Waiting For Godot???

[abu afak]

Doesn't answer my question.
yes obviously intelligent design needs a God to be true.
At the same time, why would evolution prove there is none?
You can be a literalist both ways.
Evolution is undeniable in examples of species perfectly matching their surroundings, and physical alterations that exists as surroundings changed. Humans are a good example of it.

As I said above/previous, Evolution Proves there is none ONLY If you are a literalist and the many contradictions in ie, Genesis creation myth. (order, timing, much more).
If you say just the original spark was god there need not be contradiction, but that's NOT what is being said by the OP.
SHE said there is No evolution.
No evo of Species.
Now get the **** to work on her you Moron.

`

 

[abu afak]

"And let us dispose of a common misconception. The complete transmutation of even one animal species into a different species has never been directly observed either in the laboratory or in the field."

Complete transmutation? What's that supposed to mean? It's certainly not something Darwin or other evolutionary scientists claimed. Also, evolution has never been observed directly, because of the time spans involved. The only way scientific troglodytes have of criticizing evolutionary theory is by creating a straw-man to attack

Really?

What did Darwin claim?

Not that one species becomes a new and different species?

Of course he did, you dunce.

And.....why is there still zero proof of his, and your, claims?

The quote said "complete transformation". That's the term used when anti-evolutionists talk about dogs turning into cats and the like. Darwin never suggested anything of the sort.

I asked you proof, after correcting your statement that Darwin's theory didn't require new species formation.

You didn't provide any,....because you can't.

I never said I was anti-evolution, whatever that means....I said that you are a fool for never having demanded proof to Darwinism.

You remain a fool.
Or a liar.


"...anti-evolutionists talk about dogs turning into cats and the like. Darwin never suggested anything of the sort."
Go back and do some reading and you will find that that is exactly what is required for Darwin's thesis to be correct.

And you remain a Monster LIAR/Liar for Jesus.
And everyone note she can't answer MY POSTS . (ie #22 or 3 more. Tho she will have to wing it now)

As I've said 100 times here...
Science doesn't deal in "Proof", only math does.
Science deals in theories affirmed over time.
Evolution has stood the test of time - 160 years- and a burst of New sciences. (and 100,000 fossils found only in the correct strata.)
All relevant ones help confirm it, (DNA, Isotopic dating, etc) and NONE Contradict it.
Evolution has Overwhelming EVIDENCE.

You cannot debate ME.
You an only try and MISLEAD/proselytize here.

`

 

[iamwhatiseem]

They can both be true, but they can also both be false. At the end of the day, each of us can chose to believe one or both to be true or one or both to be false, or chose to withhold believing anything. There are IMHO better reasons to believe both are probably true, there are so many things we choose to believe without proof, no? Maybe we should also consider whether it is beneficial to us as individuals and as a society to believe something to be true ahead of the proof that may never come. How is your life impacted one way or another based on what you believe to be true even if you can't prove it? There could be more of an impact than you know.

Except there is NO Evidence for god/godS (and you gotta pick Which/Witch one!),
But Overwhelming evidence for evolution.

You can indeed choose to believe anything you want, but that does not mean it's rational to do so based on evidence.

So just a vacuous statement on your part.
`

Sorry, but you appear to attack being legalistic, while at the same time exercising it.
At the same time, PC's beliefs don't bother me. I am not bothered by whatever religious beliefs people have.

 

[abu afak]

Sorry, but you appear to attack being legalistic, while at the same time exercising it.

I was being both explicit and logical
You saying people can believe anything they want is never-never land/idiotic.
You, of course can, but that doesn't mean all 'beliefs' are mere beliefs, some are fact/evidence based.
You OMITTED that major fact because you are not very bright.
Understand now?
bye.
`

 

[Likkmee]

184 years and counting!!!
On this date, October 2nd, 1836, Charles Darwin returned to England.
View attachment 396020
"Charles Darwin's return to England
Naturalist Charles Darwin returned to England this day in 1836 after a five-year journey on the HMS Beagle, on which he gathered the specimens and observations that led to his theory of evolution by natural selection."
Britannica.com


As of this moment.....with more scientists feverishly at work than in all of history, not a single example of one species becoming another has been found.

"And let us dispose of a common misconception. The complete transmutation of even one animal species into a different species has never been directly observed either in the laboratory or in the field." Dean H. Kenyon (Professor of Biology, San Francisco State University), affidavit presented to the U.S. Supreme Court, No. 85-1513, Brief of Appellants, prepared under the direction of William J. Guste, Jr., Attorney General of the State of Louisiana, October 1985, p. A-16.

""As of this moment.....with more scientists feverishly at work than in all of history, not a single example of one species becoming another has been found.""

LIE:
IT/THEY certainly has, including with US/Humans evolving from Proto-Apes like all the other Primates.

And the person you cite/Kenyon is a one-in-1000 "Young Earth Creationist" Biologist!
He, like you, believes the earth is 6000 years old!
You know, that Dinosaurs had to be on the fictional Noah's ark.

You 7/11 Adventist Clown.


`

`

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Sorry, but you appear to attack being legalistic, while at the same time exercising it.

I was being both explicit and logical
You saying people can believe anything they want is never-never land/idiotic.
You, of course can, but that doesn't mean all 'beliefs' are mere beliefs, some are fact/evidence based.
You OMITTED that major fact because you are not very bright.
Understand now?
bye.
`

Haha... whatever kid.
My IQ is probably at least 20 pts higher than yours.

 

[Likkmee]

 

[PoliticalChic]

They can both be true, but they can also both be false. At the end of the day, each of us can chose to believe one or both to be true or one or both to be false, or chose to withhold believing anything. There are IMHO better reasons to believe both are probably true, there are so many things we choose to believe without proof, no? Maybe we should also consider whether it is beneficial to us as individuals and as a society to believe something to be true ahead of the proof that may never come. How is your life impacted one way or another based on what you believe to be true even if you can't prove it? There could be more of an impact than you know.

Except there is NO Evidence for god/godS (and you gotta pick Which/Witch one!),
But Overwhelming evidence for evolution.

You can indeed choose to believe anything you want, but that does not mean it's rational to do so based on evidence.

So just a vacuous statement on your part.
`

Sorry, but you appear to attack being legalistic, while at the same time exercising it.
At the same time, PC's beliefs don't bother me. I am not bothered by whatever religious beliefs people have.

Let me point out that nothing in any of my posts refers to religion.
I've certainly never said I even have one.
I may be a Druid....I like trees, and I look good in blue......



Everything in my discussion of Darwinism is based on science.

It boils down to the the lack of proof of the thesis of Darwin, over nearly two centuries....as I pointed out in the OP, and that the only religion being proposed it Darwinism, a denomination of the religion of Militant Secularism,


Don't let 'em fool you....it is a religion.

From the Amazon review of Godless, by Coulter…


Though liberalism rejects the idea of God and reviles people of faith, it bears all the attributes of a religion. In Godless, Coulter throws open the doors of the Church of Liberalism, showing us its sacraments (abortion), its holy writ (Roe v. Wade), its martyrs (from Soviet spy Alger Hiss to cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal), its clergy (public school teachers), its churches (government schools, where prayer is prohibited but condoms are free), its doctrine of infallibility (as manifest in the "absolute moral authority" of spokesmen from Cindy Sheehan to Max Cleland), and its cosmology (in which mankind is an inconsequential accident).

Then, of course, there's the liberal creation myth: Charles Darwin's theory of evolution.

For liberals, evolution is the touchstone that separates the enlightened from the benighted.
And....Franklin Delano Roosevelt, "...the Socialist Savior of the Democratic Party."

the Catechism: you didn't build that.....any success is just dumb luck



Sen. Mazie Hirono (D., Hawaii) on Tuesday called for liberal activists to believe in climate change as if it were a "religion." Dem Senator Hirono: Believe in Climate Change Like a Religion





2. And the equally brilliant Ben Shapiro runs with "its sacraments (abortion)"....

"When Abortion Becomes a Sacrament

3. ...alleged comedian Michelle Wolf paid tribute to the most important facet of American life: abortion. On her Netflix show on Sunday, Wolf dressed up in red, white and blue, and shrieked into the camera, "God bless abortions, and God bless America!" She explained: "Women, if you need an abortion, get one! If you want an abortion, get one! ...


4. ...a ground shift has taken place in how Democrats think about abortion. Back in 2005, I wrote that the Democratic "safe, legal and rare" formulation regarding abortion was logically and morally untenable: If Democrats wanted abortion to be rare thanks to its inherent immorality, there was no reason for it to be legal. Democrats have finally come around: They're now "shouting" their abortions, proclaiming them from the rooftops, suggesting that there is a moral good achieved by abortion.


5. ...Lena Dunham said just two years ago, "I still haven't had an abortion, but I wish I had." Thus, Chelsea Handler, who has had two abortions, explained in the pages of Playboy, "I don't ever look back and think, 'God, I wish I'd had that baby.'" Her article was accompanied by a picture of a woman's hand with a raised middle finger with a pink bow around it; attached to the bow is a small card that reads, "It's an abortion!"





6. Gloria Steinem once remarked, "If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament." But modern-day feminists have determined that abortion isa sacrament specifically because women can get pregnant: Showing that control over your body even extends to the killing of your unborn child is a way of standing up against patriarchal concerns with Wwomen as the source of future generations.


7. ...abortion isn't just another decision. It's a giant middle finger to the moral establishment. And those who would fight abortion are desacralizing the mysterious holiness of a ritual that reinforces women's control. No wonder Wolf thinks God blesses abortion; abortion is her god."
When Abortion Becomes A Sacrament

8. “It [Communism] is not new. It is, in fact, man's second oldest faith. Its promise was whispered in the first days of the Creation under the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil: "Ye shall be as gods." It is the great alternative faith of mankind. Like all great faiths, its force derives from a simple vision. Other ages have had great visions. They have always been different versions of the same vision: the vision of God and man's relationship to God. The Communist vision is the vision of Man without God.
It is the vision of man's mind displacing God as the creative intelligence of the world.” Whittaker Chambers, Witness

9. Everyone, it seems, needs religion.
Being atheistic, the Left invents several iteration....including:



"... the BLM movement is a pseudo-church, packed with false doctrines, false priests, and an eschatological (end-of-days messianic utopian) “melanin Messiah” and an alternative Christ, promising far more than can be delivered.

• The pagan roots underpinning Black Lives Matter Inc.;
• Their slogans, and hashtags; and
• Why genuflecting to BLM is idolatry.

Of special interest is the pagan ritualism associated with "say his name/say her name" invocations that form part of the Black Lives Matter movement."

​

Genuflecting to 'Black Lives Matter' is Straight-Up Idolatry · Caldron Pool

Darrell B. Harrison and Virgil Walker's new freestyle podcast is #lit and then some.

caldronpool.com

 

[abu afak]

Haha... whatever kid.
My IQ is probably at least 20 pts higher than yours.

Your posts are stupid.
you again couldn't answer mine. So just attacked.
And my IQ is certified.
I will just hop back on over to Mensa's main two FB groups, you back the propane tank under your trailer.

and everyone please note
PoliticalChic CANNOT answer me at all. (either)
She's a Hyper-Indoctrinated religious FRAUD who needs treatment/Detox.
(abortion, communism, Gloria Steinem, BLM, Coulter, etc, in her Psychotic religio-political SCREED just above.)
WACKED!
`

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Haha... whatever kid.
My IQ is probably at least 20 pts higher than yours.

Your posts are stupid.
you again couldn't answer mine. So just attacked.
And my IQ is certified.
I will just hop back on over to Mensa's main two FB groups, you back the propane tank under your trailer.

and everyone please note
PoliticalChic CANNOT answer me at all. (either)
She's a Hyper-Indoctrinated religious FRAUD who needs treatment/Detox.
(abortion, communism, Gloria Steinem, etc, in her Psychotic religio-political SCREED just above.)
WACKED!
`

Mensa?? Haha.... yeah.
Not that impressive. I took the test for the fun of it, but declined membership once accepted because I have no interest in participating in mental circle jerks. When I took the test at the same time as about 50 others, I finished first, and scored the 2nd highest of those who qualified.

 

[rightwinger]

There is overwhelming evidence through fossils, geology, biology and DNA that evolution is a FACT

Evidence does not equal Fact. ...

In this case....YES

It is a FACT that evolution occurred, there is no disputing it.

How, why and when it occurs is up for discussion ....
the fact that it does, is not

 

[alang1216]

BTW.....there are lots of evolutionary theories.

I criticize the one government schooling claims is proven....Darwin's theory.

Are there any evolutionary theories that don't accept descent from a common ancestor?

My gov't school accepted descent from a common ancestor and I'd wager every ivy does too.

 

[PoliticalChic]

BTW.....there are lots of evolutionary theories.

I criticize the one government schooling claims is proven....Darwin's theory.

Are there any evolutionary theories that don't accept descent from a common ancestor?

My gov't school accepted descent from a common ancestor and I'd wager every ivy does too.

To have progressed from a common ancestor, there must be multiple examples of one species becoming an entirely new species.

Why didn't you point out to your 'government school teacher' that same has never been demonstrated?

 

[alang1216]

Believing in the theory of evolution requires far more faith, than belief in God. ...

I believe you hit the nail on the head.

Both a belief in God, and a belief in Darwin's version of the explanation for the diversity of life on earth, are are based on faith.

Except that Darwin amassed a mountain of evidence. Also, I doubt the two of you agree a whole lot on the nature of God.

 

[Sunni Man]

It is a FACT that evolution occurred, there is no disputing it.
How, why and when it occurs is up for discussion ....
the fact that it does, is not

Evolution is in the same quack category of Obama's "settled science". ...

 

[miketx]

184 years and counting!!!


On this date, October 2nd, 1836, Charles Darwin returned to England.
View attachment 396020
"Charles Darwin's return to England
Naturalist Charles Darwin returned to England this day in 1836 after a five-year journey on the HMS Beagle, on which he gathered the specimens and observations that led to his theory of evolution by natural selection."
Britannica.com


As of this moment.....with more scientists feverishly at work than in all of history, not a single example of one species becoming another has been found.

"And let us dispose of a common misconception. The complete transmutation of even one animal species into a different species has never been directly observed either in the laboratory or in the field." Dean H. Kenyon (Professor of Biology, San Francisco State University), affidavit presented to the U.S. Supreme Court, No. 85-1513, Brief of Appellants, prepared under the direction of William J. Guste, Jr., Attorney General of the State of Louisiana, October 1985, p. A-16.



The only question that remains is which will occur first......
.....whether Darwinism will be proven via the Scientific Method,.....

....or Hillary Clinton will clamber over the burgeoning mountain of empty cheap wine bottles in her Chappaqua Mansion, and take the oath as President.

View attachment 396026

I beg to differ with you. As we speak democrats are turning into walking sacks of shit.

 

[alang1216]

BTW.....there are lots of evolutionary theories.

I criticize the one government schooling claims is proven....Darwin's theory.

Are there any evolutionary theories that don't accept descent from a common ancestor?

My gov't school accepted descent from a common ancestor and I'd wager every ivy does too.

To have progressed from a common ancestor, there must be multiple examples of one species becoming an entirely new species.

Why didn't you point out to your 'government school teacher' that same has never been demonstrated?

But there are plenty of examples, which scientific discipline do you want to be embarrassed by?

What did your ivy say when you pointed out to your teacher that descent from a common ancestor has never been demonstrated?

 

[Sunni Man]

Except that Darwin amassed a mountain of evidence.

Again, evidence does not equal scientific fact.
Which is why evolution is still called a theory. ...

 

[alang1216]

Except that Darwin amassed a mountain of evidence.

Again, evidence does not equal scientific fact.
Which is why evolution is still called a theory. ...

Do your homework and maybe you won't sound so ignorant: Scientific theory

 

[PoliticalChic]

Believing in the theory of evolution requires far more faith, than belief in God. ...

I believe you hit the nail on the head.

Both a belief in God, and a belief in Darwin's version of the explanation for the diversity of life on earth, are are based on faith.

Except that Darwin amassed a mountain of evidence. Also, I doubt the two of you agree a whole lot on the nature of God.

"Except that Darwin amassed a mountain of evidence. "

Actually, you are evidence of Rule #1:

Every argument from Democrats and Liberals is a misrepresentation, a fabrication, or a bald-faced lie.



"Also, I doubt the two of you agree a whole lot on the nature of God."

And, you are as dumb as asphalt.
“There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been and are being evolved.”― Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species




Just between the two of us, at what age did you come to terms with being an abject imbecile?????