Evolution vs. Creation

[MazHere]

superwilly wrote:

<quoted text>
I was refuting your comment that there is NO evidence that Jesus ever existed. That is clearly not true.
I said nothing about "physics defying events".
You are the one that mentioned that.
Anyone can question the miracles, be my guest.
There is evidence that Jesus existed, you are wrong about that.

I suppose we use AD and BC because someone saw a ghost.

[Charles Idemi]

Jesus did existed and he is still existing.
If truly he did not exist, it means that, the people around him, also did not exist, which we all know is wrong.

[anonymous]

Charles Idemi wrote:

<quoted text> Are you calling Albert Einstein a liar?

On that one, yes! But he provided the world with some significant truths.

Personally, I suspect that Albert had to create a bit of a "No Comment" mythology to keep people off his back. He was a Jew who left Germany and the holocaust. He was also one of the most famous Jews of his day and his work led to things that helped win WW2. All sorts of radicals felt that his endorsement would legitimize their politics, and he was a reclusive person by nature.

Now, how can he keep the kooks from co-opting his reputation after his death? Hmmmm???

[Drew Smith]

MazHere wrote:

I suppose we use AD and BC because someone saw a ghost.

I suppose we use Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday because Tiw, Wodanaz, Thor, and Frige really existed.

[Charles Idemi]

TheBlackSheep wrote:

<quoted text>
Naw, the Germans own it.

Poops!
They own it and they can not even speak it as a first language. Irony!
English is the first and native language of England unlike Germany( German).

[Charles Idemi]

MazHere wrote:

<quoted text>
I suppose we use AD and BC because someone saw a ghost.

Lol

[anonymous]

Charles Idemi wrote:

<quoted text> That does not justify your position. Jesus did existed and he is still existed.
If truly he did not exist, the religion would have been dead by now.
If he didnot exist, also the people around him did not also exist, which we all know, is wrong.
It means that, there is no Peter, James, John, Pilate, Mary, Joseph, Herod, etc.

Sorry. We have first-hand accounts for many of those other people, and the rest are just props in the Jesus mythology. Plus nobody ever claimed that they were defying the laws of physics.

It does not concern me to find old objects with the word "Jesus" on them. It's not like it was an uncommon name. We're only talking about the one.

From Wikipedia:

"The first century works of historian Flavius Josephus refer to at least twenty different people with the name Jesus."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus#Etymology_...

So, we're really only talking about the opinions of historians and that can be biased as I presume most are from Christian dominated communities.

[Charles Idemi]

anonymous wrote:

<quoted text>
On that one, yes! But he provided the world with some significant truths.
Personally, I suspect that Albert had to create a bit of a "No Comment" mythology to keep people off his back. He was a Jew who left Germany and the holocaust. He was also one of the most famous Jews of his day and his work led to things that helped win WW2. All sorts of radicals felt that his endorsement would legitimize their politics, and he was a reclusive person by nature.
Now, how can he keep the kooks from co-opting his reputation after his death? Hmmmm???

Was he under duress when he was saying that?
He knows that science and religion can co-habit and work together for the advancement and development of mankind and the environment( ecosystem).

[MADRONE]

MazHere wrote:

What has happened with junk dna is that indeed there is now evidence that at least 80% of the genome is functional. Some researchers now conclude that it is very likely that 100% of the genome will be found to have function.

The majority of the "function" of the genome is of a general biochemical nature and has not demonstrable effect on phenotype. It is likely that a maximum of 20% of our genome will be shown to be used in our development. The rest is "junk".
You've constructed a Straw Man ("The best evidence evos had was 'junk' dna") and knocked it down with a misinterpretation.

MazHere wrote:

What has happened with vetigial organs is that more and more researchers are finding that these so called functionless organs do indeed have function but that function may be different. So much so were these finding confirmed that the definition of vestigial organ was changed by evolutionists to reflect 'different function' as opposed to no function at all. eg appendix

Vestigial structures must have some sort of function or they would likely disappear. Vestigial structures have never been claimed to be functionless.
As vestigial structures are generally repurposed, degenerate structures, they must have been adapted from earlier structures. That sounds a lot like Evolution.

[anonymous]

MazHere wrote:

<quoted text>
I suppose we use AD and BC because someone saw a ghost.

Essentially, yes. The Catholic Church established that system. We could get rid of it but nobody is in that big of a hurry.

[superwilly]

anonymous wrote:

<quoted text>
On that one, yes! But he provided the world with some significant truths.
Personally, I suspect that Albert had to create a bit of a "No Comment" mythology to keep people off his back. He was a Jew who left Germany and the holocaust. He was also one of the most famous Jews of his day and his work led to things that helped win WW2. All sorts of radicals felt that his endorsement would legitimize their politics, and he was a reclusive person by nature.
Now, how can he keep the kooks from co-opting his reputation after his death? Hmmmm???

Get your facts correct.

You said "He was a Jew who left Germany and the holocaust...".

He was visiting the US and never returned, getting citizenship in 1940, having left in 1933, two years BEFORE the holocaust.

[anonymous]

Charles Idemi wrote:

<quoted text> Was he under duress when he was saying that?
He knows that science and religion can co-habit and work together for the advancement and development of mankind and the environment( ecosystem).

If my reputation was being jeopardized by Charles Idemi who wanted my endorsement, I'd definitely call that a state of duress.

As is, I don't know if he was preaching or answering a question so I won't put words in his mouth.

[Charles Idemi]

anonymous wrote:

<quoted text>
Sorry. We have first-hand accounts for many of those other people, and the rest are just props in the Jesus mythology. Plus nobody ever claimed that they were defying the laws of physics.
It does not concern me to find old objects with the word "Jesus" on them. It's not like it was an uncommon name. We're only talking about the one.
From Wikipedia:
"The first century works of historian Flavius Josephus refer to at least twenty different people with the name Jesus."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus#Etymology_...
So, we're really only talking about the opinions of historians and that can be biased as I presume most are from Christian dominated communities.

Don't try to personalise any thing under the guise of science.
It took a lot of century before his life and events were recorded, that does not mean he did not exist. If his disciples and other people for him and against him existed, that means Jesus existed. Period.

[Dogen]

MazHere wrote:

<quoted text>
Are you serious? It is you evos that believe life sprouted out of the ground from elements, not me.
I actually believe in a God that has the power to do many things we don't understand and can't explain.

Can god create a universe that is self sustaining with natural laws?

Our is your god to weak to do that?

MazHere wrote:

<quoted text> Does it surprise you that there are things science cannot explain at present?

As this is what science claims and the reason for its continuation.

MazHere wrote:

<quoted text> Indeed what has progressed in relation to a deities ability to create a living organism out of the elements of the earth is that it has been demonstrated that energy, what God is, can be transformed into matter. Theist evolutionists do not believe in this power. They believe in miracles yet deny the power of God as being limited to their ability to explain it, which of course is ridiculous.

Actually you have it backward. Theistic evolutionists acknowledge that god is powerful enough to create life however he likes and that the evidence indicates he used evolution.

[cliche rant deleted at this point]

[anonymous]

superwilly wrote:

<quoted text>
Get your facts correct.
You said "He was a Jew who left Germany and the holocaust...".
He was visiting the US and never returned, getting citizenship in 1940, having left in 1933, two years BEFORE the holocaust.

Ummm... do you think the persecution of the Jews had an official start date and that nothing happened before the announcement? He was avoiding the hostile politics that began long before Hitler finally came into power. In 1933, Hitler was already appointed Chancellor and a Jew would have a hard time escaping Germany if they waited much longer. OK, it's not like someone sent him an invitation to stay and attend the official "Holocaust (TM)", by invitation only!

[MazHere]

timn17 wrote:

<quoted text>I don't need to post a great "refute" (please stop using that word as a noun, you idiot). All I need to do to refute that study is to tell you one simple thing - dark energy exists, and has been confirmed. Their study was an attempt to explain away dark energy, and now that we have confirmed it's existence, their study is bunk.
And I'm pretty sure that you literally cannot see replies that contradict you. Usually, I would be a little taken aback if someone was to keep spamming the same stuff and pretend like it hadn't already been replied to, but with you, I am used to it.

Good and glad you agree, there are no replies that contradict me. Then you will agree I have made these points that you and your cohorts are unable to refute.

1. Creationist predictions that if the creation was made by the hand of God there would be no need for junk dna are currently being validiated.
2. Evolutionists that shoved junk dna down creationists throats over the past decade, were actually presenting flawed and incomplete data and now have to suck eggs.
3. Evolutionists asserted that this non functional dna was the left overs from evolution. Now this great evidence has been falsified. TOE has either a failed prediction or never could make a prediction around non coding dna.
4. Creationist predictions around all organs having function and not being left overs from some deep evolutionary event are also being validiated.
5. Evolutionists predicted and thought they'd found left over non functional organs and called them vestigial.
6. Evolutionists have had to redefine the definition of vestigial because what has been found is that vestigial organs do have function. Not only do they have function they also have a different function.
7. Evolutionists have great hand waving abilities and poof mythical theropods into existence to save their bird paradigm from total falsification. This is an example of evo handwaving.
8. Handwaving has been evoked in relation to all fossil and genomic evidence in support of TOE, including mankinds ancestry with chimps.
9. TOE has predictive ability akin to a crystal ball.
10. The support I can provide for creationism could not be worse than the 150 years of instability and falsifications evos have to offer.

That kinda sums up what I have demonstrated that you no longer want to talk about because none of these above have been successfully refuted.

So what do you want to talk about now? Evo egomania.

Heaven only knows I have had to repeat myself many times. If you think you're so great and actually had something to say I am sure you would speak to it again. You've got nothing of substance to add at all. You just want to save face on this forum by using obvious avoidance.

Hence not only are you a looser, you are also a huge pretender.

[Charles Idemi]

anonymous wrote:

<quoted text>
If my reputation was being jeopardized by Charles Idemi who wanted my endorsement, I'd definitely call that a state of duress.
As is, I don't know if he was preaching or answering a question so I won't put words in his mouth.

I am going to give you what Albert Einstein said before his death, he said, " Religion without science is blind and science without religion is lame ".
Did he say that willingly or under duress ?

[anonymous]

Don't turn this debate into Holocaust denial!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein#Emigrat...

[anonymous]

Charles Idemi wrote:

<quoted text> I am going to give you what Albert Einstein said before his death, he said, " Religion without science is blind and science without religion is lame ".
Did he say that willingly or under duress ?

I.... DON'T..... KNOW!

He may have said it to keep family happy. He may have been promoting his legacy. He may have had a speech pre-written for him by the Illuminati.

All I can tell you is that I don't care. I don't even know what he means by it. It's not a scientific opinion.

[MazHere]

Dogen wrote:

<quoted text>
Can god create a universe that is self sustaining with natural laws?
Our is your god to weak to do that?
<quoted text>
As this is what science claims and the reason for its continuation.
<quoted text>
Actually you have it backward. Theistic evolutionists acknowledge that god is powerful enough to create life however he likes and that the evidence indicates he used evolution.
[cliche rant deleted at this point]

Like I said TOE needs to be sent to the philosophy camp.

That appears to be the only base you wish to have an evolution/creation discussion on.

Your post suggests that you have no intension of adhering to a scientific debate.

If you can't refute my points, they are established. That does mean TOE is false. What it does mean is that TOE is not the closed case evolutionists like to present it as being.

I don't want to waste my day discussing philosophy. I already belong to another philosophy forum so I won't be discussing philosophy here.

Science based discussion is all I am here to partake in. So if no evo can falsify my points I'll leave you all to discuss Jesus, languages, spiritual texts and their veracity, and the philosophies of life.

Cheers....