Darwinian evolution is not science its nothing but tax payer funded religious dogma. Its taught as fact but in reality its an unprovable theory as there is no LAW OF EVOLUTION as taught in our school systems.
As far a census opinion meaning something.......some on this board declare that every important man of science has historically supported human evolution as being a scientific fact......Indeed human evolution (within species) is a fact of nature. Man was created with the ability to evolve/adapt............if not, mankind would've became extinct when he 1st came into contact with the common cold virus or when he first encountered some drastic climate/weather change.
But there is a distinct difference between "horizontal evolution" which is a fact of science that demonstrates evolution within SPECIES and "vertical evolution" as taught by the Darwinian Quacks as a fact ......evolution of a vertical nature or the teaching that man has evolved from a different species. They do this, muddy the waters, they present examples of evolution within species and declare.........see, facts, and then go off on a tangent narrative and claim this proves Vertical Evolution, evolution outside of species....by calling MUTATION as a reality that creates new species........but in reality MUTATION is the deformed entity of a completely healthy DNA example....mutation never adds onto a DNA, mutation takes away perfection and leaves deformity behind in its wake.
They will show different states of animalistic type characteristics of supposed different stages of human evolution.....when in reality the fossils found represent.....the remains of isolated pockets of humanity that attempted to survive via incestuous reproduction. The fossils found are nothing but examples of deformed or mutated HUMANS as the DNA proves.
They attempt to declare, "See the great resemblance between normal DNA and these sub humans?" Of course the DNA is close........but there is always something missing.....that which is missing is the reason for the deformity.
You will never see a Darwinist promote this possibility because it defeats their basic tenet of life having evolved randomly from NON LIVING MATTER.
There is a huge list of great men of science that dismisses Darwinian teaching as quackery. There are many of these men of science that actually believe in the God of Creation. 1. Joseph Lister........the father of antiseptic surgical practice
2. Louis Pasteur who debunked the atheistic claim of "spontaneous generation of life from non living matter".
3. Isaac Newton......who believed in gravity, calculus and the Bible. 4. Johann Kepler astronomy. 5. Robert Boyle Chemistry.
6. Georges Cuvier Paleontology. 7. Charles Baggage computer science. ............more great men of science that had a census opinion of accepting creationism over Darwinism?
Charles Maxwell, Michael Faraday, Ambrose Fleming....the list goes on and on........in fact up to 50% of the scientific community is beginning to drastically question Darwinian quackery.
Again.........anyone, SHOW ME THE LAW OF EVOUTION. If not simply accept your place as being a member of a religious cult as anything can be made into a religion and its nothing short of worshiping to read some of the quackery presented as scientific evidence.
When they go off on this tangent teaching, claiming its SCIENCE.....notice the words ALWAYS used in these supposed Scientific opinions. They use words such as, "points to", "suggests" "most likely" "could it be", etc. Real scientific Terms
As far a census opinion meaning something.......some on this board declare that every important man of science has historically supported human evolution as being a scientific fact......Indeed human evolution (within species) is a fact of nature. Man was created with the ability to evolve/adapt............if not, mankind would've became extinct when he 1st came into contact with the common cold virus or when he first encountered some drastic climate/weather change.
But there is a distinct difference between "horizontal evolution" which is a fact of science that demonstrates evolution within SPECIES and "vertical evolution" as taught by the Darwinian Quacks as a fact ......evolution of a vertical nature or the teaching that man has evolved from a different species. They do this, muddy the waters, they present examples of evolution within species and declare.........see, facts, and then go off on a tangent narrative and claim this proves Vertical Evolution, evolution outside of species....by calling MUTATION as a reality that creates new species........but in reality MUTATION is the deformed entity of a completely healthy DNA example....mutation never adds onto a DNA, mutation takes away perfection and leaves deformity behind in its wake.
They will show different states of animalistic type characteristics of supposed different stages of human evolution.....when in reality the fossils found represent.....the remains of isolated pockets of humanity that attempted to survive via incestuous reproduction. The fossils found are nothing but examples of deformed or mutated HUMANS as the DNA proves.
They attempt to declare, "See the great resemblance between normal DNA and these sub humans?" Of course the DNA is close........but there is always something missing.....that which is missing is the reason for the deformity.
You will never see a Darwinist promote this possibility because it defeats their basic tenet of life having evolved randomly from NON LIVING MATTER.
There is a huge list of great men of science that dismisses Darwinian teaching as quackery. There are many of these men of science that actually believe in the God of Creation. 1. Joseph Lister........the father of antiseptic surgical practice
2. Louis Pasteur who debunked the atheistic claim of "spontaneous generation of life from non living matter".
3. Isaac Newton......who believed in gravity, calculus and the Bible. 4. Johann Kepler astronomy. 5. Robert Boyle Chemistry.
6. Georges Cuvier Paleontology. 7. Charles Baggage computer science. ............more great men of science that had a census opinion of accepting creationism over Darwinism?
Charles Maxwell, Michael Faraday, Ambrose Fleming....the list goes on and on........in fact up to 50% of the scientific community is beginning to drastically question Darwinian quackery.
Again.........anyone, SHOW ME THE LAW OF EVOUTION. If not simply accept your place as being a member of a religious cult as anything can be made into a religion and its nothing short of worshiping to read some of the quackery presented as scientific evidence.
When they go off on this tangent teaching, claiming its SCIENCE.....notice the words ALWAYS used in these supposed Scientific opinions. They use words such as, "points to", "suggests" "most likely" "could it be", etc. Real scientific Terms
Last edited:
) You omit the scriptures that command all deceit be exposed while defending the word of God? If the bible is untrue in any part then it cast doubts on entire work of books.
)........and the dead were judged, according to their works, by the things which were written in books." -- Rev. 20:12
