Evolution is a False Religion not Proven Science.

[PostmodernProph]

What's your scientific background?

obviously more extensive than Zmrzlina's......and if you agree with him, more extensive than yours......I for one, know what the scientific method is......do you have enough scientific background to know what it is?......

You are making it clear you have no background in science. Experimentation is the method that empirical evidence is gathered and lays the foundation of scientific knowledge but no amount of experimentation will allow for dogmatic truths.

and, in the case of macro-evolution, the lack of experimentation is ignored in the acceptance of dogmatism......

 

[HUGGY]

I'm not Satan. I'll bet that many liberals think I am though.

Where is the lie in my post?

BELIEVERS expose the theory of evolution for what it is =a SILLY,IGNORANT THEORY invented by sin loving GOD REJECTORS that fear their final judgment day.

Again I ask, where is the lie in my post?

It is unkind to argue with the mentally ill.

 

[BillyP]

but apparently you don't......I don't reject fossils.......I don't reject the fact that 37k different types of beetles evolved.......I accept the Big Bang as the result of God saying "let there be".......and a flood that killed all humans except one family didn't need to cover the entire earth, only that portion where humans lived at the time......so, again.....what do I have to reject of science to have faith in God?......

Ok, you have your own definition of god and don't adhere to any organized religion. That's already better. I've always said that if a god exists, science is just showing us its creation.

just YHWH, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and the religion of Christianity.....nothing more complicated than that.....are you as ignorant of religion as you are of science?......

Christianity rejects science, and that you believe in the Big Bang makes you not a Christian, you can't just pick and choose what you'll believe, that gets you a ticket on the bus to the highway to hell. Seems YOU'RE pretty ignorant of Christianity.

 

[Derideo_Te]

1. Single celled organisms are not visible to the naked eye.

somebody should invent something....they could call it a "microscope" (patent applied for)....

2. We have not been observing single celled organisms for hundreds of millions of years.

then we missed it.....

3. Conditions for the evolution of single celled organisms into multi celled organisms are still being researched.
/yawn......


4. Cells, single or multi, don't fossilize therefore we don't have a record for how many times it might have occurred.
any non DNA lifeforms roaming around out there?......


5. Science has proved that cells consist of chemicals.
well yeah.....so are rocks and water.....


6. Chemicals occur naturally.
we can leaves where they came from for another thread....

7. Random events happen all the time.
not many of them turn single celled organisms into multicelled organisms, though.....

8. Just because you never saw it doesn't mean that it never happened.
yet some here argue that because we never saw it means it DID happen.....

In other words you have no valid rebuttal of the facts. Thanks for tacitly conceding your position. Have a nice day.

 

[Zmrzlina]

obviously more extensive than Zmrzlina's......and if you agree with him, more extensive than yours......I for one, know what the scientific method is......do you have enough scientific background to know what it is?......

You are making it clear you have no background in science. Experimentation is the method that empirical evidence is gathered and lays the foundation of scientific knowledge but no amount of experimentation will allow for dogmatic truths.

and, in the case of macro-evolution, the lack of experimentation is ignored in the acceptance of dogmatism......

No in the case of macro-evolution the empirical evidence found in the fields of genetics, paleontology and archaeology are ignored by you and other proponents of Intelligent Design dogma. What is the point of scientific inquiry when we can point to supernatural explanations for our gaps in our understanding of the natural world?

 

[PostmodernProph]

Ok, you have your own definition of god and don't adhere to any organized religion. That's already better. I've always said that if a god exists, science is just showing us its creation.

just YHWH, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and the religion of Christianity.....nothing more complicated than that.....are you as ignorant of religion as you are of science?......

Christianity rejects science, and that you believe in the Big Bang makes you not a Christian, you can't just pick and choose what you'll believe, that gets you a ticket on the bus to the highway to hell. Seems YOU'RE pretty ignorant of Christianity.

your arguments reject reality.....

 

[PostmodernProph]

1. Single celled organisms are not visible to the naked eye.

somebody should invent something....they could call it a "microscope" (patent applied for)....

2. We have not been observing single celled organisms for hundreds of millions of years.

then we missed it.....

3. Conditions for the evolution of single celled organisms into multi celled organisms are still being researched.
/yawn......


4. Cells, single or multi, don't fossilize therefore we don't have a record for how many times it might have occurred.
any non DNA lifeforms roaming around out there?......


5. Science has proved that cells consist of chemicals.
well yeah.....so are rocks and water.....


6. Chemicals occur naturally.
we can leaves where they came from for another thread....

7. Random events happen all the time.
not many of them turn single celled organisms into multicelled organisms, though.....

8. Just because you never saw it doesn't mean that it never happened.
yet some here argue that because we never saw it means it DID happen.....

In other words you have no valid rebuttal of the facts. Thanks for tacitly conceding your position. Have a nice day.

???....every statement I made WAS fact....

 

[PostmodernProph]

You are making it clear you have no background in science. Experimentation is the method that empirical evidence is gathered and lays the foundation of scientific knowledge but no amount of experimentation will allow for dogmatic truths.

and, in the case of macro-evolution, the lack of experimentation is ignored in the acceptance of dogmatism......

What is the point of scientific inquiry

I have seen that this is the new mantra for the left....

 

[PratchettFan]

now, apart from the fact there ARE mushrooms and humans, what evidence do you have that they share a common ancestor?.......

The basic structure of life. DNA, RNA, cell structure. As far as I am aware, there are no silicone based life forms on this planet. No life forms which have no cells, none which have no DNA. Unless you can point to any, then any suggestion there is no connection makes no sense.

digital watches, Sony game platforms, and Gateway computers all use binary code.....that does not mean they are descended from each other.....it just means their intelligent designer used something that works to make them........

Yes. Just as we use the biological process of evolution to breed domestic animals. Which only supports what I was saying, so thanks for the example. Continuing with that theme, each of those items descended from a common ancestor.

 

[PratchettFan]

Ok, you have your own definition of god and don't adhere to any organized religion. That's already better. I've always said that if a god exists, science is just showing us its creation.

just YHWH, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and the religion of Christianity.....nothing more complicated than that.....are you as ignorant of religion as you are of science?......

Christianity rejects science, and that you believe in the Big Bang makes you not a Christian, you can't just pick and choose what you'll believe, that gets you a ticket on the bus to the highway to hell. Seems YOU'RE pretty ignorant of Christianity.

Christianity does not reject science. There is nothing in it which conflicts with science in any way.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

10,000+ colleges and universities on the planet.

Hand full teach evolution is false.

Only those with a lack of faith in their religious beliefs and are weak believe evolution is a threat to them.

10,000 institutions that are all on the same page is not because of partisan political religious beliefs.
Something about the scientific method and facts, things religious fanatics can never comprehend.

I'm not a religious fanatic.

Not only are the odds against evolution but recently discovered properties of genetically altered cells to revert back to their pre-engineered state seems to indicate its a "machine" with a built-in fail safe mechanism.

Does that mean is was designed by the guy with long white beard on the Sistine chapel... Who the **** knows.

Like Hillary said what difference does it make

 

[HUGGY]

just YHWH, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and the religion of Christianity.....nothing more complicated than that.....are you as ignorant of religion as you are of science?......

Christianity rejects science, and that you believe in the Big Bang makes you not a Christian, you can't just pick and choose what you'll believe, that gets you a ticket on the bus to the highway to hell. Seems YOU'RE pretty ignorant of Christianity.

Christianity does not reject science. There is nothing in it which conflicts with science in any way.

Ya... Christians totally embrace the science of talking snakes..

And the science of the walking dead..

 

[pinqy]

Christianity rejects science, and that you believe in the Big Bang makes you not a Christian, you can't just pick and choose what you'll believe, that gets you a ticket on the bus to the highway to hell. Seems YOU'RE pretty ignorant of Christianity.

Christianity does not reject science. There is nothing in it which conflicts with science in any way.

Ya... Christians totally embrace the science of talking snakes..

And the science of the walking dead..

There was a talking donkey, too.

 

[PostmodernProph]

The basic structure of life. DNA, RNA, cell structure. As far as I am aware, there are no silicone based life forms on this planet. No life forms which have no cells, none which have no DNA. Unless you can point to any, then any suggestion there is no connection makes no sense.

digital watches, Sony game platforms, and Gateway computers all use binary code.....that does not mean they are descended from each other.....it just means their intelligent designer used something that works to make them........

Yes. Just as we use the biological process of evolution to breed domestic animals.

so slow....waiting for the environment to kill off the bulls we don't want.....Herefords alone took fifty million years.....

 

[PostmodernProph]

Christianity does not reject science. There is nothing in it which conflicts with science in any way.

Ya... Christians totally embrace the science of talking snakes..

And the science of the walking dead..

There was a talking donkey, too.

wiser than the average atheist, I've been told......

 

[HUGGY]

Christianity does not reject science. There is nothing in it which conflicts with science in any way.

Ya... Christians totally embrace the science of talking snakes..

And the science of the walking dead..

There was a talking donkey, too.

Turns out that they are pretty comon.

 

[Ronin]

Evolution is a scientifically established fact. No scientist is questioning that it is real. The various arguments are not about if it is happening but how it is happening. You may as well deny the existence of gravity because no one can say for sure how it works.

Unfortunately, it's a theory - not a fact - It's the Theory of Evolution - untill someonme invents a Time Machine it will remain a theory. It's a theory that I somewhat agree with - however it has alot of holes in it .

One primary hole being the absense of intermediate species or transitional fossils with the geological evidence.

Transitional fossils are the remains of those creatures which should be found ‘in-between’ one kind of creature and another kind. For example, evolutionists have long sought the ‘missing link’ between ape and human—some sort of half human/half ape intermediate form. None has ever been found, though many candidates have come and gone. Amplified, no doubt, by the lure of prestige, fame and fortune, the desire to discover such a fossil has led some even to fabricate evidence, such as with the famous Piltdown Man hoax. In that case, though the perpetrator has never been definitively identified, a human skull was ‘planted’ with an ape’s jaw which was crudely ‘doctored’. The result fooled the world for decades into thinking this was proof of human evolution.

And your comment re:Gravity - uh sorry to burst your bubble - but Gravity is a fact , and uh yes but I'm sorry they do understand how it works......You must be a Liberal - Right ?

Your citing two cases of fraud and stating there is no evidence of transitional fossils? Wow. You state you somewhat agree with it, how? Which part?

Bohlinia, Pezosiren portelli, proboscideans, Dimetrodon, Archaeopteryx, Sinornis, Tiktaalik, Gerobatrachus hottorni, Odontochelys semistestacea, a few of those transitional fossils. What is your classification of geological evidence? If the foundation has "having been there in person" for factual agreement then religion will be your only comfort. (Your weren't there during that either though) Keep in mind people like the op see carbon dating either as inaccurate or a ploy of Satan.

Any kind of conversation will only go so far when the debate is comparing even the investigative methods of science to what they consider REALITY based on:

 

[Steven_R]

Ya... Christians totally embrace the science of talking snakes..

And the science of the walking dead..

There was a talking donkey, too.

wiser than the average atheist, I've been told......

Remember geometry in 9th grade? You might have been exposed to the formula for circumference of a circle. C=2πr

Turns out that math in the Bible is slightly different. Seems Solomon was building some stuff for God's Temple, including big bowl thing. The Bible very clearly says the diameter of this bowl thing was "ten cubits from the one brim to the other" but the circumference of this big bowl thing was "and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about." (1 Kings 7:23)

If the diameter is 10 cubits, that means the radius is 5 cubits (because 1 diameter is equal to 2 radii. 10/2=5). So using our formula, we can plug in the values we have. So

C=2*π*5
So our answer is 31.416 cubits

Wait a minute. Our answer is 31.416 cubits, but the Bible answer is 30.0 cubits exactly.

What gives? Is the Bible wrong or is math? If it's the literal truth, is rounding down consistent with every word being the Inherent and Ineffable Word of God?

So maybe a talking ass is wiser than me, but at least I can still do junior high math.

 

[AtheistBuddah]

*sigh

Alright GISMYS, listen closely because I'm only going to say this one. Evolution IS NOT a religion. It doesn't even address the question of a bio genesis at all. It is merely the change of organisms over time. That's it.

 

[THE LIGHT]

*sigh

Alright GISMYS, listen closely because I'm only going to say this one. Evolution IS NOT a religion. It doesn't even address the question of a bio genesis at all. It is merely the change of organisms over time. That's it.

Which is not actually what you mean. And you know it.