Evolution lies

[Ringtone]

Evolution is a FACT

God is a theory

And, not even a good theory. A decent theory has at least some plausible basis in fact; for "God" there is zero.

Define "basis in fact," nitwit, without begging the question. LOL! Zoom! Right over your silly ass head.

 

[Ringtone]

Evolution is the satanic lie creating a distance between you and God. Stop to sin, repent and come back to God, otherwise it will be too late

Scientism as a whole, including ToE, is a lie for those who don't actually understand science to fall for. ToE, unlike biology or chemistry, doesn't have a single bit of falsifiability for it to be called a science.

In terms of science, not falsifiable means if it's true we can't tell. If it's false we can't tell either. That's what ToE is by far.

Actually, that is not true. We have found trillions of fossils and any one of them could have falsified the ToE. None of them did (some are disputed, like the finding of 'human' footprints with dinosaurs that may or may not be real).

LOL! Fossils and geological evidence?! Your so-called fossil evidence and geological evidence are the same thing. They do not prove direct ancestry at all. What exactly is this biological and DNA evidence of yours?

Note how your typical evolutionist true believer doesn't really know what he's talking about. He's just a slogan spouter of popular authority.

You're unwittingly asserting that naturalism is true; therefore, evolution is true. You're unwittingly begging question, brainwash. What precisely is your ontological justification for your religion?

First off, you appear confused as to whom you are replying to (we've all been there) since I never mentioned geological, biological, or DNA evidence. I don't know what slogans you feel are being spouted?

I do believe in both nature and evolution as natural process, nothing unwitting about it. I've never encountered ANY evidence of the supernatural and, until I do, do not believe it exists. Everything I see I believe can be explained by natural processes. As to what came before the Big Bang, I don't know and I'm fine admitting that.

You've encountered plenty of evidence for God's existence. You're a liar, an irrational twit.

 

[Ringtone]

Dinosaur fossils are a trick of the debil!

I'm of the opinion that museum curators are the ones who put them in the ground millions of years ago.

So what, precisely, do the existence of fossils have to do with the hypothesis of evolution, i.e., the purely metaphysical presupposition of a common ancestry? Evolution is not the hypothesis that species have appeared and gone extinct over time. Evolution is the hypothesis that all species are necessarily of a common ancestry via naturalistic means. Hello! Knock. Knock. Anybody home?

Behold the typical ignorance and presumptuous prattle of the mindless slogan spouters of evolution who unwittingly beg the question, who unwittingly presuppose the conclusion in their premise of naturalism and call it science.

I can't help but notice that the more hyper, the hyper-religioner becomes, the angrier they are.

Your fundie christian madrassah obviously neglected a science curriculum so maybe we can help.

Let's define for you that a fossil is the organic remains or an impression of an organism as a mold in rock. A transitional fossil is a fossil which shows structural features and traits common to or intermediate between two other fossils. Transitional fossils show clear relationships between other fossils and can even show details of how particular features transitioned. For example, whales have finger-like ''hands'' in their flippers. Vestigial bones and organs exist in both humans and animals. Are we to believe that your various gods had spare parts left over and perhaps played a cruel joke on the more hyper of the hyper-religious?

Knowledge advances and is confirmed by subjecting hypotheses to tests that explore the validity of one hypothesis from another. Fossil evidence, along with disciplines of paleontology, chemistry, earth science, geology, biology, etc., does this.

Let's propose that the hyper-religious offer a hypothesis for their respective gods and let's subject those tobthe sane standards as science is held to. Quite obviously, the hyper-religious would fail that requirement. Your shrill screeching about those evilutionist atheists not having a perfect record of every fossil and every intermediate fossil of every creature that ever lived is nothing more than the lunatic rants that afflict the hyper-religious. It can serve only to reinforce one's own preconceptions.

Ahhhhhhh, shut up, you drooling 'tard.

 

[Hollie]

Dinosaur fossils are a trick of the debil!

I'm of the opinion that museum curators are the ones who put them in the ground millions of years ago.

So what, precisely, do the existence of fossils have to do with the hypothesis of evolution, i.e., the purely metaphysical presupposition of a common ancestry? Evolution is not the hypothesis that species have appeared and gone extinct over time. Evolution is the hypothesis that all species are necessarily of a common ancestry via naturalistic means. Hello! Knock. Knock. Anybody home?

Behold the typical ignorance and presumptuous prattle of the mindless slogan spouters of evolution who unwittingly beg the question, who unwittingly presuppose the conclusion in their premise of naturalism and call it science.

I can't help but notice that the more hyper, the hyper-religioner becomes, the angrier they are.

Your fundie christian madrassah obviously neglected a science curriculum so maybe we can help.

Let's define for you that a fossil is the organic remains or an impression of an organism as a mold in rock. A transitional fossil is a fossil which shows structural features and traits common to or intermediate between two other fossils. Transitional fossils show clear relationships between other fossils and can even show details of how particular features transitioned. For example, whales have finger-like ''hands'' in their flippers. Vestigial bones and organs exist in both humans and animals. Are we to believe that your various gods had spare parts left over and perhaps played a cruel joke on the more hyper of the hyper-religious?

Knowledge advances and is confirmed by subjecting hypotheses to tests that explore the validity of one hypothesis from another. Fossil evidence, along with disciplines of paleontology, chemistry, earth science, geology, biology, etc., does this.

Let's propose that the hyper-religious offer a hypothesis for their respective gods and let's subject those tobthe sane standards as science is held to. Quite obviously, the hyper-religious would fail that requirement. Your shrill screeching about those evilutionist atheists not having a perfect record of every fossil and every intermediate fossil of every creature that ever lived is nothing more than the lunatic rants that afflict the hyper-religious. It can serve only to reinforce one's own preconceptions.

Ahhhhhhh, shut up, you drooling 'tard.

That was another of your thoughtful, considered responses.

It's always interesting to see the hyper-religious reduced to foul mouthed, juvenile insults when they can't compose a coherent sentence.

 

[alang1216]

I doubt you have the first clue what I'm even talking about, brainwash.

Evolutionist: Oh, look, species have appeared and gone extinct over time. They have similar biological and genetic structures (as if, mind you, the terrestrial creatures of common design would be radically dissimilar): common ancestry must be true!

LOL!

You're right, I don't have the first clue what you're even talking about.

Your ignorance of biology and fossils is not really a great selling point, you might want to address the evidence. Species have appeared and gone extinct over time, you're right there. So where do these new species come from?

 

[alang1216]

You've encountered plenty of evidence for God's existence. You're a liar, an irrational twit.

I'm impressed that you know more about me than I do. What evidence have I encountered for the supernatural?

 

[Ringtone]

I doubt you have the first clue what I'm even talking about, brainwash.

Evolutionist: Oh, look, species have appeared and gone extinct over time. They have similar biological and genetic structures (as if, mind you, the terrestrial creatures of common design would be radically dissimilar): common ancestry must be true!

LOL!

You're right, I don't have the first clue what you're even talking about.

Your ignorance of biology and fossils is not really a great selling point, you might want to address the evidence. Species have appeared and gone extinct over time, you're right there. So where do these new species come from?

You ass. My ignorance of biology?! By which you actually mean my rejection of the hypothesis of evolution, which I understand very well. You don't have the first friggin' clue what I know or don't know about the matter. You imbecilic atheists predictably spout the same slogans over and over again.

It's tiresome.

"Oh, you reject the hypothesis of evolution? You must not understand the hypothesis and the purported evidence for it."

New flash: the fundamentals of the hypothesis, the purported evidence for it, the evolutionist's underlying presupposition and the reasoning thereof are not the stuff of rocket science. I pulled down straight A's on the various aspects of the hypothesis in college, in exams and papers, and my professors never had the slightest clue that I actually believed it was all a crock, a myth, a bedtime story, a fantasy, a fairy tale, a pile of crap. . . .

You don't understand what I'm getting at, apparently, by your own admission, regarding the underlying metaphysics of scientific inquiry in general and the underlying metaphysics of the hypothesis in particular. It's you who doesn't really grasp, ultimately, why you believe it to be true. You unwittingly beg the question, presuppose the conclusion in your premise, every time you open your yap. Essentially, your "religious" conviction comes down to this: naturalism is necessarily true; therefore, evolution is necessarily true. LOL! Zoom! Right over your head.

For someone who believes God doesn't exist, you sure do act as if he does, and apparently you think your it as you unwittingly claim that naturalism/materialism is absolutely true . . . as if you had all knowledge like God. LOL!

As for the foundation of existence, the issue is not knowing precisely what preceded the Big Bang or what preceded the putative, primordial quantum vacuum . . . or, even, for that matter, what materially preceded the latter if anything. The issue is that the material realm of being is obviously a mutable and, therefore, contingent existent. It cannot possibly be the eternal ground of existence. The evidence for that conclusion is both empirical and rational.

Once again, those who stupidly claim there is no evidence for God's existence are rank imbeciles and liars.

 

[Ringtone]

Well, considering Humankind is a part of Universal Evolution, and Humans are lying, I suppose in a way the title of this thread could be interpreted in that way, that Humans. But there are plenty of ancient scriptures, including the Book of Genesis that discuss evolution. One great text on this topic, besides Hesiod's Works and Days, and Ovid's Metamorphosis, is the Corpus Hermeticum, Chapter X specifically.

But, I have an evolutionary traits, besides hair and eye color; where I can manipulate and generate magnetic fields to vibrate water, and atoms, telekenesis and utilize telepathy.

Once I figure out how to upload a video of such a demonstration, I'll do that.

By all means have it, and watch how I tear your metaphysical presuppositions of naturalism, the stuff of your religion, to shreds.

 

[BreezeWood]

Well, considering Humankind is a part of Universal Evolution, and Humans are lying, I suppose in a way the title of this thread could be interpreted in that way, that Humans. But there are plenty of ancient scriptures, including the Book of Genesis that discuss evolution. One great text on this topic, besides Hesiod's Works and Days, and Ovid's Metamorphosis, is the Corpus Hermeticum, Chapter X specifically.

But, I have an evolutionary traits, besides hair and eye color; where I can manipulate and generate magnetic fields to vibrate water, and atoms, telekenesis and utilize telepathy.

Once I figure out how to upload a video of such a demonstration, I'll do that.

By all means have it, and watch how I tear your metaphysical presuppositions of naturalism, the stuff of your religion, to shreds.

.

The issue is that the material realm of being is obviously a mutable and, therefore, contingent existent. It cannot possibly be the eternal ground of existence.

.
that would be the spiritual content of the physiological substance providing for the eternal component to materials limited duration.
.
.

Once again, those who stupidly claim there is no evidence for God's existence are rank imbeciles and liars.

.
the same is easily said for adherents of the forgeries and fallacies of the desert religions.
.
.

By all means have it, and watch how I tear your metaphysical presuppositions of naturalism, the stuff of your religion, to shreds.

.
they are separately distinct, combined inseparably. the physiological substance and its metaphysical spiritual content. you ignore at your own peril.
.
.
- you seem upset - was it the outcome of the election ...

 

[Hollie]

Well, considering Humankind is a part of Universal Evolution, and Humans are lying, I suppose in a way the title of this thread could be interpreted in that way, that Humans. But there are plenty of ancient scriptures, including the Book of Genesis that discuss evolution. One great text on this topic, besides Hesiod's Works and Days, and Ovid's Metamorphosis, is the Corpus Hermeticum, Chapter X specifically.

But, I have an evolutionary traits, besides hair and eye color; where I can manipulate and generate magnetic fields to vibrate water, and atoms, telekenesis and utilize telepathy.

Once I figure out how to upload a video of such a demonstration, I'll do that.

By all means have it, and watch how I tear your metaphysical presuppositions of naturalism, the stuff of your religion, to shreds.

I suppose you will accomplish that by launching into another of juvenile, saliva slinging tirades.

 

[Hollie]

Once again, those who stupidly claim there is no evidence for God's existence are rank imbeciles and liars.

Odd, that for another of your emotional outbursts, you’re still a failure at offering any evidence for your various gods.

 

[alang1216]

I doubt you have the first clue what I'm even talking about, brainwash.

Evolutionist: Oh, look, species have appeared and gone extinct over time. They have similar biological and genetic structures (as if, mind you, the terrestrial creatures of common design would be radically dissimilar): common ancestry must be true!

LOL!

You're right, I don't have the first clue what you're even talking about.

Your ignorance of biology and fossils is not really a great selling point, you might want to address the evidence. Species have appeared and gone extinct over time, you're right there. So where do these new species come from?

You ass. My ignorance of biology?! By which you actually mean my rejection of the hypothesis of evolution, which I understand very well. You don't have the first friggin' clue what I know or don't know about the matter. You imbecilic atheists predictably spout the same slogans over and over again.

It's tiresome.

"Oh, you reject the hypothesis of evolution? You must not understand the hypothesis and the purported evidence for it."

New flash: the fundamentals of the hypothesis, the purported evidence for it, the evolutionist's underlying presupposition and the reasoning thereof are not the stuff of rocket science. I pulled down straight A's on the various aspects of the hypothesis in college, in exams and papers, and my professors never had the slightest clue that I actually believed it was all a crock, a myth, a bedtime story, a fantasy, a fairy tale, a pile of crap. . . .

You don't understand what I'm getting at, apparently, by your own admission, regarding the underlying metaphysics of scientific inquiry in general and the underlying metaphysics of the hypothesis in particular. It's you who doesn't really grasp, ultimately, why you believe it to be true. You unwittingly beg the question, presuppose the conclusion in your premise, every time you open your yap. Essentially, your "religious" conviction comes down to this: naturalism is necessarily true; therefore, evolution is necessarily true. LOL! Zoom! Right over your head.

For someone who believes God doesn't exist, you sure do act as if he does, and apparently you think your it as you unwittingly claim that naturalism/materialism is absolutely true . . . as if you had all knowledge like God. LOL!

As for the foundation of existence, the issue is not knowing precisely what preceded the Big Bang or what preceded the putative, primordial quantum vacuum . . . or, even, for that matter, what materially preceded the latter if anything. The issue is that the material realm of being is obviously a mutable and, therefore, contingent existent. It cannot possibly be the eternal ground of existence. The evidence for that conclusion is both empirical and rational.

Once again, those who stupidly claim there is no evidence for God's existence are rank imbeciles and liars.

You are very articulate when it comes to telling me I'm wrong but much less so about telling me why I'm wrong and why you are right. If you understand the science behind evolution you don't show it. I asked a simple question which you completely ignored: "So where do these new species come from?"

 

[LittleNipper]

The simple fact is that if a human skeleton was found right next to a Dinosaur, the evolutionist would do one of three things. He would either hide the fact, he would deny the fact, or he would find an excuse for the fact. The evolutionist wouldn't say, "Well, I guess that proves man and dinosaurs lived at the same time." What is a concern for me is that I do feel that evolutionists have done this for the last 100 years, and are hiding objects from public display that they cannot explain in evolutionary terms and that go against their train of thought. They have done this regarding various footprints that have been discovered and are immovable. In at least one instance a human footprint was even defaced and declared to be only another dinosaurs track... I for one do accept that change within species is a God allowed trait, so that the various individual species can survive in a changing environment. HOWEVER, changes that supposedly transformed one species into another cannot be proven and as far as I'm concerned never occurred. That is the lie/fraud of the evolutionist. It is not honest science.

 

[Hollie]

The simple fact is that if a human skeleton was found right next to a Dinosaur, the evolutionist would do one of three things. He would either hide the fact, he would deny the fact, or he would find an excuse for the fact. The evolutionist wouldn't say, "Well, I guess that proves man and dinosaurs lived at the same time." What is a concern for me is that I do feel that evolutionists have done this for the last 100 years, and are hiding objects from public display that they cannot explain in evolutionary terms and that go against their train of thought. They have done this regarding various footprints that have been discovered and are immovable. In at least one instance a human footprint was even defaced and declared to be only another dinosaurs track... I for one do accept that change within species is a God allowed trait, so that the various individual species can survive in a changing environment. HOWEVER, changes that supposedly transformed one species into another cannot be proven and as far as I'm concerned never occurred. That is the lie/fraud of the evolutionist. It is not honest science.

I didn’t see a single fact attached to your “the simple fact is...”.

What facts can you offer to support your conspiracy theory that those atheist evilutionists are hiding objects?

Are we to accept your claims to a conspiracy theory that would include a coordinated, worldwide conspiracy involving all the teaching universities, science museums and private industry?

Yours are rather extreme positions.

FYI, there is vast evidence for transitional species. While you may believe that is a part of the global conspiracy theory you subscribe to, I still have no “simple facts” you have to support such a conspiracy.

 

[alang1216]

The simple fact is that if a human skeleton was found right next to a Dinosaur,

The simple fact is that the discoverer would have found the single greatest find in the history of science. They would be famous and the money would be pouring in. Quite the incentive I think.

 

[Hollie]

The simple fact is that if a human skeleton was found right next to a Dinosaur, the evolutionist would do one of three things. He would either hide the fact, he would deny the fact, or he would find an excuse for the fact. The evolutionist wouldn't say, "Well, I guess that proves man and dinosaurs lived at the same time." What is a concern for me is that I do feel that evolutionists have done this for the last 100 years, and are hiding objects from public display that they cannot explain in evolutionary terms and that go against their train of thought. They have done this regarding various footprints that have been discovered and are immovable. In at least one instance a human footprint was even defaced and declared to be only another dinosaurs track... I for one do accept that change within species is a God allowed trait, so that the various individual species can survive in a changing environment. HOWEVER, changes that supposedly transformed one species into another cannot be proven and as far as I'm concerned never occurred. That is the lie/fraud of the evolutionist. It is not honest science.

With regard to you comment about footprints being discovered and defaced, I suspect you are referring to the Paluxy River footprints.

Your comments mirror (and I suspect come from), those of Henry Morris. I’m not aware of any studies, analysis, research or examination of the area done by religious organizations who published any results.

You might also be interested to know that even some of the YEC’ers have disagreed with such creationers as Carl Baugh, Don Patton and others about the Paluxy River footprints.

“A few individuals such as Carl Baugh, Don Patton, and Ian Juby, continue to promote the Paluxy "man tracks" or alleged human tracks in Mesozoic or Paleozoic from other localities, but such claims are not considered credible by either mainstream scientists or major creationist groups. When examined thoroughly and carefully, the Paluxy tracks not only provide no positive evidence for young-earth creationism, but are found to be among many other lines of geologic evidence which indicate that the earth has had a long and complex history.”

CC101: Paluxy River footprints

 

[LittleNipper]

The simple fact is that if a human skeleton was found right next to a Dinosaur, the evolutionist would do one of three things. He would either hide the fact, he would deny the fact, or he would find an excuse for the fact. The evolutionist wouldn't say, "Well, I guess that proves man and dinosaurs lived at the same time." What is a concern for me is that I do feel that evolutionists have done this for the last 100 years, and are hiding objects from public display that they cannot explain in evolutionary terms and that go against their train of thought. They have done this regarding various footprints that have been discovered and are immovable. In at least one instance a human footprint was even defaced and declared to be only another dinosaurs track... I for one do accept that change within species is a God allowed trait, so that the various individual species can survive in a changing environment. HOWEVER, changes that supposedly transformed one species into another cannot be proven and as far as I'm concerned never occurred. That is the lie/fraud of the evolutionist. It is not honest science.

I didn’t see a single fact attached to your “the simple fact is...”.

What facts can you offer to support your conspiracy theory that those atheist evilutionists are hiding objects?

Are we to accept your claims to a conspiracy theory that would include a coordinated, worldwide conspiracy involving all the teaching universities, science museums and private industry?

Yours are rather extreme positions.

FYI, there is vast evidence for transitional species. While you may believe that is a part of the global conspiracy theory you subscribe to, I still have no “simple facts” you have to support such a conspiracy.

Well, it seems very odd to me that while it is known that various bones of giants were indeed discovered and some sent to the Smithsonian, they all seem to have disappeared without any explanation whatsoever. I mean, certainly an object could be displayed as even a hoax or a 18th, 19th fraud; however, no! The items in question once proudly displayed were long ago packed away or simply gone missing, and not talked about anymore. Out of sight, out of mind... Rather mysterious.

 

[LittleNipper]

The simple fact is that if a human skeleton was found right next to a Dinosaur, the evolutionist would do one of three things. He would either hide the fact, he would deny the fact, or he would find an excuse for the fact. The evolutionist wouldn't say, "Well, I guess that proves man and dinosaurs lived at the same time." What is a concern for me is that I do feel that evolutionists have done this for the last 100 years, and are hiding objects from public display that they cannot explain in evolutionary terms and that go against their train of thought. They have done this regarding various footprints that have been discovered and are immovable. In at least one instance a human footprint was even defaced and declared to be only another dinosaurs track... I for one do accept that change within species is a God allowed trait, so that the various individual species can survive in a changing environment. HOWEVER, changes that supposedly transformed one species into another cannot be proven and as far as I'm concerned never occurred. That is the lie/fraud of the evolutionist. It is not honest science.

With regard to you comment about footprints being discovered and defaced, I suspect you are referring to the Paluxy River footprints.

Your comments mirror (and I suspect come from), those of Henry Morris. I’m not aware of any studies, analysis, research or examination of the area done by religious organizations who published any results.

You might also be interested to know that even some of the YEC’ers have disagreed with such creationers as Carl Baugh, Don Patton and others about the Paluxy River footprints.

“A few individuals such as Carl Baugh, Don Patton, and Ian Juby, continue to promote the Paluxy "man tracks" or alleged human tracks in Mesozoic or Paleozoic from other localities, but such claims are not considered credible by either mainstream scientists or major creationist groups. When examined thoroughly and carefully, the Paluxy tracks not only provide no positive evidence for young-earth creationism, but are found to be among many other lines of geologic evidence which indicate that the earth has had a long and complex history.”

CC101: Paluxy River footprints

That website supports evolution and works to disregard Noah's Flood. It is not what would be regarded as impartial.

 

[LittleNipper]

The simple fact is that if a human skeleton was found right next to a Dinosaur,

The simple fact is that the discoverer would have found the single greatest find in the history of science. They would be famous and the money would be pouring in. Quite the incentive I think.

No they wouldn't. Such a discovery would bring down/undermine years of scientific research and call everything now regarded as scientific into questionable poppycock. Atheists would suddenly have to find a church and give up their excuses ---- it wouldn't be allowed to see the light of day.

 

[Hollie]

The simple fact is that if a human skeleton was found right next to a Dinosaur, the evolutionist would do one of three things. He would either hide the fact, he would deny the fact, or he would find an excuse for the fact. The evolutionist wouldn't say, "Well, I guess that proves man and dinosaurs lived at the same time." What is a concern for me is that I do feel that evolutionists have done this for the last 100 years, and are hiding objects from public display that they cannot explain in evolutionary terms and that go against their train of thought. They have done this regarding various footprints that have been discovered and are immovable. In at least one instance a human footprint was even defaced and declared to be only another dinosaurs track... I for one do accept that change within species is a God allowed trait, so that the various individual species can survive in a changing environment. HOWEVER, changes that supposedly transformed one species into another cannot be proven and as far as I'm concerned never occurred. That is the lie/fraud of the evolutionist. It is not honest science.

I didn’t see a single fact attached to your “the simple fact is...”.

What facts can you offer to support your conspiracy theory that those atheist evilutionists are hiding objects?

Are we to accept your claims to a conspiracy theory that would include a coordinated, worldwide conspiracy involving all the teaching universities, science museums and private industry?

Yours are rather extreme positions.

FYI, there is vast evidence for transitional species. While you may believe that is a part of the global conspiracy theory you subscribe to, I still have no “simple facts” you have to support such a conspiracy.

Well, it seems very odd to me that while it is known that various bones of giants were indeed discovered and some sent to the Smithsonian, they all seem to have disappeared without any explanation whatsoever. I mean, certainly an object could be displayed as even a hoax or a 18th, 19th fraud; however, no! The items in question once proudly displayed were long ago packed away or simply gone missing, and not talked about anymore. Out of sight, out of mind... Rather mysterious.

I’m not clear about what bones of giants were discovered and later disappeared.