from that false premise by defintion is false.
so my answer stands :there is no credible proof that genetic disorders are on the rise

Researchers have identified more than 4,000 diseases that are caused by genetic variants.



The Basics on Genes and Genetic Disorders


There are over 6,000 genetic disorders that can be passed down through the generations, many of which are fatal or severely debilitating. Since 1997, the GDF has worked with Mount Sinai to help provide funding for research to improve early detection and treatment options for many of these disorders.

Genetic Disease Foundation: Hope Through Knowledge

It looks like the number of genetic disorders are on the rise.

Praise Jay-zus.

You must find it galling that the science you hate is exposing your gawds as incompetent "designers".

As the alleged author of all, your gawds are thus responsible for all.

How is it possible that your incompetent designer gawds got so much so wrong?

Actually, as science becomes more exacting, the diagnosis of disease becomes more exacting. The diagnosis of genetic disease is becoming more of a science.

 

[Hollie]

What do you think scientific explanations are Daws ?

a report based on evidence objective testing and observation.
THEY ARE NOT based on belief in the supernatural as a causation.

Here i will help you out since you can't be honest,they are opinions.

So.... the occurrance of genetic disease is not fact but just opinion?

Your goofy fundie agenda manages to dismantle your own arguments.

Can I get a hallelujah brothas' and sistas'.

Is Ken Ham out of jail yet?

 

[Hollie]

Omigosh was that an enlightening 5 pages. I would love to keep it going because it was really getting under her skin but I have to get to the gym.

Did you guys just see what happened there? I became Holly!!!! I employed all of her tactics and techniques and baited her into a frenzy. She was cutting and pasting like mad trying to teach me and I was just repeating the same thing over and over again like she does.

Technique 1: Continually accuse me of getting my info from the ICR website. Truth is I have never been to the ICR website. So I picked the IHEU website and just mentioned it over and over and over again, not bothering to really read any of her posts.

Technique 2: Continually quote this character Haran Yahya. I had no clue who that was and I doubt many ID Theorists or Creationist do since the guy is a Muslim trying to prove the existence of Allah. It's not really like Christians use the same sources as Muslims since for the most part, they want us Christians dead.

So I picked Lawrence Krauss and just kept accusing her of using him as a source over and over again. Lawrence Krauss is a Dawkins crony and atheist philosopher. The most disturbing thing about Holly is she never once denies that is where she is getting her info. I really think something is wrong with her. Maybe she is trying to manage hating on multiple forums at one time but it is like she isn't reading anything. She doesn't even question who Krauss is or what the IHEU is. Weird.

Tehnigue 3: Attribute some belief someone has explained numerous times they don't believe in just to aggravate them. Holly has repeatedly stated I believe in a 6000 year old earth when I have told her numerous times I do not. So for the last 5 or 10 posts, I keep talking about her belief in an eternal universe. Hollie has never said she believes in an eternal universe and if she believes current thought, more like believes the big bang and a universe that is approx 14 billion years old. Again, really weird she never denies that. It's like she isn't reading anything.

Technique 4: Continually accuse your opponent of being dishonest and misquoting. Did you see how I didn't even bother to read what she posted but just kept saying over and over again she was quoting out of context or intentionally leaving parts out? I kept using her phrase on her over and over,"intellectual dishonesty".

Technique 5: Aggravate your opponent by using subtle word games. Know your audience only believes in ONE God, continually refer to gods.

Bravo Hollie!! Your own techniques beat you at your own game!!

Omigosh Hollie. You were cutting and pasting like a mad woman. It is funny that you accused me of lashing out when I was just following your posting methodology. Did this little experience enlighten you at all to how frustrating your posts are, or how people could take you as the one who is attacking?

All that just as a cover for your inability to respond to specific points?

It's what the gawds want.

 

[cooky]

Your bolded comment above is an outright admission the TOE is not real science. The whole theory collapses if you can't define what fittest is. More info in post 6855. Again, just because you refuse to see it doesn't mean it isn't there. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it driink.

Fitness is very easily defined as reproductive success. Differential reproductive success is ultimately what drives evolution.

Whats more, the phylogenetic study of rRNA sequences has revolutionized evolutionary biology such that a "tree of life" can be resolved from comparative studies of ribosomal sequences that is largely unbiased by HGT artifacts. Your supposition that modern genetics has convoluted the 'tree of life' could not be further from the truth. To help clarify your understanding of how modern phylogenetic analysis has only empowered evolutionary biology I have linked a review from the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that was published in 2011.

Phylogeny and beyond: Scientific, historical, and conceptual significance of the first tree of life

While the detractors of the TOE will allude to flaws, gaps and evidence that contradicts the TOE they have failed to produce any credible scientific discourse that supports their position.

I challenge the opponents of the TOE to link one publication from the Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences that explicitly refutes the modern synthesis of the TOE. Its time to crap or get off the pot folks.

 

[Youwerecreated]

bullshit! since you have no proof that Adam lived any conclusion drawn from that false premise by defintion is false.
so my answer stands :there is no credible proof that genetic disorders are on the rise

Researchers have identified more than 4,000 diseases that are caused by genetic variants.



The Basics on Genes and Genetic Disorders


There are over 6,000 genetic disorders that can be passed down through the generations, many of which are fatal or severely debilitating. Since 1997, the GDF has worked with Mount Sinai to help provide funding for research to improve early detection and treatment options for many of these disorders.

Genetic Disease Foundation: Hope Through Knowledge

It looks like the number of genetic disorders are on the rise.

Praise Jay-zus.

You must find it galling that the science you hate is exposing your gawds as incompetent "designers".

As the alleged author of all, your gawds are thus responsible for all.

How is it possible that your incompetent designer gawds got so much so wrong?

Actually, as science becomes more exacting, the diagnosis of disease becomes more exacting. The diagnosis of genetic disease is becoming more of a science.

It is my opinions mutations were used by God to put an end to eternal life after adam and eve sinned.

These mutations have been passed on for 6,000 years.

 

[Youwerecreated]

a report based on evidence objective testing and observation.
THEY ARE NOT based on belief in the supernatural as a causation.

Here i will help you out since you can't be honest,they are opinions.

So.... the occurrance of genetic disease is not fact but just opinion?

Your goofy fundie agenda manages to dismantle your own arguments.

Can I get a hallelujah brothas' and sistas'.

Is Ken Ham out of jail yet?

No,how do you think genetic problems some are being headed off in the womb. Some there is nothing we can do about. Why do you think moms and dads are having gene screening before and during pregnancy ? Genetic disorders are a fact.

Life coming from nonliving matter is an opiion. Organisms evolving into destinctly new organisms ,not of the same family, is built on opinions. So what it comes down to does the evidence better support a designer or naturalism?

 

[Youwerecreated]

Your bolded comment above is an outright admission the TOE is not real science. The whole theory collapses if you can't define what fittest is. More info in post 6855. Again, just because you refuse to see it doesn't mean it isn't there. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it driink.

Fitness is very easily defined as reproductive success. Differential reproductive success is ultimately what drives evolution.

Whats more, the phylogenetic study of rRNA sequences has revolutionized evolutionary biology such that a "tree of life" can be resolved from comparative studies of ribosomal sequences that is largely unbiased by HGT artifacts. Your supposition that modern genetics has convoluted the 'tree of life' could not be further from the truth. To help clarify your understanding of how modern phylogenetic analysis has only empowered evolutionary biology I have linked a review from the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that was published in 2011.

Phylogeny and beyond: Scientific, historical, and conceptual significance of the first tree of life

While the detractors of the TOE will allude to flaws, gaps and evidence that contradicts the TOE they have failed to produce any credible scientific discourse that supports their position.

I challenge the opponents of the TOE to link one publication from the Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences that explicitly refutes the modern synthesis of the TOE. Its time to crap or get off the pot folks.

What you are saying is built on circular reasoning,just because we have the same genetic code and DNA similarity. DNA similarity proves nothing.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Let me show you the nonsense and circular reasoning used by evolutionist.

Chimps,cats,dogs,cows,mice,flies,chickens. They all share DNA similarity with humans does that mean we are all related ? What's being ignored is the huge difference in DNA information. This points to a designer using the same or similar substances to create with a huge difference in DNA transcription. Yes folks the DNA information.

Evolution say's because of similarity this shows we are all related through a natural process. That is if you can read between the lines. It is pure nonsense and circular reasoning at best that supports these opinions.

 

[Hollie]

Let me show you the nonsense and circular reasoning used by evolutionist.

Chimps,cats,dogs,cows,mice,flies,chickens. They all share DNA similarity with humans does that mean we are all related ? What's being ignored is the huge difference in DNA information. This points to a designer using the same or similar substances to create with a huge difference in DNA transcription. Yes folks the DNA information.

Evolution say's because of similarity this shows we are all related through a natural process. That is if you can read between the lines. It is pure nonsense and circular reasoning at best that supports these opinions.

So... what you're suggesting is that the gawds spent time "designing" every terrestrial animal and human which has ever walked or crawled on the planet but for some reason "designed" DNA as a comment component of life just to fool us?

Your self-inflicted ignorance Is your own.

 

[cooky]

Your bolded comment above is an outright admission the TOE is not real science. The whole theory collapses if you can't define what fittest is. More info in post 6855. Again, just because you refuse to see it doesn't mean it isn't there. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it driink.

Fitness is very easily defined as reproductive success. Differential reproductive success is ultimately what drives evolution.

Whats more, the phylogenetic study of rRNA sequences has revolutionized evolutionary biology such that a "tree of life" can be resolved from comparative studies of ribosomal sequences that is largely unbiased by HGT artifacts. Your supposition that modern genetics has convoluted the 'tree of life' could not be further from the truth. To help clarify your understanding of how modern phylogenetic analysis has only empowered evolutionary biology I have linked a review from the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that was published in 2011.

Phylogeny and beyond: Scientific, historical, and conceptual significance of the first tree of life

While the detractors of the TOE will allude to flaws, gaps and evidence that contradicts the TOE they have failed to produce any credible scientific discourse that supports their position.

I challenge the opponents of the TOE to link one publication from the Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences that explicitly refutes the modern synthesis of the TOE. Its time to crap or get off the pot folks.

What you are saying is built on circular reasoning,just because we have the same genetic code and DNA similarity. DNA similarity proves nothing.

First of all, my post references RNA not DNA.... there is a difference. Additionally, your OPINION that the comparative phylogenetics based on small subunit ribosomal sequences proves nothing is well outside of the scientific mainstream- see the PNAS I provided in my previous post. I'm not exactly sure how you arrived at the conclusion that comaparative phylogentics is circular reasoning but your conclusion that the conservation of the genetic code and translation mechanisms among all known life is not due to common descent but is instead due to a 'designer' has no basis in science.

Ultimately the quantitative phylogenetic analysis of SSU rRNA is in agreement with numerous other lines of evidence i.e. the fossil record that support the modern synthesis of the TOE.

Again, I posit my challenge to those who oppose the TOE:

I challenge the opponents of the TOE to link one publication from the Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences that explicitly refutes the modern synthesis of the TOE

 

[Youwerecreated]

Fitness is very easily defined as reproductive success. Differential reproductive success is ultimately what drives evolution.

Whats more, the phylogenetic study of rRNA sequences has revolutionized evolutionary biology such that a "tree of life" can be resolved from comparative studies of ribosomal sequences that is largely unbiased by HGT artifacts. Your supposition that modern genetics has convoluted the 'tree of life' could not be further from the truth. To help clarify your understanding of how modern phylogenetic analysis has only empowered evolutionary biology I have linked a review from the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that was published in 2011.

Phylogeny and beyond: Scientific, historical, and conceptual significance of the first tree of life

While the detractors of the TOE will allude to flaws, gaps and evidence that contradicts the TOE they have failed to produce any credible scientific discourse that supports their position.

I challenge the opponents of the TOE to link one publication from the Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences that explicitly refutes the modern synthesis of the TOE. Its time to crap or get off the pot folks.

What you are saying is built on circular reasoning,just because we have the same genetic code and DNA similarity. DNA similarity proves nothing.

First of all, my post references RNA not DNA.... there is a difference. Additionally, your OPINION that the comparative phylogenetics based on small subunit ribosomal sequences proves nothing is well outside of the scientific mainstream- see the PNAS I provided in my previous post. I'm not exactly sure how you arrived at the conclusion that comaparative phylogentics is circular reasoning but your conclusion that the conservation of the genetic code and translation mechanisms among all known life is not due to common descent but is instead due to a 'designer' has no basis in science.

Ultimately the quantitative phylogenetic analysis of SSU rRNA is in agreement with numerous other lines of evidence i.e. the fossil record that support the modern synthesis of the TOE.

Again, I posit my challenge to those who oppose the TOE:

I challenge the opponents of the TOE to link one publication from the Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences that explicitly refutes the modern synthesis of the TOE

Dna is converted to Rna so the information does not get tainted,so what is your point ? Naturally you are looking for such an article because you and everyone who knows anything about science,know that the heads of the curriculum in the field of science will not allow anything supporting design.That's a fact. Secularists are in control and have been for a while.

They don't allow anything in that refutes the lie being taught. I may have jumped the gun about where I thought you were headed.