Comments by "" (@lezgoto) on "Richard Dawkins on The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution" video.

  1. Ive said this before. I could care less whether or not jesus existed. I believe he was a god as much as you are. I believe in a Creator of the Universe not a man who claims to be a god. Oh, and again, you have still not answered my question. Do you believe in the christian scientists? You dont, and you purposely avoid this, because conceding to not believing them means conceding to the fact that scientists are only interested in pushing their biased agendas, not the Truth.
    1
  2. However a ripe apple will drop itself (to the eater below). If no one were to eat it, the fruit would disintegrate and the seed would replant itself continuing the species. And how exactly, since you're a man of desription, would you describe Natural Selection?
    1
  3. Nope.
    1
  4. Obviously you cannot compare. Everyone agress that the stork story, and aliens etc. are fairy tales. However, when you have billions of people who live their lives based on a book/bible given by G-d, that shows credibility. So that should be taught. I'm not even sure how you tried to find an analogy there.
    1
  5. The odds that even one cell can be produced are stagger the imagination. But to say this happened trillions and trillions of times is an improbability, or rather an impossibility no matter how many galaxies there are.
    1
  6. G-d created the world 6000 years ago. When creating the world, he created it IN FULL BLOWN EXISTENCE. Meaning, right after trees were created, there were young looking ones AND old looking ones. And if you would count the rings you would find many, even though G-d created it a minute earlier. Certain species depend on ROTTED wood for their survival, and that was how it was created. So too with everything. Adam wouldn't have been able to exist had the world been created "fresh". He'd have no food
    1
  7. I'm a little confused by your statement. You asked me a question regarding an apparent contradiction between science and the Bible, and I responded humans did not evolve. I dont understand your follow up response though. One thing seems clear. Dawkins and most, if not al evolutionists, do not believe in a Bible given by G-d to the people, and the Bible clearly does not make mention of evolution.
    1
  8. Cont. During that time all potatoes for instance,would have less C. 14 than the potatoes of today; and fossils of early potato-eaters would therefore contain less C. 14, thus making them APPEAR deceptively old to the theorists who would ascribe the paucity of the C. 14 content to the long drawn-out process of radioactive breakdown. The entire measurement is therefore fallacious. The paucity of C. 14 is NOT the result of disintegration: IT WAS NEVER THERE in larger amounts.
    1
  9. Lets start again with color. Wind-pollinated violets have the plainest of colors, for the wind can see no color and it needs no color. But the species of violet which are insect-pollinated are beautifully colored to attract insects. Purposefulness! The katydid makes its music by running the edge of one wing over 200 saw-points on the other. In the base of the wing it has a tiny amplifier made of chitin (skeletal material) which is stronger than steel, and which causes the sound to travel a mile.
    1
  10. Proffesor Kammerer was famed for research on "acquired characteristics" of the feet of toads. Finally he was exposed as a falsifier and he had the decency to shoot himself. Ever studied the new find in Java called "the new skull of Pithecanthropus"? Right. Later it was revealed to be an elephants knee bone. The irresponsibilty which made possible such an error was quietly passed over, however the public retained the first impression which was the goal to begin with.
    1
  11. "Attempt to think" Thanks for the sarcasm.
    1
  12. You're being religious in the fact that you believe in assumptions and theories. You have no proof. Secondly, there is no need for insults. A science major such as yourself should know that.
    1
  13. Correction: you cant claim ancestral inheritance here.
    1
  14. For some reason my post was deleted. I guess someone took offense! So here goes again, for those who missed it. With every book Dawkins comes out with, he's just continuing to grease to his pole. He'll be told, STRAIGHT TO HELL, DO NOT PASS GO! Idiot, just another wishful hoper that there is no G-d so he can further his stupid, baseless agenda. Talk about being delusional! Idiot. A child with a little sense can take this guy apart.
    1
  15. Dont show me a book written by a money seeking individual with a bias who has never studied the Bible, and if he has, it certainly doesn't compare to his studying evolution. How come he hasn't given you a good answer? Show me how when you read his book and saw something in particular, that you reacted by saying, "Now I believe in evolution." I believe in the holocaust B/C of eye witnesses. Do you know of any for evolution? W WHY TAMPER IF THERE IS TONS OF PROOF, AND BILLIONS OF FOSSILS?
    1
  16. @Havenfall G-d has a purpose but it wasn't given to Him. He is all of life. His is, was, and always will be, everything. To see a skyscraper and deny it had a designer or builder is tantamount to what you're saying. You may want to know info on the designer, was he American, Chinese, how old he was, but ONE THING IS CLEAR TO ALL, THERE WAS OBVIOUSLY A DESIGNER AND BUILDER. So too with creation, because one cell is more complicated than a skyscraper.
    1
  17. then on the average it would require 10 to the power of 243 billions of years to produce even a single protein molecule simpler than any which we know. Such is the impossible probability of the chance of creation of merely a single molecule, but a single cell requires MILLIONS of molecules, in every conceivable size and makeup; the size and makeup must also be of perfect precision. ONE of the molecules, is the DNA. The smallest DNA molecule supplies 4 to the 100th power of different plans...
    1
  18. Abiogenesis cannot create a lottery or a lottery winner. There is nothing spontaneous about a lottery. It is something that was thought about with cunning, plan, purpose and design. A cell is even more complicated. Abiogenesis cannot and does not suggest anything. Intelligence does.
    1
  19. When you see the electric eel, do you honestly believe that Natural Selection decided at random that this creatures defense mechanism should be electricity?! Do you realize the magnitude of what you're saying? The fire fly over millions of years decided to grow a transparent stomach to send a signal with its light to attract itself. Accidental natural selection at work, right! No! Do you think its accident that all defense mechanims are different, such as the skunk smell,electricity of the eel
    1
  20. This does not mean the world is not perfect. That is G-d's way of controlling certain things in his world. You on the hand blieve that the world is not perfect because accident means that hopefully in the near billion years earth will "figure out" and "realize" that cancer and tornados are no good for humans. ASSUMPTION.
    1
  21. Red Queen Effect (with an 'E' btw,) is yet another evolutionary hypothesis. Another hopeful reason as to why animals exist the way they do. You guys hear three quarters of these terminologies from Dawkins and others and most of you have absolutely no idea what they mean other than on some possible surface level. You just throw them out trying to sound educated. But at the end of the day it means nothing except another hypothesis. Btw, no animals are evolving today!
    1
  22. Theorists say, "If our telescopes can pierce the heavens to observe galaxies millions of light years away, 'it follows' that we are seeing light which emanated millions of years ago". But it does not follow; for this is tantamount ot saying: "since we arbitrarily begin with the premise that the Universe evolved, and was not created, it follows that it is millions of years old." However, since G-d created it all at once, it follows that light from distant stars were able to be seen immediately.
    1
  23. The earth has a purpose in that it gives the human a place to breathe, eat and live in. It does not have the same purpose in life as Man does since it does not have Free-will. The whole Universe was created for Man-kind. The color in the fruit serves G-d who put it there by allowing Man to see the obvious design of its Creator. That is its purpose. Serving G-d in a way that allows Man to use his Free-Will.
    1
  24. cont. (The sponsors of this method do not claim that it can measure the age of uncharted bones, for the fossils must be burned up in order to attempt any measuring; nor do they claim the ability to measure the age of the rocks or other inorganic matter [Nat'l Geographic]). The theorists here begin with THEIR ASSUMPTION THAT THE EARTH IS VERY OLD, and that therefore the present proportion of Carbon 14 in the earths atmosphere was already in existence countless aeons ago. Cont.
    1
  25. On the contrary! I'm promoting intellectualism! Since that is something you are seeking, please see my comments above that I've posted and respond. P.S. what makes YOU believe that Creation is anti-intellectualism? How did YOU come to YOUR conclusion? Did you study Creationism, or only atheism? If you've never studied the other half, then obviously you cannot form an opinion. A judge has to hear and understand two sides to every argument before deciding.
    1
  26. Thats it? Wow, very intelligent. Why don't you try writing again in a million years when your brain ins more developed.
    1
  27. Take the eye for example. According to Evolution, not only did the "accident" of the eye happen by mere good luck for us, but the accident occured 3 TIMES.Evolutionists unashamedly declare "the eye arose" in three ENTIRELY UNRELATED FAMILIES: 1) in Anthropods (insects, crabs, spiders) 2)mollusks (octopus, squid) and 3) the vertebrates. There is no connection in the evolutionary sense between these three groups! In all 3, the chemistry of the seeing process is almost the same.
    1
  28. Collapsed stars, failed solar systems? Who says they failed? Were they meant to be anything than what they are now? Do you assume that G-d wanted life on other planets? "This petty solar system" was created for the human race to live on. Dinosaurs became extinct, as may other animals, but a) 99%? As far as Creationists are concerned most of them are still here. and b) how would this either prove evolution, or disprove G-d? G-d created the world 6000 years ago exactly how you see it.
    1
  29. Sorry. Not Steve. I meant Bo.
    1
  30. How did I know you were going to say that!! LOL. You people have no LOGIC in anything you write! You just bad-mouth other people! Very educated indeed!
    1
  31. Again, your problem is having difficulties in understanding things about G-d, and thats fine. This in no way proves evolution! Evolution is accidental, not by design. It seems however that you obviously see Design. Questions about Him does not mean He therefore does not exist. As the expression goes, the proof is in the pudding. If you see Design, then it was designed by a Designer.
    1
  32. "Even if your claim of "thousands" of scientists believing in creationism is correct, what do you say about the hundreds of thousands of scientists who do not?" But if you admit that there are dissenting views amongst scientists themselves, so why believe the evolutionists more? Are these hundreds of thousands creationist scientists just too dumb and blind to see the "obviousness" of evolution, though they all graduated with the same marks in the same colleges?
    1
  33. @123Atheist Where did the first star come from? You're just going around in circles. Life is from supernovae. Supernovae is part of the "life" cycle of the star, the star came from.....? "Science has showed we dont need G-d" Go tell that to the hundreds of thousands of scientists who believe in a G-d.
    1
  34. Thats fine that I'm made up of salt and other elements. My question to you is, how do you know I wasn't created like that?
    1
  35. Squirrels eat acorns. Do you? And what are you proving? If anything you see then that these animals were given even stronger teeth in order for them to be able to get the acorn open. They dont eat cherry seeds or plum pits. The main consumer of fruits the last time I checked were humans, not animals. Again you are trying to prove your point from the exception. Aeros802 also. He wrote even some humans dont have color vision. But thats non-sense because 99% of all humans have color sight!
    1
  36. More illogical, "I don't have anything else to say except to show my education and maturity by cursing someone else!" statements, mate. Yeah, make that checkMATE for me.
    1
  37. "Evolution is just a process in nature." Evolution is a theorized process in Nature with no proof. And to quote many evolutionists, "We must say evolution even though the mathematical probability is nearly an impossibility, because the alternative is a Creator." Its clear they don't believe, otherwise they have clear recourse to a Creator.
    1
  38. Yes, even without recourse to a Bible, one can see G-d, and studying Creation brings us to the conclusion of a Creator.
    1
  39. Another example: Lead Measurement. The "best geologic estimates"which the theorists advanced for the earths age are those based on the proportion of Lead 207 to Lead 206 in the rocks. These estimates are based are ORDINARY lead in the rocks, and not on radioactive materials. The entire system is based on the arbitrary assumpton THAT NONE OF THE LEAD 207 FOUND IN THE ROCKS WAS THERE FROM THE BEGINNING, but was formed as the product of radioactive materials. Since there is no method (cont. next)
    1
  40. Contentiousness? Any living being without a brain don't contend anything with anyone. Listen to yourself! You attribute human emotions to senseless trees! And how many trees exactly are "dying"? And yes, if they die its because G-d wants them to. Why is that hard understand, because the poor old tree is dying? Also, I cannot understand your urge to have to put your opponents down in negative comments. Have I offended you ever?
    1
  41. @lezgoto Why would you read a book about G-d written by an atheist? Or rather, if it is the Truth you seek, you will you follow up this book with another about G-d written by a theist? Also, don't forget, that Stenger maintains that Free-will will EVENTUALLY please explained by scientific methods. Which means, that now he does not know, and he does not know when anyone will explain it, but dont worry world, eventually it will happen.....
    1
  42. SP K172 is another fabrication (as you already know.) Creationists have long ago denied this as evidence of any kind. Look it up as you do everything else. The bottom line is without attributing intelligence to Natural Selection, you're saying it happened accidentally. Nothing as cunning as a single cell could "just happen" cerainly not trillions of them. So in the end we have to ask "accident" or planned? Its impossible for the former.
    1
  43. @JohnnyKubark Dude, there never were "bad characteristics". All part of the imaginary evolutionists mind. Everything was always as you see them now. Understand?
    1
  44. Another religious I'd like to share with you. A religious person believes that the most important thing for a human is his use of Free Will. Now, when coming to the subject of G-d, He is the secret of the Universe. Nothing is as concealed as He is, and He is not seen even by the greatest of men, Yet nothing in the Universe is as evident as the Creator. THERE IS NO FACT AS OPEN AS THE FACT OF A VAST INTELLECT. Wherever you turn, there is a declaration in billions of inscriptions, "I was Here!"
    1
  45. @123Atheist So even though they are "scientists" using "scientific methods" in archeological diggings, you still disregard it, thereby proving ALL scientists are biased to their agenda as are evolutionary scientists. How many evolutionists have had "proofs" promoting the theory only to later be revealed as hoaxes?
    1
  46. You're mixing apples and oranges. G-d is G-d, always was G-d. As far as the world and earth, things are too designed for them to have come about accidently. Its like this: We're both standing in an art roomobserving a painting of a forest. I say, "the artist did a great job! Look at his design and use of color." You say, as you look around the room, "I don't see any artist here. How do you know an artist made this?"
    1
  47. There is NO random occurence. How did this all start? Because "He said, and it was". G-d gave a command, "Let there Be....." Purpose doesn't require s/o to give it. Purpose requires a purposeful result, which we have. G-d also made man in a way that we should not be able to grasp everything (for a number of reasons). which we can't do. For example, close your eyes and imagine nothing. Now put your hand in the middle of that. That is not nothing however, that is space. We cant imagine nothing
    1
  48. Ok, Haven, you win. You're just blowing me away with your logic. Is that what you think I'm going to respond? You sound like a little kid trying to sound tough (clusterf) to prove a point. "Why G-d this and why that...goo goo gaga?" Is this how you prove a point? It seems random b/c you blindly ignore Plan. And if there is s/t you dont understand you dismiss it instead of studying it. You want to live your life being willfully blind b/c you choose to. When you can counter logically, let me know.
    1
  49. "If you can't understand how stacked against us the odds are of finding "all of the fossils" are,.." THIS PERFECTLY POINTS OUT AGAIN THE ARGUMENT I MADE BEFORE. When you are confronted with something YOU DONT ANSWER! You brush it off with , "if you cant understand..." or with "you obviously dont understand evolution" You circumvent everything. Try to actually point to something SPECIFIC and say, "you see? This demonstrates evolution." Go ahead, I dare you or anyone on this board. Talk is cheap.
    1
  50. There are hundreds of thousands of books are relating to the bible and bible studies. You choose not to see. I asked you about the electricity of the eel, and the marvelous firefly and you think that Natural selection chose those to work. you have to be insane to believe that. Did N.S. also give people the URGE to do eat, or to sleep? Where did the URGE come from? And what about the inorganic creation such as the sun that you conveniently dont answer? Its because there is no answer for you.
    1
  51. Well said again. keep up the good work. Thank you for taking me over. It was three months of hard work! (Even though I enjoyed it.)
    1
  52. Very funny! Thats great.
    1
  53. "so that no matter how many logical reasons i give you..." Please point out ONE logical reason you've given me.
    1
  54. I have. Review the answers. And remember, its the results that count which prove G-ds existence.
    1
  55. Please see what I've posted the last two months.
    1
  56. If the one guy you mean is Ernst Haeckel, not only did he fabricate a series of drawings of various embryos in which he gave the human embryo a tail, to prove that man and animal have common characteristics, but when he was forced to admit that he intentionally falsified them, he justified himself by the argument that MANY SCIENTISTS HAD FALSIFIED THEIR SKETCHES. He invented imaginary missing links in evolution and gave them impressive names to overawe the reader. What a joke.
    1
  57. @cayetanoluis It seems as if you haven't been following the past six weeks' comments. I wasn't only harping on the eel or catfish, but on the defense of the snowshoe rabbit, the chameleon that can instantly change colors to blend, the skunk smell, the bee stinger, or the human eye. Darwin himself made short shrift of this by saying, "The impossibility of the eye existing needs not be discussed here". An eye is just as amazing as the electricity of the eel. The fact that either exist shows Design
    1
  58. How do you know animals ever attempted to eat fruit without color? There never were any! Talk about making things up.
    1
  59. Everything has purpose. The color of the fruit has purpose and the spinning of electrons have purpose. The purpose of these phenomona are numerous. But one thing is certainly clear. If something has a function and it is doing something useful and is part of a bigger picture, then it was obviously made. Like a screw in the engine, while it may not be the end result, it is obvious that 1)the screw was designed and 2)that it was designed for a purpose and plan.
    1
  60. All you also so naive to think that all the men of the great past were just a bunch of Idiots who weren't exposed to the "truth"? George Washington was fooloed, Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson because they all believed in G-D. Look at your currency even. Sir Isaac Newton was an amazing scientist but he was amazed with G-D and his creations, but you think he was a fool. I've demonstrated to you at least ten times Planned Purpose by obvious intelligence and you cant/haven't show/n me anything!!
    1
  61. He is also overwhelmed by the huge animals which to him speak of untold aeons of past time. He gazes at portraits of primitive men, at paintings depicting the primitive swamp, at placards which assign pompous names and age classifications of millions of years; and he is helpless before this mighty arrange of "scientific evidence". In closing, you've never responded with LOGIC to any thing I've posed you. How can you explain the eye 3 times? You cant but you're convinced. That sums it all up.
    1
  62. Its not that I think its related. You believe that the string theory is the best theory for the origin of matter, you believe that evolution is how species continue to exist, and you're not sure who or what to contribute inorganic substances to. to you, its a whole bunch of powers at work here. I believe it all to be the work of G-d.
    1
  63. I watched the interview. All of it. While I agree that Wendy is very annoying, and condescending and "demeaning" herself, with that laugh, I still mostly agree with her over all point which is that there schools should teach the controversies since there are no proofs. But I'd say even to teach creationism. His reply basically was that there is proof and she should just got ot the museums and "see the beauty of evolution! It's fascinating" There are problems though with his wonderful proof.
    1
  64. Take the watermelon. Why is it a dull green on the outside? Is it warning you of something? Can we attribute intelligence to the melon? And what happens when you break it open? You see a luscious red color that make you want to sink your teeth into it! Now, I ask you, do you see Plan and Purppose, or do you see millions of accidents all over? Because thats what it boils down to, accident or purposefulness. Adaptation, evolution etc. are all synonymous with "accidently". So, what do YOU see?
    1
  65. I told you what constitutes design. Please see my reply 1 day ago. There is Design in everything G-d created in Nature. There is also purpose in cancer. Its called "people die". Who sent it? The same One who sent health to the person before he had cancer. If you sit in the sun, it can 'poison' you, but without the sun no life could exist. The sun is very purposeful! Anything can be used or abused, not just the sun. A car is good invention, but you think its bad b/c accidents happen.
    1
  66. "Given enough time, all these can come about." Thats what it boils down to then, huh? Given billions of years, trillions and trillions of purposeful Design finally fell into, and we just happen to be here enjoying it. Does this actually make sense to you? I'm curious would you be willing to bet your life on this 1 in 1trillion zeros probability of this happening? Btw, as a music critic, I found yours to be very good.
    1
  67. Aeros802 declares out loud for all to hearthat he is a willful liar just to try and prove a point. Does everyone see what he wrote? He actually likes sour taste! That means he'd rather his watermelon be naturally bitter and sour than sweet. He'd like for the peach to be sour as well. He also likes his milk sour. And folks, even if he does for some reason, we all agree he is the exception, not the rule.
    1
  68. Whether your zebra case was merely an example or not is irrelevant. Whats wrong with you? After all it still illustrates how evolutionists depict things to have happened, i.e. unfavorable characteristics. This is a fabricated assumption. To say Natural Selection sieved anything out is saying that once upon a time developed in certain ways that were a hinderance to it and now the better ones only exist. To this we say baloney. All animals were always exactly how you see now.
    1
  69. Accident as in no one is planning it. A nonrandom process however will be just as succesful as you writing a book blind, in a language you dont know if you dont attribute it to an Intelligence or Planner. If it is not planned, how could the possibility of even one cell or molecule exist? "Oh", they say, "given a billion years anything can happen".......
    1
  70. Natural selection is synonomous with accident or coincidence. Anything that has design or Intelligence had a Designer with intelligence.
    1
  71. Haven, I hate to tell you this but you have said nothing. Absolutely nothing the last 2 months. Except for evolutionary jargon and jibberish of which is evident even you have absolutely clue about. You've resorted to you previous arguments of putting your opponents down. You have brought absolutely nothing to the table which made me think for a second you might be right in ANYTHING you've mentioned.
    1
  72. WHAT EVIDENCE? YOU HAVEN"T SHOWN ANY YET!! And I told you, why dont you explain this process? I was not refering to a book. I write capitals when I refer to G-d. They're not random.
    1
  73. Correction: and that have a good taste? According to you, shouldn't at least one ripe/ matured fruit actually taste sour either after being plucked or cooked? There should be at least ONE fruit that "happens" to have an attractive color though it is not yet ripe! Bu everywhere you look you will find Intelligence in nature. Its amazing!
    1
  74. Since when does something old mean its not valid? Since you grew tired of unsuccessfully trying to explain it away? Yet another display of, "I HAVE NOTHING LOGICAL TO SAY SO LET ME MAKE FUN OF MY OPPONENT INSTEAD!" A bunch a wavelengths? Sunlight? Where exactly did these come from? I agree that science can try to explain how things work, I do it all the time. But why it works cant be explained. Why does Gravity work other than its G-ds will? Science will never tell you why, maybe only how.
    1
  75. Ever heard of Drummonds Hoax?Its a picture of a newly born baby hanging from a branch by a hand which was intended to demonstrate monkey-like characteristics of the infant. But htis is a hoax. No baby is able to perform such a feat, yet this fraudulent picture continues to be displayed, DESPITE THE FLAT CONTRADICTION BY OBSTETRICIANS. The truth is that basically all the theorists all guilty of fraud, for they willfully ignore the fossil record which clearly contradicts them.
    1
  76. "Millions of people believed in multiple Gods, the Sun God Ra, and those "fairy tales". Simply put, numbers of believers doth not the truth make." I agree 100%. As I've pointed out earlier, there are alot of crazy religions out there making some claim. What we're discussing really is the existence of a G-d whether you believe in the Bible or not. The creationist speaks of obvious Planned Creation by Intelligent Design, and evolutionists speak of fortunate accidents.
    1
  77. This is also a fact that we humans cant grasp. One of the reasons for this is actually so we dont be all high and mighty about how smart we are, or how strong we are, because actually we are very limited in these areas compared to G-d, who understands everything. So G-ds existence is Not accidental. You just cant grasp it. Which again brings us to the ultimate question. Is this whole Universe with its cunning design and intent, purpose or accident? Sorry, but only a fool would say the latter.
    1
  78. What happened Steve? I thought you wanted proof? You wanted to see me take him apart. So, can we agree on that one condition?
    1
  79. "We know the Earth is old" Wishful thinking. "Genetic evidence shows we all had a common ancestor." All that proves is that G-d created us with similar DNA. "You're going against 99% of scientists." Assumed/made-up. "Evolution isn't random chance" Tell that to Havenfall who thinks it is. "Its design was done by the law of Physics." Do you even think when you type that? Who/What made these "laws of physics"? That got there on there own??? Think!!
    1
  80. I am very well educated in my books and yours. creation may have come from the Bible, but where did the Bible come from? thanks for tuning in and commenting.
    1
  81. Evolution is actually the biggest religion there is. You talk about blind faith! Alll proof to evolution happened in the distant past. "One who wishes to lie distances his testimonies". (There were millions who witnessed the giving of the Bible however.)
    1
  82. Your comparison is flawed, however. What you should really compare it to you is, the odds of you winning the lottery is maybe 1 in a million, lets say. But what are the odds of YOU winning every single time?? Then you would know for certain that someone is pulling strings to make you win since it is nearly an impossibility for you to win even three times. Evolution suggests you can win trillions of times, because with the complexity of Life, ALL of us are winning trillions of times.
    1
  83. Haven, you dont believe in G-d because you said you dont see him anywhere. You dont see evolution either! You dont actually with your own eyes see ANYTHING evolving! You cant point to a single animal and say, "You see this animal? Its still evolving." And while you're stymied by the electricity of the eel, the eye is just as amazing. Millions of years ago, N.S. suggested that a fish should develop an....eye? "You know, it'd be great if I could see. Let me start making an eye! Not one, but two!
    1
  84. There are berries that are poisonous too, and yes a person can mistakenly eat those. But why do you pick the 1% of the foods that Nature grows that are bad to prove your point, and not the other 99%? Did I declare myself a winner anywhere? What is your need to speak in a derogatory unrespectable manner? The whole world is a construct of all our minds. The things we see are all the same. I dont choose to see red,everyone sees red in the apple. Coincidence that all of us find fruit to be alluring?
    1
  85. Listen to what you're saying! You're saying Manhattan Island, and all its skyscrapers could be an accident. Any airport and all its airplanes are all accidents. All the librarys' books were written over millions of years by accident. Haven! Come on, man! Are you serious!?
    1
  86. of chemical engineering, physics and logistics. And DNA and other molecules are to be found trillions of times in trillions of different living species. This shows us Intelligent Design. To attribute this to accident is to say the least, irresponsible or willful blindness.
    1
  87. Therefore the low proportion of C.14 in organic materials of ancient times is NOT due to the measured breakdown of this isotope, BUT IS DUE TO THE SIMPLE FACT THAT THE PROPORTION OF C. 14 WAS LOW IN THE FIRST PLACE. It is not even established that the present proportion of C. 14 is constant; this is an unproved assumption. But even if equilibrium exists today, it certainly did not at the beginning. TIME HAD TO ELAPSE BEFORE SUCH ALLEGED EQUILIBRIUM COULD BE REACHED.
    1
  88. Thats unfortunate for you. Maybe if you had asked the right person, he would have satisfied your thirst for Truth.
    1
  89. You have not responded to my point. In the examples I pointed out to you, such as the 3 eye groups, the tree, please tell me. What do YOU think? Again, at the end, its either random accidents or Intelligent Design. The fact that you may have questions about G-d, why He "hides" or gives cancer, doesn't mean that He therefore cant be there. So I ask YOU, not Wendy, or Dawkins, but your mind, do you SEE perfect accidents in the trillions or purposefulness.
    1
  90. Steve, please see my comments above. There are five in a row with my posts responding to unchie979, as I can only reply to one person.
    1
  91. "Everything in our uiverse came from the Big Bang" And where did all the energy that caused this eventual Bang come from? "When matter and antimatter were created the antimatter was destroyed leaving only normal matter." Assumption. "Even as we speak particles are constantly being created and destoyed from nothing." Right, but thats G-ds doing. "You just need to prove He's there" Actually the proof is shouting at you in billions of tongues in G-d's Nature, you just want to call it accident.
    1
  92. DO you really believe I'm come to debunk evolution without first reading on it? I did not need to wait for Dawkins books. There are countless others. But guess what, I found them ALL to be lacking. However I cannot say that about Creation since everything fits into the framework G-d composed some 3300 years ago. _ no exceptions. You've never studied the bible, and I dont mean reading, I mean study seriously.
    1
  93. "I suggest you study up on evolution and natural selection because you misunderstand how it works." Have you once studied Creationism? Or did you merely give it a glance and discard it? The process of Creation is a fact, planned purpose for every minute detail proves this. Again, in the end, you and your friends see thankful accident, meaning "somehow they came about" and I see Design. The same way the suit speaks of a tailor, and a car a manufacturer, the universe testifies to a Maker.
    1
  94. you've never responded to inorganic origins/design, you've ignored the fact that I've proven to you the fact that scientists say something does not make it fact etc. So whos being crude and illogical? All evolutionary "evidence" is a fallacy yet you have no problem listening to the hot air called evolution. I've answered every question you've asked and you purposely ignore my answers b/c you have no choice. And once more, ultimately we ask "Accident or purposefulness?" You say accident. Crude
    1
  95. @123Atheist I've done more than my fair of reading. I mentioned free-will because of Stengers position. Do you believe in/rely on the christian scientists who have "proof" that jesus resurrected himself? After all, you cant disprove science....
    1
  96. "Through millennia, the animals with favorable traits to the environment they were in, survived to pass on their genes." Thats a cop-out! How do you know this? Where are all the fossils of these animals with non-"favorable traits"? Theres no proof. Also, what exactly does favorable traits mean? What you're basically saying is that favorable traits with the trillions of complex designs of even knowing the future all happened. That is absurd!
    1
  97. Another example. Imagine going in a space ship a billion mph for a million years. After ten minutes (or less) we'd be wondering when we'd hit a brick wall because our minds think of everything in terms of space (area) and time. We cant fathom that we would go on forever without hitting anything. But as scientists will tell you, space is limitless. We can't imagine existence outside the realm of Time or Space, but those are also G-ds creations. Its for this reason you wonder how G-d ever got here
    1
  98. @dwaynejensendotcom Well said. Although get ready for the bashing now from the religious evolutionists!
    1
  99. You say there is incontrovertible evidence to evolution which is why you believe it and I say there is too much evidence proving G-ds existence. Please refer to some of these proofs that everyone is agreement with that it must be evolution. Meaning, the same way you wrote "nothing you mentioned seems too far out there to not be explained by evolution", why cant you understand it to be G-d? I think its merely because of your questions surrounding G-d. But please show me a proof. Good weekend.
    1
  100. All the facts you wrote in 6 parts I mostly agree on. We are differing HOW those facts came to be. I say there is Intelligent Design by a Designer, and you believe in accidents. Your time lines and theories involved with these facts are your assumptions. And the fact the these purposeful phenomenon surround continuously speak of a Designer. He's not hiding. You just have to look. Also, peple laughing dont prove anything because the billions of believers would laugh at you. Would you give in?
    1
  101. unchie, Everywhere in Nature you will see Plan and Purpose. To illustrate. Take the apple tree. Is the the tree that intelligent to know 1) that there are eaters, 2) that have eyes 3) that the eye can distinguish colors 4) that the eater has teeth 5) that have tounges for taste, 6) that like sweet foods with a little acidity 6) that have stomachs to digest it 7)that have noses to smell? How does the the tree "know" this? Is it aware of human/animal presence? All the things point to a Designer.
    1
  102. If there is a G-d, you 're also free to decide your own purpose. G-d doesn't decide for you. Infinite regress? What you mean another theory? Infinite regress is a kid who keeps asking "Why?" over and over again. what in the world does I.R. prove???? Again, logical answers only please.
    1
  103. The onus is actually on you to prove that G-d does not exist. "Yeah, bit I dont understand this or that, so there cant be a G-d!" Immature response. For someone who was going to take me head on, you've given up pretty quickly and you haven't demonstrated anything.
    1
  104. Animals have no free will, only humans do.
    1
  105. Do you think Hitler can commit the atrocities he did, and then just take a slleping poison to kill himself and thats it? No Retribution for him? Thats where we differ. I sleep at night knowing hes getting his just desserts and that he'll suffer forever. You wonder how can there be a G-d who would let such chaos? You therefore denounce anything G-dly, and you look at the world as a "we just happen to be here, gone today forgotten tomorrow" type of outlook. All we need to know is that He exists.
    1
  106. Why no 3 stooges response? Do you have a favorite 3 stooges line?
    1
  107. I dont think life can be explained by ANY natural process. If you've actually read anything I've written the past six weeks, you'd see that. That is exactly my point. The world was created by a Creator who made all the rules of His nature and continues to will everything into existence. We employ the use of science only to be able to see, at least partially, His Handiwork.
    1
  108. Please rephrase your question. Secondly, I'd again like to point out your problem seems to be how a G-d could exist. Even if you find that difficult, how have you come to the conclusion that matter evolved? There is obvious design. Your answer to this is, but I dont understand "this" or "that" about G-d. Therefore things have had to evolve? The suit speaks of a tailor, plumbing speaks of a plumber, and the world speaks of a Creator.
    1
  109. First of all, I agree with comment number 2. I'm actually presently surprised you said that, as I use that as an argument when discussing the religions of the world. Secondly, when you see the obvious Design in Nature, what/who do you give the credit to? At the end of the day it boils down to 1 of 2 things. Purpose or accident. You tell me. Thirdly, I'm also a huge three stooges fan. Shemp especially. Themsfightinwoids in my country! Oh yeah, so whats stopping you? We're not in my country!
    1
  110. I've recieved 3 responses and I've chosen to respond to yours. I have more education on the subject than you, that I can guarantee, not to slight you, but this is what I've studied. There is not a shred of evidence to evolution, its all based on asssumptions. Its obvious that Dawkins has no interest in seeing, and neither do you. It takes a lot more faith to believe in evolution than in a G-d. If you'd like or anyone for that matter, I can easily prove the existence of a Creator. U ready to see?
    1
  111. If it was only to appeal to an emotion I would've brought this up six weeks ago, not try to show you plan and purpose in creation. The reason you dont see like I do, is simply because of your trained upbringing that evolution made everything, but anyone who wishes to see the overwhelming evidence of a Creator can merely look with seeing eyes. I will demonstrate this idea tomorrow.
    1
  112. A museum is a propoganda mill. EVERYTHING IS TREMENDOUSLY BIASED. The "sequence" of the fossils is purposely arranged to promote the Theory. Its a museum dedicated to the religion of evolutionists. Its no wonder that you and countless others are harassed by doubts in creation. Its like a person trying to maintain pure and proper thoughts in a house of prostitution. Any unknowing visitor sees the exhibits and believes that they were unearthed in the order in which they are arranfed at the museum.
    1
  113. I welcome your checking. If G-d has the power to create a world, don't you think He has the power to make a real forceful flood, causing the carvings in the Canyon? Slight variation is fine, as long as its done by a G-d with Intelligence, not by some accidental abstract means ending in trillions of purpose and design. Please ask again if I misunderstood your question. Thanks for responding.
    1
  114. "Try reading a book." Gee thanks, I didn't think of that. I've read plenty. "We've found many transitional fossils." All hoaxes and lies. As one scientist was forced to admit, "the naked truth is simply that there is no reliable evidence concerning the evolutionary sequence of invertebrate phyla" (American Scientist). After over a century of ceaseless and widespread digging, the evidence has "not yet" been found. It will never be found for these "transitional forms" never existed.
    1
  115. You are again assuming this to be the case regarding the geological rocks. Proof please. "My lord, I'm getting sick of this" I knew deep down you believe in Him. "Beneficial variations...will pass it on to future generations, the bad ones dont b/c they hinder...." Its nothing you haven't repeated enough times already. Again though, this sounds like an intelligence at work here. You are attributing a plan and design, with intent and motive to Natural Selection.
    1
  116. In all due respect, (and I've grown to respect you as it is obvious you are looking for Truth whether you accept ot from me or not) you've just admitted that you believe this world with all the genius of evolution to be an accident, which brings us then to only one logical question that we must be honest about. Can TRILLIONS of amazing creations with purpose and design all be the result of accident or MUST WE SAY THEY"VE BEEN DESIGNED? it is imperative we answer this question first.
    1
  117. Ever heard of Colorado Man? Another front-page splash of a man consisting of only one tooth. After a time, this "find" was quietly ignoredwhen it was ascertained as belonging to a species of horse. And this is the same patternin every instance; a skull or fragment is found, and the experts make haste to proclaim the discovery of "a new stage in the history of the evolution of Man". Of course when the hoax is subsequently revealed, its barely found in the newspapers and the public is duped.
    1
  118. Cont. And therefore, any organic material with little Carbon 14 "demonstrates" that it has had long ages in which its Carbon 14 has disintegrated and disappeared. This is equivelent to the argument that since they assume the earth is very old, it therefore "follows" that the fossils are very old. For recent dates, the system may have some validity, but for old dates it amounts to reasoning in a circle, because: cont.
    1
  119. I dont accept either. Large scale and small scale does not make a difference to a Creator. If any animal/living thing changes immediately or within a generation, its b/c it was CREATED to be able to do so. Not b/c natural-selection gave it this ability.
    1
  120. Where did the "katydid "learn this"? The cicada has noise instruments which are far more astounding. Two sound pits, one on each side of the abdomen, are controlled by plates which are raised or lowered to control the volume. each sound pit has drumheads, an amplifier, a sounding board, and a pipe which supplies air for noise making! Did they not mate until this system was finally figured out over the million years? This is found around the animal world and in every case it is a planned marvel.
    1
  121. They're already taught atheism. Its called Evolution. Wendy Wrights point and others as well is to teach Creation. "Less than 1/3 of the world follows Christianity". That may be, but she meant in America, where, since the beginning of school systems here, they've been taught to believe in G-d.
    1
  122. @epanek Who said anything about negative mutations? Who said anything about mutations at all? Not I. This plan means for people to grow in their "natural" as they've always done, and to die when their time comes whether its old age or cancer. People suffer yes, but that is also part of G-ds plan. To which you may ask "What kind of loving G-d lets His people suffer? But we are not in this world for this world, but rather for the next world, the Afterlife. cont.
    1
  123. Simply? We dont. The same way evolutionists have no idea how or what started the evolution process way back hundreds of trillions of years ago, or even how matter came to exist at all. There never is/was a definitive beginning according to evolutionists and there was, they don't know when. (Can you comprehend hundreds of trillions of years ago but not G-d?) Which then brings us back to the first question. Is this whole Universe Design or accident. There must be a Designer since accident is moot
    1
  124. How can you say the evidence for evolution is incontrovertible, when there are thousands of scientists, even non- religious ones, who disagree with the evidence? Its not like gravity lets say, where everyone agrees that gravity is a fact. Those who believe in evolution push for evolution for it to be a fact. How many evolutionists have brought forth evidence for it and later proven to be a hoax? Now why would they tamper with a fossil and disguise it to be something its not? B/c of an agenda.
    1
  125. What should be taught is the universally claimed idea that the world has a Creator and to study it for the reasons that billions of people believe and live by one. True numbers don't mean everything in all senses, but it certainly is not regarded as "fairy tale". Nobody believes and lives by the stork delivering babies or Goldilocks, so therefore no one studies it. But for centuries and Millenia people have studied Creation. I'm not saying to use a specific text, although the Bible is fine.
    1
  126. "If it has happened, then no matter how improbable, it is possible." The odds of winning the lottery are highly improbable, but what if someone kept winning the lottery repeatedly, would you suspect foul play or would you say, "look, the odds of it happening are nearly an impossibility, but obviously if it happened, then no matter how improbable, its a possibility"? No you would not, especially if it continued to happen.
    1
  127. @123Atheist Supernovae. More evolution jargon. Go ahead and explain that word to yourself. But be careful. As you get to the words, "exploding stars" and "tremendous energy", make sure to explain to yourself first how THAT energy got there, or how the stars got there. Also, how did the sun get here? Also how do you know that G-d didn't create supernovae. P.S. You've already claimed yourself as not being an expert, so what with the "I already see you don't know as much as I do..."?
    1
  128. To sell the idea of evolution the fossils are arranged in "ascending order of complexity" The nomenclature is impressive and a novice fails to realize that the terminology of the fossils IS EXPRESSLY INTENDED TO COVER UP THE TRUTH. The novice thinks that the all-knowing scientists have "dated" the fossils by putting a Geiger to them with the dates automatically computed and believes the fossils are arranged correspondingly in precise sequence.
    1
  129. All methods used for dating is based on assumptions. A few examples: Sodium. They assume that oceans originally HAD NO SALT, therfore they claim to calculate the age of the earth by the rate at which salt is now being deposited by the rivers into the seas (Sodium Measurement).They therefore assert that the amount of salt in the ocean is evidence of the length of time that the rivers have been flowing into the ocean. But this "measurement" is meaningless since there was ALWAYS salt in the oceans.
    1
  130. You assume mutation is not accidental because you've arbitrarily decided that its a given that things mutated in the first place! How could anything mutate?! What does N.S. mean? You have yet to define it as you asked me to define design. How could anything "suddenly mutate" How could anything suddenly "converge"? How did initial matter ever get here to begin? Where did cells or aoms come from. An atom is as intricate and complex as a skyscraper to say that it just beneficially came to be....
    1
  131. It is not accepted as proof for the same reason you dont want to. People dont WANT to believe in G-d. Their guilt overcomes them and they except evolution with open arms. By the way, an evolutionist will never be fully happy in life, because he thinks that in the end he'll just end up in ahole somewhere and be recycled. This unfortunately takes away the fact that each and every person is here for a reason, and they should fulfill that reason. There are no accidents. Again, accident or purpose?
    1
  132. Design can be defined as follows: to create, fashion, execute, or construct according to a plan. "An apple doesn't exist for humans, rather to make new trees" Tell me, if this is the case, why does the apple have an alluring color only when ripe? Why does it have a sweet taste only when its ripe? Who/what is the color/taste for if not for humans? To merely make other trees the color/taste is not necessary. They are there for human benefit! Plan and Purpose.
    1
  133. He was created to look like a 30 year old. If you were brought to the scene you would swear that he has to have been in existence for at least 30 years, and I would respond and say that he was just created a day ago....If he was created as a baby he had no mother/father to feed him. And so too for all living things. There were old and young fish in the sea right from the start. Therefore, from the get-go Earth appeared to be much older. However G-d created it to look like that.
    1
  134. cont. due to the fundamental fact that the earth is NOT old but new, IT STARTED OUT WITHOUT CARBON 14 (which the theorists admit is the result of cosmic-rays). IT THEREFORE TOOK TIME TO BUILD UP ENOUGH CARBON 14 TO ESTABLISH THE PRESENT RATIO. The earths supply of C.14 has increased steadily; and the further back in history one goes, the less Carbon 14 was to be found.
    1
  135. The infintesimal DNA molecule holds MILLIONSOF COMPLICATED INSTRUCTIONS governing every phase of the bodys make-up and this molecule also has the ability to send out this information to BILLIONS OF CELLS OF THE BODY. And the identical DNA with every one of these instructions is PRESENT IN THE TRILLIONS OF CELLS IN THE BODY. And each body has a different setof instructions in its DNA molecules. That is immense complexity in a master plan. And you say, "But thats the process of science!" Please.
    1
  136. To continue. Is it an accident that the fruit is green when its not ripe, and only when its ripe it turns red? Of course not. Theres Plan and Purpose in that. The fruit while its not ripe hides inconspicuously among the leaves so as not to attract the would-be eaters, but when its ripe it turns into a shiny red color as if advertising itself, "I'm now ready to be eaten!", and becomes conspicuous with its red color. As with all fruits, a dull color means, "Dont eat me!".
    1
  137. @123Atheist What about "hurting"G-d? Thats not bad? So you could do what you want without taking G-d into consideration, but creationists have to take evolutionists into consideration? What real evidence? Lizards? Its all assumed. a)How do you know they weren't created like that, and b) show me the evidence. If religious people believe in evolution, then they dont really believe in G-d. When you believe in G-d, no recourse to evolution is necessary.
    1
  138. They make the wishful postualation that all Argon 40 in the Universe is the breakdown-product of Potassium 40 and therefore demonstrates the passage of certain periods of time. When questioned, "From what was P. 40 formed?" that reply is that it too "evolved" from a primordial chemical which "evolved' from something earlier, ad infinitum. BUT CREATION BY A CREATOR IMPLIES THE ABILITY TO CREATE EVERY KIND OF MATTER WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF TIME.
    1
  139. Skurve, that is all true. But you know what? For some reason, you and I cant muster up enough electrical energy to electrocute another as a defense mechanism, only the eel, catfish and ray. Now, with the evolutuionary thesis at play here, how did three ENTIRELY UNRELATED animals get this capability? You cant claim ancestral inheretance here?
    1
  140. Another is the Potassium-Argon "Clock". This circular illogic is the "measurement" of the earths age by means of the measured breakdown of Potassium 40 into a daughter-product Argon 40. This is based on the arbitrary assumption that "all products of chemical evolution" were "not able"to be created by a Creator independently, but needed to undergo the process of metamorphosis as we see today. Instead we assume that Argon 40 was in existence at the beginning, as they concede Potassium 40 was.
    1
  141. You're right. I misjudged your upbringing. My apologies. Sincerely. I must say though while your parents/teachers didn't seem to convince you of anything, you don't seem satisfied by evolution either. You just claimed evolution to be a fact, yet earlier you posted, "Without any shadow of a doubt? What are you talking about? The first sentence in the paragraph was 'I don't know what matter is made up of, or where it comes from.' I only said the super string field is the BEST THEORY."....
    1
  142. Correction: Construct of your mind.
    1
  143. So please show me some proof that everyone agrees with. And also, how can you say "incontrovertible" when scientists themselves differ? Please answer these two points.
    1
  144. All right Steve. I'll take your challenge. If if it means I may only prove something to you. But only on one condition: that we use LOGIC, not guess work or assumptions, but LOGIC. Agreed? Also, please no foul language.
    1
  145. You misunderstood, or maybe I mis-typed. When I typed "everything fits into the framework G-d composed some 3300 years ago" I meant His Bible, not Creation. Hinduism may be older, but G-d did not give anything to them. The reference to G-d is made and has been made by countless great minds of the current days and all in the past. Now, I'm not saying that there aren't crazy religions out there, there are. All I'm saying is that it's obvious from Design that there is a Creator.
    1
  146. First of all, why do you consider that the fact that these are known to have been made by man, not to be analogous? The reason it is analogous is because the end result shows purpose, planning and design! Therefore, since the electron spins of the rocks serve a purpose, you also see plan intent, and purpose. The fact that a fruit has color shows plan, not accident. If it is accidental why should ALL fruit have color? Should ONE fruit not have color? This too is Plan, design and intent.
    1
  147. @epanek cont. And suffering in this world is much more preferable than suffering in the next world. Now you wont understand this concept if G-d/the Bible is not in your lexicon or in your way of thinking. There are hundreds of reasons why people suffer, and if one of them is b/c of a persons bad deeds, it is actually a kindness from G-d that he allows him to a) continue living at all and b) to allow him to suffer in this world instead of the next.
    1
  148. @JohnnyKubark "Like a sieve that filters out beneficial...." Wow. Thats sounds actually like intelligence. Tell me, how did this all-knowing natural selection come to figure this out? Are you attributing Intelligence to it? Are you calling it a powerful Force of some sort? If not, tell me how it figures out wha tto sieve out. you're bsically saying it happened accidentally...
    1
  149. To continue. "The pigments which absorb the light that stimulates sight are made of Vitamin A in the form of its aldehyde, retinene; together with certain retinal proteins called opsins". These are very complicated chemical products. But they have "arisen independently" 3 times. The same with color vision. Teleost fish have color vision, as do reptiles and birds and evolutionists assert that reptiles and birds did not evolve from teleost fishes. They claim the "accident" of color more than once.
    1
  150. Seeds do spread that way. Look at the dandelion. The same way G-d made different species of animals with different defense mechanisms, he made thousands of differences of plant life as well. Fruit seed get spread by the eaters, and the wind as well, and the dandelion only by the wind. Nectar is spread by the employment of the bee. A whole system that occured not once, or twice, but millions of times are different! Does wind not have effect in fields where trees grow?
    1
  151. (cont.) to an ape which had died 50 years prior. Dawson was revealed as an imposter; he had put fossils together with hthe jawbone which HE HAD DYED TO SIMULATE AGE. So instead of Piltdown Man being 500,000 years old he was now declared to be 50,000 years old. But Dr. Franz weidenreich asserted that the skull was "characteristic of modern man with no special features." And the famed British paleontologist Sir Arthur Keith hotly contested any criticism of Piltdown Man.
    1
  152. It was sculpted with sufficient beast-like features to make him scientifically authentic, and copies of this sculpture stood in 300 museums throughout the world. "He was derived directly from Proliopithecine of the Oligocene, making the primate Piltdown Man an ancestor of true primates, whic hmeans that man emerged about 50 million years ago." However, after 50 years of service in building up the theory, in 1953 P.M. was EXPOSED AS A HOAX. The jawbone was not even a fossil for it belonged....
    1
  153. Matter can be created only by a G-d, AKA the Creator. G-d always was, is, and always will be. Humans think in terms of time, size and space, however those are also creations of G-d. He existed out of time. He also created the sun clouds and everything else that is nonorganic. evolution has no way of explaining how a gas sun came to be. Did it evolve from another gas creation, and also happens to be perfect for life on Earth? The point is to see Plan and Purpose in EVERYTHING, like the car.
    1
  154. cont: or the camouflage of the horseshoe rabbit? Why didn't n.s. just give all living species the camouflage mechanism? The millions of different kinds of species with all the signals that they have either to attract mates or to send warning are all to give you and the rest of mankind a signal that you all should wake up and see! As King David remarked, "How amazingly good are you works, O lord, you made them all with wisdom!
    1
  155. There is a big difference! If G-d created everything, then the all knowing and perfect G-d is in charge, and if there were no G-d, then everything is haphazard and life has no real meaning. The Creator of the Universe is the same G-d that is in the Bible. (psst. Just look at the first verse!)
    1
  156. You are incorrect regarding micro-e. Creationists believe, that if the mosquito has changed/adapted due to global warming, it is because it was created to be able to do so. The same way you and I, though we are warm blooded, we can nevertheless adapt to living in an environment that is very cold. The body reacts correctly to maintain survival. The same way how If we get infected our body immediately reacts to get rid of the infection. This is not micro-evolution, rather the body doing its job.
    1
  157. And finally, Carbon 14. This is the measurement of the proportion of Carbon 14 to other carbon in organic materials. Radioactive Carbon 14, which is the product of the bombardment of cosmic rays, is taken up by living organisms; and with the passage of long time periods it disintegrates, at a measured rate. The theorists thus attempt to calculate the age of fossils by the proportion of Carbon 14 in the materials in comparison to other carbons. cont.
    1
  158. Whether they like it or not, evolutionsts are claiming accident, because you cannot attribute intelligence to matter that doesn't have a brain. Algae didn't think, and DNA didn't think and neither do eyes or any element on the peridic table. It had to have come from somewhere initially. Matter, that complex, could never come into any form of existence certainly not living existence, so at the end of the day its just accidental. Adaptation, natural selection are just synonomous with accident.
    1
  159. All right Steve. I'll take your challenge. Even if it means I may only prove something to you. But only on one condition: that we use LOGIC, not guess work or assumptions, but LOGIC. Agreed? Also, please no foul language.
    1
  160. And when I said you dont see evolution anywhere, I mean that lliterally. Was Sir Isaac Newton a caveman? Or George Washington? And again, hundreds of thousands of scientists think evolution is fraudulent. Are they cavemen?
    1
  161. If the world were billions of years old, where are all the fossils of old remains? The earth should flooded with them all over, yet no intermediary fossils have yet to be found! Here and there they try to claim they've "found it" but eventually it all crumbles. The fact is, when you or your buddies on this forum are posed a logical question, you don't answer it. You avoid it by saying, its obvious you don't understand, or other excuses. If someone asks you a question, ANSWER IT! And no one has.
    1
  162. we can only refer to complexity is regards to matter. Matter can not create itself.
    1
  163. Obviously however, the people writing on this forum or Dawkins for that matter do not believe in the Bible. Our discussion for the last three months was how even if you don't believe in the Bible you can still prove the existence of a Creator. But yes, science and the Bible get along perfectly.
    1
  164. Once again you have not answered my question. You continuously dont answer my questions. I asked you about the christian scientists, you dont respond. I ask you about the inorganic world, you dont respond. I ask you about the marvel of electricity in the eel and you admit you have no idea how it got there. (Dont worry, neither do ANY evolutionists). And btw, rays and catfish also have electricity which, even according to the theorists, have absolutely no connection in the evolutionary sense.
    1
  165. But Newton and countless others before him studied the world around them and concluded that G-d created it. So you should hold to their authority in the matters that they were authorized in, I didn't mention quantum physics. If the brilliant minds of the past came to this conclusion, you can too. But you think its not scientific to believe. Tell me, what do you say to all the christian "scientists" who've "proven without a doubt" that a certain someone resurrected himself? They're scientists!
    1
  166. a)You haven't given me one proven fact. b)As far as a G-d, I show you purposeful Plan and Purpose, and you show me perfect happy accidents without knowledge, yet "somehow" figured things out. c)I've been in science labs many times and each time I am amazed at the Hand of the Creator in his wonderfully amazing creation, from the different elements, bacteria, animals, and we human beings.
    1
  167. The result didn't happen by accident. the die was actually cast by someone. You are saying that the die actually could roll itself. You are also saying the die could roll itself and also get the same result a million times in a row, b/c, after all, it IS possible, by accident, of course.
    1
  168. Yes they are all different colors. But thats the beauty of it. You see, if all ripe fruit were a shiny red, it would be monotonous, therefore G-d created many fruits having different alluring colors. All fruit have enjoyable taste, but they're all different. Imagine if everything you tasted taste the same! It'd be boring! G-d in his infinite goodness gave us many enjoyable tastes! Enjoy them! Designed and planned!
    1
  169. @Havenfall The question you asked earlier, about the die being cast with a "random" result, has 2 answers. First, by the law of physics, if one held the die the exact same way and threw with the exact same velocity/force each time, then the result is actually NOT random. Secondly, one who believes in G-d believes there is no such thing as random. The lottery ticket numbers were MEANT for you to have, and so is the result of the die. The spot a leaf lands on is also G-ds will.
    1
  170. I'll ask you once more. Intelligent Design or accident?
    1
  171. It actually takes more faith to believe that billions of purpose "accidents" took place for our benefit than to believe in a G-d. But Dawkins believes it is 'delusional' to do so. The truth is, however, that Dawkins, and countless others, including scientists, don't want to believe so that they can do and say whatever their heart desires without guilt, which is exactly why evolution was accepted with open arms. But Evolution is all based on assumptions not facts. I'll illustrate this as well.
    1
  172. @123Atheist And also, of course the book makes no mention of G-d! Dawkins is an atheist!
    1
  173. Creationists are heavily scientific. we just use it to study G-ds amazing creations, not to disprove His existence.
    1
  174. Thirdly, as complicated as a watch may be, with all its gears, buttons, etc., the watchmaker is even more complex because he can make the watch, but he can also walk and chew gum at the same time! Plus he can destroy the watch or anything he designs. G-d made a complex world and He Himself is even more complex! You're like the watch that would only "think" in its own world of gears that it doesn't comprhend walking or chewing. So too we dont understand everything about G-d. After all, He is G-d.
    1
  175. There is plenty of evidence all around. You just have to want to see it.
    1
  176. I know where humans came from. Humans came from humans, and have always been human, cats were always cats, whales were always whales. P.S. If I made a movie, would that convince you? People can say whatever they want. My brain, my fully developed one, I may have to add, will allow me to decide. Not a movie.
    1
  177. And modern medicine has done a wonderful job of bringing this help to the open for all of mankind to benefit from. We all applaud them for their work. And this came from all that data. I know, however, that these natural processes around us were made by G-d. Nature is just an abused word that people use when referring to G-ds work, but He created Nature and all its processes.
    1
  178. You and all evolutionists are artists at assuming. "as they did not believe in a personal god - showing they had serious doubts about established doctrines." How in the World would you know that?! Did you read Isaacs Newtons private diary or something? Or G. Washingtons? Is this another one of your LOGICAL answers? This is how you debate?! Are these the answers you would give in a public debate. None of our currency had any reference to God......Oh , so the 1800 had "weak beliefs". Weak.
    1
  179. If you believe in accidents, then there really is nothing more to discuss. It may be an old argument, but you believe that after millions of years of spilling ink, a million page novel, with an authors name, title, plot, prologue and epilogue, all in the same language, would eventually be made. You also believe that after a million years of hurricanes in metal scrap yards, there could eventually be a 747, accidentally. But not one 747, but millions of them. Is this your position?
    1
  180. So when you ask, where is He? I say where is He not? Electricity has never been seen by any man yet we know it by its workings. G-d does not choose to be seen for He does not choose to frustrate a mans Free Will. Mankind is therefore put to the test whether they choose to open their eyes and recognize Him from His works which are everywhere. Billions of tongues on all sides proclaim the message of plan and purpose.
    1
  181. The point ISN'T "Who made it?" but rather "THERE IS INTENT PURPOSE AND PLAN!" Only a madman or stubborn theorist, (possibly seeking money and/or glory as you pointed out) would say, "Given enough time, anything can happen!" This, therefore is more than enough of a demonstration, of billions out there.
    1
  182. I'll let you answer your own question. Can a car build itself after a billion year storm in a metal junk yard? Can even a simple wooden log cabin be built after a billion year hurricane in a forest? The cabin speaks of Design, as does the car. You must admit this yourself. So too, a seed and fruit which are billions of times more complicated. You have a problem however with questions about G-ds existence. This does NOT disprove his existence though. Remember, Design speaks of Designer!
    1
  183. If you think the world being accidental is logical, then you're right. I'm being illogical. I do see however, that you not brought one good logical point to any of the discussion we've had. You've admitted you believe in accidents, (I've shown you clear Plan and Purpose in countless things in Nature to which you attribute to N.S.) you're afraid to be believe in G-d b/c you think its unscientific, and YOU have never once showed me what made YOU come to the conclusion evolution must be it.
    1
  184. Design in the apple is the fact that it has alluring color, pleasant scent, mouthwatering taste, all for the purpose of the eater. Did the tree know 1)that humans have eyes 2) that can distinguish color or 3)that like sweet tasting fruit? This then was obviously designed by an Intelligence for the eater. The same way a book speaks of an author and obviously knows 1)of readers 2)that have eyes, so too there must be an "Author" for everything in nature that speaks of balance, design and purpose.
    1
  185. Please actually read what I wrote. You ASSUME how the wonders of nature came to be. Thats our argument. "Evolution is meant to be by progress, understand?" Do you? How is it progressing exactly. Does it or does it not have intelligence. If not, then its accidental. Why call it "progress"? "Progress", "adaptation", natural selection all mean accidental unless there is an outside Force controlling it. Nothing happens by itself.
    1
  186. My point was you don't know what matter is made of yet you cling to this "best theory" with much seeming conviction. "You're a bit of a slow one." Typical pro evolution response, to put opponents down by making fun of them and writing with vulagar language instead of talking like a respectable human being. Design is simple. Spilled ink is not design. You cannot spill ink and have a 300 page book that has a plot, uses capitals at the beginning of each sentence etc. Obviously it has an Author.
    1
  187. Why is there color at all? Accidental? How did it get there? Why is there a sweet smell at all? Is it just coincidence that all "hydrocarbons" that are edible to eat have good smell with attractive color that,, and a good taste?
    1
  188. Please rephrase your question. I'm not sure I understood what you were asking.
    1
  189. And evolutionists believe in evolution because its the foundation of their faith. Its their faith because they use it to shed their guilt of everything they've done wrong or would like to do. Its their faith because they believe it not to be scientific to believe in G-d, and its their faith because they cant understand the goings on in this world to innocent peoples who suffer. Btw, I will ignore you if you cant type in a becoming responsible manner.
    1
  190. Correction. Even Dawkins said that for us to imagine something hundreds of millions of years ago is nearly impossible, but he NEEDS TO SAY THIS for his theory to work.
    1
  191. @123Atheist So how did life start 450 million years ago? What initially created life? Where did the molecules and cells, which are very complex come from? Did they just appear, or happen to get there accidentally?
    1
  192. "These first molecules in primodial earth had to gain the knowledge". Gain the knowledge? What does this mean? Molecules don't have brains and they don't fugure anything out. "They would some how gain this knowledge". Exactly, somehow they would gain the knowledge. That my friend right there is religion. Believing that somehow, you or Dawkins have no clue how, but somehow things extremely complicated happened and giving intelligence to rocks is more religious than believing in a G-d.
    1
  193. Please answer my previous two questions. By your response I again see that your issue is questions surrounding G-d, His existence, hoe He runs the world, etc. If you believe in evolution though only, please answer those questions or any of them. they are a)If religious scientists can be wrong, cant evolutionists? b) Where did the inorganic world come from? c) Incontrovertible? d) can you show me a proof? e) why would evolutions tamper with evidence and why were so many later shown to be a hoax?
    1
  194. I agree with you as well regarding thee real enemy. But because I agree with you on this does not mean I should therefore deny the existence of a Creator or a religion. A a religious person, I do only what is His will, not some sadistic minds warped interpretation of His will. These people use religion to push there messed up agenda. However, as a religious person, I also believe evolutionists (which is synonomous with atheists) do the exact same thing.
    1
  195. Sure I did. You just dont want ot listen and see. You're afraid you'll be thought of as primitive. The world all around you, which is too complicated and Intelligent, must have had an Intelligent Designer. You have not yet answered about the christian scientists. They're still scientists and they'll tell you there is plenty of evidence he existed. You also have not answered about the inorganic world. Limted space? you've been doing enough typing the last three weeks....
    1
  196. @junkyardpolester And where did your imaginary billion year old water-filled asteroids come from? And yes, all outcomes are G-ds will.
    1
  197. "How many biologists reject the evidence in favor of evolution?" Again, in all due respect, where is the LOGIC in this argument, for how many biologists REJECT the evidence of evolution?
    1
  198. Lets take the orange. Its a dull green color when its not ripe but turns a bright orange color when it is ripe. Now, when you peel it, you'll notice that the UNDER SIDE OF THE PEEL HAS NO COLOR AT ALL. Why is that? Accident? No. It has no color there because COLOR THERE WOULD BE PURPOSELESS! The whole point of color is for the benefit of the eater, a) to attract his attention, and b) to make the food more enjoyable! Now Who made these fruits "know" this. Does the orange 'know' anything?
    1
  199. "I'm done talking to a wall." What your done with is trying to grab at straws when someone hits you with LOGIC. What your done with, is avoiding the nervous feelings you have that the baloney you were spoonfed with may be COMPLETELY FULL OF HOLES, and you dont want to hear it. What you're tired with is having a debate with an opponent who actually makes sense to you and you religiously cling to the belief of random accidents without any intelligence. You just cant stand the truth.
    1
  200. My pleasure. Unchie, do you think its accidental, or coincidence that ALL edible fruit have an attractive color? Why is it that at least ONE fruit or vegetable should have a dull looking grey color? Did the tree just "happen"to make color? The purpose of the color therefore is for the eater, us! We're not talking that humans wouldn't be able to figure it out. They would. The same way they've figured out not to eat a peach pit. But that EVERYTHING NOT EDIBLE is dull or bad smelling or purposeful!
    1
  201. And because they're scientists, they're right? It had to have happened? Of course not! Rather those scientists have an agenda, a religious agenda and they'll claim in the name of science that he came to life. But you (and I, I might add) believe it it to be propoganda on their part just to further push their initial claims. Are the scientists standing on the shoulders of their ancestors/peers? Is the fact that they're scientists prove they have the Truth in mind when they come with their proofs?
    1
  202. It is not a contradiction that G-d exists and we can't understand everything. As great as we humans can achieve, He allows us to realize we can never compare to Him. Why bad things happen to good people doesn't disprove the fact that He's there. If you were all knowing of His ways and understood everything he did, you'd lose your Free Will which is mans purpose. To choose virtue.
    1
  203. You can ask I.R. about anything. This doesn't prove anything. It just proves you have a question a G-d again. In fact, I.R. disproves evolution! They say "4.4 billion years ago something happened. Atoms, neutrons blah blah blah came together etc." And where did this come from? "Oh, dont you knoww from supernovae!" And where did that come from?.....ad infinitum. Theres I.R. for you.
    1
  204. Again though, in the lottery example, evolution suggests you could win the lottery "by chance" countless times. Any honest thinking person would never say "I guess its possible" but rather they'd say that the lottery is fixed.
    1
  205. I don't assume there is a G-d. I know there is One as is evidence by Plan and Purpose in all of Nature. Mountains? Tell me one or two and we'll debate. All the wonderful processes that Aeros802 pointed only shows Design, not accident. Maybe you can explain better than he can, because I "obviously misunderstand the process of science."
    1
  206. I have many times. But this is pretty much what you're saying in defense of evolution: I HAVE NOTHING LOGICAL TO SAY, SO I'LL TRY TO BE AS BASE AND LOW HUMAN BEING AS I CAN, LIKE MY GREATGRANDFATHERS, AND CURSE AWAY AND SPIT ON MY OPPONENTS WITH INSULTS! Listen, maybe your other buddies have millions of years for your brain to finish developing, but I dont. When you have some logical to say, then speak up.
    1
  207. You still use the exception to prove your pionts, not the rule. The rule is that 99% of all people enjoy fruits exactly the way they are. Your human color vision statement was pure idiocy on purpose, again to try to venture some type of defense. Pure nonsense as 99% OF ALL HUMANS HAVE COLOR VISION! WHATS WRONG WITH YOU?
    1
  208. You may contend that I've conceded to the point I don't know how His existence came about, but this is not the point. The point is, that ultimately, it comes down to those two choices. Accident or Design by a designer. Sure, we can ask questions about G-d, and we do, and there are answers, but first comes first, and that is to answer, Design or happy accidents.
    1
  209. Thats right. because you all share one thing in common and its this: I HAVE NOTHING TO SAY TO SOME ONE WHO IS ACTUALLY SPEAKING WITH LOGIC AND POINTING OUT PLAN AND PURPOSE IN CREATION AND IN ALL INORGANIC CREATIONS AS WELL, SO INSTEAD I'LL JUST MAKE FUN OF HIM FOR BEING BACKWARDS AND IN THE DARK AGES! Tell me, why does G-d scare you all so much? Why do you believe its unscientific to believe? I believe in Him but I also employ science to study Him. Scientists have been wrong many times.
    1
  210. Please see my posts below as I can only respond to one person. I responded to unchie979 with five replies. Thanks.
    1
  211. Absurdly irrelevant? So do you trust the christian scientists? Or how about the other scientists of all other religious beliefs around the world? The answer is you dont, even though they are scientists who supposedly have "proofs" to their claims, because you know they have an agenda to push. Inorganic material is irrelevant or do you you not have a logical answer so you call it irrelevant?
    1
  212. @epanek Peoples lives are their buildings and G-d wants them built on solid foundations, not to collapse. A persons eventual death does not signify his life/"his Building" has collapsed. It merely means he's being moved "up" to a higher floor.
    1
  213. Hey Bo, what happened to our discussion? I thought you were ready?
    1
  214. When observing everything in Nature, the fact that the complexity of even one cell or atom could exist, is testimony to an Intelligence. e.g. Every living cell, in addition to other complicated materials of which it is composed, needs millions of protein molecules. But the accidental formation on our earth of even ONE such molecule is an insane improbability. If a quantity of matter, IN VOLUME EQUAL TO THE ENTIRE UNIVERSE, were shaken up and down TRILLIONS OF TIMES EVERY SECOND, then....
    1
  215. The only problem is that short legged zebras never existed. Zebras have always been zebras, and they've also always being weaker and slower than the predator. Sheep have always been the same, and have always been weaker and stronger than their predators. Actually b/c of that, the ratio of lion to sheep will always be outnumbered by the sheep/prey. That shows balance and Plan and Purpose. By a Planner. What you wrote, was yet again based on an assumption.
    1
  216. @123Atheist "They know that we don't need one to create, but they believe one did because he exists". If they believe One exists, One who has the power to create, why would they need recourse to evolution? The answer is the ones who really believe in G-d, actually DO NOT need recourse to evolution at all! And show me ONE example of what YOU believe is "evidence" to evolution, because after years of studying this "evidence" turns out its all based on assumptions or "facts" that aren't.
    1
  217. If G-d had a designer, He wouldn't be much of a G-d now, would He?
    1
  218. It doesn't need to spread too far as there aren't fruit trees everywhere on this planet obviously. The wind would blow the seeds far enough for them to spread.
    1
  219. First of all, it is NOT science that gave us G-d in the first place. It was studying Nature all around us that let us see G-d, even without employing science. We have our own eyes and when we see the marvel of color on edible fruit, it behooves us to ask, how did that get there? Did the apple tree know 1)that there are eaters 2) that have eyes 3) with color vision? So we see an Intellect at work here! Study of science only further enhances this by allowing us to see things we cant with our eyes.
    1
  220. What it comes down to is people not interested in seeing, so they shouldn't be numb with guilt. But since you've got it figured out, tell me, how did any life form get here in the first place? Where did rocks, magnesium or any element of the periodic table come from? Matter doesn't just "get here somehow" like your friend Aeros802 thinks. If it took millions of years for species to get everything in prestine order for them to survive, how did they ever survive all those years? Logic only please.
    1
  221. In all due respect, you're not getting my point, or you're not answering it. How do you know that all the essentials in life weren't created by a Creator? Questions about, "Why this" and "why that" don't PROVE anything. That fact that anything could mutate or adapt or evolve without any intelligence or Design is accidental. Please logically answer this.
    1
  222. No. what phillyboy72 is doing is making sense and using logic. Seriously, were you expecting to convince me with logic when you wrote: color is actually just a contract of your mind? The things you believe in takes more conviction than believing in a G-d.
    1
  223. Please also respond to the eel, catfish and ray all having electric uses even though they are entirely unrelated in the evolutionary sense.
    1
  224. Lets talk. Where do you want to start? Its got to be one topic at a time though. we cant be all over the place.
    1
  225. I assert to know, you're right. And you'd like to know who created G-d. And the answer is, now think about this carefully, who created the creator of G-d? And then who created the creator of the creator of G-d, and so on. Which means we must always go back to a beginning. Now if in this beginning there was a G-d that started creating all the other G-ds, why do that to begin with, after all He is the all powerful that started it all!? Therefore we can conclude its been the same G-d all the time!
    1
  226. Correction: In regards to matter....
    1
  227. And the answer is....they have NOT evolved from apes. Besides, and this should be obvious, once you're qouting the Bible, you should realize the Bible makes no mention of evolution or anything evolving at all.
    1
  228. This magic you refer to, still exists in Nature all around you. Religionists can believe in a G-d even WITHOUT recourse to a Bible. The G-d explanation makes more sense thats why. At the end of the day, stripped of all their verbiage, (Adaptation, Convergence, parallel evolution, sudden mutations) they all mean nothing except accident. A bunch of happy accidents. The tongue is an accident, so is the heart liver, spleen, kidneys, red and white blood cells, mothers milk etc. I see Intelligence.
    1
  229. Who said anything about Jesus. Not me. Speaking of Sir Isaac, he actually believed in G-d! But he was demented, and delusional.
    1
  230. What have you to say about the marvel of the sun without which all life would not exist? Where did the sun originate from? What about the rain cycle of the sun creating, water vapor, leading to clouds, with wind blowing it over the earth with gravity allowing it to fall and roll down back into the seas? Who created all these, or ALL inorganic material!? The truth is you have nothing logically to say at all to these except for cheap words.
    1
  231. The fact that we have to peel them shows perfection of the orange. Not the oppsite. The peel acts as a perfect jacket for the fruit protecting it form outside elements. Pips DO NOT appear on the meat of the orange or the cantaloupe or honeydew, rather only on their shell because the job of the peel/shell PROTECTS it.
    1
  232. Typical evolutionist reaction. Cowardness. Absolutely no logic in any argument.
    1
  233. First of all, I'll be happy to prove to you that it is not a fact that we came from apes. Secondly, resorting to cursing at someone a)gives you absolutely no credibility, as no educated higher class person would actually talk that way, so your exposing yourself, and b)is obviously some defense mechanism. Why you want to believe in this hog wash, or anyone for that matter is beyond me. The fact is we are and always have been human beings with intelligence right from the get go.
    1
  234. "Sorry to see you're so unwilling to even consider you might be wrong". Are you telling me that you've considered that YOU might be wrong? So why hold that against me if you're guilty of the same thing? Have YOU actually studied creation? Have you ever spoken to one of the thousands of scientists who believe in creation?
    1
  235. "You think it's some sort of conscious decision made by a species. It's not that at all." Thats exactly my point! There is no decision being made, and therefore if no one/thing is deciding something with intelligence, then you're calling it accidental! Again, you're the guy in the art room who doesn't see the artist for the painting, yet have to admit that an artist created it. Your question is why the artist doesn't show himself. A valid question. If you admit this is your problem, I'll answer.
    1
  236. To all: Aeros802, who from the beginning said he was going to "take me head on" apparently lost his head somewhere, because a) he stopped responding awhile ago, and b) has brought absolutely nothing to the discussion, and c) when his head was given back to him he's spewed nothing must insults. Great way to win arguments!
    1
  237. With "simple"forms at the bottom of the fictitious "geoligic column" and "complex" forms in the upper layers. He also thinks these bones are of proven age. He's persuaded that these ugly ape-menwere found exactly as they see. A visitor is unaware, for example, that the dodo in the museum is just fiction which is cunningly and convincingly "reconstructed" (which the curators themselves will admit); ALL the fossils are dressed up to create the illusion that this is what the animals looked like.
    1
  238. Haven, lets take a look at this from a different angle. Say you're standing over two graves. On the left is Sir Isaacs Newton, and on the right is Hitler. Do you look down and say, "well at least Hitler got to do whatever he wanted, killed millions, slept with whomever and got to do every sin in the book, whereas poor Sir Isaac couldn't indulge"? Do you think that the end for them is the same, a six foot hole in the ground, and that after millions of years, who really cares what Hitler did?
    1
  239. "These genes adapt by natural selection reacting to their environment around them." Who says? How do you know? I believe that everything works in concert, and that everything behavess the way they do because a Designer designed it. You believe in happy accidents. How do you know the crab and roach didn't always have longer DNA? You're just hypothesizing and assuming that they have been around longer! Creation says though, they were all created differently right away, since they are different!
    1
  240. Ever heard of Piltdown Man? He was ensconed in all the biology textbooks for 50 YEARS, declared to be Middle Pleistocene, early Pleistocene, and Late Pleistocene. The entire find consisted of a skull and a detached jaw with a tooth. "There is little doubt that the skull and jaw belong to the same individual", they wrote.He wsas described as "An ancient human type known scientifically as Eoanthropus Dawsoni (discovered by Dawson). His entire body, was conjured up entirely by their imagination...
    1
  241. @123Atheist And where did hydrogen come from? Again, you're going round in circles so lets just cut straight to the beginning. Tell me how the first gas, asteroid, supernovae etc. ever got here to begin with. Christian scientists will try to show you "evidence" that he existed and "evidence" he was resurrected. Now you will ignore this evidence (as I do btw,) b/c you believe christians have some agenda, i.e. jesus upon whom they base their faith, without which their whole religion crumbles....
    1
  242. With every stupid fairy taled book Dawkins come out with, he's just continuing to further grease his pole. He'll be told, "STRAIGHT TO HELL!! DO NOT COLLECT $200.00!!" I would actually pay a lot of money to watch that! The moron is a hopeful idiot with more holes in his stupid theory than Goldylocks and the Three Bears. Idiot.
    1
  243. So the colorless fruit/fruit trees figured out they weren't being utilized and decided to go extinct, whereas the colored fruit/fruit trees realized they needed to continue their produce because the populace liked their product. Is this your position? These are either super duper intelligent trees, because you're attributing intelligence to them or incredible accident. I'll go with neither.
    1
  244. Only someone who studies the Bible can understand it. Not someone who just reads it once like a book. It is not a book. It is the word of G-d, who is infinite, and His bible is also infinite. There are people who study the Bible their entire lives, and never finish I might add b/c it is infinite. However there are many principles that can be learned from it and creation is certainly one of them. While this is not a Bible forum, if you'd like to briefly ask a seemly contradiction, I'd help answer
    1
  245. "They believe G-d created us using Evolution" Why attribute to G-d a world which is proposed to have taken 4.4 billion years when you can aggrandize G-d much more by saying He did it in six days? Secondly, Evolution is the alternative to G-d. To quote evolutionists, "but we must say this (billions of years) because the alternative is a Creator" which they or you is interested in believing in.
    1
  246. @cayetanoluis "yes, to discover how evolution works". Thats like saying that the christian scientists study archaeology to know exactly how jesus resurrected himself. They also use "evidence".
    1
  247. Lets go back to the time of creation. We are witnessing Adam being created. After his creation he is only a minute old. However, along comes an evolutionist, or other scientist that is an "expert" in dating formula, and he says, "Well based on the fact that he's 6 feet, black hair, and shows signs of adulthood, this man is at least 13 years old". A we say to him, actually he's only been around for a minute. He thinks we're crazy, but we KNOW he's wrong. So why assume theres a Creator? P&P shows.
    1
  248. Anything in Nature such as fruit, the human eye, or any limb for that matter (no pun intended) as I have pointed out many times on this forum.
    1
  249. "The best theory I have heard is that matter is created from vibrations of super string fields colliding" And this is what has convinced you of the truth? This is how you know without any shadow of doubt that matter came to be?! You can make fun by calling Him a "magic" being or any other jeering adjective you'd like. It does not disprove anything. G-d has always been here. The fact that we cannot comprehend this doesn't make it false. A blind person doesn't understand colors, but they're real.
    1
  250. @123Atheist "Energy is eternal" Cop-out. Says you and the evolutionists. The fact that there is a G-d is evedent in the evidence in all of Nature. The fact that you dont see a builder does not mean that the building built itself. It had a builder/designer whether you see him or not. That is clear to all. All of Nature is much more complicated than any skyscraper, so whether you see Him or not its obvious G-d is there. Ultimately you're left with two choices. Accident or design. You choose.
    1
  251. What it means is simple. Do you believe in jesus' resurrection because these "scientists" have 'proven' it based on archeological finds? You dont. And you understand my point. THE FACT THAT SCIENTISTS SAY SOMETHING DOES NOT MAKE IT FACTUAL. Evolutionary scientists have an agenda as well. Th christian scientists went ot the same college schooloing as the evolutionists did and they differ. "But 99.9% of scientists say evolution is a fact!" First, thats made up, and secondly, thats meaningless.
    1
  252. Your questions about G-d are rhetorical, like the question, 'Can G-d create a rock that He Himself cannot lift?' There are answers to these questions, but it is obvious you are not seeking an answer to them but you merely want to "prove" because of your questions that He obviously does not exist, and therefore you've concluded that things evolved.
    1
  253. I'm not confusing anything. We were humans however right from the beginning.
    1
  254. Plus, the eye was so good the fish or N.S. decided to send this good fortune to al other living animals and eventually humans! And yes, there are/were plenty of evolutionists who suggest/ed that as a defense against predators certain fish developed wings to be able to fly away from predators. You know this. So why dont we see this today? Are you going to say those evolutionists were wrong?! It cant be! After all they were scientists!
    1
  255. "You have made the assumption that requires evidence and you have given none." Have you been reading my posts? All my examples show Intelligent Design. You dont believe in a book written only 2000 years ago, but you believe in something that took place hundreds of millions of years ago. Wheres the LOGIC in that? You've assumed that intricately complex designs just happened yet where is your PROOFS? Not empty words, but PROOFS? Because you think you can ridicule me better doesn't make you right
    1
  256. "Gravity is a theorized process with no proof by your logic. It does not remove the fact it happens." True. However all people/scientists are in agreement 100% that Gravity is real, and therefore is it is more factual than theory. The theory is just maybe in HOW it works, not if it works. Whereas with evolution there are countless scientists who disagree if it works.
    1
  257. That rivmba response actually came from me. I used the wrong account. Sorry.
    1
  258. And as far as the seed being needed in order to continue the species as someone pointed out, is it coincidence that ALL SEEDS ARE PROTECTED IN SOME WAY OR ANOTHER? Meaning, the cherry pit, peach pit pit and plum pit are all hard enough that humans cant chew it else the seed would go lost. The orange pips are sour ensuring that we spit them out on the ground. This demonstrates that the tree is aware that humans have strong teeth and also dislike sour taste. Plan and purpose.
    1
  259. I actually always try to employ both myself. Believing in G-d does NOT mean one shouldn't study science and appreciate it. On the contrary, the more studying the better. However, science should used as a tool to see as much as possible the creations that He created.n not use science to come to a conclusion that G-d doesn't exist. That is misusing a good thing.
    1
  260. I agree that all those elements are essential to life. But I do not believe in a)cosmic collisions having happened 3.8 billion years ago or b)resulting in a perfect world on earth. All evolutionists ASSUME things to be true such as the earth hadn't cleared its orbit...and that the world must be billions of years old. Even Dawkins said that for us to imagine something hundreds of years ago is nearly impossible but he NEEDS TO SAY THIS for his theory to be correct.
    1
  261. Look, its obvious you're not convinced that evolution is a fact. In fact, you yourself have stated so. Your real problem with religion seems to be all the negative that happen to "innocent" people and the fact that people actually do wicked things in the name of religion. Which would leave anyone bitter, and I guarantee you, anyone who kills people because of a belief will fry big time. Why G-d lets it happen is something else and if you wish to discuss it, I will too. You are seeking meaning!
    1
  262. cont. of testing Lead 207 to discover whether it was an original constituent of the rocks, the entire system collapses into nothing; for we reject the unfounded assumption that there was originally no Lead 207 in the rocks. Just as they concede that the Lead 206 was there from the beginning, SO WAS THE LEAD 207.
    1
  263. Is it a stretch to believe in the car makers in Detroit even though you cant see them? Obviously not because there is too much perfection in the design of the car. Also, we KNOW that they haven't put in even a singe extra screw or wire. Seeing isn't always believing, eeing with your mind that allows you to come to obvious conclusions is a necessity. One seed in a fruit is infinitely more complicated than the parts of a car being put together. It too has a Designer.
    1
  264. Ever heard of the Scopes Trial? The Hesperopithecus Tooth was introduced as EXPERT TESTIMONY to the truth of evolution. The press hailed it as a great blow against the enemies of evolution. Big headlines. At a later date however, 1) in a small notice 2) in the inside pages 3) of scientific journals, it was acknowledged as a tooth of an extinct pig. How many of the newspaper-reading public read the expose' in the scientific journals?
    1
  265. "All I ask is that you come to the conversation with information that has been proven and tested...not information with a religious agenda." You are guilty of the exact same thing. You have no evidence. And hundreds of thousands of scientists have seen your "evidence" and discarded it. "and who are you to say "algae doesn't think".". Can you believe you wrote that? That right there was your convincing argument. Now I know I'm right.
    1
  266. Back to the tree. Does the tree release anything WHICH IT NEEDS? It holds its twigs permanently, it holds the leaves all summer 1) while the sunlight works on the chlorophyll and 2) while the shade is desirable. Not until fall when sunlight is limited and when shade is not desired does the tree allow its leaves to fall. How does the tree know this? It holds a blossom until the ovary is fertilized, and ONLY THEN DOES IT ALLOW THE BLOSSOM TO FALL OFF. Purposeful, or accident/willful blindness?
    1
  267. @123Atheist You assume Carbon. Nitrogen, and Phosphorus were always around, as you do with organic molecules, water, energy....You know how complicated phosphorus is, so how can you say that? Nitrates are also extremely purposeful! Can that be the result of accident? How did they get there?! Who said they were always around? You mean evolutionists? Of course they say that, they need too! They can build evolution on the fact that "there had to be water" else the theory never takes off!
    1