theists, please give us the creation of man theory

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
72,375
Reaction score
4,481
Points
1,855
Location
Houston
When did God start making deformed and retarded babies?
When humans started playing around with chemicals they do not fully understand or control
It happened way before that. Or do you have a link that shows a specific date that this started? No? Then please try again.
What is your point?

God created life

would you prefer Nothingness?

never to have existed?
The point is that your answer was simply made up on the spot. Which shows that what theists don't know, they make up, like the bible. The authors had no concept of science and just wrote what they did understand, which was not much.
You could say exactly the same thing about evolution. It's all made up.
no---not the same thing at all.......evolution is a theory based on evidence
..creation just says ''god did it''
You pretend you understand science.
hahahhahahahahaha
....better than BELIEVING fairytales made up by people thousands of years ago that didn't know shit = they were dumb= you must be dumb
hhahhahahahahahhahahah
You think they are fairy tales instead of how ancient man passed down history and knowledge.

hhahhahahahahahhahahah
hhahhahahahahahhahahah
hhahhahahahahahhahahahahhahhahahahahah
hhahhahahahahahhahahahahhahhahahahahah
hhahhahahahahahhahahahahhahhahahahahahhahahahhhahhahahahaha
hhahhahahahahahhahahahahhahhahahahahahhahahah hhahhahahahaha
hhahhahahahahahhahahahahhahhahahahahah
hhahhahahahahahhahahahahhahhahahahahah
hhahhahahahahahhahahahahhahhaha
hhahhahahahahahhahahahahhahhaha
.....ancient man thought the world was flat and the Earth was the center of the Universe--so they didn't know shit
hahahahahahhaahhah
Just as the Chinese used well known history and everyday things as symbols in their written language to make words easier to remember, ancient man used stories to pass down historical events and important knowledge to future generations. Interspersed in these allegorical accounts of history are wisdoms that they deemed important enough to pass down and remember.

hhahhahahahahahhahahah
hhahhahahahahahhahahah
hhahhahahahahahhahahahahhahhahahahahah
hhahhahahahahahhahahahahhahhahahahahah
hhahhahahahahahhahahahahhahhahahahahahhahahahhhahhahahahaha
hhahhahahahahahhahahahahhahhahahahahahhahahah hhahhahahahaha
hhahhahahahahahhahahahahhahhahahahahah
hhahhahahahahahhahahahahhahhahahahahah
hhahhahahahahahhahahahahhahhaha
hhahhahahahahahhahahahahhahhaha
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
36,833
Reaction score
3,829
Points
1,130
Why don't 'evolution' cultists just provide us with the chain of evidence that proves their fantasy is indeed a fact? A simple request for those allegedly all 'scientific n stuff'. Otherwise you trolls have nothing to say except nonsense. It must suck that Genesis has as much credibility as your weird improbable nonsense, and in fact agrees with such 'science' as the Big bang Theory and the 'Adam' allegory is more scientifically feasible than dumbass claims that humans 'evolved' over time, or just spontaneously popped up by the hundreds all at once, fully adult and capable of feeding themselves and wandering around the planet, depending on which silly handwave one chooses to adopt today.
Oh, dear. That’s a tough one.

For a chain of evidence, I might suggest 150 years of advancements and discoveries in science, paleontology, biology, chemistry and geology.

Or, we could just default to your preferred ideology of rattling bones and making animal sacrifice to the gods to make thunder and lightning go away.
 

Meriweather

Not all who wander are lost
Joined
Oct 21, 2014
Messages
6,121
Reaction score
719
Points
165
so, you don't have a theory on the creation of man
No. I am quite content with knowing the little that is available and pondering the questions. There is a difference between being curious about any number of past or future things that truly cannot be answered just yet--and the things that are vital to living life to the fullest now in the present. How we evolved or what our next life will be like isn't vital to right now.
 

BreezeWood

VIP Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
9,826
Reaction score
522
Points
85
Why don't 'evolution' cultists just provide us with the chain of evidence that proves their fantasy is indeed a fact? A simple request for those allegedly all 'scientific n stuff'. Otherwise you trolls have nothing to say except nonsense. It must suck that Genesis has as much credibility as your weird improbable nonsense, and in fact agrees with such 'science' as the Big bang Theory and the 'Adam' allegory is more scientifically feasible than dumbass claims that humans 'evolved' over time, or just spontaneously popped up by the hundreds all at once, fully adult and capable of feeding themselves and wandering around the planet, depending on which silly handwave one chooses to adopt today.
Oh, dear. That’s a tough one.

For a chain of evidence, I might suggest 150 years of advancements and discoveries in science, paleontology, biology, chemistry and geology.

Or, we could just default to your preferred ideology of rattling bones and making animal sacrifice to the gods to make thunder and lightning go away.
.
Why don't 'evolution' cultists just provide us with the chain of evidence that proves their fantasy is indeed a fact?
Oh, dear. That’s a tough one.
.
picaro has a habit of running away when the evidence is provided ... must be why they keep asking for it.
 

Picaro

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
18,868
Reaction score
3,962
Points
290
Location
Texas
Why don't 'evolution' cultists just provide us with the chain of evidence that proves their fantasy is indeed a fact? A simple request for those allegedly all 'scientific n stuff'. Otherwise you trolls have nothing to say except nonsense. It must suck that Genesis has as much credibility as your weird improbable nonsense, and in fact agrees with such 'science' as the Big bang Theory and the 'Adam' allegory is more scientifically feasible than dumbass claims that humans 'evolved' over time, or just spontaneously popped up by the hundreds all at once, fully adult and capable of feeding themselves and wandering around the planet, depending on which silly handwave one chooses to adopt today.
THAT'S your theory??
the point is, theists DON'T have a theory--really...it's just ''god did it'''
I understand evolution better than you do.
hahahahahaha
LOL they think some stupid rubbish is better than nothing, as long as it isn't part of a social revolution that condemns mindless self-indulgence and a God who refuses to perform magic tricks on demand, as all pagans want to see, along with massive humans sacrifices to appease their bloodlust. And, they think 'rational people' should be on their side ....
 

Picaro

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
18,868
Reaction score
3,962
Points
290
Location
Texas
.....ancient man thought the world was flat ....
Some did, most didn't.



"The earliest documentation of a spherical Earth comes from the ancient Greeks (5th century BC).[4][5] Since the 600s AD,[6] scholars have supported that view, and by the Early Middle Ages (7001500 AD), virtually all scholars maintained the spherical viewpoint.

Since the 1400s, belief in a flat Earth among educated Europeans was almost nonexistent. This despite fanciful depictions in art, such as the exterior panels of Hieronymus Bosch's famous triptych The Garden of Earthly Delights, in which a disc-shaped Earth is shown floating inside a transparent sphere.[7][3]

According to Stephen Jay Gould, "there never was a period of 'flat Earth darkness' among scholars, regardless of how the public at large may have conceptualized our planet both then and now. Greek knowledge of sphericity never faded, and all major medieval scholars accepted the Earth's roundness as an established fact of cosmology."[8] Historians of science David Lindberg and Ronald Numbers point out that "there was scarcely a Christian scholar of the Middle Ages who did not acknowledge [Earth's] sphericity and even know its approximate circumference".[9]

Historian Jeffrey Burton Russell says the flat-Earth error flourished most between 1870 and 1920, and had to do with the ideological setting created by struggles over biological evolution. Russell claims "with extraordinary few exceptions no educated person in the history of Western Civilization from the third century B.C. onward believed that the Earth was flat", and ascribes popularization of the flat-Earth myth to histories by John William Draper, Andrew Dickson White, and Washington Irving.[2][10][11]"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_flat_Earth#cite_note-FOOTNOTERussell1993-11

Oh my, it seems that the 'intellectuals' of the era most enamored with 'evolution' and 'social Darwinism' are the tards who came up with the 'flat earth' myth and spread that as 'fact', too .... what a coincidence, eh?


"In Inventing the Flat Earth: Columbus and Modern Historians, Jeffrey Russell describes the Flat Earth theory as a fable used to impugn pre-modern civilization and creationism.[10][2][3]

James Hannam wrote:


The myth that people in the Middle Ages thought the Earth is flat appears to date from the 17th century as part of the campaign by Protestants against Catholic teaching. But it gained currency in the 19th century, thanks to inaccurate histories such as John William Draper's History of the Conflict Between Religion and Science (1874) and Andrew Dickson White's A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom (1896). Atheists and agnostics championed the conflict thesis for their own purposes, but historical research gradually demonstrated that Draper and White had propagated more fantasy than fact in their efforts to prove that science and religion are locked in eternal conflict.[12]"
Oh my, the 'objective rationalists' like to lie a lot, don't they? No surprise that these days many academics think over 35% of doctoral theses use faked data, and we know for certain corporations can hire all the scientists they want to lie about whatever they want them to.
 
Last edited:

Picaro

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
18,868
Reaction score
3,962
Points
290
Location
Texas
Why don't 'evolution' cultists just provide us with the chain of evidence that proves their fantasy is indeed a fact? A simple request for those allegedly all 'scientific n stuff'. Otherwise you trolls have nothing to say except nonsense. It must suck that Genesis has as much credibility as your weird improbable nonsense, and in fact agrees with such 'science' as the Big bang Theory and the 'Adam' allegory is more scientifically feasible than dumbass claims that humans 'evolved' over time, or just spontaneously popped up by the hundreds all at once, fully adult and capable of feeding themselves and wandering around the planet, depending on which silly handwave one chooses to adopt today.
It’s 7th grade biology that introduces students to how organisms change and adapt to their environments. Was your 7th grade spent at a madrassah?
It’s nice to know that one only needs a 7th grade education to believe in evolution.
It's disturbing to know most of these 'rationalists' don't even know their own theories and can't discern the diffrences between adaptations alread built into genes and mutations, which are necessary by the billions and trillions, all beneficial to boot and in correct sequences, in order for 'evolution' to work, yet science proves benefical mutations are practically non-existent in real live, making the whole theory a pile of rubbish re empirical evidence, and indeed they can never produce any evidence; instead of evidence, we're suppose to accept some weird nonsense re a tiny motley collection of bones from several extinct species of apes scattered over millions of years that will fit on my kitchen table as 'evidence', and by extension that means anal sex between men must be 'normal' or something and all kinds of other stupid claims, cuz Xians are bads n stuff.
 

Picaro

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
18,868
Reaction score
3,962
Points
290
Location
Texas
Why don't 'evolution' cultists just provide us with the chain of evidence that proves their fantasy is indeed a fact? A simple request for those allegedly all 'scientific n stuff'. Otherwise you trolls have nothing to say except nonsense. It must suck that Genesis has as much credibility as your weird improbable nonsense, and in fact agrees with such 'science' as the Big bang Theory and the 'Adam' allegory is more scientifically feasible than dumbass claims that humans 'evolved' over time, or just spontaneously popped up by the hundreds all at once, fully adult and capable of feeding themselves and wandering around the planet, depending on which silly handwave one chooses to adopt today.
THAT'S your theory??
the point is, theists DON'T have a theory--really...it's just ''god did it'''
I don't have a theory, and I'm not some pathetic sexual fetishist with some compulsion to bash Xians or a sociopath who can't grasp just why it's bad to murder 10's of millions of babies just for the crime of being 'inconvenient', when almost everyone in the first world knows what is 100% effective at preventing pregnancies. I sleep just fine not knowing either way. Judaism and its Christian sect have been a great positive in human history, while those who hate it an oppose it are loons and sickos for the most part, and of course they rely mass murders as their 'solution' to every social problem.

It's obvious 'evolution' is a load of bullshit, not 'science', and as a theory the Intelligent Design people have arguments that are in many cases better science than the 'evolutionists' make, which is also fine with me; I have no problem with teaching the ID arguments in schools if they're going to allow the 'evolution' rubbish and lies to be taught as 'facts' when they're not even close to 'facts', otherwise ban both of them and stop brainwashing kids; the schools are seriously screwing them up as it is. The only reason to peddle the 'evolution' nonsense is so they can peddle the political agendas re 'faggots are normal and trannies are too!' sickness, among other junk 'science'. Sociopaths particularly like the idea that 'economically useless people' should be starved to death or eliminated, and those asshole Xians stand in the way of 'economic reality', hence the sicko deviants, Marxists, and Libertarians all at least have common ground there in extermnating those assholes and their beliefs as well.
 
Last edited:

BreezeWood

VIP Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
9,826
Reaction score
522
Points
85
.....ancient man thought the world was flat ....
Some did, most didn't.



"The earliest documentation of a spherical Earth comes from the ancient Greeks (5th century BC).[4][5] Since the 600s AD,[6] scholars have supported that view, and by the Early Middle Ages (7001500 AD), virtually all scholars maintained the spherical viewpoint.

Since the 1400s, belief in a flat Earth among educated Europeans was almost nonexistent. This despite fanciful depictions in art, such as the exterior panels of Hieronymus Bosch's famous triptych The Garden of Earthly Delights, in which a disc-shaped Earth is shown floating inside a transparent sphere.[7][3]

According to Stephen Jay Gould, "there never was a period of 'flat Earth darkness' among scholars, regardless of how the public at large may have conceptualized our planet both then and now. Greek knowledge of sphericity never faded, and all major medieval scholars accepted the Earth's roundness as an established fact of cosmology."[8] Historians of science David Lindberg and Ronald Numbers point out that "there was scarcely a Christian scholar of the Middle Ages who did not acknowledge [Earth's] sphericity and even know its approximate circumference".[9]

Historian Jeffrey Burton Russell says the flat-Earth error flourished most between 1870 and 1920, and had to do with the ideological setting created by struggles over biological evolution. Russell claims "with extraordinary few exceptions no educated person in the history of Western Civilization from the third century B.C. onward believed that the Earth was flat", and ascribes popularization of the flat-Earth myth to histories by John William Draper, Andrew Dickson White, and Washington Irving.[2][10][11]"Myth of the flat Earth - Wikipedia

Oh my, it seems that the 'intellectuals' of the era most enamored with 'evolution' and 'social Darwinism' are the tards who came up with the 'flat earth' myth and spread that as 'fact', too .... what a coincidence, eh?


"In Inventing the Flat Earth: Columbus and Modern Historians, Jeffrey Russell describes the Flat Earth theory as a fable used to impugn pre-modern civilization and creationism.[10][2][3]

James Hannam wrote:


The myth that people in the Middle Ages thought the Earth is flat appears to date from the 17th century as part of the campaign by Protestants against Catholic teaching. But it gained currency in the 19th century, thanks to inaccurate histories such as John William Draper's History of the Conflict Between Religion and Science (1874) and Andrew Dickson White's A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom (1896). Atheists and agnostics championed the conflict thesis for their own purposes, but historical research gradually demonstrated that Draper and White had propagated more fantasy than fact in their efforts to prove that science and religion are locked in eternal conflict.[12]"
Oh my, the 'objective rationalists' like to lie a lot, don't they? No surprise that these days many academics think over 35% of doctoral theses use faked data, and we know for certain corporations can hire all the scientists they want to lie about whatever they want them to.
.
Since the 1400s, belief in a flat Earth among educated Europeans was almost nonexistent.
According to Stephen Jay Gould, "there never was a period of 'flat Earth darkness' among scholars, regardless of how the public at large may have conceptualized our planet both then and now.
.
are you sure picaro ... that's all there was the flat earth. so says the inquisitor.


On April 12, 1633, chief inquisitor Father Vincenzo Maculani da Firenzuola, appointed by Pope Urban VIII, begins the inquisition of physicist and astronomer Galileo Galilei. Galileo was ordered to turn himself in to the Holy Office to begin trial for holding the belief that the Earth revolves around the sun, which was deemed heretical by the Catholic Church. Standard practice demanded that the accused be imprisoned and secluded during the trial.


oh, of course how to victimize the innocent by your theory as long as that is possible who cares the subject matter -
 

BreezeWood

VIP Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
9,826
Reaction score
522
Points
85
Why don't 'evolution' cultists just provide us with the chain of evidence that proves their fantasy is indeed a fact? A simple request for those allegedly all 'scientific n stuff'. Otherwise you trolls have nothing to say except nonsense. It must suck that Genesis has as much credibility as your weird improbable nonsense, and in fact agrees with such 'science' as the Big bang Theory and the 'Adam' allegory is more scientifically feasible than dumbass claims that humans 'evolved' over time, or just spontaneously popped up by the hundreds all at once, fully adult and capable of feeding themselves and wandering around the planet, depending on which silly handwave one chooses to adopt today.
It’s 7th grade biology that introduces students to how organisms change and adapt to their environments. Was your 7th grade spent at a madrassah?
It’s nice to know that one only needs a 7th grade education to believe in evolution.
It's disturbing to know most of these 'rationalists' don't even know their own theories and can't discern the diffrences between adaptations alread built into genes and mutations, which are necessary by the billions and trillions, all beneficial to boot and in correct sequences, in order for 'evolution' to work, yet science proves benefical mutations are practically non-existent in real live, making the whole theory a pile of rubbish re empirical evidence, and indeed they can never produce any evidence; instead of evidence, we're suppose to accept some weird nonsense re a tiny motley collection of bones from several extinct species of apes scattered over millions of years that will fit on my kitchen table as 'evidence', and by extension that means anal sex between men must be 'normal' or something and all kinds of other stupid claims, cuz Xians are bads n stuff.
.
and indeed they can never produce any evidence -
.
evidence of the metaphysical physiology and its spiritual content -

1597371341701.png


the evolutionary process is provided in real time from the very beginning to the present - obscured by the deniers and their wanton disregard for natures bountiful blessings and remarkable achievements.
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
36,833
Reaction score
3,829
Points
1,130
Why don't 'evolution' cultists just provide us with the chain of evidence that proves their fantasy is indeed a fact? A simple request for those allegedly all 'scientific n stuff'. Otherwise you trolls have nothing to say except nonsense. It must suck that Genesis has as much credibility as your weird improbable nonsense, and in fact agrees with such 'science' as the Big bang Theory and the 'Adam' allegory is more scientifically feasible than dumbass claims that humans 'evolved' over time, or just spontaneously popped up by the hundreds all at once, fully adult and capable of feeding themselves and wandering around the planet, depending on which silly handwave one chooses to adopt today.
It’s 7th grade biology that introduces students to how organisms change and adapt to their environments. Was your 7th grade spent at a madrassah?
It’s nice to know that one only needs a 7th grade education to believe in evolution.
It's disturbing to know most of these 'rationalists' don't even know their own theories and can't discern the diffrences between adaptations alread built into genes and mutations, which are necessary by the billions and trillions, all beneficial to boot and in correct sequences, in order for 'evolution' to work, yet science proves benefical mutations are practically non-existent in real live, making the whole theory a pile of rubbish re empirical evidence, and indeed they can never produce any evidence; instead of evidence, we're suppose to accept some weird nonsense re a tiny motley collection of bones from several extinct species of apes scattered over millions of years that will fit on my kitchen table as 'evidence', and by extension that means anal sex between men must be 'normal' or something and all kinds of other stupid claims, cuz Xians are bads n stuff.
It seems you get your science from ID’iot creationist websites which would explain your confusion regarding some sadaptations “built in” to genes and mutations.

The claim that most mutations are harmful is right out of the playbook of Henry Morris, Answers in Genesis and the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. They are charlatans who prey on the scientifically illiterate.

  1. Most mutations are neutral. Nachman and Crowell estimate around 3 deleterious mutations out of 175 per generation in humans (2000). Of those that have significant effect, most are harmful, but the fraction which are beneficial is higher than usually though. An experiment with E. coli found that about 1 in 150 newly arising mutations and 1 in 10 functional mutations are beneficial (Perfeito et al. 2007).

    The harmful mutations do not survive long, and the beneficial mutations survive much longer, so when you consider only surviving mutations, most are beneficial.

  2. Beneficial mutations are commonly observed. They are common enough to be problems in the cases of antibiotic resistance in disease-causing organisms and pesticide resistance in agricultural pests (e.g., Newcomb et al. 1997; these are not merely selection of pre-existing variation.) They can be repeatedly observed in laboratory populations (Wichman et al. 1999). Other examples include the following:
    • Mutations have given bacteria the ability to degrade nylon (Prijambada et al. 1995).
    • Plant breeders have used mutation breeding to induce mutations and select the beneficial ones (FAO/IAEA 1977).
    • Certain mutations in humans confer resistance to AIDS (Dean et al. 1996; Sullivan et al. 2001) or to heart disease (Long 1994; Weisgraber et al. 1983).
    • A mutation in humans makes bones strong (Boyden et al. 2002).
    • Transposons are common, especially in plants, and help to provide beneficial diversity (Moffat 2000).
    • In vitro mutation and selection can be used to evolve substantially improved function of RNA molecules, such as a ribozyme (Wright and Joyce 1997).
  3. Whether a mutation is beneficial or not depends on environment. A mutation that helps the organism in one circumstance could harm it in another. When the environment changes, variations that once were counteradaptive suddenly become favored. Since environments are constantly changing, variation helps populations survive, even if some of those variations do not do as well as others. When beneficial mutations occur in a changed environment, they generally sweep through the population rapidly (Elena et al. 1996).

  4. High mutation rates are advantageous in some environments. Hypermutable strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa are found more commonly in the lungs of cystic fibrosis patients, where antibiotics and other stresses increase selection pressure and variability, than in patients without cystic fibrosis (Oliver et al. 2000).

  5. Note that the existence of any beneficial mutations is a falsification of the young-earth creationism model (Morris 1985, 13).

The “tiny motley collection of bones” comment is comedy gold. The national collection consists of 40 million fossil specimens. Would those really fit on your kitchen table?


“The National Fossil Collection contains over 40 million fossil specimens.”



How about Human fossils?


From skeletons to teeth, early human fossils have been found of more than 6,000 individuals. With the rapid pace of new discoveries every year, this impressive sample means that even though some early human species are only represented by one or a few fossils, others are represented by thousands of fossils. From them, we can understand things like:

  • how well adapted an early human species was for walking upright
  • how well adapted an early human species was for living in hot, tropical habitats or cold, temperate environments
  • the difference between male and female body size, which correlates to aspects of social behavior
  • how quickly or slowly children of early human species grew up.


Gee, whiz. You might want to send a strongly worded email to your local chapter of the Ken Ham Admiration Society and have them update their brochures.
 

Ben Thomson

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2020
Messages
684
Reaction score
555
Points
873
Sorry, but I needed more than 10 lines:

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.

4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness.

5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

6 And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.”

7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so.

8 God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.

9 And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so.

10 God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good.

11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so.

12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.

14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years,

15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so.

16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars.

17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth,

18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good.

19And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

20 And God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky.”

21So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living thing with which the water teems and that moves about in it, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.

22 God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.”

23 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.

24 And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the creatures that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its kind.” And it was so.

25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

27So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”

29 Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food.

30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.

31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.
28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number..I don't see that happening without a hell of a lot of incest going on..
 

Picaro

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
18,868
Reaction score
3,962
Points
290
Location
Texas
.....ancient man thought the world was flat ....
Some did, most didn't.



"The earliest documentation of a spherical Earth comes from the ancient Greeks (5th century BC).[4][5] Since the 600s AD,[6] scholars have supported that view, and by the Early Middle Ages (7001500 AD), virtually all scholars maintained the spherical viewpoint.

Since the 1400s, belief in a flat Earth among educated Europeans was almost nonexistent. This despite fanciful depictions in art, such as the exterior panels of Hieronymus Bosch's famous triptych The Garden of Earthly Delights, in which a disc-shaped Earth is shown floating inside a transparent sphere.[7][3]

According to Stephen Jay Gould, "there never was a period of 'flat Earth darkness' among scholars, regardless of how the public at large may have conceptualized our planet both then and now. Greek knowledge of sphericity never faded, and all major medieval scholars accepted the Earth's roundness as an established fact of cosmology."[8] Historians of science David Lindberg and Ronald Numbers point out that "there was scarcely a Christian scholar of the Middle Ages who did not acknowledge [Earth's] sphericity and even know its approximate circumference".[9]

Historian Jeffrey Burton Russell says the flat-Earth error flourished most between 1870 and 1920, and had to do with the ideological setting created by struggles over biological evolution. Russell claims "with extraordinary few exceptions no educated person in the history of Western Civilization from the third century B.C. onward believed that the Earth was flat", and ascribes popularization of the flat-Earth myth to histories by John William Draper, Andrew Dickson White, and Washington Irving.[2][10][11]"Myth of the flat Earth - Wikipedia

Oh my, it seems that the 'intellectuals' of the era most enamored with 'evolution' and 'social Darwinism' are the tards who came up with the 'flat earth' myth and spread that as 'fact', too .... what a coincidence, eh?


"In Inventing the Flat Earth: Columbus and Modern Historians, Jeffrey Russell describes the Flat Earth theory as a fable used to impugn pre-modern civilization and creationism.[10][2][3]

James Hannam wrote:


The myth that people in the Middle Ages thought the Earth is flat appears to date from the 17th century as part of the campaign by Protestants against Catholic teaching. But it gained currency in the 19th century, thanks to inaccurate histories such as John William Draper's History of the Conflict Between Religion and Science (1874) and Andrew Dickson White's A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom (1896). Atheists and agnostics championed the conflict thesis for their own purposes, but historical research gradually demonstrated that Draper and White had propagated more fantasy than fact in their efforts to prove that science and religion are locked in eternal conflict.[12]"
Oh my, the 'objective rationalists' like to lie a lot, don't they? No surprise that these days many academics think over 35% of doctoral theses use faked data, and we know for certain corporations can hire all the scientists they want to lie about whatever they want them to.
.
Since the 1400s, belief in a flat Earth among educated Europeans was almost nonexistent.
According to Stephen Jay Gould, "there never was a period of 'flat Earth darkness' among scholars, regardless of how the public at large may have conceptualized our planet both then and now.
.
are you sure picaro ... that's all there was the flat earth. so says the inquisitor.


On April 12, 1633, chief inquisitor Father Vincenzo Maculani da Firenzuola, appointed by Pope Urban VIII, begins the inquisition of physicist and astronomer Galileo Galilei. Galileo was ordered to turn himself in to the Holy Office to begin trial for holding the belief that the Earth revolves around the sun, which was deemed heretical by the Catholic Church. Standard practice demanded that the accused be imprisoned and secluded during the trial.

oh, of course how to victimize the innocent by your theory as long as that is possible who cares the subject matter -
Breezewood, still pissed about that pony he was supposed to get.
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
36,833
Reaction score
3,829
Points
1,130
Why don't 'evolution' cultists just provide us with the chain of evidence that proves their fantasy is indeed a fact? A simple request for those allegedly all 'scientific n stuff'. Otherwise you trolls have nothing to say except nonsense. It must suck that Genesis has as much credibility as your weird improbable nonsense, and in fact agrees with such 'science' as the Big bang Theory and the 'Adam' allegory is more scientifically feasible than dumbass claims that humans 'evolved' over time, or just spontaneously popped up by the hundreds all at once, fully adult and capable of feeding themselves and wandering around the planet, depending on which silly handwave one chooses to adopt today.
THAT'S your theory??
the point is, theists DON'T have a theory--really...it's just ''god did it'''
I don't have a theory, and I'm not some pathetic sexual fetishist with some compulsion to bash Xians or a sociopath who can't grasp just why it's bad to murder 10's of millions of babies just for the crime of being 'inconvenient', when almost everyone in the first world knows what is 100% effective at preventing pregnancies. I sleep just fine not knowing either way. Judaism and its Christian sect have been a great positive in human history, while those who hate it an oppose it are loons and sickos for the most part, and of course they rely mass murders as their 'solution' to every social problem.

It's obvious 'evolution' is a load of bullshit, not 'science', and as a theory the Intelligent Design people have arguments that are in many cases better science than the 'evolutionists' make, which is also fine with me; I have no problem with teaching the ID arguments in schools if they're going to allow the 'evolution' rubbish and lies to be taught as 'facts' when they're not even close to 'facts', otherwise ban both of them and stop brainwashing kids; the schools are seriously screwing them up as it is. The only reason to peddle the 'evolution' nonsense is so they can peddle the political agendas re 'faggots are normal and trannies are too!' sickness, among other junk 'science'. Sociopaths particularly like the idea that 'economically useless people' should be starved to death or eliminated, and those asshole Xians stand in the way of 'economic reality', hence the sicko deviants, Marxists, and Libertarians all at least have common ground there in extermnating those assholes and their beliefs as well.
Totally awesome, dude.

I was hoping you could link us to the peer reviewed research data submitted by the fine folks at the Creation Research Society or those at the Disco’tute.

Shirley, the ID’iot creation ministries must have a wealth of data they can present to support magic and supernaturalism as opposed to the atheist evilutionist scientists and their bogus science and stuff.

Thanks,

Thanks, again.
 

Picaro

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
18,868
Reaction score
3,962
Points
290
Location
Texas
Why don't 'evolution' cultists just provide us with the chain of evidence that proves their fantasy is indeed a fact? A simple request for those allegedly all 'scientific n stuff'. Otherwise you trolls have nothing to say except nonsense. It must suck that Genesis has as much credibility as your weird improbable nonsense, and in fact agrees with such 'science' as the Big bang Theory and the 'Adam' allegory is more scientifically feasible than dumbass claims that humans 'evolved' over time, or just spontaneously popped up by the hundreds all at once, fully adult and capable of feeding themselves and wandering around the planet, depending on which silly handwave one chooses to adopt today.
It’s 7th grade biology that introduces students to how organisms change and adapt to their environments. Was your 7th grade spent at a madrassah?
It’s nice to know that one only needs a 7th grade education to believe in evolution.
It's disturbing to know most of these 'rationalists' don't even know their own theories and can't discern the diffrences between adaptations alread built into genes and mutations, which are necessary by the billions and trillions, all beneficial to boot and in correct sequences, in order for 'evolution' to work, yet science proves benefical mutations are practically non-existent in real live, making the whole theory a pile of rubbish re empirical evidence, and indeed they can never produce any evidence; instead of evidence, we're suppose to accept some weird nonsense re a tiny motley collection of bones from several extinct species of apes scattered over millions of years that will fit on my kitchen table as 'evidence', and by extension that means anal sex between men must be 'normal' or something and all kinds of other stupid claims, cuz Xians are bads n stuff.
It seems you get your science from ID’iot creationist websites which would explain your confusion regarding some sadaptations “built in” to genes and mutations.

The claim that most mutations are harmful is right out of the playbook of Henry Morris, Answers in Genesis and the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. They are charlatans who prey on the scientifically illiterate.

  1. Most mutations are neutral. Nachman and Crowell estimate around 3 deleterious mutations out of 175 per generation in humans (2000). Of those that have significant effect, most are harmful, but the fraction which are beneficial is higher than usually though. An experiment with E. coli found that about 1 in 150 newly arising mutations and 1 in 10 functional mutations are beneficial (Perfeito et al. 2007).

    The harmful mutations do not survive long, and the beneficial mutations survive much longer, so when you consider only surviving mutations, most are beneficial.

  2. Beneficial mutations are commonly observed. They are common enough to be problems in the cases of antibiotic resistance in disease-causing organisms and pesticide resistance in agricultural pests (e.g., Newcomb et al. 1997; these are not merely selection of pre-existing variation.) They can be repeatedly observed in laboratory populations (Wichman et al. 1999). Other examples include the following:
    • Mutations have given bacteria the ability to degrade nylon (Prijambada et al. 1995).
    • Plant breeders have used mutation breeding to induce mutations and select the beneficial ones (FAO/IAEA 1977).
    • Certain mutations in humans confer resistance to AIDS (Dean et al. 1996; Sullivan et al. 2001) or to heart disease (Long 1994; Weisgraber et al. 1983).
    • A mutation in humans makes bones strong (Boyden et al. 2002).
    • Transposons are common, especially in plants, and help to provide beneficial diversity (Moffat 2000).
    • In vitro mutation and selection can be used to evolve substantially improved function of RNA molecules, such as a ribozyme (Wright and Joyce 1997).
  3. Whether a mutation is beneficial or not depends on environment. A mutation that helps the organism in one circumstance could harm it in another. When the environment changes, variations that once were counteradaptive suddenly become favored. Since environments are constantly changing, variation helps populations survive, even if some of those variations do not do as well as others. When beneficial mutations occur in a changed environment, they generally sweep through the population rapidly (Elena et al. 1996).

  4. High mutation rates are advantageous in some environments. Hypermutable strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa are found more commonly in the lungs of cystic fibrosis patients, where antibiotics and other stresses increase selection pressure and variability, than in patients without cystic fibrosis (Oliver et al. 2000).

  5. Note that the existence of any beneficial mutations is a falsification of the young-earth creationism model (Morris 1985, 13).

The “tiny motley collection of bones” comment is comedy gold. The national collection consists of 40 million fossil specimens. Would those really fit on your kitchen table?


“The National Fossil Collection contains over 40 million fossil specimens.”



How about Human fossils?


From skeletons to teeth, early human fossils have been found of more than 6,000 individuals. With the rapid pace of new discoveries every year, this impressive sample means that even though some early human species are only represented by one or a few fossils, others are represented by thousands of fossils. From them, we can understand things like:

  • how well adapted an early human species was for walking upright
  • how well adapted an early human species was for living in hot, tropical habitats or cold, temperate environments
  • the difference between male and female body size, which correlates to aspects of social behavior
  • how quickly or slowly children of early human species grew up.


Gee, whiz. You might want to send a strongly worded email to your local chapter of the Ken Ham Admiration Society and have them update their brochures.
hahaha, now the mental patients are claiming there are 40 million human fossil remains. And, they still can't tell the diffrence between mutations and adaptations, and of course never have proven one species can morph into another, either.
 

Picaro

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
18,868
Reaction score
3,962
Points
290
Location
Texas
Why don't 'evolution' cultists just provide us with the chain of evidence that proves their fantasy is indeed a fact? A simple request for those allegedly all 'scientific n stuff'. Otherwise you trolls have nothing to say except nonsense. It must suck that Genesis has as much credibility as your weird improbable nonsense, and in fact agrees with such 'science' as the Big bang Theory and the 'Adam' allegory is more scientifically feasible than dumbass claims that humans 'evolved' over time, or just spontaneously popped up by the hundreds all at once, fully adult and capable of feeding themselves and wandering around the planet, depending on which silly handwave one chooses to adopt today.
THAT'S your theory??
the point is, theists DON'T have a theory--really...it's just ''god did it'''
I don't have a theory, and I'm not some pathetic sexual fetishist with some compulsion to bash Xians or a sociopath who can't grasp just why it's bad to murder 10's of millions of babies just for the crime of being 'inconvenient', when almost everyone in the first world knows what is 100% effective at preventing pregnancies. I sleep just fine not knowing either way. Judaism and its Christian sect have been a great positive in human history, while those who hate it an oppose it are loons and sickos for the most part, and of course they rely mass murders as their 'solution' to every social problem.

It's obvious 'evolution' is a load of bullshit, not 'science', and as a theory the Intelligent Design people have arguments that are in many cases better science than the 'evolutionists' make, which is also fine with me; I have no problem with teaching the ID arguments in schools if they're going to allow the 'evolution' rubbish and lies to be taught as 'facts' when they're not even close to 'facts', otherwise ban both of them and stop brainwashing kids; the schools are seriously screwing them up as it is. The only reason to peddle the 'evolution' nonsense is so they can peddle the political agendas re 'faggots are normal and trannies are too!' sickness, among other junk 'science'. Sociopaths particularly like the idea that 'economically useless people' should be starved to death or eliminated, and those asshole Xians stand in the way of 'economic reality', hence the sicko deviants, Marxists, and Libertarians all at least have common ground there in extermnating those assholes and their beliefs as well.
Totally awesome, dude.

I was hoping you could link us to the peer reviewed research data submitted by the fine folks at the Creation Research Society or those at the Disco’tute.

Shirley, the ID’iot creation ministries must have a wealth of data they can present to support magic and supernaturalism as opposed to the atheist evilutionist scientists and their bogus science and stuff.

Thanks,

Thanks, again.
Ah, another triggered deviant rants onward. lol
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
36,833
Reaction score
3,829
Points
1,130
Why don't 'evolution' cultists just provide us with the chain of evidence that proves their fantasy is indeed a fact? A simple request for those allegedly all 'scientific n stuff'. Otherwise you trolls have nothing to say except nonsense. It must suck that Genesis has as much credibility as your weird improbable nonsense, and in fact agrees with such 'science' as the Big bang Theory and the 'Adam' allegory is more scientifically feasible than dumbass claims that humans 'evolved' over time, or just spontaneously popped up by the hundreds all at once, fully adult and capable of feeding themselves and wandering around the planet, depending on which silly handwave one chooses to adopt today.
It’s 7th grade biology that introduces students to how organisms change and adapt to their environments. Was your 7th grade spent at a madrassah?
It’s nice to know that one only needs a 7th grade education to believe in evolution.
It's disturbing to know most of these 'rationalists' don't even know their own theories and can't discern the diffrences between adaptations alread built into genes and mutations, which are necessary by the billions and trillions, all beneficial to boot and in correct sequences, in order for 'evolution' to work, yet science proves benefical mutations are practically non-existent in real live, making the whole theory a pile of rubbish re empirical evidence, and indeed they can never produce any evidence; instead of evidence, we're suppose to accept some weird nonsense re a tiny motley collection of bones from several extinct species of apes scattered over millions of years that will fit on my kitchen table as 'evidence', and by extension that means anal sex between men must be 'normal' or something and all kinds of other stupid claims, cuz Xians are bads n stuff.
It seems you get your science from ID’iot creationist websites which would explain your confusion regarding some sadaptations “built in” to genes and mutations.

The claim that most mutations are harmful is right out of the playbook of Henry Morris, Answers in Genesis and the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. They are charlatans who prey on the scientifically illiterate.

  1. Most mutations are neutral. Nachman and Crowell estimate around 3 deleterious mutations out of 175 per generation in humans (2000). Of those that have significant effect, most are harmful, but the fraction which are beneficial is higher than usually though. An experiment with E. coli found that about 1 in 150 newly arising mutations and 1 in 10 functional mutations are beneficial (Perfeito et al. 2007).

    The harmful mutations do not survive long, and the beneficial mutations survive much longer, so when you consider only surviving mutations, most are beneficial.

  2. Beneficial mutations are commonly observed. They are common enough to be problems in the cases of antibiotic resistance in disease-causing organisms and pesticide resistance in agricultural pests (e.g., Newcomb et al. 1997; these are not merely selection of pre-existing variation.) They can be repeatedly observed in laboratory populations (Wichman et al. 1999). Other examples include the following:
    • Mutations have given bacteria the ability to degrade nylon (Prijambada et al. 1995).
    • Plant breeders have used mutation breeding to induce mutations and select the beneficial ones (FAO/IAEA 1977).
    • Certain mutations in humans confer resistance to AIDS (Dean et al. 1996; Sullivan et al. 2001) or to heart disease (Long 1994; Weisgraber et al. 1983).
    • A mutation in humans makes bones strong (Boyden et al. 2002).
    • Transposons are common, especially in plants, and help to provide beneficial diversity (Moffat 2000).
    • In vitro mutation and selection can be used to evolve substantially improved function of RNA molecules, such as a ribozyme (Wright and Joyce 1997).
  3. Whether a mutation is beneficial or not depends on environment. A mutation that helps the organism in one circumstance could harm it in another. When the environment changes, variations that once were counteradaptive suddenly become favored. Since environments are constantly changing, variation helps populations survive, even if some of those variations do not do as well as others. When beneficial mutations occur in a changed environment, they generally sweep through the population rapidly (Elena et al. 1996).

  4. High mutation rates are advantageous in some environments. Hypermutable strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa are found more commonly in the lungs of cystic fibrosis patients, where antibiotics and other stresses increase selection pressure and variability, than in patients without cystic fibrosis (Oliver et al. 2000).

  5. Note that the existence of any beneficial mutations is a falsification of the young-earth creationism model (Morris 1985, 13).

The “tiny motley collection of bones” comment is comedy gold. The national collection consists of 40 million fossil specimens. Would those really fit on your kitchen table?


“The National Fossil Collection contains over 40 million fossil specimens.”



How about Human fossils?


From skeletons to teeth, early human fossils have been found of more than 6,000 individuals. With the rapid pace of new discoveries every year, this impressive sample means that even though some early human species are only represented by one or a few fossils, others are represented by thousands of fossils. From them, we can understand things like:

  • how well adapted an early human species was for walking upright
  • how well adapted an early human species was for living in hot, tropical habitats or cold, temperate environments
  • the difference between male and female body size, which correlates to aspects of social behavior
  • how quickly or slowly children of early human species grew up.


Gee, whiz. You might want to send a strongly worded email to your local chapter of the Ken Ham Admiration Society and have them update their brochures.
hahaha, now the mental patients are claiming there are 40 million human fossil remains. And, they still can't tell the diffrence between mutations and adaptations, and of course never have proven one species can morph into another, either.
Please pay attention. There was no representation of 40 million human fossil remains.


Lacking a science vocabulary leaves you at a disadvantage.





 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
36,833
Reaction score
3,829
Points
1,130
Why don't 'evolution' cultists just provide us with the chain of evidence that proves their fantasy is indeed a fact? A simple request for those allegedly all 'scientific n stuff'. Otherwise you trolls have nothing to say except nonsense. It must suck that Genesis has as much credibility as your weird improbable nonsense, and in fact agrees with such 'science' as the Big bang Theory and the 'Adam' allegory is more scientifically feasible than dumbass claims that humans 'evolved' over time, or just spontaneously popped up by the hundreds all at once, fully adult and capable of feeding themselves and wandering around the planet, depending on which silly handwave one chooses to adopt today.
THAT'S your theory??
the point is, theists DON'T have a theory--really...it's just ''god did it'''
I don't have a theory, and I'm not some pathetic sexual fetishist with some compulsion to bash Xians or a sociopath who can't grasp just why it's bad to murder 10's of millions of babies just for the crime of being 'inconvenient', when almost everyone in the first world knows what is 100% effective at preventing pregnancies. I sleep just fine not knowing either way. Judaism and its Christian sect have been a great positive in human history, while those who hate it an oppose it are loons and sickos for the most part, and of course they rely mass murders as their 'solution' to every social problem.

It's obvious 'evolution' is a load of bullshit, not 'science', and as a theory the Intelligent Design people have arguments that are in many cases better science than the 'evolutionists' make, which is also fine with me; I have no problem with teaching the ID arguments in schools if they're going to allow the 'evolution' rubbish and lies to be taught as 'facts' when they're not even close to 'facts', otherwise ban both of them and stop brainwashing kids; the schools are seriously screwing them up as it is. The only reason to peddle the 'evolution' nonsense is so they can peddle the political agendas re 'faggots are normal and trannies are too!' sickness, among other junk 'science'. Sociopaths particularly like the idea that 'economically useless people' should be starved to death or eliminated, and those asshole Xians stand in the way of 'economic reality', hence the sicko deviants, Marxists, and Libertarians all at least have common ground there in extermnating those assholes and their beliefs as well.
Totally awesome, dude.

I was hoping you could link us to the peer reviewed research data submitted by the fine folks at the Creation Research Society or those at the Disco’tute.

Shirley, the ID’iot creation ministries must have a wealth of data they can present to support magic and supernaturalism as opposed to the atheist evilutionist scientists and their bogus science and stuff.

Thanks,

Thanks, again.
Ah, another triggered deviant rants onward. lol
You scurried away.

I’n not surprised.
 

Picaro

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
18,868
Reaction score
3,962
Points
290
Location
Texas
Sorry, but I needed more than 10 lines:

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.

4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness.

5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

6 And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.”

7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so.

8 God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.

9 And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so.

10 God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good.

11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so.

12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.

14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years,

15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so.

16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars.

17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth,

18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good.

19And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

20 And God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky.”

21So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living thing with which the water teems and that moves about in it, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.

22 God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.”

23 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.

24 And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the creatures that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its kind.” And it was so.

25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

27So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”

29 Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food.

30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.

31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.
28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number..I don't see that happening without a hell of a lot of incest going on..
Not really; there were other people around, and even among Noah's beasts there are two versions of the numbers of each taken on the Ark, though the numbers are symbolic, and from statistical studies we know there should be at least a few hundred pairs of mammals to generate growth of a species, and that applies to tribes of peoples as well. And forget that whole 'Out of Africa' theory; it's on its way out and new evidence is casting doubt on it. In any case, the early author of Genesis weren't interested in empirical research, yet got close to many of the theories proposed today anyway.
 

Picaro

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
18,868
Reaction score
3,962
Points
290
Location
Texas
Why don't 'evolution' cultists just provide us with the chain of evidence that proves their fantasy is indeed a fact? A simple request for those allegedly all 'scientific n stuff'. Otherwise you trolls have nothing to say except nonsense. It must suck that Genesis has as much credibility as your weird improbable nonsense, and in fact agrees with such 'science' as the Big bang Theory and the 'Adam' allegory is more scientifically feasible than dumbass claims that humans 'evolved' over time, or just spontaneously popped up by the hundreds all at once, fully adult and capable of feeding themselves and wandering around the planet, depending on which silly handwave one chooses to adopt today.
THAT'S your theory??
the point is, theists DON'T have a theory--really...it's just ''god did it'''
I don't have a theory, and I'm not some pathetic sexual fetishist with some compulsion to bash Xians or a sociopath who can't grasp just why it's bad to murder 10's of millions of babies just for the crime of being 'inconvenient', when almost everyone in the first world knows what is 100% effective at preventing pregnancies. I sleep just fine not knowing either way. Judaism and its Christian sect have been a great positive in human history, while those who hate it an oppose it are loons and sickos for the most part, and of course they rely mass murders as their 'solution' to every social problem.

It's obvious 'evolution' is a load of bullshit, not 'science', and as a theory the Intelligent Design people have arguments that are in many cases better science than the 'evolutionists' make, which is also fine with me; I have no problem with teaching the ID arguments in schools if they're going to allow the 'evolution' rubbish and lies to be taught as 'facts' when they're not even close to 'facts', otherwise ban both of them and stop brainwashing kids; the schools are seriously screwing them up as it is. The only reason to peddle the 'evolution' nonsense is so they can peddle the political agendas re 'faggots are normal and trannies are too!' sickness, among other junk 'science'. Sociopaths particularly like the idea that 'economically useless people' should be starved to death or eliminated, and those asshole Xians stand in the way of 'economic reality', hence the sicko deviants, Marxists, and Libertarians all at least have common ground there in exterminating those assholes and their beliefs as well.
Totally awesome, dude.

I was hoping you could link us to the peer reviewed research data submitted by the fine folks at the Creation Research Society or those at the Disco’tute.

Shirley, the ID’iot creation ministries must have a wealth of data they can present to support magic and supernaturalism as opposed to the atheist evilutionist scientists and their bogus science and stuff.

Thanks,

Thanks, again.
Ah, another triggered deviant rants onward. lol
You scurried away.

I’n not surprised.
you haven't said anything, so what was there to run away from? Your babbling isn't impressive enough to 'scurry' anybody away, just repetitively boring, since you can't produce any chain of evidence to back your silly junk.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top