Science Proves the Bible Again

[Hollie]

Ahh, you're on the event horizon of a conspiracy theory.

“Oy vey he noticed!”

Gee, whiz. Your tender sensibilities are offended.

Don't be offended. The bibles are the only books you need to read.

Only for you pharisitical atheists. You are more provincial than you will ever grasp

You hold opinions based on ignorance.

You hold yours based in a provincial and limited worldview...like any other Puritan fundamentalist.

Such an angry zealot.

 

[bripat9643]

but I do have countless lying on your part accusing me of lying and lying about evolution. You got zero evidence

And then a lie, in the next breath. You just can't help yourself.

You must be talking to yourself in the mirror. Stick out your tongue. Is it forked shape haha?

You have zero evidence as your mountain of evidence while you can't help yourself in believing in the lies. In the Michio Kaku thread, he established God exists through theoretical physics experiment and math. That is where the truth begins. Not with Satan. You know it, but still cannot accept because lying is easier to cover up your foolishness.

Michio Kaku did not establish that God exists.

You don't know the meaning of "evidence." You believe evidence is where the Bible says God created the universe.

 

[bripat9643]

Your basic circular reasoning fallacy. That is evolution in-a-nutshell.

Before Ardi, you were claiming it was Lucy. What a contradiction!

No monkeys are bipedal today. If things in the present help find how things were in the past, then the past monkeys were not bipedal. They also have small cranial capacity like the past monkeys. We also do not see any monkeys becoming human. Humans are humans. Monkeys are monkeys even though you look like a monkey.

So you are wrong again.

I got the term "macroevolutio" from -- Macroevolution. How stupid can you be???!!!???!!!

Furthermore, the answer has already been found circa 2011. Your so-called evolution is behind .

"The cfr gene resides on a plasmid (mobile element) and can easily be transferred from one bacterium to another. The cfr protein transfers chemical groups called methyl groups to the ribosome (protein-making factory) that prohibits antibiotics from binding to the ribosome but does not affect the function of the ribosome. The gene has been found in MRSA bacteria and helps bacteria resist seven classes of antibiotics. This gene is a very powerful ally to the bacteria! It is unknown whether S. sciuri obtained the gene from another bacteria or whether the cfr gene was original to the bacteria and may have acquired mutations that permitted it to still perform the function of methylation but in a way that allowed the bacteria to resist antibiotics. Either way, it is clearly not the evolution of a new gene from “scratch.” Rather, it is the modification of a current gene that is beneficial to the bacteria in the presence of antibiotics.

The scientist involved in the study stated, “What we've discovered here is so exciting because it represents a truly new chemical mechanism for methylation. We now have a very clear chemical picture of a very clever mechanism for antibiotic resistance that some bacteria have evolved.” Although the bacteria are obviously not “clever,” God in His infinite wisdom and grace designed bacteria with amazing mechanisms to allow them to adapt in a post-Fall world (see this article for more information). If the scientist by using the word evolved means “change,” then yes the bacteria have changed, but they have not evolved new genes that would help them evolve from a microbe into a man."

Bacteria Keep “Outsmarting” Antibiotics

Thats great about the gods designing bacteria. Be sure to thank them for designing the cancer cell. A masterstroke of design.

And just when I was thinking I couldn’t be less impressed with you. Cancer isn’t a form of bacteria.

Try paying attention. My response was to the suggestion of the gods "designing" bacteria. Were the gods selective in their "designs" and not design the cancer cell?

Cancer cells were designed?

Bacteria was designed?

If we are to believe that the gods are responsible for all of creation then we have to accept that things are the way they are because the gods want them precisely this way.. And this includes a nasty and capricious nature which will kill people via floods and tornadoes and fires and earthquakes and disease etc., none of which are essential to a world created by the gods. They could have just as easily made things otherwise, they just didn't.

God created the smallpox and polio viruses to show humans how loving and benevolent he is.

 

[bripat9643]

You still have found a chimp or ape that is bipedal.

Uh...what? You write like a child.

Humans are bipedal apes, you imbecile. And all the other apes are at least partially bipedal, and the newly discovered Bili ape appears to be mostly, if not completely, bipedal.

Just shut up, you fraud. You are embarrassing yourself.

All specimens in the human family tree going back almost 2 million years are fully bipedal.

Becoming Human: The Evolution of Walking Upright | Science | Smithsonian

The earliest hominid with the most extensive evidence for bipedalism is the 4.4-million-year-old Ardipithecus ramidus. In 2009, researchers announced the results of more than 15 years of analysis of the species and introduced the world to a nearly complete skeleton called Ardi.

Although the earliest hominids were capable of upright walking, they probably didn’t get around exactly as we do today. They retained primitive features—such as long, curved fingers and toes as well as longer arms and shorter legs—that indicate they spent time in trees. It’s not until the emergence of H. erectus 1.89 million years ago that hominids grew tall, evolved long legs and became completely terrestrial creatures.​

Your basic circular reasoning fallacy. That is evolution in-a-nutshell.

Before Ardi, you were claiming it was Lucy. What a contradiction!

No monkeys are bipedal today. If things in the present help find how things were in the past, then the past monkeys were not bipedal. They also have small cranial capacity like the past monkeys. We also do not see any monkeys becoming human. Humans are humans. Monkeys are monkeys even though you look like a monkey.

So you are wrong again.

"Macro evolution" is not a scientific term. It's hocus-pocus. There is only evolution. Not all science is experiments. Furthermore, evolution has been tested in the lab with bacteria. We have bacteria resistant to antibiotics because of evolution.

I got the term "macroevolutio" from -- Macroevolution. How stupid can you be???!!!???!!!

Furthermore, the answer has already been found circa 2011. Your so-called evolution is behind .

"The cfr gene resides on a plasmid (mobile element) and can easily be transferred from one bacterium to another. The cfr protein transfers chemical groups called methyl groups to the ribosome (protein-making factory) that prohibits antibiotics from binding to the ribosome but does not affect the function of the ribosome. The gene has been found in MRSA bacteria and helps bacteria resist seven classes of antibiotics. This gene is a very powerful ally to the bacteria! It is unknown whether S. sciuri obtained the gene from another bacteria or whether the cfr gene was original to the bacteria and may have acquired mutations that permitted it to still perform the function of methylation but in a way that allowed the bacteria to resist antibiotics. Either way, it is clearly not the evolution of a new gene from “scratch.” Rather, it is the modification of a current gene that is beneficial to the bacteria in the presence of antibiotics.

The scientist involved in the study stated, “What we've discovered here is so exciting because it represents a truly new chemical mechanism for methylation. We now have a very clear chemical picture of a very clever mechanism for antibiotic resistance that some bacteria have evolved.” Although the bacteria are obviously not “clever,” God in His infinite wisdom and grace designed bacteria with amazing mechanisms to allow them to adapt in a post-Fall world (see this article for more information). If the scientist by using the word evolved means “change,” then yes the bacteria have changed, but they have not evolved new genes that would help them evolve from a microbe into a man."

Bacteria Keep “Outsmarting” Antibiotics

Learn what the term "circular reasoning" is before you use it in a sentence. Even if my post is wrong, it's not because of circular reasoning.

There is a bipedal ape today: homo sapiens. I won't bother disputing the rest of your swill because it's too stupid to bother with. You never address the questions you're asked, so why bother? Your cut-and-paste eruptions prove nothing.

 

[bripat9643]

The Bible claims that Jesus is the light of the world. The Bible in Revelations also states that there will be no need for the Sun because GOD will be the light. Imagine for a moment that GOD created light and then He establish a source for that light. The reality would be that any star, even trillions of miles away, would already become a source of light already reaching planet earth. In other words, before any problem or knowledge of the speed of light was known by man, GOD through HIS WORD, demonstrated the logical solution.

Post hoc rationalization supported by nothing.

 

[bripat9643]

The Bible claims that Jesus is the light of the world. The Bible in Revelations also states that there will be no need for the Sun because GOD will be the light. Imagine for a moment that GOD created light and then He establish a source for that light. The reality would be that any star, even trillions of miles away, would already become a source of light already reaching planet earth. In other words, before any problem or knowledge of the speed of light was known by man, GOD through HIS WORD, demonstrated the logical solution.

Why did the gods put the stars millions of light years away to make the appearance of a vast and old universe?

Those gawds, they're such kidders.

It seems God is always trying to fool us.

 

[bripat9643]

Haha, you are the number one plagiarizer of that idiot blog,

Well, you're the idiot that kept talking about creation.com and wrongly attributing it to me (despite my telling you I use AIG and ICR). Thus, I finally found an article of theirs I liked and now you don't like it and say I am plagiarizing it with zero evidence. Zero evidence is what you have for aliens, abiogenesis and we still haven't gotten anything from trying to back-engineer a chicken into a dinosaur or mini-raptor unless you are counting dino chicken nuggets .

OTOH, I did present Louis Pasteur's famous experiment to disprove abiogenesis -- only life begats life and how amino acids can't form proteins outside of the cell due to chilarity. Moreover, I presented the fine tuning facts and solar wind (including magnetic field and tectonic plates) to discard aliens. I even added SETI, Elon Musk's theories,Ferdi paradox, Drake equation, great filter and more to explain we should have made contact with ET already. Yet, you atheists and wrong scientists cannot "believe" even though panspermia has pretty much been ruled out. You still have not found a living chimp or ape that is bipedal. Yet, you claim to have the mountain of evidence and that evolution is fact. So far, the fact is evolution is wrong even though we want to see the chicken raptor .

I don’t think panspermia has been entirely ruled out. Francis Crick was convinced it was the only explanation. And it does solve some molecular clock issues. But that only begs the question of creation by pushing it back to another time and place.
There are no aliens so far as science knows. Nor any reason or evidence to postulate aliens. Life appears to have been a one time event. More than that...complex life seems to have been pushed upwards and onwards through a series (7 I believe) of events that are mind bogglingly unlikely.

So far we only know of life on this planet. We don't have the technology yet to determine if life exists on other planets.

 

[DOTR]

What impresses you as brilliant questions are really just the stock shallow sophistries of the puritan atheist.
If God created cancer then your inability to understand the reasons is hardly enough to sow doubt in my mind. God didn’t meet your standards for creation? Let’s see your improved version.

Put another way..if there is no reason for cancer, and no God, then why hasnt evolution eliminated it? (I know the answer. But you wouldn’t would you?)

 

[DOTR]

Haha, you are the number one plagiarizer of that idiot blog,

Well, you're the idiot that kept talking about creation.com and wrongly attributing it to me (despite my telling you I use AIG and ICR). Thus, I finally found an article of theirs I liked and now you don't like it and say I am plagiarizing it with zero evidence. Zero evidence is what you have for aliens, abiogenesis and we still haven't gotten anything from trying to back-engineer a chicken into a dinosaur or mini-raptor unless you are counting dino chicken nuggets .

OTOH, I did present Louis Pasteur's famous experiment to disprove abiogenesis -- only life begats life and how amino acids can't form proteins outside of the cell due to chilarity. Moreover, I presented the fine tuning facts and solar wind (including magnetic field and tectonic plates) to discard aliens. I even added SETI, Elon Musk's theories,Ferdi paradox, Drake equation, great filter and more to explain we should have made contact with ET already. Yet, you atheists and wrong scientists cannot "believe" even though panspermia has pretty much been ruled out. You still have not found a living chimp or ape that is bipedal. Yet, you claim to have the mountain of evidence and that evolution is fact. So far, the fact is evolution is wrong even though we want to see the chicken raptor .

I don’t think panspermia has been entirely ruled out. Francis Crick was convinced it was the only explanation. And it does solve some molecular clock issues. But that only begs the question of creation by pushing it back to another time and place.
There are no aliens so far as science knows. Nor any reason or evidence to postulate aliens. Life appears to have been a one time event. More than that...complex life seems to have been pushed upwards and onwards through a series (7 I believe) of events that are mind bogglingly unlikely.

So far we only know of life on this planet. We don't have the technology yet to determine if life exists on other planets.

Nor do they?

 

[DOTR]

The Bible claims that Jesus is the light of the world. The Bible in Revelations also states that there will be no need for the Sun because GOD will be the light. Imagine for a moment that GOD created light and then He establish a source for that light. The reality would be that any star, even trillions of miles away, would already become a source of light already reaching planet earth. In other words, before any problem or knowledge of the speed of light was known by man, GOD through HIS WORD, demonstrated the logical solution.

Why did the gods put the stars millions of light years away to make the appearance of a vast and old universe?

Those gawds, they're such kidders.

It seems God is always trying to fool us.

I think God leaves the fools to their own devices.

 

[abu afak]

What impresses you as brilliant questions are really just the stock shallow sophistries of the puritan atheist.
If God created cancer then your inability to understand the reasons is hardly enough to sow doubt in my mind. God didn’t meet your standards for creation? Let’s see your improved version.

Put another way..if there is no reason for cancer, and no God, then why hasnt evolution eliminated it? (I know the answer. But you wouldn’t would you?)

I think God leaves the fools to their own devices.

Let us know when you can post ANY evidence of this 'god'.
Which/Witch 'god' btw?
There are so many, and so many that are contradictory,
and ergo at least 75% are necessarily wrong even if one stepped in it.
`

 

[james bond]

You still have found a chimp or ape that is bipedal.

Uh...what? You write like a child.

Humans are bipedal apes, you imbecile. And all the other apes are at least partially bipedal, and the newly discovered Bili ape appears to be mostly, if not completely, bipedal.

Just shut up, you fraud. You are embarrassing yourself.

All specimens in the human family tree going back almost 2 million years are fully bipedal.

Becoming Human: The Evolution of Walking Upright | Science | Smithsonian

The earliest hominid with the most extensive evidence for bipedalism is the 4.4-million-year-old Ardipithecus ramidus. In 2009, researchers announced the results of more than 15 years of analysis of the species and introduced the world to a nearly complete skeleton called Ardi.

Although the earliest hominids were capable of upright walking, they probably didn’t get around exactly as we do today. They retained primitive features—such as long, curved fingers and toes as well as longer arms and shorter legs—that indicate they spent time in trees. It’s not until the emergence of H. erectus 1.89 million years ago that hominids grew tall, evolved long legs and became completely terrestrial creatures.​

Your basic circular reasoning fallacy. That is evolution in-a-nutshell.

Before Ardi, you were claiming it was Lucy. What a contradiction!

No monkeys are bipedal today. If things in the present help find how things were in the past, then the past monkeys were not bipedal. They also have small cranial capacity like the past monkeys. We also do not see any monkeys becoming human. Humans are humans. Monkeys are monkeys even though you look like a monkey.

So you are wrong again.

"Macro evolution" is not a scientific term. It's hocus-pocus. There is only evolution. Not all science is experiments. Furthermore, evolution has been tested in the lab with bacteria. We have bacteria resistant to antibiotics because of evolution.

I got the term "macroevolutio" from -- Macroevolution. How stupid can you be???!!!???!!!

Furthermore, the answer has already been found circa 2011. Your so-called evolution is behind .

"The cfr gene resides on a plasmid (mobile element) and can easily be transferred from one bacterium to another. The cfr protein transfers chemical groups called methyl groups to the ribosome (protein-making factory) that prohibits antibiotics from binding to the ribosome but does not affect the function of the ribosome. The gene has been found in MRSA bacteria and helps bacteria resist seven classes of antibiotics. This gene is a very powerful ally to the bacteria! It is unknown whether S. sciuri obtained the gene from another bacteria or whether the cfr gene was original to the bacteria and may have acquired mutations that permitted it to still perform the function of methylation but in a way that allowed the bacteria to resist antibiotics. Either way, it is clearly not the evolution of a new gene from “scratch.” Rather, it is the modification of a current gene that is beneficial to the bacteria in the presence of antibiotics.

The scientist involved in the study stated, “What we've discovered here is so exciting because it represents a truly new chemical mechanism for methylation. We now have a very clear chemical picture of a very clever mechanism for antibiotic resistance that some bacteria have evolved.” Although the bacteria are obviously not “clever,” God in His infinite wisdom and grace designed bacteria with amazing mechanisms to allow them to adapt in a post-Fall world (see this article for more information). If the scientist by using the word evolved means “change,” then yes the bacteria have changed, but they have not evolved new genes that would help them evolve from a microbe into a man."

Bacteria Keep “Outsmarting” Antibiotics

Thats great about the gods designing bacteria. Be sure to thank them for designing the cancer cell. A masterstroke of design.

Holy guacamole!!! YOUR POST #556 IS THE STUPIDEST, STUPIDEST, STUPIDEST STATEMENT IN THE UNIVERSE!!!

I just DESTROYED whiny bripat9643 with his snobby evolution science experiment about bacteria and antibiotics. He may never show his beotchy face ever on USMB again. We know there was no NEW gene created. No modification with descent. Just modification. This shows intelligence behind the design as God has allowed. Further evidence of God. Furthermore, we learned that there is something in the antibiotic to allow the bacteria to change. This is the key, key, key. you looney tunes oaf.

 

[james bond]

Fort Fun Indiana, where is the chicken that became a dinosaur? If that experiment doesn't happen, then it never did happen and never will happen. You have LIED and are WRONG once again. What kind of brain dead are you?

Chickens descend from theropod dinosaurs. They don’t become dinosaurs.

The atheist scientists are trying to reverse-engineer the chicken into a dinosaur because of their faith-based beliefs.

Reverse Engineering Birds’ Beaks Into Dinosaur Bones

 

[LittleNipper]

Thats great about the gods designing bacteria. Be sure to thank them for designing the cancer cell. A masterstroke of design.

And just when I was thinking I couldn’t be less impressed with you. Cancer isn’t a form of bacteria.

Try paying attention. My response was to the suggestion of the gods "designing" bacteria. Were the gods selective in their "designs" and not design the cancer cell?

Cancer cells were designed?

Bacteria was designed?

If we are to believe that the gods are responsible for all of creation then we have to accept that things are the way they are because the gods want them precisely this way.. And this includes a nasty and capricious nature which will kill people via floods and tornadoes and fires and earthquakes and disease etc., none of which are essential to a world created by the gods. They could have just as easily made things otherwise, they just didn't.

God created the smallpox and polio viruses to show humans how loving and benevolent he is.

GOD created benevolent organisms which may now harm individuals only because sin has corrupted everything in the environment including humanity.

 

[Hollie]

What impresses you as brilliant questions are really just the stock shallow sophistries of the puritan atheist.
If God created cancer then your inability to understand the reasons is hardly enough to sow doubt in my mind. God didn’t meet your standards for creation? Let’s see your improved version.

Put another way..if there is no reason for cancer, and no God, then why hasnt evolution eliminated it? (I know the answer. But you wouldn’t would you?)

What befuddles you are some pretty basic elements of biological evolution you are ignorant about.

It is rather ignorant to presume that cancer cells (or any other biological organism) would arbitrarily be eliminated. Biological evolution is a branching tree, not a straight line from "good to bad". A population of organisms may evolve over time together or may split, with each of its subpopulations evolving in different "directions." This is apparent with the flu virus that morphs from year to year.

Otherwise, why did the gawds design the peculiar circumstances of the planetary tilt on its axis, convection currents and the rotation of the earth to create twisters or tornadoes? Such poor design choices.

I'm sure you can speak to the above on behalf of the gods.

 

[james bond]

but I do have countless lying on your part accusing me of lying and lying about evolution. You got zero evidence

And then a lie, in the next breath. You just can't help yourself.

You must be talking to yourself in the mirror. Stick out your tongue. Is it forked shape haha?

You have zero evidence as your mountain of evidence while you can't help yourself in believing in the lies. In the Michio Kaku thread, he established God exists through theoretical physics experiment and math. That is where the truth begins. Not with Satan. You know it, but still cannot accept because lying is easier to cover up your foolishness.

Michio Kaku did not establish that God exists.

You don't know the meaning of "evidence." You believe evidence is where the Bible says God created the universe.

That's Kaku's theory based on his invisible particles experiment. Then he discovered "God is a mathematician." Don't ask me to explain his theoretical physics experiment. He's on the side of secular/atheist science. That's why the atheists all had their panties in a bunch. You can read about this in the other thread.

You are wrong again and again and again. All of the evidence should soften your thinking, but it just softens your already weak brain and hardens your heart.

Yes, the evidence is the clay tablets (Deutronomy) found centuries ago in a temple. Over time God "inspired" more books and the collection of books continued to grow. IOW, God left his autobiography in such a way that his word was discovered over time through different writers. Today's Bible was formed around 100 AD. The Dead Sea Scrolls discovered in a cave in 1947 is one of the most famous complete Bible discoveries.

I just provided the evidence while you provided more assertions and poo-poo as usually is the case.

 

[LittleNipper]

What impresses you as brilliant questions are really just the stock shallow sophistries of the puritan atheist.
If God created cancer then your inability to understand the reasons is hardly enough to sow doubt in my mind. God didn’t meet your standards for creation? Let’s see your improved version.

Put another way..if there is no reason for cancer, and no God, then why hasnt evolution eliminated it? (I know the answer. But you wouldn’t would you?)

What befuddles you are some pretty basic elements of biological evolution you are ignorant about.

It is rather ignorant to presume that cancer cells (or any other biological organism) would arbitrarily be eliminated. Biological evolution is a branching tree, not a straight line from "good to bad". A population of organisms may evolve over time together or may split, with each of its subpopulations evolving in different "directions." This is apparent with the flu virus that morphs from year to year.

Otherwise, why did the gawds design the peculiar circumstances of the planetary tilt on its axis, convection currents and the rotation of the earth to create twisters or tornadoes? Such poor design choices.

I'm sure you can speak to the above on behalf of the gods.

Sin corrupted everything in the environment. This will not be corrected until the New Heaven and the New Earth is established after the White throne Judgment.

 

[james bond]

Learn what the term "circular reasoning" is before you use it in a sentence. Even if my post is wrong, it's not because of circular reasoning.

There is a bipedal ape today: homo sapiens. I won't bother disputing the rest of your swill because it's too stupid to bother with. You never address the questions you're asked, so why bother? Your cut-and-paste eruptions prove nothing.

You are the poster child for circular reasoning, bripat9643. You just have to stick up your finger, do it in front of mirror and take a selfie.

 

[Hollie]

You still have found a chimp or ape that is bipedal.

Uh...what? You write like a child.

Humans are bipedal apes, you imbecile. And all the other apes are at least partially bipedal, and the newly discovered Bili ape appears to be mostly, if not completely, bipedal.

Just shut up, you fraud. You are embarrassing yourself.

All specimens in the human family tree going back almost 2 million years are fully bipedal.

Becoming Human: The Evolution of Walking Upright | Science | Smithsonian

The earliest hominid with the most extensive evidence for bipedalism is the 4.4-million-year-old Ardipithecus ramidus. In 2009, researchers announced the results of more than 15 years of analysis of the species and introduced the world to a nearly complete skeleton called Ardi.

Although the earliest hominids were capable of upright walking, they probably didn’t get around exactly as we do today. They retained primitive features—such as long, curved fingers and toes as well as longer arms and shorter legs—that indicate they spent time in trees. It’s not until the emergence of H. erectus 1.89 million years ago that hominids grew tall, evolved long legs and became completely terrestrial creatures.​

Your basic circular reasoning fallacy. That is evolution in-a-nutshell.

Before Ardi, you were claiming it was Lucy. What a contradiction!

No monkeys are bipedal today. If things in the present help find how things were in the past, then the past monkeys were not bipedal. They also have small cranial capacity like the past monkeys. We also do not see any monkeys becoming human. Humans are humans. Monkeys are monkeys even though you look like a monkey.

So you are wrong again.

"Macro evolution" is not a scientific term. It's hocus-pocus. There is only evolution. Not all science is experiments. Furthermore, evolution has been tested in the lab with bacteria. We have bacteria resistant to antibiotics because of evolution.

I got the term "macroevolutio" from -- Macroevolution. How stupid can you be???!!!???!!!

Furthermore, the answer has already been found circa 2011. Your so-called evolution is behind .

"The cfr gene resides on a plasmid (mobile element) and can easily be transferred from one bacterium to another. The cfr protein transfers chemical groups called methyl groups to the ribosome (protein-making factory) that prohibits antibiotics from binding to the ribosome but does not affect the function of the ribosome. The gene has been found in MRSA bacteria and helps bacteria resist seven classes of antibiotics. This gene is a very powerful ally to the bacteria! It is unknown whether S. sciuri obtained the gene from another bacteria or whether the cfr gene was original to the bacteria and may have acquired mutations that permitted it to still perform the function of methylation but in a way that allowed the bacteria to resist antibiotics. Either way, it is clearly not the evolution of a new gene from “scratch.” Rather, it is the modification of a current gene that is beneficial to the bacteria in the presence of antibiotics.

The scientist involved in the study stated, “What we've discovered here is so exciting because it represents a truly new chemical mechanism for methylation. We now have a very clear chemical picture of a very clever mechanism for antibiotic resistance that some bacteria have evolved.” Although the bacteria are obviously not “clever,” God in His infinite wisdom and grace designed bacteria with amazing mechanisms to allow them to adapt in a post-Fall world (see this article for more information). If the scientist by using the word evolved means “change,” then yes the bacteria have changed, but they have not evolved new genes that would help them evolve from a microbe into a man."

Bacteria Keep “Outsmarting” Antibiotics

Thats great about the gods designing bacteria. Be sure to thank them for designing the cancer cell. A masterstroke of design.

Holy guacamole!!! YOUR POST #556 IS THE STUPIDEST, STUPIDEST, STUPIDEST STATEMENT IN THE UNIVERSE!!!

I just DESTROYED whiny bripat9643 with his snobby evolution science experiment about bacteria and antibiotics. He may never show his beotchy face ever on USMB again. We know there was no NEW gene created. No modification with descent. Just modification. This shows intelligence behind the design as God has allowed. Further evidence of God. Furthermore, we learned that there is something in the antibiotic to allow the bacteria to change. This is the key, key, key. you looney tunes oaf.

A rather frantic tirade that addresses nothing. I've noticed that the hyper-religious tend to behave as you do (screeching rants), when their gods are held accountable.

 

[DOTR]

Fort Fun Indiana, where is the chicken that became a dinosaur? If that experiment doesn't happen, then it never did happen and never will happen. You have LIED and are WRONG once again. What kind of brain dead are you?

Chickens descend from theropod dinosaurs. They don’t become dinosaurs.

The atheist scientists are trying to reverse-engineer the chicken into a dinosaur because of their faith-based beliefs.

Reverse Engineering Birds’ Beaks Into Dinosaur Bones

Yeah well that was an interesting article but they won’t be creating dinosaurs. Just malformed chickens.