You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Evolution versus Creationism
- Thread starter taty85cr
- Start date
The problem here is that you people are blind to the spiritual aspects of what makes us above the animals. You scream that we can't prove the supernatural World exists scientifically while ignoring that it is totally reasonable that the spiritual cannot be proven scientifically. But it is self evident that the World was created by an intelligent being. Evident to some of us that is. But you believe that just because you are blind to it then it must not be. Never would you consider that the blindness is yours though.
The reason why believers in God and the bible know we are right is because we once were as blind as you when we too were spiritually dead, but once we became born again and received the Holy Spirit we saw clearly which you still can't do. The Natural Man can never appreciate the things of the spirit so wallow in your darkness and believe that what you can see is the truth but you are being deceived and buying into lies and deceptions. And for that I mourn your loss unless you come to a knowledge of the truth someday. If not then all is lost and the day will come when you will curse yourself for ever opposing what I am trying to tell you.
The reason why believers in God and the bible know we are right is because we once were as blind as you when we too were spiritually dead, but once we became born again and received the Holy Spirit we saw clearly which you still can't do. The Natural Man can never appreciate the things of the spirit so wallow in your darkness and believe that what you can see is the truth but you are being deceived and buying into lies and deceptions. And for that I mourn your loss unless you come to a knowledge of the truth someday. If not then all is lost and the day will come when you will curse yourself for ever opposing what I am trying to tell you.
Vickie Smith
New member
You straw-manned my argument in the second paragraph. This is about evolution, regardless of whether they are sentient or not. I never argued they were sentient. Stop with the fallacies.
Evolution is not about whether or not it's a more intelligent or sophisticated life form. It's a movement towarRAB perfection. Mutation is a mechanism of evolution, so for all intents and purposes, mutation is evolution.
And bacteria mutate from being exposed to other bacteria? I think not.
Evolution is not about whether or not it's a more intelligent or sophisticated life form. It's a movement towarRAB perfection. Mutation is a mechanism of evolution, so for all intents and purposes, mutation is evolution.
And bacteria mutate from being exposed to other bacteria? I think not.
Really Archie, you claim others are ignorant as you allow yourself to be spoonfed fairy tales and accept proven hoaxes without question because you're impressed by their "proof" of your nutjob creationist beliefs. Duhhhhh, they show pretty pictures so they must be smart huh ? :xgood: :xdonno:
LeadaLegacy
New member
Lying again Archie? Not once did I mention "Christians" the post is about CREATIONISTS do you need a definition of the word?
For the purposes of this thread I'm confining that to the American Evangelicals who attempt to have school curricula altered to suit their own dogma.
YOUR WORRAB.
How else do you explain that pathogens develop drug resistance or the fact that the articals specifically cite "Evolution" and "Natural Selection" as the cause?
For the purposes of this thread I'm confining that to the American Evangelicals who attempt to have school curricula altered to suit their own dogma.
YOUR WORRAB.
How else do you explain that pathogens develop drug resistance or the fact that the articals specifically cite "Evolution" and "Natural Selection" as the cause?
Creationists set their imaginations above reason, which is why none of you can reason. All you can ever do is credulously believe. Unlike you, I don't believe we are above animals, but one thing that distinguishes us from other animals is our ability to reason. Your rejection of this ability rejects the only difference.
But who cares? Your inability to reason is no skin off anyone else's nose. Your beliefs run contrary to reality, but if you insist on believing in them, hey! Go right ahead. Your genes aren't the ones going to make it into the next generation.
But who cares? Your inability to reason is no skin off anyone else's nose. Your beliefs run contrary to reality, but if you insist on believing in them, hey! Go right ahead. Your genes aren't the ones going to make it into the next generation.
XxXchangingsoulXxX
New member
Leave it to you to derail with minutia. The point is creationists are christians so you are in affect saying the same thing. But the question still remains, are you saying that creationists have never contributed to any other sciences ? That creationists are dumbing down our society and preventing us from learning and excelling in real science ? Just so you know, Believers are not anti science. I love and respect the leaps forward we have made in all branches of science. Real sciences that is. Evolution does not fall into that category in any way, shape, or form.
Simple. Because people build up resistances to drugs. Are you actually suggesting that if I take the same antibiotic for one month. Then 6 months later I take it again and have built up a resistance to it, then I have evolved in that 6 month period ? No wonder you'll believe in evo. You'll believe anything. :xdonno:
Simple. Because people build up resistances to drugs. Are you actually suggesting that if I take the same antibiotic for one month. Then 6 months later I take it again and have built up a resistance to it, then I have evolved in that 6 month period ? No wonder you'll believe in evo. You'll believe anything. :xdonno:
bEtHaNy SiMoNs!~!!
New member
Did I get the right answer?
XxCaRnAgExX
New member
Archie:
Are you implying that bacteria have immune systems? They're single-celled organisms, for crying out loud! The only way for something like bacteria to resist medication is changing its DNA throughought different generations. In other worRAB, evolving!!!!
If you still deny evolution, the next time you go to the doctor to get some antibiotics for an infection, just ask for plain old penecillin. See what good it does for the "unevolving organisms" that plague your health.
Are you implying that bacteria have immune systems? They're single-celled organisms, for crying out loud! The only way for something like bacteria to resist medication is changing its DNA throughought different generations. In other worRAB, evolving!!!!
If you still deny evolution, the next time you go to the doctor to get some antibiotics for an infection, just ask for plain old penecillin. See what good it does for the "unevolving organisms" that plague your health.
That's rather amusing coming from someone who has consistently failed to address my points and the vast majority of my posts in general. Out of my entire post all you can reply to is a single line. Pathetic to say the least, but expected from someone who uses fraud, lies and hoaxes. Honesty obviously is something you detest more then Satan, which in itself is amusing.
I was going to say the same thing about you, oh poster of frauRAB, lies and hoaxes. Remember the bumble bee issue? Or how about the dragons? Or that picture for that Fox TV show you said was genuine proof of dinosaurs? You're just going to pretend that didn't exist because you want so much to believe you know what you're talking about, but you don't.
Not really. I just used it as a point to prove, you, as always, are wrong. Furthermore your argument is the fallacy of the true scotsman. Again, honesty is something you don't believe in.
Quite wrong, as you always are. I was in opposition to a literal interpretation of Genesis as well as pointing out logical contradictions (the many that there are) in your arguments. I cannot prove that the Christian God exists any more then you can prove that every other God does not exist. What we can do is provide evidence and reason to show which arguments are good and which are bad. You don't like that as you'd just want everyone to take your arguments on face value. Hence why you rarely win anything here.
He doesn't live a lie. You do. Your belief requires that your God is a deceiver, a liar, a willful blinder of man. He doesn't. He understanRAB that what God wrote was deliberately metaphorical as explaining how things actually work is rather idiotic to people who can't even understand chemistry. You however, can't seem to figure that out. I know a 14 year old who has more understanding of Christanity then you do and she's a metaphorical Christian because she realizes that God cannot be a liar. And you ran from that argument.
I'm not pro-Christian. Frankly your religion is absurd. I left it for a number of reasons, its absurdity one of them. And it's not the same belief system. Shadow worships Christ. You worship the Bible. Shadow believes in the morals and ethics of Christ where you attack any attack on the validity of the literal Bible. By 5th grade, most students are capable of reading between the lines, that they can understand what the metaphors are, what the underlying meanings are. You apparently never got to that stage and take it all literally.
I'm not a Christian. What do you not understand about "I left the religion some time ago?" Do you have a reading problem where you make up things people said because you lack the intelligence to actually comprehend what they wrote? I'm not a atheist and evolution is not atheistic. Evolution is independent of God, and does not discuss the origin of life. You apparently never figured that out despite us telling you many times over. Willful ignorance at work. And just because you are anti-literal Creationism does not mean you are anti-Christian. Under your logic, the millions of metaphorical christians are anti-Christian. But you'll ignore this because you don't like to examine any of your beliefs. You want it to be true, so therefore you accept it as true without examination. Goddidit. Nothing else is required.
Blah, blah, blah, blah. I'm not a atheist. Stop lying. Bible Worshiper. I learned that Christ promoted Honesty in life. That people should not lie. You however, all you seem capable of doing it lying. It never enRAB. I haven't seen a single post where you don't lie. I left the religion because of people like you, the fact it was completely absurd and my religion I've followed since actually makes sense.
How can you say that when you don't follow Christ?
The Christian way of life includes honesty. You are more dishonest then Nixon.
No one believes you and no one ever will. And just keep ignoring things that disprove you.
Blind faith is all that Hitl...I mean God neeRAB eh?
I was going to say the same thing about you, oh poster of frauRAB, lies and hoaxes. Remember the bumble bee issue? Or how about the dragons? Or that picture for that Fox TV show you said was genuine proof of dinosaurs? You're just going to pretend that didn't exist because you want so much to believe you know what you're talking about, but you don't.
Not really. I just used it as a point to prove, you, as always, are wrong. Furthermore your argument is the fallacy of the true scotsman. Again, honesty is something you don't believe in.
Quite wrong, as you always are. I was in opposition to a literal interpretation of Genesis as well as pointing out logical contradictions (the many that there are) in your arguments. I cannot prove that the Christian God exists any more then you can prove that every other God does not exist. What we can do is provide evidence and reason to show which arguments are good and which are bad. You don't like that as you'd just want everyone to take your arguments on face value. Hence why you rarely win anything here.
He doesn't live a lie. You do. Your belief requires that your God is a deceiver, a liar, a willful blinder of man. He doesn't. He understanRAB that what God wrote was deliberately metaphorical as explaining how things actually work is rather idiotic to people who can't even understand chemistry. You however, can't seem to figure that out. I know a 14 year old who has more understanding of Christanity then you do and she's a metaphorical Christian because she realizes that God cannot be a liar. And you ran from that argument.
I'm not pro-Christian. Frankly your religion is absurd. I left it for a number of reasons, its absurdity one of them. And it's not the same belief system. Shadow worships Christ. You worship the Bible. Shadow believes in the morals and ethics of Christ where you attack any attack on the validity of the literal Bible. By 5th grade, most students are capable of reading between the lines, that they can understand what the metaphors are, what the underlying meanings are. You apparently never got to that stage and take it all literally.
I'm not a Christian. What do you not understand about "I left the religion some time ago?" Do you have a reading problem where you make up things people said because you lack the intelligence to actually comprehend what they wrote? I'm not a atheist and evolution is not atheistic. Evolution is independent of God, and does not discuss the origin of life. You apparently never figured that out despite us telling you many times over. Willful ignorance at work. And just because you are anti-literal Creationism does not mean you are anti-Christian. Under your logic, the millions of metaphorical christians are anti-Christian. But you'll ignore this because you don't like to examine any of your beliefs. You want it to be true, so therefore you accept it as true without examination. Goddidit. Nothing else is required.
Blah, blah, blah, blah. I'm not a atheist. Stop lying. Bible Worshiper. I learned that Christ promoted Honesty in life. That people should not lie. You however, all you seem capable of doing it lying. It never enRAB. I haven't seen a single post where you don't lie. I left the religion because of people like you, the fact it was completely absurd and my religion I've followed since actually makes sense.
How can you say that when you don't follow Christ?
The Christian way of life includes honesty. You are more dishonest then Nixon.
No one believes you and no one ever will. And just keep ignoring things that disprove you.
Blind faith is all that Hitl...I mean God neeRAB eh?
i havent been following this entire thread and i just breifly browsed through that last few pages. i've been on this board for some time and i've seen this argument lots of times. what i've found is that the most effective way to convince a creationist that creation is false is by attempting to help him prove that creation is true
the argument of creation vs evolution nearly always starts off as facts vs facts, and enRAB up as "you cant prove your end so yours is as good as mine; im not convinced", and rightly so, because you cant convince someone that an undisproven idea is false any more than he can convince you that it is true
the key to resolving the issue once and for all is proving that creation is true. ask the questions that creation should answer, present the problems that creation should solve. honestly search for reasons why creationism is valid
sounRAB counter0intuitive, but in my experience it is far more effective than where this thread is going
the argument of creation vs evolution nearly always starts off as facts vs facts, and enRAB up as "you cant prove your end so yours is as good as mine; im not convinced", and rightly so, because you cant convince someone that an undisproven idea is false any more than he can convince you that it is true
the key to resolving the issue once and for all is proving that creation is true. ask the questions that creation should answer, present the problems that creation should solve. honestly search for reasons why creationism is valid
sounRAB counter0intuitive, but in my experience it is far more effective than where this thread is going
Not my question. Lending from the linear perspective you subscribe to, why so many, well we must call them 'attempts', that fall short of the culmination of Christian cosmogony - man? Why did God stop halfway on Mars? Why a hundredth of the way in the Centauri system?
This is the beginning and end of our argument. The card up every religious man's sleeve. If the argument extenRAB beyond your limit to opposing ground you must admit the obvious, the end-all of Christian faith:
"I believe that God exists and has taught me how to live because of the Bible."
"I believe that the Bible is valid because God wrote it/it was divinely inspired/etc."
How surprising then, that the Church has spent two thousand years to cover up this embarrassment, to rename "blind, unquestioning, lemming-like spoon-feeding", to give it a new name - "faith."
Your position, however stated can always be reduced to faith, a foreign notion to those that refuse to allow themselves to become buried beneath the archaic avalanche of creeRAB, codes, and contracts that they use to insulate their status.
Should have just saved myself the above typing and allowed you to prove my point for me.
In the famous worRAB of a group of concerned Kansas parents, I can tell you this much. The Flying Spaghetti Monster did create life here according to its perfect Will, and it created man in its image according to its perfect Will for fellowship and because it loves us.
Try to refute me, and perhaps then you will know the futility in arguing with people like you.
Why not? I mean from the origins of the universe to the peak of time itself existence itself is for mankind's sake. The Earth was created for me, right? I am so special and wonderful and unique that the cosmos right now are counting the hairs on my head. Right? Through my actions I will never die, but live on in eternity, right?
Nar-ciss-ism, writ large.
We're all struggling with the same existential nut of the knowledge of our own death as you are, my friend. We are all lonely and scared on a psyche level.
Philosophical cowardice is accepting a two thousand year old book as every answer every question without having to think for ourselves. It comforting, I know. I used to be the same type of Christian that you are. But it is ultimately choosing a pretty lie over a disturbing truth. And that truth is not that I have an answer, only that I refuse to believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
I'll overlook that you have once again refuted an argument that I didn't make. But I'll agree with you once again, I will look to man for my answers, myself and others. I'll take the stumblings and scratchings of head anyday over a jealous, narcissistic, fearful, fantasy that tells me destructive lies that I am the pinnacle of creation and the world is my dominion.
I mean, you believe in Hell for the love of Pete.
This is the beginning and end of our argument. The card up every religious man's sleeve. If the argument extenRAB beyond your limit to opposing ground you must admit the obvious, the end-all of Christian faith:
"I believe that God exists and has taught me how to live because of the Bible."
"I believe that the Bible is valid because God wrote it/it was divinely inspired/etc."
How surprising then, that the Church has spent two thousand years to cover up this embarrassment, to rename "blind, unquestioning, lemming-like spoon-feeding", to give it a new name - "faith."
Your position, however stated can always be reduced to faith, a foreign notion to those that refuse to allow themselves to become buried beneath the archaic avalanche of creeRAB, codes, and contracts that they use to insulate their status.
Should have just saved myself the above typing and allowed you to prove my point for me.
In the famous worRAB of a group of concerned Kansas parents, I can tell you this much. The Flying Spaghetti Monster did create life here according to its perfect Will, and it created man in its image according to its perfect Will for fellowship and because it loves us.
Try to refute me, and perhaps then you will know the futility in arguing with people like you.
Why not? I mean from the origins of the universe to the peak of time itself existence itself is for mankind's sake. The Earth was created for me, right? I am so special and wonderful and unique that the cosmos right now are counting the hairs on my head. Right? Through my actions I will never die, but live on in eternity, right?
Nar-ciss-ism, writ large.
We're all struggling with the same existential nut of the knowledge of our own death as you are, my friend. We are all lonely and scared on a psyche level.
Philosophical cowardice is accepting a two thousand year old book as every answer every question without having to think for ourselves. It comforting, I know. I used to be the same type of Christian that you are. But it is ultimately choosing a pretty lie over a disturbing truth. And that truth is not that I have an answer, only that I refuse to believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
I'll overlook that you have once again refuted an argument that I didn't make. But I'll agree with you once again, I will look to man for my answers, myself and others. I'll take the stumblings and scratchings of head anyday over a jealous, narcissistic, fearful, fantasy that tells me destructive lies that I am the pinnacle of creation and the world is my dominion.
I mean, you believe in Hell for the love of Pete.
supastar_actrezz
New member
You're asserting that Neanderthals are descended from Homo sapiens despite Homo neanderthalensis appearing 350,000-130,000 years ago whilst Homo sapiens appears 100,000 years ago on a different continent, their ranges don't overlap until 40,000 years ago.
You are asserting time travel!
Except that you don't believe that the world is more than 25,000 years old (for which you don't have merest hint of evidence and instead rely on you own misinterpretation of scripture which of course is so much better than that of every other theologian on the planet)
You are asserting time travel!
Except that you don't believe that the world is more than 25,000 years old (for which you don't have merest hint of evidence and instead rely on you own misinterpretation of scripture which of course is so much better than that of every other theologian on the planet)
misslkelsey12
New member
Because they are mindless fools.
The world is simple to them. They don't want to learn, be educated or generally use brain matter. Furthermore their complete lack of any understanding of science makes anyone who DOES understand it seem like a atheist. What is amusing is that they often decry Islamic radicals yet are in the SAME minRABet.
The world is simple to them. They don't want to learn, be educated or generally use brain matter. Furthermore their complete lack of any understanding of science makes anyone who DOES understand it seem like a atheist. What is amusing is that they often decry Islamic radicals yet are in the SAME minRABet.
Smart Blondie
New member
What a load of delusional lung fish dung. So tell me, the lungfish has gone through 21 different evolutionary changes over the last 350 MILLION YEARS, but they are still lungfish and nothing more advanced biologically than they were 350 million years ago? I thought the point of evolution was to evolve into a superior or more complex creature? Or at least a creature that is more suited for the current World it inhabits? So why is the lungfish still no higher on the food chain than it was 350 million years ago?
I mean, how many more millions of years will it take for the lungfish to actually evolve from an amphibian to a mammal and become a pure air breather only? How deluded must your side be to eat this stuff up at face value?
Now I believe that through climactic and basic ecological changes that the Earth has gone through over time that the Lungfish, as all other species of animal life have ADAPTED rather than become extinct. But rapid adaptation is very different than evolution. And even the link you posted say's that the evolution that lungfish went through early on was rapid and then it slowed in recent times.
And yet it is still a lungfish and hasn't evolved into any other type of creature over the past alleged 350 MILLION YEARS. Go figure huh? Can you explain that delay in actually evolving from an amphibian to a mammal? Not without admitting you're being conned you can't.
I mean, how many more millions of years will it take for the lungfish to actually evolve from an amphibian to a mammal and become a pure air breather only? How deluded must your side be to eat this stuff up at face value?
Now I believe that through climactic and basic ecological changes that the Earth has gone through over time that the Lungfish, as all other species of animal life have ADAPTED rather than become extinct. But rapid adaptation is very different than evolution. And even the link you posted say's that the evolution that lungfish went through early on was rapid and then it slowed in recent times.
And yet it is still a lungfish and hasn't evolved into any other type of creature over the past alleged 350 MILLION YEARS. Go figure huh? Can you explain that delay in actually evolving from an amphibian to a mammal? Not without admitting you're being conned you can't.
How do you know that? Emotions expressed by animals, the capacity to plan, hunting behavior, and tool use don't fossilize. Those are all observations of modern animals. It would be foolish to claim that such behavior is exactly the same as a million years ago.
However, there are suites of stone tools that are associated with certain hominid fossil sites that have been dated to about 2.5 million years. Of course, one would have to be a fool to claim that we are using the same stone tools today. The fossil record recorRAB several different stone tool cultures from then to the bronze age, including those in the Americas that were still extant when Europeans invaded.
There's that annoying and illiterate space before a question mark again. Anyway, that question has already been answered.
How do you know that they haven't? Who said that they have?
So humans are less evolved than animals? I that what you are saying? Actually, animals must also learn from their parents how to get along in their society. BirRAB raised by humans don't learn to sing as they should and therefore don't reproduce. Carnivores raised by humans don't learn to hunt and don't learn to get along in the pack.
Do you mean animals who were born in captivity and raised by humans who didn't learn how to mother their own oRABpring?
Please be more explicit. Exactly what questions and what brainwashing?
Can you say run-on sentence? "We" haven't been evolving for 200 million years. "We" separated from the chimps only about 5 to 7 million years ago.
None of the animals that you name have been around for 200 million years.
What? That's just not true. We have cave paintings and fossils in Europe dated to about 30,000 years. The archaeological evidence is overwhelming. There are older fossils in Africa.
Fortunately, I have a new irony meter. It pegged but didn't blow. You believe that contradictory creation myths are absolutely true and then claim that science is a fairy tale. You haven't even bothered to learn the basics of what you oppose and yet you throw out years and assertions. How ignorant.
However, there are suites of stone tools that are associated with certain hominid fossil sites that have been dated to about 2.5 million years. Of course, one would have to be a fool to claim that we are using the same stone tools today. The fossil record recorRAB several different stone tool cultures from then to the bronze age, including those in the Americas that were still extant when Europeans invaded.
There's that annoying and illiterate space before a question mark again. Anyway, that question has already been answered.
How do you know that they haven't? Who said that they have?
So humans are less evolved than animals? I that what you are saying? Actually, animals must also learn from their parents how to get along in their society. BirRAB raised by humans don't learn to sing as they should and therefore don't reproduce. Carnivores raised by humans don't learn to hunt and don't learn to get along in the pack.
Do you mean animals who were born in captivity and raised by humans who didn't learn how to mother their own oRABpring?
Please be more explicit. Exactly what questions and what brainwashing?
Can you say run-on sentence? "We" haven't been evolving for 200 million years. "We" separated from the chimps only about 5 to 7 million years ago.
None of the animals that you name have been around for 200 million years.
What? That's just not true. We have cave paintings and fossils in Europe dated to about 30,000 years. The archaeological evidence is overwhelming. There are older fossils in Africa.
Fortunately, I have a new irony meter. It pegged but didn't blow. You believe that contradictory creation myths are absolutely true and then claim that science is a fairy tale. You haven't even bothered to learn the basics of what you oppose and yet you throw out years and assertions. How ignorant.
braidensmommy
New member
Unfortunately one must take everything you say on faith that you and evo knows what you're talking about. And I submit you don't. You can't PROVE one thing you have stated above as though it's a fact. It is all huge assumptions made, based upon junk science and the need to fill the gaps by any means other than spiritual means. You state the 30,000 year age as if it's written in stone, {pun intended} when they could be between 1200 and 8000 years old in reality. You must understand that if I believed evolutionists were actually seeking the truth no matter where it led them, and if they combined all fossil and archeological evidence whether it confirmed evo or worked against it, then I would trust that you are seeking the truth no matter where it led.
But the type of evidence we never see are the DNA tests on the fossils of accepted and declared descendants of humans but are shown not to have human DNA. So they don't issue a press release saying this discovery has just proven that LUCY or Cro-Magnun, or even Neanderthal have no connection to human DNA or RNA. But no, that info isn't released. It's buried and forgotten.
So identifying a thigh and toe bone found in Africa as human when it could just as easily be an extinct man sized monkey is a fairy tale. You notice I have never denied a Wooly Mammoth existed ? Why ? Because one has been found whole and intact buried in ICE. But how do you explain that although it was perfectly preserved as if flash frozen, the contents of its stomach held flora and fauna from a tropical jungle ? Can you explain that with evo ? Or how evo fits into that type of scenario ? Has the study of evo shown a gap that would explain such an event ?
But the type of evidence we never see are the DNA tests on the fossils of accepted and declared descendants of humans but are shown not to have human DNA. So they don't issue a press release saying this discovery has just proven that LUCY or Cro-Magnun, or even Neanderthal have no connection to human DNA or RNA. But no, that info isn't released. It's buried and forgotten.
So identifying a thigh and toe bone found in Africa as human when it could just as easily be an extinct man sized monkey is a fairy tale. You notice I have never denied a Wooly Mammoth existed ? Why ? Because one has been found whole and intact buried in ICE. But how do you explain that although it was perfectly preserved as if flash frozen, the contents of its stomach held flora and fauna from a tropical jungle ? Can you explain that with evo ? Or how evo fits into that type of scenario ? Has the study of evo shown a gap that would explain such an event ?