Prove there's a god.

[Hidingfromyou]

Orangelion wrote:

<quoted text>
Obviously if she was older she hidingfromyou would realise that bees and animals with simple farmwork and instinct is nothing compared to a person in their 30's and 40's raising kids, having a family, getting a relation, workign hard for sociaty, and all such more.

Wow, someone's upset that I'm not 16.

[Hidingfromyou]

Orangelion wrote:

That comment Hidingfromyou wrote about being sold off by her father, I am actually convinced she wasn't joking knowing the state we are assuming she is in. She is a prostitute where her dad is the pimp! LOL

Ah, you're just SirDoc's/Gate Keeper's sock.

You need serious help for your mental issues.

[macumazahn]

Hidingfromyou wrote:

<quoted text>
<grind, grind, grind>
"Hiding, what are you doing?"
"Grinding spices for tonight's meal."
"Glass isn't a spice."
"Baby <lifts shirt slightly> don't you worry your pretty little head about it, Hiding has super all taken care of."

Laffin.

[endtimesNews]

.

FALSE PROPHET in plain view --------- ID'd

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

.

[Hidingfromyou]

Orangelion wrote:

<quoted text>
That obviously isn't true, as each generation ends up being bigger and stronger than the second, why haven't kids gotten smaller, their sedentary, oh no, instead their bigger, I bet 16 year olds during the 1950's were only 150lbs, now most tend to look around 175lbs. It should apply the same to the teeth, despite apparently being not being needed for what they were originally needed for several years back since food being less tough. What does that say about evolution? What is it that makes animals grow wings, fish grow feat? It is simply a theory made by darwin without any evidence or prove.

Sorry, baby, you're wrong here. Humans today are simply nowhere near as strong and fast as the humans of more than 12000 years ago. Some of the top Olympic athletes approach the speed at which people used to be able to run.

In the above paragraph, you're confusing good diets and development with evolution. In the past few hundred years, in select societies, food quality has greatly increased while parasites have been virtually eliminated. That allowed the human body to develop to its full potential - over the course of 5 generations. It takes 5 generations to reach the full species height. Humans are just now starting to get back to where we were, in terms of height, of our ancestors (prior to 12 000 years ago). But we won't get the strength back.

It's not surprising that you are confused on these issues, given you have a religious bent.

[Hidingfromyou]

nanoanomaly wrote:

<quoted text>Total body size decreasing wasn't mentioned, just the jaw and cheekbone's.

Previously I had discussed bone density and musculature.

[Black Thunder 42]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
Why do elements not evolve?
Oxygen has always been oxygen, right?
Carbon has always been carbon, right?
Water has always been water...
Every life on Earth is made of elements & are thought to have evolved. Why hasn't elements evolved?

They do and have. This is about as dumbed down as it gets. Hope you understand it.

http://aether.lbl.gov/www/tour/elements/stell...

[Hidingfromyou]

Orangelion wrote:

<quoted text>
When I said that statement about logic peaking in early adulthood I actually used it as a white lie to shut you up. That is simply what I was trying to say kid.

Why do you use multiple sox? Is this a strange brain disorder on your part?

[Hidingfromyou]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
Makes sense, yes. So you can tell what kind of food a fossil ate.

See? Witty and intelligent. Riverside, you've set a new standard to which others on here will simply never match.

(that's a compliment, btw)

[Hidingfromyou]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
Why do elements not evolve?
Oxygen has always been oxygen, right?
Carbon has always been carbon, right?
Water has always been water...
Every life on Earth is made of elements & are thought to have evolved. Why hasn't elements evolved?

Err...that's not actually what theory has to do in science.

Elements don't evolve because they don't reproduce. Evolution is about change - you need something that can change to have evolution. You need to have a system that includes 1) reproduction, 2) inheritable traits, 3) variation of those traits, and 3) limited resources to have evolution.

If you're missing any of those, you simply do not have a system with evolution in it.

[Hidingfromyou]

scambuster wrote:

<quoted text>
People on here are usually rude... I've kinda come to expect it when I come here. Hell, even I can be an asshole sometimes on here. I have met some incredible people on here though... Atheists, Agnostics, Christian... All types. All interesting people.
I guess the key to it all is to expect people to get angry, and not get butthurt about it. My philosophy anyway.

I'm only rude to people after they've been rude to me. Orangelion picked a fight - s/he's all upset that s/he can't keep up. That's what happens when your only source of knowledge comes from creationism.

:)

[Hidingfromyou]

Orangelion wrote:

And when animals adapt, the adaptation is supposed to be permanant, its supposed to be improving to more conditions it faces, not simply suited to the condition its already in, that isn't improving, that is simply suiting the enviroment. The peppered moth should have the ability to change colour anyway at anytime to suit the enviroment if it is to adapt to improve its survival of the fittest. Fish have adapted to living on land have they? Is this really survival of the fittest, it isn't survival of the fittest anymore if he is in the see again and drownin. Evolution is flawed.

I'm sorry, but you are very confused about biology.

Adaptation takes place at several different levels. Within individuals, adaptation has two levels: developmental and immediate response. All offspring's bodies develop in response to environmental conditions. So, a child grows up in a high altitude environment, its body will be well suited to apoxia. A child grows up in poverty, it's going to be of smaller stature, have greater health problems and a shorter lifespan.

Immediate adaptive responses happen when you're faced with a challenge in the environment. So you go for a vacation in Peru to see Machu Pichu - suddenly, you're exposed to apoxic conditions. Your resting heart rate skyrockets, your breathing increases, blood pressure increases, mobility decreases. Over the course of three weeks, your red blood cell count will increase and your heart rate and breathing will return to near baseline.

Adaptive responses such as the above are the product of natural selection.

[Hidingfromyou]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
Ok, so then why does DNA evolve but the elements that make DNA don't?

B/c DNA:

1. produces proteins (traits)
2. is inherited
3. subject to mutation and therefore contains variety
4. either gets passed on or not

DNA that gets passed on continues in the environment. DNA that doesn't get passed on goes extinct. The DNA that gets passed on has mutations acting on it constantly. Sometimes this produces new, useful DNA and this outcompetes other, previous versions. The previous versions then go extinct.

Does this make sense?

The basic molecules that make up DNA don't change - it's the configuration (and therefore the products of) these molecules that get passed on.

[Hidingfromyou]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
It seems some people are arrogant enough to say that they "know"...

Gatekeeper doesn't know what s/he's talking about. S/he doesn't understand the math involved and is just making it up. S/he won't be able to point you to a scientific reference for his/her claims - s/he could only point to a creationist site for such fake numbers.

[Hidingfromyou]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
That's true, but you know it goes both ways on the bad parent subject.
I'm not that bigoted where I'll say that all gays are bad parents, I'm sure a lot of them are decent people.
I DO believe, though, that it gay parents can't give a child a moral compass of mom/dad. They can't. It's either 2 men or 2 women. I believe that the child will grow up a little confused & would possible choose to be gay, also.

Studies of children of gay households reveal that the children are better adjusted, on average, then in other household situations.

[Happy Lesbo]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
Where there's a left, there's always a right....
"Two therapists who try to turn gay people straight, along with a student who says he was successfully converted to heterosexuality, are suing nearly two dozen California state officials, including Gov. Jerry Brown, saying a new state law infringes on their civil rights."
www.cnn.com/2012/10/04/us/california-gay-ther...

.. you didn't read the entire article:

"This law bans non-scientific 'therapies' that have driven young people to depression and suicide. These practices (conversion therapy) have no basis in science or medicine."

.. sending a child/teen to conversation therapy is akin to sending someone to Joseph Mengele's laboratory. Treatment includes aversion shock therapy, brainwashing and physical punishment. All because their parents can't accept them for who they are or their religion says they're not going to heaven if they're homosexual ..

.. pathetic ..

[Happy Lesbo]

Hidingfromyou wrote:

<quoted text>
So you're telling me that you are 16?
Uhm...are you forgetting how our conversations went?

.. Orangelion & GK are not worth your time or brilliance ..

.. use your scroll button ..

.. RR is close, very close ..

[Hidingfromyou]

Happy Lesbo wrote:

<quoted text>
.. Orangelion & GK are not worth your time or brilliance ..
.. use your scroll button ..
.. RR is close, very close ..

Yeah, Orange and GK seem like the same person.

I like RR, he's ok by me once you get past the bigotry.:)

[RickBlaine]

Elements don't evolve because they don't reproduce. Evolution is about change - you need something that can change to have evolution. You need to have a system that includes 1) reproduction, 2) inheritable traits, 3) variation of those traits, and 3) limited resources to have evolution.

If you're missing any of those, you simply do not have a system with evolution in it.

Huh?

[RickBlaine]

Hidingfromyou wrote:

<quoted text>
Err...that's not actually what theory has to do in science.
Elements don't evolve because they don't reproduce. Evolution is about change - you need something that can change to have evolution. You need to have a system that includes 1) reproduction, 2) inheritable traits, 3) variation of those traits, and 3) limited resources to have evolution.
If you're missing any of those, you simply do not have a system with evolution in it.

So, let me see if I can restate your argument. Elements didn't spontaneously generate from nothing. Living things didn't evolve by chance from non-living things (elements). Therefore, neither, living things, nor nonliving things exist. Therefore, God must not exist. Is that right?