Evolution is real!
First Prev
of 9
Next Last
Mountain Man

Wooton, KY

#1 Feb 14, 2013
I accept evolution as a scientific fact. I do not believe man was created during some seven-day creation spree by some white haired being who lives up in sky. I think man and all life evolved from earlier forms down through the ages. Now, fire away, you Bible thumpers. Show your ignorance.

Judged:

17

15

15

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Enos

Statesboro, GA

#2 Feb 14, 2013
As an anthropologist that has been exposed to deep interpretation of evolutionary theory...and as a student of G-d's word I can find nothing in either study that conflicts with the other. Both studies support each other. And that is a fact.

“Gods Curse On Lazy Hillbillies”

Since: Jun 12

Dale City, VA

#3 Feb 14, 2013
Mountain Man wrote:
I accept evolution as a scientific fact. I do not believe man was created during some seven-day creation spree by some white haired being who lives up in sky. I think man and all life evolved from earlier forms down through the ages. Now, fire away, you Bible thumpers. Show your ignorance.
No One Said His Hair Was White....That's Just an Ugly Rumor!!!...And It wasn't a Seven Day Creating Spree....Because He Rested On The Seventh Day....Probably Watched Some Football.....

And Can You Show Us any {Scientific} Fact That You Accept Evolution as Being Scientific Facts....
Based Allah

Hazard, KY

#4 Feb 14, 2013
Enos wrote:
I can find nothing in either study that conflicts with the other. Both studies support each other. And that is a fact.
You plebs should stop slinging the "fact" word around. Evolution isn't a "fact". Gravity, technically, isn't a "fact". Yes, they both have MASSIVE amounts of evidence that are basically undeniable, but they are still not "scientific facts".

& what you just said definitely isn't a "fact". So please explain.
John Paul

Greenbrier, AR

#5 Feb 14, 2013
granted, prehistoric fossils abound around the globe - but what puzzles me is how can man, being a fairly recent addition to the evolution chart - still lack any link between us and any predecessor?

actually - every species lack reasonable evidence of links between each other.

there's apes -and there are men. there's NOTHING in between like either. just like the space between the ears of anthropologist.
Enos

Statesboro, GA

#6 Feb 15, 2013
Based Allah wrote:
<quoted text>
You plebs should stop slinging the "fact" word around. Evolution isn't a "fact". Gravity, technically, isn't a "fact". Yes, they both have MASSIVE amounts of evidence that are basically undeniable, but they are still not "scientific facts".
& what you just said definitely isn't a "fact". So please explain.
If you had reading comprehension skills you would have noted my sentence "evolutionary theory". Apparently you do not know the difference between theory and fact. Go look up the definition of the word theory. Then go look up the definition of the word fact. Then you might understand.

Since: Jun 10

London, KY

#7 Feb 15, 2013
John Paul wrote:
granted, prehistoric fossils abound around the globe - but what puzzles me is how can man, being a fairly recent addition to the evolution chart - still lack any link between us and any predecessor?
actually - every species lack reasonable evidence of links between each other.
there's apes -and there are men. there's NOTHING in between like either. just like the space between the ears of anthropologist.
Because the Human Genome was mapped,it's beginning to look like modern man is a genetic construct,aka an artificial creature.That accounts for Homo Sapiens sudden appearance 700,000 years ago,along side Neanderthal (Neander Valley) man who existed at the same time.Who did the manipulation is unknown,yet.But it sure wasn't a god.If GOD had created man,he sure screwed up big time.
Trololol

Hazard, KY

#9 Feb 15, 2013
Enos wrote:
I can find nothing in either study that conflicts with the other. Both studies support each other. And that is a fact.
You still didn't explain this. I can only assume what you meant by this is that Creationism or "Intelligent Design" and Evolution support each other. If this is what you meant, then you couldn't be more wrong.

Creationism has no evidence supporting it, period. No, a 2,000+ year old book full of inaccuracies, contradictions and flaws does not count as scientific evidence.
Early Cuyler

Greenbrier, AR

#10 Feb 15, 2013
Trololol wrote:
<quoted text>
Creationism has no evidence supporting it, period. No, a 2,000+ year old book full of inaccuracies, contradictions and flaws does not count as scientific evidence.
Name one flaw, contradiction, or inaccuracy in the 2000+ year old book.
Trololol

Hazard, KY

#11 Feb 15, 2013
Early Cuyler wrote:
<quoted text>
Name one flaw, contradiction, or inaccuracy in the 2000+ year old book.
There's literally thousands of contradictions and scientific inaccuracies in the bible. Have you ever actually, you know, read the bible?

Take the time and actually READ about some things, all of the world's knowledge is available via the internet, no matter your education. Try looking at things with an open mind. You'd be surprised at what you learn, even the hard truths.

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald...

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/page/bible-...

http://www.project-reason.org/gallery3/image/...

Scientific errors: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Scientific_error...
Early Cuyler

Greenbrier, AR

#12 Feb 15, 2013
Trololol wrote:
<quoted text>
There's literally thousands of contradictions and scientific inaccuracies in the bible.
Name one.
Trololol

Hazard, KY

#13 Feb 15, 2013
Early Cuyler wrote:
<quoted text>
Name one.
How simple of one do you want? Because I'm starting to believe you're just not very smart. Let me dumb it down for you a bit, since you obviously do not like to read.

Genesis 1:11-12 and 1:26-27 Trees came before Adam.
Genesis 2:4-9 Trees came after Adam.

What about flaws regarding common sense and rationality? Like Noah's Ark? It was rationally impossible. Surely you don't believe every single word in the bible is 100% true. Do you?(Yes this is an actual question)
Trololol

Hazard, KY

#14 Feb 15, 2013
Early Cuyler, are you taking the time to actually read the sources I provided for you and/or the bible to check the authenticity of them... or do you just not have anything to reply?

If I were a betting man, I'd wager you've never even completely read the bible, and that I (non-religious) know more about it than you.

Studies show that Atheists/Agnostics know more about religion than actual religious people do. Knowledge is power!
Enos

Statesboro, GA

#15 Feb 15, 2013
Trololol wrote:
<quoted text>
You still didn't explain this. I can only assume what you meant by this is that Creationism or "Intelligent Design" and Evolution support each other. If this is what you meant, then you couldn't be more wrong.
Creationism has no evidence supporting it, period. No, a 2,000+ year old book full of inaccuracies, contradictions and flaws does not count as scientific evidence.
Read genesis. It parallels scientific theory in the same order.....It is so simple that a child could understand...if he reads genesis.....and scientific theory of the earth's creation and the intoduction of fuana and it's morph to current time...
Unknown Hinson

Statesboro, GA

#16 Feb 15, 2013
Early Cuyler wrote:
<quoted text>
Name one flaw, contradiction, or inaccuracy in the 2000+ year old book.
From one to another that has studied the word I could not agree with you more early....how's granny?
Unknown Hinson

Statesboro, GA

#17 Feb 15, 2013
Trololol wrote:
<quoted text>
There's literally thousands of contradictions and scientific inaccuracies in the bible. Have you ever actually, you know, read the bible?
Take the time and actually READ about some things, all of the world's knowledge is available via the internet, no matter your education. Try looking at things with an open mind. You'd be surprised at what you learn, even the hard truths.
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald...
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/page/bible-...
http://www.project-reason.org/gallery3/image/...
Scientific errors: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Scientific_error...
Haha..haha....how about going to the source, trogladyte....sucking up the spew from satan's minions Huh? Beware....you regurgitate the spew from evil men. I have been trained to use the scientific method and I have yet to find 1...piece of information in THE WORD that is not fact. Perhaps if you had studied Latin or Greek, or Old English you might have a better understanding of the richness of the lexicon of the King James Bible....vocabulary is a lost art...and those without an understanding of the history of the english language will be lost when studying THE WORD. WORDS HAVE MEANING. Beware the evil you spew....
Old ky home

United States

#18 Feb 15, 2013
Mountain Man wrote:
I accept evolution as a scientific fact. I do not believe man was created during some seven-day creation spree by some white haired being who lives up in sky. I think man and all life evolved from earlier forms down through the ages. Now, fire away, you Bible thumpers. Show your ignorance.
Hhhhhh... While I understand you're just a troll, trying to get a rise out of people. Yes, I get that. Nonetheless, your post still irkes me to no end. Even someone with an elementary grasp of the scientific method could tell you that your use of the phase "scientific fact" is completely wrong. The phrase in itself is an oxymoron. Science deals not with "facts". NOTHING can be proven scientifically... now things may be able to be proven mathematically, but thats a different subject. Science isn't as black and white as mathematics, things cannot be proven. Science doesn't present proof. Science present evidence, and all concepts are open for interpretation. The whole idea of the scientific method basically boils down to how one must be completely open to the possibility of another possible answer. NOTHING can be 100% proven.

There are no facts, only interpretations.
-Friedrich Nietzsche
Trololol

Hazard, KY

#19 Feb 15, 2013
Unknown Hinson wrote:
<quoted text>Haha..haha....how about going to the source, trogladyte....sucking up the spew from satan's minions Huh? Beware....you regurgitate the spew from evil men. I have been trained to use the scientific method and I have yet to find 1...piece of information in THE WORD that is not fact. Perhaps if you had studied Latin or Greek, or Old English you might have a better understanding of the richness of the lexicon of the King James Bible....vocabulary is a lost art...and those without an understanding of the history of the english language will be lost when studying THE WORD. WORDS HAVE MEANING. Beware the evil you spew....
Psalm 14:1 - "The fool had said in his heart there is no God. Their work is abomination, there is none that doeth good".

You're sitting on a computer which was made by Alan Turning (homosexual Atheist), using Microsoft Windows which was developed by Bill Gates (Atheist, who's donated BILLIONS of DOLLARS to charity and science, trying to make the world a better place), & you're on the World Wide Web which was developed by Tim Berners Lee (Atheist).
Have a Facebook? Yeah, better delete that too... developed by Mark Zuckerburg (Atheist).

STUDY THE WORDS OF GAWHD. HERP DERPPY DERP. You're an idiot and not even prepared to debate with me. Quit while you're ahead, pal.
Dandan harding

Greenbrier, AR

#20 Feb 15, 2013
Trololol wrote:
<quoted text>

Genesis 1:11-12 and 1:26-27 Trees came before Adam.
Genesis 2:4-9 Trees came after Adam.
Genesis 1 records the order
Genesis 2 is not referring to the order at all.
It's pretty simple.

Jesus said that one must become like a little child to ever see Heaven, also that those who think themselves mighty will be humbled.
LolLol

East Bernstadt, KY

#21 Feb 15, 2013
Trololol wrote:
<quoted text>
Psalm 14:1 - "The fool had said in his heart there is no God. Their work is abomination, there is none that doeth good".
You're sitting on a computer which was made by Alan Turning (homosexual Atheist), using Microsoft Windows which was developed by Bill Gates (Atheist, who's donated BILLIONS of DOLLARS to charity and science, trying to make the world a better place), & you're on the World Wide Web which was developed by Tim Berners Lee (Atheist).
Have a Facebook? Yeah, better delete that too... developed by Mark Zuckerburg (Atheist).
STUDY THE WORDS OF GAWHD. HERP DERPPY DERP. You're an idiot and not even prepared to debate with me. Quit while you're ahead, pal.
...and your debating the word of God with Christians.

And your point is?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 9
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Hazard Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
What's Your Opinion of Donald Trump Now ? 2 min Humpty Trumpty 79
Maria caudill 1 hr you dont even know 9
dumping sewage in the river 1 hr Maga 4
Booze on Sunday's? 1 hr HellO 3
Rescare Neglect. 2 hr Gross 3
What woman is easy in Hazard 2 hr Trust me I know 2
News Bible study rules for public schools proposed (Feb '10) 2 hr Paul 163,730

Hazard Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Hazard Mortgages