Noahs Ark. An engineers perspective.
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

“Shaggin' Wagon.”

Level 1

Since: Apr 09

Springfield, MA

#66 Apr 23, 2010
This thread has become awesome.

“Shaggin' Wagon.”

Level 1

Since: Apr 09

Springfield, MA

#65 Apr 23, 2010
JRS wrote:
<quoted text>
You are like a drunk in the gutter demanding that the worker explain and defend himself as he walks past on the way to a job.
ok. I prove my point.
JRS

Oak Creek, WI

#67 Apr 23, 2010
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
And yet we have a single cell grow into a beautiful woman in a mere 20 years. Happens all the time.
Reproduction is not evolution. To satisfy the fantasy of evolution where a skunk turns into a rose you just cop out and say it takes billions of years. Reproduction is not evolution.
MIDutch

Waterford, MI

#68 Apr 23, 2010
Hey, I thought this thread was about Noah's ark, the engineering implausibility of it's construction and the complete lack of evidence for it's existence.

Not that I'm surprised that the "creationists" have changed the subject. It's what they always do when they have NO answers in support of their arguments (which is almost all of the time).
MIDutch

Waterford, MI

#69 Apr 23, 2010
Whoops, forgot to mention ... 4000+ years worth of looking and they still can't find it even though their "science textbook tells them EXACTLY where to look.

It should be in PERFECT condition as well. The largest wooden structure ever built, gopher wood (wood so tough it survived massive global flood conditions, rampant tectonic plate movements and destructive forces equivalent to 20 BILLION hydrogen bombs all going off at the same time) and cold dry conditions perfect for preservation.

Odd that no one has been able to find it.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#70 Apr 23, 2010
JRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Reproduction is not evolution. To satisfy the fantasy of evolution where a skunk turns into a rose you just cop out and say it takes billions of years. Reproduction is not evolution.
Since you are a "Flood theory" proponent, does this mean you are admitting you were wrong when you stated there are no such thing as beneficial mutations? You do wish your position to be consistent, yes?

Would you prefer dealing with the problems of your position or would you prefer to continue to throw out insults and avoid dealing with the vacuousness of your position?

Feel free to run away again like always.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#71 Apr 23, 2010
JRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Reproduction is not evolution. To satisfy the fantasy of evolution where a skunk turns into a rose you just cop out and say it takes billions of years. Reproduction is not evolution.
I didn't say it was. But you claimed that it is inconceivable that a human could develop from a single cell. I just pointed out that exact thing happens all the time, in fact has happened billions of times. I was merely showing that in your argument "if evolution is true, then a human can come from a single cell", that the conclusion is in fact true...meaning you have not falsified the assumption.

BTW...a skunk turning into a rose IS a fantasy, and has nothing to do with evolution.

As I have stated (many times) you are arguing against a comic book version of evolution. That means your arguments fail, since you are not saying anything at all about the REAL theory of evolution. If you REALLY want to debate against ToE, you first need to learn what ToE really says.

Then, of course, you are going to need evidence against ToE. So far, all you have provided are lies and opinions.

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#72 Apr 25, 2010
JRS wrote:
To satisfy the fantasy of evolution where a skunk turns into a rose...
Nothing in evolution claims that a skunk turned into a rose. Do you have anything to contribute other than straw man arguments?
MIDutch

Waterford, MI

#73 Apr 25, 2010
So, junior, what sort of "wood" can withstand the energy release of 20 BILLION hydrogen bombs?

You know, you may try this answer: "since there was only one little window and Noah had it closed, he didn't see that God had activated the interstellar drives and actually had Noah and his little wooden boat orbiting the planet earth at a safe distance until the It was done re-terraforming the planet's surface".

It certainly doesn't say in the Bible that it DIDN'T happen this way, which is usually all that is necessary for "fundie christian" apologetics.
dsmit

United States

#74 Jun 20, 2012
MIDutch wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm guessing it was because of the extinct Termitus eatum unobtanium insect species.
Hilarious, wish I had thought of that. Kudos.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
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.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... 3 min Science 180
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 3 min John 32,052
GOD-guided (Co)Evolution Theory 30 min BradWatson_Miami 1
How can we prove God exists, or does not? (May '15) 50 min Science 519
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 56 min 15th Dalai Lama 75,181
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 2 hr Nemesis 162,041
The Subduction Zone class on Evidence. (Jun '13) 3 hr pshun2404 141
More from around the web