Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Are you sure?I can't agree with the creationist ideas. ...
I'm starting to think Dawkins is a closet ID'er.I have to admit that the creationists have bet their creationism on INTELLIGENT DESIGN in regards to court or justice system. This is the battleground for our young minds now. Where your evolutionary scientists have advantage there are all those papers your scientists wrote to support evolution and get continued funding. The best way to describe it is they wrote papers "assuming" evolution and not trying to demonstrate it or anything like that. They may have purposely left out anything to do with evolution. Thus, the creationists have to do the same thing. They have to play the same game. While they support intelligent design, they do not exactly discuss ID but provide evidence for it through their papers. I have to admit that in our justice system, we have to play the same game as evolutionists have. Your side is ahead, obviously, in that regard.
Here's an example of a paper topic for ID (even including a Richard Dawkins' quote lol):
" Among the most compelling evidence for design in the realm of biology is the discovery of the digital information inherent in living cells. As it turns out, biological information comprises a complex, non-repeating sequence which is highly specified relative to the functional or communication requirements that they perform. Such similarity explains, in part, Dawkins’ observation that, “The machine code of the genes is uncannily computer-like.” What are we to make of this similarity between informational software—the undisputed product of conscious intelligence—and the informational sequences found in DNA and other important biomolecules?"
What is the best evidence/argument for intelligent design? | GotQuestions.org
What is the best evidence/argument for intelligent design? Does the universe and life show signs of being intentionally designed?www.gotquestions.org
There are no facts that prove creationer design. The inability of creationerists to make any supportable argument for creationerism might have clued you in, or not.I'm starting to think Dawkins is a closet ID'er.
Why else would he keep throwing out facts that prove design and disprove Darwinism?
Some easy facts. Today's monkeys and birds are the same as yesterday's monkeys and birds. The fossil records shows this and that explains why they exist today. The ability to reason like this is part of the intelligent design, but for some reason it's not on YOUR side.There are no facts that prove creationer design. The inability of creationerists to make any supportable argument for creationerism might have clued you in, or not.
Haha, gotta turn to a fellow nutter for that garbage. Looks like you are learning from hitting brick wall after brick wall.I'm starting to think Dawkins is a closet ID'er.
Why else would he keep throwing out facts that prove design and disprove Darwinism?
Some easier facts. You don’t understand the subject.Some easy facts. Today's monkeys and birds are the same as yesterday's monkeys and birds. The fossil records shows this and that explains why they exist today. The ability to reason like this is part of the intelligent design, but for some reason it's not on YOUR side.
Who said "There's nothing to fear but fear itself?"Some easier facts. You don’t understand the subject.
interestingliterature.com
And yet, I got proof that it is the atheists who are the nutters. Just take a gander at this list.Haha, gotta turn to a fellow nutter for that garbage. Looks like you are learning from hitting brick wall after brick wall.
That was a really unhinged rant, even by your history of unhinged rants.Who said "There's nothing to fear but fear itself?"
Sir Francis Bacon. I think he was referring to God's wrath and the discoveries of creation science to counter the atheist science.
Or you can find your own. What a wacko beotch this Harriet Martineau (Unitarian or earlier Jehovah's Witness (does not believe in Jesus nor Trinity)):
"The book referred to was the British social theorist Harriet Martineau’s 1848 book Eastern Life, which put forward the idea that the world’s religions were evolving to become more and more abstract and that (she implied) the end-goal of society was a form of philosophic atheism."
Who Said, ‘We Have Nothing to Fear Except Fear Itself’?
In this week’s Dispatches from The Secret Library, Dr Oliver Tearle examines the origins of a famous phrase ‘We have nothing to fear except fear itself.’ Those words – and the sentiment they convey…
I understand your NEED for the unhinged, libtard, crazy, nutty, wacktard, delirious, berserker, demented, deranged and SAF/POS type rants. However, there is no room for it in this forum. USMB has the Rubber Room for you. You should leave and post there as intelligent people have reached the point of satiation laughing at your takes here in S&T forum.That was a really unhinged rant, even by your history of unhinged rants.
The raving of a Flat Earther.I understand your NEED for the unhinged, libtard, crazy, nutty, wacktard, delirious, berserker, demented, deranged and SAF/POS type rants. However, there is no room for it in this forum. USMB has the Rubber Room for you. You should leave and post there as intelligent people have reached the point of satiation laughing at your takes here in S&T forum.
Clearly you don't understand how evolution works or refuse to.All the examples given were not of vestige organs change which resulted in a different specie. Maybe early man did have a larger appendix because of diet, but they were still man.
No. It has been natural selection from the beginning. Evolution changes minute pieces very slowly and if its not suited, goodbye.here is a thought for you, what is the driving force of evolution? Survival of the fittest?
If they didn't die, why wouldn't they be competing also?As i understand that means those animals the compete the best for food sources survive those who don't die.
Not at all. Those that do not inherit changes suited to their environment, get natural selected and do not breed.Well that would mean that the number of animals would determine the amount of competition.
Cetaceans (whale ancestors) that had hind limbs and chewed their food:
Basilosaurus - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
"According to paleontologist Barbara Stahl, the serpentine-shaped body and the peculiar shape of the cheek teeth make it clear that these archaeocetes could not have been the ancestor of modern whales.[3][4] With regard to this transition Barbara Stahl further states that Basilosaurus and its relatives do not display, even in a rudimentary way, evidences of the backward migration of the nostrils on the dorsal surface of the head, the reduction and carried upwards of nasal bones and the expansion of premaxillary and maxillary elements to the rear to cover the original braincase roof.[3] Another problem is that according with National Academy of Sciences publication[5] Basilosaurus was the precursor to modern whales, one of the missing links. However many disagree of this. Among them, Dr. Lawrence Barnes, a whale evolution expert from the National History Museum who does not believe that Basilosaurus was an ancestor to modern whales because this whale lived at the same time as the modern form of whales.[6]"
Basilosaurus - CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science
creationwiki.org
They're NOT ancestors lol.
Right, but cetaceans were. This is not the only ctacean with hind limbs or molars. So you didn't really make any point , there. Because you are very dumb.of the cheek teeth make it clear that these archaeocetes could not have been the ancestor of modern whales.
No, I am right and made my point. I'll win in the end. Wikipedia is liberal and has tendency towards atheist science.Right, but cetaceans were. This is not the only ctacean with hind limbs or molars. So you didn't really make any point , there. Because you are very dumb.
Such is why creationer ministries have no connection to science.Some easy facts. Today's monkeys and birds are the same as yesterday's monkeys and birds. The fossil records shows this and that explains why they exist today. The ability to reason like this is part of the intelligent design, but for some reason it's not on YOUR side.
The EVIDENCE and science backs up the creation side. It's NOT MY FAULT that evolutionists believes in lies without any evidence. SATAN did it again to THE EVOS as he convinced them through Darwin and the atheist scientists.Such is why creationer ministries have no connection to science.
There is no evidence presented by ID'iot creationers.The EVIDENCE and science backs up the creation side. It's NOT MY FAULT that evolutionists believes in lies without any evidence. SATAN did it again to THE EVOS as he convinced them through Darwin and the atheist scientists.
