Zone1 The Problem of Evil

[frigidweirdo]

Retroactive Prehistory

That myth was based on the ancient lake created by the melting of the glaciers. It extended from Switzerland to Afghanistan. The Flood wiped out the evil Neanderthal species. Noah and his family weren't the only Cro-Magnons to survive and wind up in the Caucasus Mountains.

Neanderthal were evil?

Also, are you saying the Bible isn't true?

 

[Clyde 154]

Evolution is based on overwhelming physical evidence from many fields of science. You can play semantic games with the word 'theory' but that only shows your ignorance of the scientific term 'theory'.

If any evidence were actually "overwhelming"...............the LAW OF EVOLUTION would be observable and reproducible. Present the evidence for a Law of Evolution, if you can the noble prize is yours. There is no Law of Evolution.

Show me the overwhelming evidence that does not begin with subjective BS pseudo terminology. Example: Darwinism. Concept, Suggests, Possible, Could have. There is no evidence of any type of evolution OUTSIDE OF SPECIES. All lifeforms on the planet earth share DNA......all life on earth is carbon based. No Dog has ever evolved into a Cat, no fish has ever evolved into warm blooded animal. Of course all lives form were coded within their DNA to adapt to their surroundings..........if not biological life would have become extinct when it encountered a simple cold virus. Life adapts not because of MUTATION, which in reality never improves a string of DNA it corrupts DNA and makes any offspring inferior to the preceding generation. Vertical Evolution is a scientific impossibility........... horizontal evolution has existed since the beginning of time (within species). Because a bird grows a different type of beak does not mean that its no longer a bird.......because miniature horses exist along side giant horses such as Clydesdales.......does not mean either is no longer a horse. The same for a wolf, fox, dog......etc., all bovine types of cattle....all are the within species. Just as Genesis 1:24 declared and Pasteur proved in the 19th century



I laugh when some Darwinian Cultist finds a group of human remains in an isolated cave system and declare the remains as some separate species other than human......never considering the same MUTATED traits occur naturally due to inbreeding. Look at the pictures or supposed wax figures presented in museums........declaring these are examples of subhumans along the evolutionary map. Then look at the pictures of inbreed families found in isolated groups of humans. LMAO enlarged skulls, deformed jaw lines, enlarged brow lines....overgrown bones, deformed feet...etc.

Men evolved from lower primates? My question? What? Are the primates that exist today just to stupid to evolve into man?

 

[Clyde 154]

If any evidence were actually "overwhelming"...............the LAW OF EVOLUTION would be observable and reproducible. Present the evidence for a Law of Evolution, if you can the noble prize is yours. There is no Law of Evolution.

Show me the overwhelming evidence that does not begin with subjective BS pseudo terminology. Example: Darwinism. Concept, Suggests, Possible, Could have. There is no evidence of any type of evolution OUTSIDE OF SPECIES. All lifeforms on the planet earth share DNA......all life on earth is carbon based. No Dog has ever evolved into a Cat, no fish has ever evolved into warm blooded animal. Of course all lives form were coded within their DNA to adapt to their surroundings..........if not biological life would have become extinct when it encountered a simple cold virus. Life adapts not because of MUTATION, which in reality never improves a string of DNA it corrupts DNA and makes any offspring inferior to the preceding generation. Vertical Evolution is a scientific impossibility........... horizontal evolution has existed since the beginning of time (within species). Because a bird grows a different type of beak does not mean that its no longer a bird.......because miniature horses exist along side giant horses such as Clydesdales.......does not mean either is no longer a horse. The same for a wolf, fox, dog......etc., all bovine types of cattle....all are the within species. Just as Genesis 1:24 declared and Pasteur proved in the 19th century



I laugh when some Darwinian Cultist finds a group of human remains in an isolated cave system and declare the remains as some separate species other than human......never considering the same MUTATED traits occur naturally due to inbreeding. Look at the pictures or supposed wax figures presented in museums........declaring these are examples of subhumans along the evolutionary map. Then look at the pictures of inbreed families found in isolated groups of humans. LMAO enlarged skulls, deformed jaw lines, enlarged brow lines....overgrown bones, deformed feet...etc.

Men evolved from lower primates? My question? What? Are the primates that exist today just to stupid to evolve into man?

Please don't attempt to piss down my back and declare, "relax its only rain". Man has never evolved outside of its own species. Horizontal Evolution is not evidence that proves Vertical Evolution outside of species. Were the dinosaurs once cold blooded then evolved into warm blooded creatures with the traits of birds? Hell, you can't get the supposed scientific community to even agree on the concept of warm blooded or cold blooded ......but either or both is taught as FACT. BS

Problem solved.........in order to fit the pseudo narrative. Let's declare that dinosaurs were both Warm Blooded and Cold Blooded. LMAO
And were are to blindly accept as truth that a living biological lifeform can be both warm blooded and cold blooded? Notice how the TRUTHFUL article begins..........."May HAVE evolved...." Yeah, MAY HAVE is real objective scientific term.

Dinosaurs may have evolved from warm-blooded ancestor

Some dinosaurs, such as stegosaurs, may have needed to bask in the sun to keep their body temperature constant.

www.nhm.ac.uk

 

[Meriweather]

Sorry but I'm not capable of reaching a decision until the facts are in.

I get that. Let someone else do the work for those who can't be bothered.

 

[ding]

No, just for truth and logic and reason.

Your need to change the argument from there's no God to there's no God of Abraham says otherwise.

 

[alang1216]

If any evidence were actually "overwhelming"...............the LAW OF EVOLUTION would be observable and reproducible. Present the evidence for a Law of Evolution, if you can the noble prize is yours. There is no Law of Evolution.

That is your strawman, I never said it. We have found literally trillions of fossils and not one of them violates the theory of evolution. If you don't believe in evolution how do you explain the fossil record? Very old rocks contain dinosaurs but no humans or any of the mammals we see today. Even older rocks contain no dinosaurs. Where did dinosaurs come from? Where did dogs and cats come from?

Of course all lives form were coded within their DNA to adapt to their surroundings..........

How much adaptation must happen before a new species exists, one that can't breed with original species? Donkeys and horses maybe?

The same for a wolf, fox, dog......etc., all bovine types of cattle....all are the within species. Just as Genesis 1:24 declared and Pasteur proved in the 19th century

Did all creation take place in 6 days?

I laugh when some Darwinian Cultist finds a group of human remains in an isolated cave system and declare the remains as some separate species other than human......never considering the same MUTATED traits occur naturally due to inbreeding. Look at the pictures or supposed wax figures presented in museums........declaring these are examples of subhumans along the evolutionary map. Then look at the pictures of inbreed families found in isolated groups of humans. LMAO enlarged skulls, deformed jaw lines, enlarged brow lines....overgrown bones, deformed feet...etc.

What if you look at their DNA and find it completely different?

Men evolved from lower primates? My question? What? Are the primates that exist today just to stupid to evolve into man?

You have finally revealed your complete lack of knowledge of evolution so it is hardly surprising you don't believe it is true.

 

[alang1216]

Please don't attempt to piss down my back and declare, "relax its only rain". Man has never evolved outside of its own species. Horizontal Evolution is not evidence that proves Vertical Evolution outside of species. Were the dinosaurs once cold blooded then evolved into warm blooded creatures with the traits of birds? Hell, you can't get the supposed scientific community to even agree on the concept of warm blooded or cold blooded ......but either or both is taught as FACT. BS

Problem solved.........in order to fit the pseudo narrative. Let's declare that dinosaurs were both Warm Blooded and Cold Blooded. LMAO
And were are to blindly accept as truth that a living biological lifeform can be both warm blooded and cold blooded? Notice how the TRUTHFUL article begins..........."May HAVE evolved...." Yeah, MAY HAVE is real objective scientific term.

Dinosaurs may have evolved from warm-blooded ancestor

Some dinosaurs, such as stegosaurs, may have needed to bask in the sun to keep their body temperature constant.

www.nhm.ac.uk

Again, your ignorance of the subject is on display. There are fish that have eyes and fish that don't is that a problem for you?

 

[alang1216]

I get that. Let someone else do the work for those who can't be bothered.

Great idea, thanks. Let me know when some evidence surfaces.

 

[Meriweather]

Great idea, thanks. Let me know when some evidence surfaces.

Go beyond evidence. Or...stay within self-created boundaries. That was noted at the beginning.

 

[alang1216]

Your need to change the argument from there's no God to there's no God of Abraham says otherwise.

No, I think I've been pretty consistent in my beliefs: there may be a 'creator' of the universe (agnostic) but the God of Abraham is a myth with no connect to any creator (atheist). Doesn't mean I don't like myths, I just take them for what they are, nothing more.

 

[Meriweather]

alang1216 Grin. So you disagree. So did all the people who never went to sea and all those who never went over the mountains. Too afraid of sea and mountains, too afraid of all they might find.

 

[alang1216]

alang1216 Grin. So you disagree. So did all the people who never went to sea and all those who never went over the mountains. Too afraid of sea and mountains, too afraid of all they might find.

I make a firm distinction between the natural world and the supernatural one. I live in the natural world so that is fine. Going into the supernatural world, at least to me, is like heroin. I'm sure I'd love it while I'm doing it but I'm not sure I'd ever make it back to reality and in the end I'd gain little except some escapism.

 

[Meriweather]

I make a firm distinction between the natural world and the supernatural one. I live in the natural world so that is fine. Going into the supernatural world, at least to me, is like heroin. I'm sure I'd love it while I'm doing it but I'm not sure I'd ever make it back to reality and in the end I'd gain little except some escapism.

As I cannot tolerate anything stronger than aspirin, nor alcohol (genetics from my grandmother, thank you very much, Grandma), I cannot relate to heroin. The fear that it might end with little more than escapism is probably nothing to fear, but the uncertainty that you'd never make it back should you try, is valid. However, once the experience ends, reality hits big time mainly because physical reality is a pale comparison to actual reality.

 

[alang1216]

physical reality is a pale comparison to actual reality.

I understood the rest of your post but this one confused me.

 

[Clyde 154]

That is your strawman, I never said it. We have found literally trillions of fossils and not one of them violates the theory of evolution. If you don't believe in evolution how do you explain the fossil record? Very old rocks contain dinosaurs but no humans or any of the mammals we see today. Even older rocks contain no dinosaurs. Where did dinosaurs come from? Where did dogs and cats come from?


How much adaptation must happen before a new species exists, one that can't breed with original species? Donkeys and horses maybe?


Did all creation take place in 6 days?


What if you look at their DNA and find it completely different?


You have finally revealed your complete lack of knowledge of evolution so it is hardly surprising you don't believe it is true.

Spin much? You never said the evidence is overwhelming (a straw argument) and you attempt to use the secular deflection of accusing others of YOUR GUILT? LMAO. Again.......if evolution is a fact with overwhelming evidence.........SHOW ME THE LAW OF EVOLUTION. Imagine that.......a wingnut attempting to declare the Laws of Physics as a straw argument. Priceless. You will not address the question because you know the answer..........evolution is an IDEA not a fact...as it cannot be proven via the basic laws of physics.

The Holy Scriptures address fools such as yourself. ".......professing wisdom they became fools........" Creation is proven via the things that are created without quantification by Applied Science. Human Secularism DECLARES the Universe as a self creating realm in direct violation of the laws of physics........secularism declares that life came from Star Dust with Helium and Hydrogen evolving into biological life after cooking in chaos for 13 billion years. It takes a fool to believe such nonsense.

"For the wrath of God is revealed from Heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, BECAUSE THAT WHICH IS KNOWN OF GOD IS EVIDENT WITHIN THEM; FOR GOD MADE IT EVIDENT TO THEM. FOR SINCE THE CREATION OF THE WORLD HIS INVISIBLE ATTRIBUTES, HIS ETERNAL POWER AND DIVINE NATURE, HAVE BEEN CLEARLY SEEN, BEING UNDERSTOOD THROUGH WHAT IS MADE, SO THEY ARE WITHOUT EXCUSE. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, BUT THEY BECAUSE FUTILE IN THEIR SPECULATION, AND THEIR FOOLISH HEARTS WERE DARKENED..............


Professing to be wise, they became fools................" -- Romans 1:18-23


If you can't present the Law of Evolution as demonstrated by the Scientific Method of Observable, reproducible consistency ..........present the Facts of Physics that disprove the Creation Model. Objective facts in evidence........no speculation, no assumptions, no conjecture.....not philosophy (human thought) dressed up like science.......just prove the creation model false through the application of science. On the flip side of that coin...........A self creating, self evolving through chaos, beginning with just 2 elements Helium and Hydrogen as found in a star after the supposed big bang......turning into biological life after billions of years...........IS FALSIFIED EVERY TIME THAT A SELF GENERATING LIFE EXPERIMENT IS PUT TO THE TEST OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD.

Creation has never been objectively disproved by an application of science actual.........creating life from dead matter is falsified every time its placed to the text of the Scientific Method.

Just like all secular spin nuts...........you attempt to erect a building (theory of evolution) while dismissing the fact that your building (evolution) has no foundation to stand on. Life could not evolve unless it first comes into existence yet you attempt skip over the required fundamental building blocks of evolution. Abiogenesis.......you can't prove life evolved from dead matter or the universe created itself from nothing via the laws of physics that control it...........but you ignore your lack of a foundation, your argument is constructed upon quick sand. Talk about a strawman argument.........you are the one ignoring the 1st law of logic, the law of the excluded middle. Nothing can be both true and false.

 

[alang1216]

Spin much? You never said the evidence is overwhelming (a straw argument) and you attempt to use the secular deflection of accusing others of YOUR GUILT? LMAO. Again.......if evolution is a fact with overwhelming evidence.........SHOW ME THE LAW OF EVOLUTION. Imagine that.......a wingnut attempting to declare the Laws of Physics as a straw argument. Priceless. You will not address the question because you know the answer..........evolution is an IDEA not a fact...as it cannot be proven via the basic laws of physics.

The evidence for evolution IS overwhelming and is supported by biology, geology, and paleontology. Descent from a common ancestor is a fact, there are many scientific THEORIES as to how evolution proceeds but it is likely a combination of several factors.

The Holy Scriptures address fools such as yourself. ".......professing wisdom they became fools........" Creation is proven via the things that are created without quantification by Applied Science. Human Secularism DECLARES the Universe as a self creating realm in direct violation of the laws of physics........secularism declares that life came from Star Dust with Helium and Hydrogen evolving into biological life after cooking in chaos for 13 billion years. It takes a fool to believe such nonsense.

Or a scientist, as most do believe it. How does creationism explain the fossil record? For a very long time there were no dinosaurs, then they appeared. Is the process of creation still going on?

"For the wrath of God is revealed from Heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, BECAUSE THAT WHICH IS KNOWN OF GOD IS EVIDENT WITHIN THEM; FOR GOD MADE IT EVIDENT TO THEM. FOR SINCE THE CREATION OF THE WORLD HIS INVISIBLE ATTRIBUTES, HIS ETERNAL POWER AND DIVINE NATURE, HAVE BEEN CLEARLY SEEN, BEING UNDERSTOOD THROUGH WHAT IS MADE, SO THEY ARE WITHOUT EXCUSE. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, BUT THEY BECAUSE FUTILE IN THEIR SPECULATION, AND THEIR FOOLISH HEARTS WERE DARKENED..............

Professing to be wise, they became fools................" -- Romans 1:18-23

You take your wisdom from a man who was convinced he was living at the end of time. Two thousand years later we are still waiting for him to be right.

If you can't present the Law of Evolution as demonstrated by the Scientific Method of Observable, reproducible consistency ..........present the Facts of Physics that disprove the Creation Model. Objective facts in evidence........no speculation, no assumptions, no conjecture.....not philosophy (human thought) dressed up like science.......just prove the creation model false through the application of science. On the flip side of that coin...........A self creating, self evolving through chaos, beginning with just 2 elements Helium and Hydrogen as found in a star after the supposed big bang......turning into biological life after billions of years...........IS FALSIFIED EVERY TIME THAT A SELF GENERATING LIFE EXPERIMENT IS PUT TO THE TEST OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD.

So you've moved the goal posts from evolution to abiogenesis. How many billion years have these experiments been run? On the other hand, has anyone ever seen creationism in action? Is there a mechanism for creationism?

Creation has never been objectively disproved by an application of science actual.........creating life from dead matter is falsified every time its placed to the text of the Scientific Method.

How many times has creationism been proved?

Just like all secular spin nuts...........you attempt to erect a building (theory of evolution) while dismissing the fact that your building (evolution) has no foundation to stand on. Life could not evolve unless it first comes into existence yet you attempt skip over the required fundamental building blocks of evolution. Abiogenesis.......you can't prove life evolved from dead matter or the universe created itself from nothing via the laws of physics that control it...........but you ignore your lack of a foundation, your argument is constructed upon quick sand. Talk about a strawman argument.........you are the one ignoring the 1st law of logic, the law of the excluded middle. Nothing can be both true and false.

There are plenty of examples of non-living matter mimicking some functions of life as in self-replicating molecules. Doesn't take much imagination to think what would happen after billions of years of that.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Neanderthal were evil?

Also, are you saying the Bible isn't true?

Mika's No Archangel

You could say that God wanted to dramatize His point, so He told the scripture in parables. Jesus certainly used them. The point of the fable of Adam and Eve was, "Don't be like Joe Scarborough!"

 

[frigidweirdo]

Mika's No Archangel

You could say that God wanted to dramatize His point, so He told the scripture in parables. Jesus certainly used them. The point of the fable of Adam and Eve was, "Don't be like Joe Scarborough!"

You could say a million different things.

The problem is these religious people are telling everyone that this stuff is TRUE. It's in the Bible, so it's true.

I had one guy start telling me that it didn't rain heavily in the flood story, it was a light constant rain and all kinds of things.

 

[Clyde 154]

The evidence for evolution IS overwhelming and is supported by biology, geology, and paleontology. Descent from a common ancestor is a fact, there are many scientific THEORIES as to how evolution proceeds but it is likely a combination of several factors.


Or a scientist, as most do believe it. How does creationism explain the fossil record? For a very long time there were no dinosaurs, then they appeared. Is the process of creation still going on?


You take your wisdom from a man who was convinced he was living at the end of time. Two thousand years later we are still waiting for him to be right.


So you've moved the goal posts from evolution to abiogenesis. How many billion years have these experiments been run? On the other hand, has anyone ever seen creationism in action? Is there a mechanism for creationism?


How many times has creationism been proved?


There are plenty of examples of non-living matter mimicking some functions of life as in self-replicating molecules. Doesn't take much imagination to think what would happen after billions of years of that.

Of course descent from a common ancestor is a fact of biology...............a human ancestor (within species) is a fact. If there was no first creation there could be no descending possible. You continue to ignore the basic tenant of the vertical evolution........abiogenesis. Again........what you call evolution is a trait of all biological life on earth, the ability to access dormant DNA in order adapt to outside threats and environment. To claim that mutation adds quality to any strain of DNA is laughable, mutation corrupts healthy DNA and produces less than perfect examples of existing life, always has, always will.

In a prima facie manner creation is demonstrated by the Physical Fact that nothing can create itself from nothing...........like the BIG BANG. Its called the Law of Causality that has never been broken or proven wrong. If the universe can't explain its own existence by application of the laws of Physics........then CREATION must be Transcendent or Superior to Nature......its called Super (superior) Natural (to nature). Creation does not require FACTS only TRUTHS. TRUTH can be established by a presentation of Prima Facie evidence beyond the reason to doubt otherwise. In order to refute the supernatural creation model you must present the FACTS of PHYSICS that proves the prima facie to be false. Proceed explain via the laws of physics how the universe created itself from nothing, producing 2 gasses (helium and hydrogen) that formed stars which in turn EVOLVED in biological life over billions of years. ITS YOU that claims to be working with facts of science.........creationists claim to be working with prima facie truth beyond reasoon of doubt based upon REASON and LOGIC.

God is eternal and requires no creator........


Once again.....present the LAW OF EVOLUTION as demonstrated by the application of physics and the scientific Method. Demonstrate how non living matter become alive and changed species.....show us an example of how DNA adds unto a healthy example of life. If a creature is to change its DNA producing warm blooded animals from cold blooded creatures as claimed by the Darwinian Cult...........where did the new information come from? Magic? Pond Scum? When any living creature evolves within species.......it must by logic and reason come from dormant pre-existing links. There is no way in hades to add or (wink, wink) MUTATE information that did not previously exist.....most certainly mutation changes any lineage within species........it corrupts the perfect producing an incomplete example of that life. Deformed limbs, eyes, bones,. An example of such is finding a type of deformed fish and claiming that its a completely new life form.....or deformed human remains and claim these examples of deformation are different examples of evolution.

If you can't prove abiogenesis ......then by logic you must believe in creationism. Attempting to claim that horizontal evolution equates to vertical evolution (one species changing into another) is laughable. Next you attempt to claim that "consensus" argument establishes facts of science. If that is true........then the 90 + percent of humanity that believes in God in one form or another must be true.....no? Consensus proves nothing......consensus is a subjective opinion. Those calling themselves men of science in history once taught as a consensus that the sun revolved around the earth which was the center of the universe.........that leech bleeding was a cure to certain medical conditions....etc.,

My Question is? Why did God allow a rib bone to evolve into a megaphone?

 

[Meriweather]

I understood the rest of your post but this one confused me.

It was once noted that we are not physical beings seeking a spiritual existence, but spiritual beings seeking physical existence. For this to make any sense, belief has to start with the knowledge humans are body, mind, and spirit.

The Apostle Paul (who may have been the very person he said was caught up to the third heaven) once described this existence as only being able to see as though through a dark glass. I do not know what he meant by 'third heaven', but being a photography student back then, I described it as this life being the negative (that brownish film) of a positive print.

I experienced God's love, which is beyond description, beyond imagining. No one in this life can love anyone else as much as they deserve; no one can love you as much as you deserve. Our love is a pale copy of the reality. My immediate desire was, "I wish I could love like that." And, the knowledge that God loves all--not just me--like that.

Looking for physical evidence of God is like looking for physical evidence of love. Looking for evidence about love starts with the wrong idea about love and will only result in wrong conclusions. Even more so when it comes to God. Looking for physical evidence of God starts with the blunder that there is physical evidence to be found. The error in that premise can only result in an error in the conclusion.