Evolution vs. Creation

[TerryL]

Charles Idemi wrote:

<quoted text> The same Blah blah blah blah blah. Tell me if you have one single shred of evidence, how the universe came into form?

1 shred of evidence for how the universe came about would be 2x more than what you have as 'evidence' for your 'god'. The fact that there lots of very good evidence giving clues to how the univers formed just means there is more for you to ignore

[TerryL]

KittenKoder wrote:

<quoted text>
So, you say you know how it happened?
Why do you have to lie? Why can't you just be honest and say you don't know?

Honesty has no place in religion

[anonymous]

Charles Idemi wrote:

<quoted text> You must be really sick of yourself.
How did the universe came into form? because we know that, it was neither humans, animals nor plants.

What the heck would humans, animals or plants have to do with how the universe was created? Does that mean that water or rock created the universe, the way freeservant suggests? OK, which Megaman villain are you backing? Bubbleman?

[TerryL]

Charles Idemi wrote:

<quoted text> Read the book of Genesis. God created the universe. No one can say it was human, animals and plants handiworks?

using the source of the claim (The Bible) as proof the claim is true is stupid beyond measure. Using that "logic" I can claim you are a murderer because I saw it written on a piece of paper. As proof of your guilt, I offer that piece of paper. Electric chair for you!

[TerryL]

Charles Idemi wrote:

<quoted text> The amazing universe that no humans, plants nor animals created, proves the existence of a God.

You're drooling again

[anonymous]

Lizz wrote:

We evolved from the lizzards. Think about it, we all just have shorter tongues.

I am the Eggman!

[woodtick57]

Charles Idemi wrote:

<quoted text> So, what would your point, Mr. Know all?
Humans, animals, and plants are neither the creators of the universe, then who?

why does there have to be a who? think outside the old stone-age paradigm.

[woodtick57]

Charles Idemi wrote:

<quoted text> I notice shit when i see one.
So far, i have been receiving shit as answers, yours is also one of them.

Sad that you think the truth is shit...

[woodtick57]

Charles Idemi wrote:

<quoted text> You don't know and yet we have the answers.
God created the universe, period!

you have absolutely zero evidence of that claim. why do you bveleive it? because it sounds cool? cuz it supports your ego?

[Charles Idemi]

StarsplashTaiwan wrote:

<quoted text>
Fine you want a logical explaination that you will just shrug off regardless because you refuse to accept any other form of thinking? Fine here it is.
Overtime, Stars and Suns die off and explode in supernovas. The particles that made up destroyed planets and stars from the system that was destroyed by the supernovas are spread beyond massive distances which in time will collect. That explains the rings around planets like Uranus, Saturn and Neptune. These loose particals collide with each other. The heat generated from the collision would fuse the particles together forming an even bigger partical which in time creats comets and astroids. Back then, the universe was extremely unstable with supernovas going off every which way. The shear force could of sent planets in a collision course with each other. Other colided because their orbits overlapped each other where eventually, they would collide. This explains how the Earth and the Moon has the same composition with one another: A massive rock hit Earth while it was still molten and the remaining pieces formed what is called our Moon. That explains why Earth, as small as it is, even has a moon.
Its called Astronomy. And its more real than Creationism.

Foul!
The logical conclusion or answer is that, no one can disprove the existence of God.

[HTS]

TerryL wrote:

<quoted text>Why is "I don't know" not an acceptable answer for the religious? How does inserting "god-did-it" (when "I don't know" would be an honest answer) actually do anything other than stifle further inquiry?

Atheist scientists insert "evolution-did-it" rather than "I don't know". Example: Abiogenesis. The entire theory of evolution is founded on the religion of atheism.

[Charles Idemi]

StarsplashTaiwan wrote:

<quoted text>
O Geee... A book. Just like the bible. You mean an interpretation of something that might of happened? If the book of Gensis is telling the truth, then there must be a magical land of Nania. What great physical evidence you have there. I mean, even something like fossils couldn't clearly disprove that the world was created in 7 days. Newsflash: It does.

Fiction and Reality are just two different concepts, get that!

[woodtick57]

HTS wrote:

<quoted text>Atheist scientists insert "evolution-did-it" rather than "I don't know". Example: Abiogenesis. The entire theory of evolution is founded on the religion of atheism.

ummm...abiogenesis has nothing to do with the theory of evolution.

sucks when you look so foolish through your own words, huh?

[TerryL]

HTS wrote:

<quoted text>Atheist scientists insert "evolution-did-it" rather than "I don't know". Example: Abiogenesis. The entire theory of evolution is founded on the religion of atheism.

Please... can't you come up with any orginal ignorance to spew?

[Charles Idemi]

Thomas Robertson wrote:

woodtick57 wrote:
Then go ahead and disprove the existence of the FSM. it is the fastest growing religion on the planet, it must be real if you cannot disprove he is the ruler of all.
Charles Idemi wrote:
You can call God, whatever names you can, but nothing can change his identity as the most the high.
Charles, you must hold the world record for red herrings.

Irony!
Why do love embracing the word, LIES ?

[woodtick57]

Charles Idemi wrote:

<quoted text> Fiction and Reality are just two different concepts, get that!

you obviously do get it. you rely on fiction to guide your life. science relies on reality.

[Charles Idemi]

Thomas Robertson wrote:

<quoted text>
Another red herring from Charles Idemi.
I wonder what else is new.

Like i said earlier, why do you love embracing the word, LIES?

[Charles Idemi]

Thomas Robertson wrote:

Hello, KittenKoder!
So you're a South Park fan too!
Just one correction: it's not leprechauns which steal underwear, it's gnomes.
You might have confused that episode with another episode, in which Cartman reports that he saw a leprechaun.
Anyway, gnomes and leprechauns must really exist, because we saw it on South Park.
Charles Idemi tells us that the Bible must be true becuase it mentions actual places and actual people.
Apparently, then, any source which mentions actual places and actual people must be true.
South Park mentions actual places and actual peole, so South Park must be true.

Did the actual people endorses God or not, yes or no?

[woodtick57]

Charles Idemi wrote:

<quoted text> Like i said earlier, why do you love embracing the word, LIES?

if you believe the christian god myth, you ar the one embracing proven lies. why do you embrace lies?

[Charles Idemi]

TerryL wrote:

<quoted text>Besides your need to try and lend credibility to your religious views, why does there have to be a "who"?

Ofcourse! because both the questions and answers are always pointing to that direction, " who ".