Evolution vs. Creation

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008. Full Story
FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

#60356 Nov 23, 2012
ToManyLaws wrote:
<quoted text>
HOLY CRAP....Your insane as heck. Please get mental help fast.
You guys can't handle the truth, can you?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#60357 Nov 23, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Come on Dude you and many here like kitten & subductionzone have really big attitudes but have provided stuff all to support yourselves.
When evos get pinned they scurry off down the path to evasion and want to evade the point by using strategies such as changing the topic or posing non related questions, often of a philosophical smoke screen. Hence they can go around in circles for years and say absolutely nothing of substance.
Can you evos make any scientifically based predictions around dna or not?
Yup.

http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/T9Q...
MazHere wrote:
I said creationists predict that NO dna will be totally functionless. Evos have gone from 2% to 80% functionality.
Who would any of you evos like to put your credibility on the line to be requoted in time that one day 100% of the genome will be known to have function? I say it will. Do disagree if you suggest this mere 20% left will remain support for TOE and stand the test of time.
Function is not the problem, as already stated. It's the pattern of nested hierarchies that clinches it.
MazHere wrote:
OR, do you wish to withdraw all claims that non coding dna informs support for TOE at all?
OR just keep playing games of evasion, whereby creationists hold the upper hand here on this forum.
Evasion? That's all you've done for months. You keep doing that now. Your BS is rebutted and all you can do is posture and repost the same BS without addressing anything previous.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Everton, Australia

#60358 Nov 23, 2012
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Can and done. Can you do anything but copy-paste yourself over and over?
<quoted text>
Potential falsifications of evolution were posted by me earlier today. Keep skipping, skippy.
Then repost them. They are easy to find in your control panel.

You keep making these claims yet I am the only one that seems to be able to requote a view supported by research and links to same

BTW, where is your woffly stand on ervs. Provide something for me to pull apart and demonstrate the assumption and folley that underpins all research on ervs.
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#60359 Nov 23, 2012
ToManyLaws wrote:
<quoted text>
Naiz fascism as a freligion is vile and evil. What you think is right the rest of us think is nasty.
That might be a bit overly condemning of Christianity. The early Christians were a bit zealous but they did have quite a humanistic ideology once you released yourself from the trappings of aristocracy and organized demagoguery.

I can't say that any Christians currently embrace that but I'll listen.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#60360 Nov 23, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
You absolutely have no idea what supporting your view looks like, do you?
I say the research supports Sanford and have explained why.
And I explained why he is wrong.(shrug)
MazHere wrote:
You come back with a load of woffle about Gish. I don't give a stuff about Gish. I can run my own race.
This is why you lot of evos are gobsmacked. If you can't prattle some prewritten response to the usual creationist lines you are totally lost like Alice in Wonderland.
You are lost and are gobsmacked and unable to mount any substantive reply and never ever have.
Which is why AGAIN you are not attempting a rebuttal. And AGAIN you are completely ignoring the inconsistencies of your own position. And AGAIN ignoring the fact that should some great miracle occur and you were somehow able to falsify evolution, I can just invoke magic and STILL be on a level playing field.

You can't win. You can only lie and encourage the same behaviour in your fellow fundies.

Remember, God is watching...

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Everton, Australia

#60361 Nov 23, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Now another 3rd page of woffle with not a whiff of scientific backing to be seen to refute my assertions.
You keep saying you or others have provided a substantive reply. Then requote it. I dare you. You have provided nothing more than woffle. Woffle for the purpose of my point means no substantive refute backed by research to the suggestion that your evidence for evolution that is related to non coding dna, vestigial organs, organisms limitless ability to adapt is flawed.
Your opinion and bla mazhere is wrong is not evidence for anything. You have not provided any evidence nor argument that challenges anything I have said so far.
The fact is recent research supports the opposite of initial evolutionary claims, which so happens to align with general creationist long standing predictions.
How do you know the latest flavour of the month means anything at all? Is it because you have mountains of it? You can throw out all biology books older than 10 years as they are outdated. That is how stable TOE is.
It is funny how when I am accused of providing no support for my view I can immediately repost or requote previous posts that show you up to be the desperate liar that you are.
However when it comes to you, you just speak to empty words. Such is your desperation on obvious state of denial.
See?? Dah!!!
Junk dna the fantasy of desperate evos
http://www.nature.com/news/encode-the-human-e...
Here is the published and peer reviewed research.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15716009
http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/biology/fra...
Here is the pay per view, peer reviewed and published paper that the previous article speaks to.
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/316/5833/18...
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/316/5833/18...
Are there any predictions that TOE can make around non coding dna and comparative similarity? The answer is NO.
Creationists can and on the above points of evidence suggest the research favours their predictions and turns evolutionary theory into a myth of change and unfalsifiability.
Hence TOE is not a science it is a philosophy trying to be a science and failing miserably it seems. Evos just refuse to see it. Its a matter of unfounded pride.
If there is anything you have provided worth requoting then requote it or stop playing games of evasion and suck it up. You loose by default if nothing else.
You see this above. This is me being able to requote substantive posts and views that are supported by links to research.

All you can do and talk about is how you wish you were equally articulate and speak to your imagined substantive replies that you can never find.
FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

#60362 Nov 23, 2012
ToManyLaws wrote:
<quoted text>
HOLY CRAP....Your insane as heck. Please get mental help fast.
I meant when the stones were cut in half they had distinct pictures in them. What did you think I meant?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#60363 Nov 23, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Then repost them. They are easy to find in your control panel.
And they are easy to find on this thread.(shrug)
MazHere wrote:
You keep making these claims yet I am the only one that seems to be able to requote a view supported by research and links to same
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed...

329724 current papers on evolution. You may find the occasional IDCreationist one, but you won't be fond of their conclusions. Which of my claims do you think are NOT supported by research? Oh wait - that's why you haven't addressed them yet. Only misrepresented evolutionary biologists instead.

Remember you can't claim unreliable evolutionary biologists prove unreliable evolution wrong with unreliable evolutionary biology. That's intellectual dishonesty to the core.

And then you take one mighty leap further and claim GODDIDIT WITH MAGIC!
MazHere wrote:
BTW, where is your woffly stand on ervs. Provide something for me to pull apart and demonstrate the assumption and folley that underpins all research on ervs.
Like I said, you haven't even gotten around to the rest yet. But the fact we share nearly 200,000 of these with the other great apes is a start.

“Waytogo”

Since: Oct 09

Location hidden

#60364 Nov 23, 2012
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>I meant when the stones were cut in half they had distinct pictures in them. What did you think I meant?
I knew what you meant. I have read the total LIE BS story also. That whole deal has been disproven as a fake. But you do liek to believe in made up BS dont you.
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#60365 Nov 23, 2012
FREE SERVANT wrote:
Agate stones are said to be from 200 to 400 million years old according to scientist. These stones have been found in Kentucky that have distinct pictures of native American Indians after they were cut in half. The Creator of the earth foreknew about the Indians. I personally think scientist have their timelines wrong.
OK, that isn't too clear on any level. Are you suggesting that humanity is 200 to 400 million years old? What was cut in half? Stones or Indians? Either way, what is implied by cutting things in half? Are you implying that God "knew" about Indians but was not directly involved in their creation? WTF?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#60366 Nov 23, 2012
MazHere wrote:
Oh and you would know for sure on the back of a big bang model where physics breaks down at the singularity. On the back of a model that suggests 96% of the universe is dark energy, a substance they know nothing about except it makes their physics less problematic.
Except when calculations are made against observable astronomical phenomena under the Dark Matter hypothesis they prove to be correct. They are in the correct positions. No other model (such as modified gravity) can do this so far.
MazHere wrote:
How about this theory that you all like to ignore. This will never take off because it actually makes sense and does not require the mystery of dark matter and energy.
It's an apologetics bastardization of relativity, and ignores the fact that it would work with ANY other space body being the center of the universe. Oh, except the Bible sez the Earth is important therefore it's GOTTA be Earth in the middle! How's that GODMAGIC theory coming along? Still zip?
MazHere wrote:
Hence one can believe in a theory that breaks down and makes the earth not special or one can choose another equally credible theory.
BTW, I also can present research that suggest intergalactic shadows are missing causing challenges to the validity of big bang.
While at the same time ignoring positive predictions like the prediction of background radiation levels to 1 part in 300,000. Theory may not be perfect but you only got magic as an alternative.
MazHere wrote:
The one thing that supports a biblical Gods ability to create instantly is that there is now research that proves energy can turn to matter.
Of course it can. Matter IS energy.
MazHere wrote:
What is God described as? Energy and light. What is the primary matter of the universe according to researchers...energy contained within a singularity the physics of which also breaks down at that instant of creation. So here again is support for yet another biblical assertion and a creationist view that the primary matter of the universe will be made from the substance of God. Done!
Except you have no mechanism or scientifically verifiable source. Hence semantic word-games are used to claim physics supports invisible Jewmagic.

So precisely what type of energy is God made of?
MazHere wrote:
The statement that a source of power can create matter has been established. That is suportive data on creos behalf
That view is as good if not better than anything you can provide, despite big bangs general acceptance.
Translation - "The existence of the universe supports Godmagic because the Bible sez God created the universe!"

Well done.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#60368 Nov 23, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
No serious takers only those wanting to philosophise.
Great! That means I win.
My winning means evos cannot defend their theory, or at least the ones on this forum certainly can't.
Of course I can. You haven't falsified it yet. You haven't addressed it yet. I admit I can't beat invisible Jewmagic, but then non-falsifiable non-scientific concepts such as that can easily be dismissed.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#60369 Nov 23, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Religion is dying because most religions do not adhere to the teachings in their spiritual texts. You've got Catholics bowing down to idols, Islamic extremists and uncivilized faiths populating like rabbits, and other that don't believe in a biblical God but uphold some unsubstantiated dribble of their own.
Look at this article. I have sourced a refute for you lot seeing as none of you are able to supply anything of substance for yourselves.
http://thenaturalhistorian.com/2012/11/03/the...
I refute you by claiming that evidence of people leaving religion does not inform the creation/evolution debate at all. You are evading strong and robust discussions I speak to in an attempt to evade the thread topic. On a properly moderated forum your posts would likely have been deleted.
This boof in the refute to my assertion above is trying to refute accumulating evidence that researchers and scientists are flocking to the various forms of creationism in droves.
Note this fool basing his entire refute on the basis of amounts of published articles, as if the publication watch dogs allow creationist research past their gates. It is only puiblished when disgiused as based on evo paradigms.
Indeed I assert that researchers are flocking to creationist models in droves. John Sanford is just one of them.
So what you're saying is that you can't get invisible Jewmagic published in the scientific arena because of the evil atheist world-wide evolutionist conspiracy, so you're publishing it yourselves, peer-reviewing it yourselves, and pretending it's relevant to science. Got it.

Oh, and you're still contradicting yourself and still wiping out all life on Earth multiple times over, still relying on reality-denying YEC's who also contradict themselves, still pretending that negative arguments against evolution automatically count as positive evidence for creationism, and still fixing any and all problems with invisible Jewmagic.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#60370 Nov 23, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
If you are refering to me, it is you that have proven to be dim becuase you have not addressed me with substantive research to refute me. Nor have you explained how anything I assert is not as equally a good interpretation of the data as any these researchers have come up with.
All your woffle around junk dna, vestigial organs; Over 4 billion years of accumulative beneficial mutation that are overwhelmingly negative and restrictive which is great evidence for creation dismissed by the mere wave of the hand and any old ridiculous scenarion any delusional mind can come up with will do!
You can do no more than ridicule me and that makes me extremely happy because you have provided evidence of your own ignorance.
We can not only ridicule you but also point out your dishonesty and where your assertions go wrong. That's including claiming negative arguments as "positive evidence". And what the heck do you mean 4 billion years anyway?!? There's no such thing as 4 billion years!

Oh wait - you're a hypocrite.(shrug)

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Everton, Australia

#60371 Nov 23, 2012
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
That might be a bit overly condemning of Christianity. The early Christians were a bit zealous but they did have quite a humanistic ideology once you released yourself from the trappings of aristocracy and organized demagoguery.
I can't say that any Christians currently embrace that but I'll listen.
The basis for the NT is to forgive, turn the other cheek and pray for your enemies. It is hard to be perfect. The OT condemns killing for any other reason than is directly controlled by God. Anything more than this comes from the reasonings of man that are often peddled as scripture. Many scriptures warn of this.

That is why I do not adhere to any particular faith and simply call myself a Christian with a preference for creationist predictive capability.

The Crusades and all the examples of Christendom at its worst does not negate the concept of the peace that the NT and Christianity are meant to reflect.

The bible, including the NT, is the only spiritual text where the composers did not take glory for themselves and did not live in shameless luxury as a result of profits from their teachings. That is almost a miracle! For me this puts the bible and the NT above and beyond any other spiritual text.

Of course this has little to do with the evolution/creation debate. However, I think I can give up on evos coming up with anything better than what I and others can present as creationists. The point is the supposed evidence for TOE is not that crash hot after all. TOE is supported by whatever flavour of the month is on offer.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#60372 Nov 23, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Listen here to me you are woffling agian.
What is it that you do not understand about this.
These data support models in which negative epistasis contributes to declining rates of adaptation over time. Sign epistasis was rare in this genome-wide study, in contrast to its prevalence in an earlier study of mutations in a single gene.
It is self explanatary. Then you go on with some woffle about many that has absolutley nothing to do with the research.
Do you understand it all?
Yup. Which is why you still haven't been able to address the logical consequences of Sanford's arguments. And you STILL focus on anti-evolution apologetics while ignoring your own internal inconsistencies.
FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

#60373 Nov 23, 2012
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
OK, that isn't too clear on any level. Are you suggesting that humanity is 200 to 400 million years old? What was cut in half? Stones or Indians? Either way, what is implied by cutting things in half? Are you implying that God "knew" about Indians but was not directly involved in their creation? WTF?
Let me clarify! Agate stones are cut and polished. The KY agates that have vivid mineral colors sometimes are found to have distinct pictures in them. Examples have been found with birds and other nature scenes as well as humans that are clearly Indians.
Portal

Naperville, IL

#60374 Nov 23, 2012
Gets Pkr wrote:
<quoted text>
And the socialist gospel proclaims that once upon a time a lightning bolt struck a possible ammoniated methane pool, generated stray amino acids which possibly hooked up in a manner which allowed it feed, digest and reproduce itself. Sorry progressive genius, I just can't buy swamp land in southern Arizona, but you obviously have that "kind of blind faith" for such an investment.
No,Big G open your gray matter. Humans make up theories to mislead and confuse the clueless. Creationism and evolution are just two examples.......there is another option but, apparently being human has a mind block thrown up....for most humans. The others that can think and reason....don't care for the "Norm" in the theory misinformation data. The cosmos has all the answers.....religion is a block, evolution are a block...now, my position should be clear Big G. Its pointless, the human being will be extinct before they understand.
FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

#60375 Nov 23, 2012
ToManyLaws wrote:
<quoted text>
I knew what you meant. I have read the total LIE BS story also. That whole deal has been disproven as a fake. But you do liek to believe in made up BS dont you.
Please stop supporting lies and get with the real world! This is not fake, I have seen them.
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#60376 Nov 23, 2012
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>Let me clarify! Agate stones are cut and polished. The KY agates that have vivid mineral colors sometimes are found to have distinct pictures in them. Examples have been found with birds and other nature scenes as well as humans that are clearly Indians.
...and the point is?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

Weird Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
What are you thinking about now? (Jun '10) 5 min Sublime1 20,185
30,000 post wins (May '13) 9 min Weird 0ne 2 1,793
Tonights Menu 12 min AmyFaith 10
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 34 min Tom2Tone 147,093
Interesting Quotes (Jun '11) 42 min Sublime1 13,313
When I get bored I... 44 min Emad 2
Words or names starting and ending with the sam... 49 min -patricia- 280
I Like..... (Mar '14) 52 min Hatti_Hollerand 306
'Hoosier Hillbilly' or 'Barack Obama' Who'd Be... 1 hr Hoosier Hillbilly 26
It Takes 7 Police Agencies to Break Up Wedding ... 4 hr MAYOR DYSASTER 8
•••

Weird People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••