Evolution vs. Creation

[Kong_]

xxxooxxx wrote:

<quoted text>How about nuclear fusion...

would you say that a human built nuclear reactor was of intelligent design?...of course, anyone would.

But to claim that a star, doing the exact same process is undemonstrated as an intelligent process, is ludicrous.

Sure!

Sun = nuclear reactor

Same as

Natural Selection = Artificial Selection

[The Dude]

xxxooxxx wrote:

<quoted text>
Actually the truth of the matter is, Science has to tie ID in with religious creationism to avoid the real issue...that of an obvious intelligent process behind the Universe.

So obvious that no IDCer can demonstrate it.

We don't NEED to tie ID with religious creationism. They did it themselves. They openly admitted it.

Oh. After they uh, got caught lying their big fat azzes off about it first though.

[The Dude]

xxxooxxx wrote:

<quoted text>
"the universe being an intelligent process is simply an undemonstrated claim."
So why does science copy "undemonstrated" intelligent?...lol

No reason why science can't copy nature. If an intelligence is responsible for nature then how come every time I ask you fundies to back it up you don't bother and point to phones, computers and houses made by humans instead?

[The Dude]

xxxooxxx wrote:

<quoted text>
"How can they copy designs when you have no designs to show us?"
Most, if not all of Science is based on the intelligent processes of the Universe...fact.

Please back up your baseless claim with objective verifiable testable scientific evidence. Thanks in advance for not bothering.

Ever.

[The Dude]

xxxooxxx wrote:

<quoted text>
How about nuclear fusion...
would you say that a human built nuclear reactor was of intelligent design?...of course, anyone would.
But to claim that a star, doing the exact same process is undemonstrated as an intelligent process, is ludicrous.

In which case you should be able to provide us with the observable mechanisms behind the intelligent manipulation of nuclear fusion in stars.

That would uh, NOT include pointing to anything that humans have built.

[The Dude]

MikeF wrote:

You're starting to sound like Chuckles.

Not a good sign. Jimbo is Cowboy's future, could Chuck be xxxooxxx's?

[Charles Idemi]

Chimney1 wrote:

<quoted text>
There is no such thing as "faith based evidence". They are contradictory terms. Faith is by definition a belief held in the absence of evidence.
We have no idea why there is something rather than nothing. We do not even know if that is a meaningful question. But we DO know that your superficial answer "It must be God!" does not answer the question any better than any other attempt. All you are really saying is, "Its beyond our brains, lets hope there is a super-powerful intelligence out there that can answer it!". Faith without evidence.
We know there is a universe. Unlike the time wasting theologians and non-science philosophers that preceded them, scientists started by asking questions they could answer, based on observation of the universe we live in. How fast does a ball bearing accelerate down an incline? What can that tell us more generally? And proceeded from the most immediate questions to the deeper ones, layer by layer.
It is this approach that has given us the answers we do have until now, not this "Must have been God!" fake certainty, accompanied of course by fake rewards, fake punishments, and playing on humans' hope and fear to control them.

But your so called scientific evidence can not truly and sincerely answer the basic questions of humans and how the universe emerged.

[MikeF]

The Dude wrote:

<quoted text>
Not a good sign. Jimbo is Cowboy's future, could Chuck be xxxooxxx's?

Well hugs & kisses did play the ownership card.

[Charles Idemi]

ChristineM wrote:

<quoted text>
Total tosh,
The babble says gods intention to kill was deliberate and planned and based on nothing more than intolerant greed, i.e. MURDER for profit so why does the babble NOT agree with you?
If it were accidental then the book would not have the readership it has, a bit of blood, guts and mayhem does wonders for a books popularity, hey, you are hooked on it.
Genesis 6:11-17 and 7:11-24 – God planned and carried out the first recorded mass murderer in history for no other reason than intolerance that his own creation were not being good little subjects.
Exodus 12:29 – God planned and carried out the killing innocent children for no other reason than egotistical spite that there parents (his creation) were not being good little subjects
Deuteronomy 21:10-13 – God allows and condones the rape, slavery and subjugation of women for no other reason than he gets off and rape, slavery and subjugation of those who ere not being good little subjects
Or do you have some christian cop out for those atrocities, no not one of the worthless excuses written by apologists thousands of years later when people began questioning but a contemporary and valid reason that would be accepted in a court of law for such abhorrent behaviour written in the babble? No? wow I am surprised…
<quoted text>
Summarily speaking who cares about a dying faith built on genocide, child murder and rape, deception and LIES?
<quoted text>
That’s what was though of the Roman Empire and I believe Hitler thought the same about the Reich, as did Genghis Khan. History is littered with such claims.
Genesis 6:11-17 and 7:11-24
Exodus 12:29
Deuteronomy 21:10-13
Are you saying that the babble does not agree with you? Because it’s printed in the babble in the verses I cite and you are denying them and calling me a liar?
Or is it that you have no excuse so simply IGNORE the parts of the babble that disagree with you and call the person who cites those verses you IGNORE a liar.
You pathetic moron, I have given you every chance to justify your cause and all you can do is try and change the subject and call me a liar. Pathetic…
Honey, just because you build you life around lies does not mean that everyone lies, It simply means you have no understanding of truth. I have no god to lie for so I see no need to lie. Christianity is declining, you cannot call that a lies because it is a FACT
God was the first recorded mass murderer in history - FACT
God killed children - FACT
God condoned rape - FACT
No lies, that is WRITTEN, accept it and become a better christian

Liar!
If the bible is actually that, there would be no 10 commandments, which speaks against adultery, fornication, rape, lying, sin, stealing and what have you, in the old testament.
In the new testament, Jesus gave only two commandments, which covers the ten given by Moses, it speaks about love of God, and love of ones neighbour as ones self. If the bible is really what you say it is, there would be nothing like the above. This makes you to be a liar and a misquoter of the bible.

[Kong_]

Charles Idemi wrote:

<quoted text>But your so called scientific evidence can not truly and sincerely answer the basic questions of humans and how the universe emerged.

Nor can your Bronze-age campfire stories.

[Charles Idemi]

ChristineM wrote:

<quoted text>
Precisely what happen after 10^-34th of a second (that’s a very tiny fraction of a second billions of times faster than a single clock tick on the fastest computer known to man) following the event known as the “Big Bang” is known. Science is working to push those boundaries further, the mathematics exists.
The babble bashers aren’t bothering, they are resistant to modern understanding of science because it contradicts a bronze age delusion that goddodit
Faith based evidence? A bronze age guess based on NO evidence is not evidence. It’s delusion.
What it says is – we don’t know how the universe happened so good must have done it – that’s the mantra of deliberate ignorance.

You have no evidence either.

[Charles Idemi]

KittenKoder wrote:

<quoted text>
Wow, complete projection, you have demonstrated that all you have is projection now and nothing to actually debate with.

Likewise. Your big bang projection to date, is a farce. Period.

[Charles Idemi]

The Dude wrote:

<quoted text>
They aren't baseless, I cite the evidence with it. You never address it therefore there is no reason to presume there is a problem. Especially since the scientific community agrees with me and you're scientifically illiterate.
<quoted text>
LIKEWISE!
<quoted text>
Actually I have a pretty good idea, yeah.
<quoted text>
Metaphorically speaking that sounds cool to me.
<quoted text>
And that's why I've never claimed that science knows for certain. Yet here I am in a position where you need to have the concepts of "theory" and "hypothesis" to you all over again. Keep in mind you don't even have those, hence faith-based evidence stands out.
<quoted text>
Yes, very simple. You're incapable of debate so it's much simpler to accuse others of lying for daring to disagree with you. After all, you are important.
<quoted text>
LIKEWISE!!!!!!!!!!11!1!1

Lol
Scientific community? Lol
They are not super humans, they are just humans, which we all know are imperfect, and prone to errors. You have no evidence on how the universe and humans came about. Period.

[Charles Idemi]

GatorBUILT wrote:

<quoted text>
Educative? WTF LMFAOOLOLOLOL...try EDUCATIONAL, dumbass

Laugh your ass out to death you educated backward clown.

[ztormbringer]

Denny Crain wrote:

<quoted text>Science has never created life

Uh, actually it has, over 20 years ago experiments with contained conditions holding what science at that time considered the "primordial soup" mixture of chemicals in solution and in atmosphere subjected to high voltage electrical arc to replicate lightning produced proto amino acid chains - the building blocks of life as we know it, those when further stimulated began to organize in more complex structures - indistinguishable from the posited first living things on earth - the experiment was shut down out of fear of and pressure from religious groups and the subsequent withdrawal of funding. The data published was directly instrumental in the later successful cloning experiments.

[ztormbringer]

Illustrated Man wrote:

<quoted text>So Evolution evolved itself? lol

Actually that's not as absurd as you try to make it sound. On just one level or facet of your statement, yes evolution eventually evolved an organism with a brain capable of perceiving the evidence of evolution and conceiving a theory as to the mechanism suggested by that evidence ergo the theory of evolution, a product of evolution.

[alan]

Charles Idemi wrote:

<quoted text>But your so called scientific evidence can not truly and sincerely answer the basic questions of humans and how the universe emerged.

Never question human intelligence> After all they think they are the superior beans in the universe. And, they are primitive as far as the others are concerned.

[Langoliers]

The Dude wrote:

<quoted text>If you're referring to evolution, it's been provided many times. You've never been able to deal with it yet.

Doesn't matter though, since science is irrelevant when one's position is invisible magical wizards.

No not evolution I was responding about the lack of evidence for exodus.

[Langoliers]

Kong_ wrote:

<quoted text>Please provide the Bible verse where this ("mountains up, ocean floors down") is specified.

Langoliers wrote, "<quoted text>
Lack of evidence is not evidence. "

Repeat this 1,000 times.

To yourself, please.

There are a number of Scripture passages that identify the flood waters with the present-day seas (Amos 9:6 and Job 38:8-11 note “waves�). If the waters are still here, why are the highest mountains not still covered with water, as they were in Noah's day? Psalm 104 suggests an answer. After the waters covered the mountains (verse 6), God rebuked them and they fled (verse 7); the mountains rose, the valleys sank down (verse 8) and God set a boundary so that they will never again cover the earth (verse 9)[1]. They are the same waters!

Isaiah gives this same statement that the waters of Noah would never again cover the earth (Isaiah 54:9). Clearly, what the Bible is telling us is that God acted to alter the earth's topography. New continental landmasses bearing new mountain chains of folded rock strata were uplifted from below the globe-encircling waters that had eroded and leveled the pre-Flood topography, while large deep ocean basin were formed to receive and accommodate the Flood waters that then drained off the emerging continents.

That is why the oceans are so deep, and why there are folded mountain ranges. Indeed, if the entire earth's surface were leveled by smoothing out the topography of not only the land surface but also the rock surface on the ocean floor, the waters of the ocean would cover the earth's surface to a depth of 1.7 miles (2.7 kilometers). We need to remember that nearly 70 percent of the earth's surface is still covered by water. Quite clearly, then, the waters of Noah's Flood are in today's ocean basins.

[xxxooxxx]

ztormbringer wrote:

<quoted text>
Uh, actually it has, over 20 years ago experiments with contained conditions holding what science at that time considered the "primordial soup" mixture of chemicals in solution and in atmosphere subjected to high voltage electrical arc to replicate lightning produced proto amino acid chains - the building blocks of life as we know it, those when further stimulated began to organize in more complex structures - indistinguishable from the posited first living things on earth - the experiment was shut down out of fear of and pressure from religious groups and the subsequent withdrawal of funding. The data published was directly instrumental in the later successful cloning experiments.

"experiment was shut down out of fear of and pressure from religious groups"

Sounds like a very simple process to facilitate...and to claim that making a very simple single cell organism in a science lab in some university or laboratory somewhere would all be shut down and abandoned and never tried again because of religious groups twenty years ago is quite unbelievable...

link please.