Evolution vs. Creation

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

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#106056 Nov 16, 2013
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Even evo scientists are too stupid to be able to define a human being, when a creo easily can. That is what faith in the obviously impossible must do to ones mind.
Another obvious lie.

We can "define a human being". We can define what a chimpanzee is. We can define what a gray whale is. You do not like the fact that humans, chimps and gorillas are all apes.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Australia

#106057 Nov 16, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
You know they have nothing when we get the "wrong links", "confused" and "off topic" deflection tactic. I only ask simple questions that even I can understand..Like a Stator and Rotor in a flagella proton powered axial motor, or 7 or...That each stator has a cavitation torque feedback circuit to a controller, a controller that can then feed the right amount of protons or sodium ions in digital steps to keep the little guy happy, simple evo stuff like that...
Evo ignorance, reasonings based on strolls down the garden path to evasion and the absurdum about majority rule, are all that evos have left. Evos can't understand anything simple let alone complicated.

A living organism is a complex factory of reproduction and entropy. Evolutionists base their claims on faith that is more non plausible than belief in a non corporeal alien form of life, God. But they have no trouble believing in dark energy and multiple dimensions. Go figure!

I am interested to hear if Subby, after all his wing flapping about whales, can even accept that every biology book and depiction of whale evolution in the world, is a misrepresentation. None state the glossy pictures are actually supposed decendants of the line whose dating makes the entire myth ridiculous. OR Will we see yet another evo that has opened his big hero mouth and then go running for the hills when exposed.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#106058 Nov 16, 2013
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Even evo scientists are too stupid to be able to define a human being, when a creo easily can. That is what faith in the obviously impossible must do to ones mind.
Same as the chimp we are ...hominini you can look that one up if you like.

SBT
Level 2

Since: Jun 13

United States

#106059 Nov 16, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Your personal belief, no matter how sincere is not a basis to refute science.
Discovering that high risk occupations can lead to death faster than posting on Topix is also not a basis to preclude the entire body of scientific research, evidence and insight.
It is understandable that your personal experiences and education have lead you to look for answers, but you are using your gut and not your intellect to draw conclusions.
He asked a why "believe" question, I answered it right out of my gut. You seem to be suggesting my faith in God blurs my understanding of science, wrong. I found that the media and public school system were in lock step preventing a pile of controverting fact's from getting to my ears and eyes. I had been brainwashed, simple as that.

When I was young there was still a large group that held that Operation Science and Origin Science were independent fields. Now that they are blurred whats happened? People that find or support anything contrary to the dogma are "expelled". Wow, mixing those did us well. Example - the research controverting 'Dark Matter' had to come out of Peru and little items like MO-1 from Japan. I don't need an evo filter between me and truth, they tried that game on me in college geo class. Their world unraveled.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Australia

#106060 Nov 16, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Another obvious lie.
We can "define a human being". We can define what a chimpanzee is. We can define what a gray whale is. You do not like the fact that humans, chimps and gorillas are all apes.
Ok but first lets set the scene. You have not presented any research that demonstrates an organism can adapt without limit. You challenged me on whales, flopped out and now want a definition of 'human being'.

Here is it...

A human being is a placental mammal that is also a furless obligate biped that is genetically capable of sophisticated language, higher reasoning ability and abstract thought as well as expressing the Neu5Ac molecule. No other organism or ape fits that definition.

How about you give us a demo of how an evo defines a human? Will your reply be better than "'DER', let's talk about something else"!

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#106061 Nov 16, 2013
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Evo ignorance, reasonings based on strolls down the garden path to evasion and the absurdum about majority rule, are all that evos have left. Evos can't understand anything simple let alone complicated.
A living organism is a complex factory of reproduction and entropy. Evolutionists base their claims on faith that is more non plausible than belief in a non corporeal alien form of life, God. But they have no trouble believing in dark energy and multiple dimensions. Go figure!
I am interested to hear if Subby, after all his wing flapping about whales, can even accept that every biology book and depiction of whale evolution in the world, is a misrepresentation. None state the glossy pictures are actually supposed decendants of the line whose dating makes the entire myth ridiculous. OR Will we see yet another evo that has opened his big hero mouth and then go running for the hills when exposed.
You my self licking ice cream cone head friend,
are....
At the apex of hypocrisy.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Australia

#106062 Nov 16, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> Same as the chimp we are ...hominini you can look that one up if you like.
Are you still sucking on your ice cream, you stupid and sad excuse for an evolutionist? Only idiot evotards have a problem defining a human being.

A confirmation of a hypothesis can be generated on any basis from abiogenesis to the fall of Rome, and is testable and falsifiable, regardless of your ignorance and ability to be an evo parrot puppet.

Adaption is not what results in common ancestors between deers and whales. Adaptation gives you fitter deers and whales.

Creation is true if the genome is designed to maintain organisms within their familial group/kind. The fact that TOE is challenged by the validation of such a prediction is an added plus.

For now I am the one that has presented research that speaks to restrictions and limits to the genomes inability to adapt. Evos have presented their opinion and every side wind they can think of, and therefore have no more credibility than a squarking parrot that can repeat "they said so".

There is evidence in nature of the genomes limits to adaptability.

In gradually deteriorating environments, survival at lethal stress may be procured by prior adaptation to sublethal stress through genetic correlation. Neither the standing genetic variation of small populations nor the mutation supply of large populations, however, may be sufficient to provide evolutionary rescue for most populations.

http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/conten ...

There is empirical evidence that the genome has limits to its use of even beneficial mutations in a declining fitness landscape.

Genome deterioration: loss of repeated sequences and accumulation of junk DNA.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12188042

Genetic code of human race is deteriorating due to environmental factors

http://www.naturalnews.com/021220_genetic_mod ...

Evidence for Widespread Degradation of Gene Control Regions in Hominid Genomes

http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/1 ...

Diminishing Returns Epistasis Among Beneficial Mutations Decelerates Adaptation

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/332/6034/11 ...

Negative Epistasis Between Beneficial Mutations in an Evolving Bacterial Population

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/332/6034/11 ...

All data demonstrates an organism has limits to it ability to adapt. Breeders have known it for centuries but scientists don't let a little thing like direct observational evidence get in the way of a great story.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#106063 Nov 16, 2013
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Evo ignorance, reasonings based on strolls down the garden path to evasion and the absurdum about majority rule, are all that evos have left. Evos can't understand anything simple let alone complicated.
A living organism is a complex factory of reproduction and entropy. Evolutionists base their claims on faith that is more non plausible than belief in a non corporeal alien form of life, God. But they have no trouble believing in dark energy and multiple dimensions. Go figure!
I am interested to hear if Subby, after all his wing flapping about whales, can even accept that every biology book and depiction of whale evolution in the world, is a misrepresentation. None state the glossy pictures are actually supposed decendants of the line whose dating makes the entire myth ridiculous. OR Will we see yet another evo that has opened his big hero mouth and then go running for the hills when exposed.
There goes Maz stinking up the place with her flapping blue waffle again.

Let's here the details of how whale evolution is wrong.

SBT
Level 2

Since: Jun 13

United States

#106064 Nov 16, 2013
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Evo ignorance, reasonings based on strolls down the garden path to evasion and the absurdum about majority rule, are all that evos have left. Evos can't understand anything simple let alone complicated.
A living organism is a complex factory of reproduction and entropy. Evolutionists base their claims on faith that is more non plausible than belief in a non corporeal alien form of life, God. But they have no trouble believing in dark energy and multiple dimensions. Go figure!
I am interested to hear if Subby, after all his wing flapping about whales, can even accept that every biology book and depiction of whale evolution in the world, is a misrepresentation. None state the glossy pictures are actually supposed decendants of the line whose dating makes the entire myth ridiculous. OR Will we see yet another evo that has opened his big hero mouth and then go running for the hills when exposed.
I am sure he is looking this up in talkorigins right now..
Oh my. Wanna see my research on Killer Whales? below -

http://www.genesisalive.com/2013/09/the-compl...

SBT
Level 2

Since: Jun 13

United States

#106065 Nov 16, 2013
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Evo ignorance, reasonings based on strolls down the garden path to evasion and the absurdum about majority rule, are all that evos have left. Evos can't understand anything simple let alone complicated.
A living organism is a complex factory of reproduction and entropy. Evolutionists base their claims on faith that is more non plausible than belief in a non corporeal alien form of life, God. But they have no trouble believing in dark energy and multiple dimensions. Go figure!
I am interested to hear if Subby, after all his wing flapping about whales, can even accept that every biology book and depiction of whale evolution in the world, is a misrepresentation. None state the glossy pictures are actually supposed decendants of the line whose dating makes the entire myth ridiculous. OR Will we see yet another evo that has opened his big hero mouth and then go running for the hills when exposed.
And avoid details and mechanisms at all costs..

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#106066 Nov 16, 2013
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok but first lets set the scene. You have not presented any research that demonstrates an organism can adapt without limit. You challenged me on whales, flopped out and now want a definition of 'human being'.
Here is it...
A human being is a placental mammal that is also a furless obligate biped that is genetically capable of sophisticated language, higher reasoning ability and abstract thought as well as expressing the Neu5Ac molecule. No other organism or ape fits that definition.
How about you give us a demo of how an evo defines a human? Will your reply be better than "'DER', let's talk about something else"!
Actually I have. Of course you are the only fool who makes the claim "without limit". How far a species can evolve is limited by many things. For example the square/cubed law limits the size of land based animals.

And the word you want is not "research" it is "evidence". The fossil record supports the theory of evolution, and only the theory of evolution. DNA supports evolution and only evolution. The various nested hierarchies support evolution and only evolution.

Why do you think that we must have research to back our claims when we already have evidence? Some of the research is used to answer the harder questions of evolution. And yes, the questions are difficult. That does not mean they can't be answered.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#106067 Nov 16, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
I am sure he is looking this up in talkorigins right now..
Oh my. Wanna see my research on Killer Whales? below -
http://www.genesisalive.com/2013/09/the-compl...
LMAO!! A creatard site.

I do like creatards, they are always good for a laugh or two.

Seriously, do you want this garbage debunked?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#106068 Nov 16, 2013
From SBT's moronic site:

"The evolution story for marine mammals claim that some type of bear stayed in the water to long, lost it's fur, then it's nostrils slowly migrated to the top of its head over over millions of years of evolutionary magic."

If you can't get the oppositions claims correct you lose by default. That is not what is claimed by evolution. You lose moron.

They give no argument on their evidence for the creation of the whale. All they do is marvel at its sonar abilities. That does not support their claims in any way at all.

This is rather hilarious. Our side is willing to present actual evidence for our claims. All that SBT can do is to post articles that say "Looky looky, I don't know how this works therefore god did it". And Maz misinterprets every scientific article that she runs across.

SBT
Level 2

Since: Jun 13

United States

#106069 Nov 16, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
From SBT's moronic site:
"The evolution story for marine mammals claim that some type of bear stayed in the water to long, lost it's fur, then it's nostrils slowly migrated to the top of its head over over millions of years of evolutionary magic."
If you can't get the oppositions claims correct you lose by default. That is not what is claimed by evolution. You lose moron.
They give no argument on their evidence for the creation of the whale. All they do is marvel at its sonar abilities. That does not support their claims in any way at all.
This is rather hilarious. Our side is willing to present actual evidence for our claims. All that SBT can do is to post articles that say "Looky looky, I don't know how this works therefore god did it". And Maz misinterprets every scientific article that she runs across.
That's the evo story on whales SZ, like it or not..You folks have got to get a mammal back in the water for all those "adaptations". And by the way, this idea came from none other than Charles himself.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#106070 Nov 16, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
That's the evo story on whales SZ, like it or not..You folks have got to get a mammal back in the water for all those "adaptations". And by the way, this idea came from none other than Charles himself.
Sorry, it isn't. And you have just admitted to being an idiot by defending your idiot site. Do you want to go over what they got wrong, step by step?

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Australia

#106071 Nov 16, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
There goes Maz stinking up the place with her flapping blue waffle again.
Let's here the details of how whale evolution is wrong.
Do you reckon you can stick with a point for more than one post Subby, while your flapping away there.

Oh yeah, after your constantly getting around with your foot in your mouth about unlimited adaptability and your flapping about my inability to define a human being, and having already presented a couple of examples of evos whale buffoonery, sure I am more than happy to make you look like an evo puppet, yet again. Here we go...

Let's start with you explaining why basilosaurus, 49mya, is found in the fossil record dated as being older than Indohyus, 48mya, the relative basil is pictorially shown as having evolved from. I don't even need to mention ambulocetus natans.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/...

http://news.nationalgeographic.com.au/news/20...

Now instead of a leisurely 15my to 'evolve' as previously clamed and supported by some crappy empirical research suddenly, it took only 4my, despite deletrious mutations, despite negative epistasis and despite every breeder and every lab experiment demonstrating that hurrying up the process results in a drop in fitness, if not sterility.

On the basis of the data, stripped of its assumptive speculation we see an organism, basilosaurus, that has no ancestral connection to Indohyus at all, nor has basil any ancestral connection to a mouse deer.

Why? because the DATA demonstrates Basilosaurus in the fossil record prior to Indohyus its ancestor.

Now you fill in the gaps with some invented intermediates for your reseachers because, believe me when I tell you, they have no clue.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Australia

#106072 Nov 16, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually I have. Of course you are the only fool who makes the claim "without limit". How far a species can evolve is limited by many things. For example the square/cubed law limits the size of land based animals.
And the word you want is not "research" it is "evidence". The fossil record supports the theory of evolution, and only the theory of evolution. DNA supports evolution and only evolution. The various nested hierarchies support evolution and only evolution.
Why do you think that we must have research to back our claims when we already have evidence? Some of the research is used to answer the harder questions of evolution. And yes, the questions are difficult. That does not mean they can't be answered.
No empirical evidence demonstrates an organisms ability to adapt without limits and you have a world of breeders and climate change to give you idiots first hand observational data.

As for nested hierarchies, how the heck do you root anything in tetrapod when you have only just dicovered tetrapods were here 400mya prior to any of your stupid transitionals used to root with. What you have is algorithmic magic, not science.

“River of tears flowing out of ”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

West Plains

#106073 Nov 16, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
What I am saying is that in the flagella motor and gearing in MO-1, God just spoke to us all, He is an engineer and just crossed biological line's and got into the fields of clear and fast mechanical and electrical engineering, and again, schooled everyone. Backing that logic into your biological world, that make's evolution the sneaky pirate who claims he did it all. So who do we believe? Can't ask Dean Kenyon, every evo's hero now turned. Who do you go to now, the microscopes are bigger and Kenyon is vindicated. Who is your new hero?
Fanciful nonsense. You sound like a small child. None of what you post here has any factual use in refuting evolution. All you are doing is saying that people are stupid and can't figure out the natural world in a reasonable, logical manner. God musta didit wit da magic.

SBT
Level 2

Since: Jun 13

United States

#106074 Nov 16, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, it isn't. And you have just admitted to being an idiot by defending your idiot site. Do you want to go over what they got wrong, step by step?
Like this -
"I am absolutely delighted to report that our usually recalcitrant fossil record has come through in exemplary fashion. During the past fifteen years, new discoveries in Africa and Pakistan have added greatly to our paleontological knowledge of the earliest history of whales".
(Natural History 5/94) Steven J. Gould

But just five years later, Scientific American (January 1999) reported the discovery of fossilized ankle bones that has “left [whale] researchers even more puzzled than before.” The author of this article states that these bones (found in Pakistan!)“leave researchers wondering where whales came from.” Sorry Steven.

So what happened to all the transitional forms SZ?, none around now,(a broken record for your side), but why? They are found as drawings in evo textbooks to comfort Darwinist's. Your transnationals (all now extinct, we think) have fwd nostrils, none moving to the top.(Mosasaur, Pleiosaur), Whales are independent as skull top breathers.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Australia

#106075 Nov 16, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Fanciful nonsense. You sound like a small child. None of what you post here has any factual use in refuting evolution. All you are doing is saying that people are stupid and can't figure out the natural world in a reasonable, logical manner. God musta didit wit da magic.
..as opposed to squabbling evolutionists with their flavour of the month that ALL agree on at least one evo penchant "It all evolved". LOL!

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
True or False Game 2 min Old Sam 378
Truck containing 36,000 pounds of Crisco stolen 5 min -Lea- 37
CHANGE One letter CHANCE (Sep '08) 6 min Old Sam 29,495
***Keep a Word~Drop a Word*** (Jan '10) 7 min Crazy Jae 77,366
OFFBEAT.keepAword.DropAword.2011edition (Oct '11) 8 min Old Sam 17,792
Change-one-of-six-letters (Dec '12) 10 min Old Sam 3,526
What's your tip for the day? 13 min Old Sam 1,212
What are you thinking about now? (Jun '10) 17 min -Lea- 22,231
During Obama's Speech at Democratic Campaign Ra... 21 min Sam 31
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 33 min wichita-rick 148,965

Weird People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE