Comments by "Jackie Wu" (@jwu1950) on "Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell"
channel.
-
2
-
***** You are much smarter than most of the people here. But evolution which you believed in should be revised as to say evolution by the process of God's selection, don't you think ?
Eve and the apple is undoubtedly a metaphor. It is meant to explain what we see is not what is real, and what is real we cannot see. Eve could see the apple, but the apple is only an illusion. The knowledge the devil was telling her about is still an illusion. What is real inside all these molecules, atoms, and subatomic particles are metaphysical and what is metaphysical is not knowable by humans. God is real and God is metaphysical and unknowable by humans. You were correct not to believe in God's plan as prophecies by humans because the Will of God is unknowable to human, even to Jesus. You should therefor reject the idea of sins for the same reason. Believe in God. Believe in Jesus who is the human teacher who didn't undermine, marginalise, and misrepresent God by prophecies but simple taught us to love God with all our hearts, with all our minds, and with all our souls, and to love one another as he loved us. May the love and the peace of Jesus be with you.
2
-
1
-
***** You said, "You don't get to pick and choose what they teach you at school is "truth" or not." I don't pick and choose, I analyse and apply logic and reasoning. It is called critical thinking, in case you have not been taught what that means. Then you said, "the media doesn't teach me or anyone about evolution." They don't, they just stuff the nonsense into your head by lies, propagandas, presumptions, and presuppositions.
I checked all the sites you listed. They talk about mutations, genetics, and fossils. None of that is evolution. Varieties within species are part of design, not speciation. Darwinian evolution by the process of natural selection does not exist in real life, only in fairy tales. Nature does not have any intelligence to enable nature to act, choose, and select, unless by nature we mean God, and by natural we mean God given. Only living organisms can mutate and that is because of the intelligence designed into each and every living organism by the intelligence designer which enables the living organism to survive and reproduce. The inanimate natural environment does not and can not mutate, evolve, or select who and what to be mutated.
1
-
***** You'll be genuinely surprised alright when you start to realise how credulous
you have been to blindly believe in the fairy tale of evolution. You'll also find out everything I said is based on truth and verifiable facts.
Truth number one : Evolution "is neither a fact nor a single theory. It is a collection of theories applied towards a variety of casual questions. It is not a science because there is no theory to be scientifically tested." Per Wiki, "Evolutionary biologist Kirk J. Fitzhugh[39] wrote, "'Evolution' cannot be both a theory and a fact. Theories are concepts stating cause–effect relations...One might argue that it is conceivable to speak of 'evolution' as a fact by way of it being the subject of reference in explanatory hypotheses...In the strictest sense then, 'evolution' cannot be regarded as a fact even in the context of hypotheses since the causal points of reference continue to be organisms, and no amount of confirming instances for those hypotheses will transform them into facts...While evolution is not a fact, it is also not a single theory, but a set of theories applied to a variety of causal questions...An emphasis on associating 'evolution' with 'fact' presents the misguided connotation that science seeks certainty.
Truth number two : They talk about mutations, genetics, and fossils. None of that is evolution. Evolution is not only mutation or genetics. It claimed the origin of life and of species. It claimed life originates by random chance and accidents and minute changes caused by random chance and accidents over a very long period of time amounts to speciation. The problem is random chance and accidents do not exist in real life, only in fairy tales, and time has been observed to reduce order and complexity into chaos and simplicity, never the other way around. In other words, time works against evolution, the more time is involved, the more unlikely is evolution. Evolution is a mathematical impossibility. The law of cause and effect prohibit the existence of random chance and accidents. Everything that exist is caused to exist. We call the first cause God, the creator.
Truth number three : Nature does not have any intelligence to enable nature to act, choose, and select, unless by nature we mean God, and by natural we mean God given. You insisted, "Yes it does, it's called natural selection. And better yet, it proves that something doesn't need intelligence to design things. Mutations happen," So what is nature and what is natural if nature does not mean God and natural does not mean God given ? How is mutation a selection made by the inanimate natural environment when all mutation must be carried out by living organisms by the intelligence designed into each and every living organisation ? To believe in natural selection is akin to believing humans can pop out of rocks naturally. That is a logical fallacy, personal incredulity.
Truth number four : The inanimate natural environment does not and can not mutate, evolve, or select who and what to be mutated. This is a statement of fact. But you said, "You've just committed another logical fallacy, proof by assertion." Are you asserting that the opposite is true, that is, the inanimate natural environment does and can mutate, evolve, or select who and what to be mutated ? Is that your logical fallacy, proof by assertion, or can you substantiate your claim ?
Truth number five : Varieties within species are part of design, not speciation. These are the facts, white cats and black cats are both cats, white humans and black humans are both human, big dogs and small dogs are both dogs, etc., etc. No moving the goalpost or special pleading is involved here.
1
-
1
-
***** The evidence against evolution is the fact that evolution is neither a fact nor a single theory. It is therefor not a science for there is no theory to be scientifically tested. A collection of theories applied to a variety of casual questions is a story, a godless fairy tale in the case of evolution. The other evidence against evolution is the fact that the law of cause and effects ensures random chance and accidents do not exist in real life, only in fairy tales. Yet another evidence against evolution is the fact that time has always been observed to reduce order and complexity into chaos and simplicity and never the other way around. The more time is involved logically means the more unlikely is evolution.
The evidence for creation includes : the birds and the bees, the flowers and the trees, the fish in the seas, the far galaxies, the food that we eat, the air that we breathe, everything comprehensible and all that is incomprehensible to you and to me. The logical proof is the law of cause and effects that says everything that exist is caused to exist, and it points to a first cause. We call the first cause God, the creator.
You haven't quoted anybody ? What about all those bull shits you claimed as logical fallacies and all those meaningless results of meaningless experiments ? Why are you asking for sources anyways when you just regard mine as appeal to authority whereas yours are evidence ? That's just bull shit. If you can't rely on facts, logic and reasoning what source can you rely on ?
You have explained what natural selection is ? When ? WTF do you mean by natural if you don't mean God given ? I asked you this question several times already. It only seemed you have no answer or you would have answered it the first time I asked. You are the one who think that by repeating natural selection a few more times it may become true. The bad news is, it doesn't. There is no natural selection unless by nature we mean God and by natural we mean God given.
1
-
***** You asked me for evidence against evolution and evidence for creation and I gave you both in verifiable facts and truthful logical arguments which you ignore because you have no rebuttal.
You quoted logical fallacies without understanding what you quoted is referring to and you applied them at me when you should have applied them at yourself. For example, personal credulity is your blind belief in evolution, not my evidence based belief in God.
" peer-reviewed scientific articles" of what ? Mutation, genetics, and fossils are not evolution. I told you that several times already. Why are you so dense ? You said, "Mutations happen, and those with negative mutations die out, while those with positive or neutral mutations live on. It's an extremely simple concept, and one you're in a state of denial over." I never denied mutations exist. I said evolution does not exist in real life, only in fairy tales.
Stop wasting my valuable time and back up your claims, you lazy ignoramus. Answer my questions : WTF is nature if by nature you don't mean God, and WTF is natural if by natural you don't mean God given ? And WTF mutation is proof of evolution when there is no speciation in mutation ?
1
-
***** There,
The evidence against evolution is the fact that evolution is neither a fact nor a single theory. It is therefor not a science for there is no theory to be scientifically tested. A collection of theories applied to a variety of casual questions is a story, a godless fairy tale in the case of evolution. The other evidence against evolution is the fact that the law of cause and effects ensures random chance and accidents do not exist in real life, only in fairy tales. Yet another evidence against evolution is the fact that time has always been observed to reduce order and complexity into chaos and simplicity and never the other way around. The more time is involved logically means the more unlikely is evolution.
The evidence for creation includes : the birds and the bees, the flowers and the trees, the fish in the seas, the far galaxies, the food that we eat, the air that we breathe, everything comprehensible and all that is incomprehensible to you and to me. The logical proof is the law of cause and effects that says everything that exist is caused to exist, and it points to a first cause. We call the first cause God, the creator.
1
-
1
-
***** Okay, for the third time,
The evidence against evolution is the fact that evolution is neither a fact nor a single theory. It is therefor not a science for there is no theory to be scientifically tested. A collection of theories applied to a variety of casual questions is a story, a godless fairy tale in the case of evolution. The other evidence against evolution is the fact that the law of cause and effects ensures random chance and accidents do not exist in real life, only in fairy tales. Yet another evidence against evolution is the fact that time has always been observed to reduce order and complexity into chaos and simplicity and never the other way around. The more time is involved logically means the more unlikely is evolution.
The evidence for creation includes : the birds and the bees, the flowers and the trees, the fish in the seas, the far galaxies, the food that we eat, the air that we breathe, everything comprehensible and all that is incomprehensible to you and to me. The logical proof is the law of cause and effects that says everything that exist is caused to exist, and it points to a first cause. We call the first cause God, the creator.
The source is simple logic and reasoning if you have any.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
***** Done that by the law of cause and effects. Everything that exist is caused to exist. The law does not allow random chance and accidents to exist and therefor evolution cannot exist. There can not be evidence for something that does not exist. Mutation and genetics exist and you can find a lot of evidence for those. These evidence also logically prove the intelligence designed into each and every living organism that enables the living organisms to live, reproduce, mutate, and act, choose, select, or otherwise manipulate their natural environment which has been designed to be inanimate, impotent ,and unintelligent, okay ? By example, the capsule carrying Armstrong landed on the moon by design and by cause, not by random chance or by accident, we explore and live for extended period of time in space and in ocean deeps which are not our natural habitat because we have the intelligence to do so, not natural selection but artificial selection as in animal bleeding where Darwin got his original idea, but Darwin was mistaken, nature has no intelligence unless by nature he meant God, and I think he did originally but he later changed his mind when Hitler supported his idea and he became rich and famous for validating Hitler's and white supremacists' agenda of ethnic cleansing. May the truth be with you.
1
-
***** That's correct, random chance and accidents do not exist in real life, only in fairy tales. If you roll one standard dice and get a 7 or 8, then I'll have to admit I am wrong. But you can't, never, regardless of how many times you roll. It is because the dice was designed to have only six sides labelled 1,2,3,4,5, and 6. You can roll any of those six sides depending on how it is rolled, the number that come up is a result of cause and design. If you want to roll 7 or 8, you would have to change the design. If you put 7 on every side you'll roll 7 every time. There is no randomness. This is the law, understand ?
You said, " evolution isn't just random chance. Natural selection removes most of the "chance" and "randomness". WTF is evolution and WTF is natural selection ? Evolution is not a single theory or a fact. It is an opinion and it does not exist in real life. Natural selection does not exist either unless by nature you mean God, and by natural you mean God's design and creation. Do not confuse mutation and genetics with evolution, they are different ideas. Mutation and genetics do exist and there are plenty of evidence for them. These evidence showed that mutation and genetics are caused by the intelligence designed into each and every living organism that enables the living organisms to live, reproduce, mutate, act, choose, select, and otherwise manipulate their natural environment which is designed to be inanimate and impotent. There is zero "chance" and "randomness" in mutation, genetics, or anywhere in real life, This is the law, understand ?
You asked, "So it's intelligent design that a baby is born with extra toes or blind?" Yes, without a doubt. It is very stupid of you to ask such a stupid question. It is even more stupid of you to then say, "What a great design and a loving God you have there." Most people would say that is not a good design and not loving of God. But it is irrelevant. God just "is". Human interpretation of good and evil, bad or good, loving or hateful, etc. are only human measurements, they don't define or determine God. Yin Yang in Chinese philosophy describe the complimentary, inter-related, and inter-dependence of Yin and Yang in everything, from God to the negative and positive charges in electromagnetism. Both Yin and Yang are necessary parts of the whole. There is no Yin without Yang, no good without evil, no bad without good, no loving without hateful. Can you have life without death and vice versa ? Of course not. That would be a stupid question if I actually ask you that, wouldn't it ?
You said, " Based on what we know of mutations they are completely random and are due to genetics, not some God designing anything." You need to understand you don't know shit if you don't even know random chance and accidents do not exist in real life.
You asked, "What about that space ship that blew up, killing all the astronauts on board on live television, due to a random faulty wire or something like that. Was that just God giving humanity the finger?" It is again very stupid of you to ask such a stupid question. Of course that space ship blowing up was designed and caused to blow up. The faulty wiring was a faulty design by human engineers, nothing random about it.
It happened as designed and as caused, nothing to do with who is giving who the finger which could be one of the causes if that actually happened, but it did not happen, nobody is giving anyone the finger. That was only your imaginative opinion. I am not saying that is not possible. Muslims spies could have done it deliberately to mean giving USA the finger, but that's just groundless speculation.
You said, "Saying that God is behind everything is just bullshit you're making up, and I can claim any God or supernatural being is doing the same thing." That's correct, you can. If you are referring to God the creator, the first cause, it is not bullshit I made up. I have proven it with evidence and logic. I told you already no one can stop you calling the first cause by any other name like Zeus, FSM, invisible unicorn, etc., it's your choice if you don't like to call the first cause God, as long as you mean the first cause with the label of you preferred.
You said, "It doesn't need intelligence to design". That is incorrect. Design is intelligence, period. For example, computers and space stations are products of human design and human intelligence, living organisms and solar systems are the design and intelligence of the intelligent designer, and we call the intelligent designer God.
The evolution conspiracy endorsed by Hitler and white supremacists are still currently active. Militant atheists like Dawkins, Krauss, Harris, and the late Hitchens are some of the conspirators. They use evolution to promote hate, violence, racism, and bigotry. That's why there are still so many blind believers of evolution even though it is painfully obvious it is a lie and a fairy tale.
1
-
***** I am speechless. You are so stupid it's no even funny. Chance, probabilities, and logic are ways to explain, they are not causes and they don't cause mutation, genetics, the rolling of dice, or anything at all.
There is zero evidence for evolution. You have not presented one single evidence for evolution because there is none to be found. Keep saying that evolution is well established does not make it become true. Even though I don't have the burden of proof, I have proved evolution does not exist in real life. You cannot prove something by evidence, especially something that does not exist. You prove it by logic and reasoning explaining the cause of the evidence. Mutation and genetics are evidence for design because they can be logically explained to have been caused by design. They are not evidence for evolution although evolution is highly dependent on them to function because they cannot be logically explained to have been caused by evolution.
You asked, "Just what do you think evolution is?" I told you that already. Evolution is a collection of theories applied towards a varieties of causal questions. In other words evolution is a story, a godless fairy tale. Evolution is highly dependent on mutations and genetics to function but it is not the cause of mutation and genetics, and mutations and genetics can logically be explained to have been caused by design, they are by virtual of this fact evidence for design rather than for evolution.
Referring to my statement ""These evidence showed that mutation and genetics are caused by the intelligence designed into each and every living organism", you asked rather impolitely, "What fucking evidence? Please provide at least one link." All the links and all the evidence you have provided, sir, and don't be so rude next time, it makes your behavior look like that of a 6 year old. They are all based on observation of organisms. When the causal point of reference is organisms, no amount of confirmations can transform them into facts because each organism is different and unique.
You asked, "So again, the fact that an animal is born with a negative mutation which will threaten its survival is intelligent design? How the fuck is that intelligent?" It is very stupid of you to ask such a stupid question. Intelligence is intelligent. It doesn't have to function the way you like it to. Stupid intelligence are still intelligent, only in a stupid way, just like the way you asked these stupid questions. Your said, "You've listed no evidence that proves that mutations aren't completely random,..." Yes I have, the law of cause and effects does not allow random chance and accidents to exist in real life. I must teach you this, evidence is not proof. Proofs only exist in logic and mathematics.
You asked, "So if God does something horrible or stupid, then he's exempt from any criticism because he's beyond human morals and logic?" I don't believe you can be so stupid. God does horrible and stupid things all day long. God is not beyond human morals and logic. You can criticise God all day long but that does not change God a single bid. God just "is". Some people are like you, they hurt their kids by criticising them all day long as if by doing so they would make themselves right. They wouldn't, they wouldn't change their kid either. Like you, they are just fooling themselves.
If one day you fall on the steps and broke your spine, there is no doubt that is a result of design and of cause. Every event is caused. Accidents do not exist in real life. This is the law of cause and effect. I do not and I can not make up laws. Fertilisation also must obey the law of cause and effect and not the fantasy of randomness. You were born out of design and cause, not out of nothing by random chance and accident.
You said, "....it was designed to safely transport people into space." That was the intention, yes, but that was not the final design, was it ? That space ship blew up because of human design and other causes, faulty unintentional human design as reported by subsequent investigations. It was not an act of God like a volcanic eruption, and not an act of randomness like you fantasied.
Re. your example of a random number generator, it depends on the perimeter you set for the calculation. If the perimeter is set at fifty million. 7 coming out three times in a roll is an indication someone is tinkering with the design of the machine. The lottery commission would definite withhold giving out prices pending further investigation if the same winning number come out twice in a roll, never mind three times, for it is almost a certainty that can't happen other than by design. They would investigate the design and the functioning of the machine like you would check the dice if a 7 come out of a roll. Design sets the perimeter of what is possible in probability calculations. Don't believe me? Ask your math teacher. While you do that ask your math teacher also why Jackie Wu says 1+1=2 is invalid in physical terms, okay ? May be he or she can teach you how to fuck and think.
We don't know God has a cause or not because God is believed to be eternal and metaphysical, and eternity and what is metaphysical is unknowable to humans. My logic is not faulty and there is no special pleading. I have never said we know God has no cause. I said we believe God is eternal but there is no way we can prove if this belief is accurate. It is like saying we humans believe galaxies billions of light years away from earth still exist but there is no way to prove if this belief is accurate or not, not because galaxies are metaphysical for they are believed to be physical, but because billions of light years feel like an eternity to us, given our limited ability.
Just the opposite, evidence like hind leg bones still being in whales proves that there was intelligence involved. Ask yourself this : without intelligence designed into whales what enables them to grow hind legs in the first place even if evolution had taken place. We can observe tree roots breaking concrete but we have never observed concretes causing trees to grow legs and walk away. That's because trees are not designed to grow legs regardless of how eager you are to have concretes lend a few legs to trees so you can validate your fantasy.
I have not repeated myself, you have. The last comment was the first time I called evolution a conspiracy. You are the one who is heavily brainwashed and not putting in an effort. Many people on YT have praised me for my originality and my clear minded free thinking accuracy. You would too if you were not so deeply indoctrinated by those lies and propagandas they fed you with in schools.
The truth will set you free. May the truth be with you. These are no my original of course, but the brilliance of bringing it up here is another example of my un-indoctrinated free-mindedness.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Mauri .tanga I know it is difficult you to read all my previous comments, so I'll repeat it for you. The overwhelming evidence for God includes : the birds and the bees, the flowers and the trees, the fish in the seas, the far galaxies, the food that we eat, the air that we breathe, everything comprehensible and all that is incomprehensible to you and to me. One of the logical proofs for God is the law of cause and effects which points to a first cause. We call the first cause God the creator.
God has been called by many different names because God means different thing to different people at different times, these are all parts of the One and the same God. God has infinite parts. The more accurate description of God I think include ; the One that cannot be named, the Alpha and the Omega, the Pantheistic God of Spinoza, the creator, the first cause, the intelligent designer, and the law giver
Make no mistake, Jesus is not God. Jesus is a man who died 2000 years ago crucified by his own people who did not believe in him. But the spirit of Jesus is alive today in his teachings which has been preserved and is available everywhere in the world to those who are interested in everlasting life.
May the love and the peace of Jesus be with you.
1
-
Mauri .tanga I gave you the evidence and I gave you the logical proof. Why are you still asking where is the evidence for God ?
You asked, "From where did the creator come?" The answer is God is eternal. Eternity, like infinity is unknowable to humans.
You said, "If the answer is "he always existed" then we have a situation," No one can say God always existed. God is metaphysical. What is metaphysical is unknowable to humans. No one knows God, where God comes from, or what is the Will of God. Any one who says he or she knows is a liar and a hypocrite. We humans can only choose to believe or not believe in God based on logic applied towards our observations, the evidence. Since the evidence and the logical proofs for God is overwhelming and there is zero contrary evidence, to believe that there is no God is irrational, illogical, and delusional.
May the truth be with you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
***** You are not allowed to graduate to the second point if you can't pass the first. So far you've failed. You cheated by quote mining. I said, " Evolution does not explain mutation and genetics, Neither do mutation and genetics explain evolution." You quoted, ""Evolution does not explain mutation and genetics" Normally that offense is sufficient reason for expulsion. However, being such a nice guy, I'll allow you another chance.
So give me a single valid evidence with logical proof for evolution. Common decent does not mean evolution. Apple computers and any generic computers have common decent but they are all designed by human using human intelligence created by God the creator, the intelligent designer, not by any baloney selection.
Genetic engineering is the proof that DNA is a design and it can be redesigned by human intelligence. Explaining the function of a part does not change the origin of the part. Compare DNA to the engine of an automobile and viruses to an electrical screwdriver. saying viruses played a major role in the origin of DNA is like saying electric screw drivers played a major role in the origin of the automobile engine, they are all designs, viruses, DNA, electric screwdrivers, and automobile engines, no mention of God is needed for such a simple understanding.
No worries, you'll get a chance to get all your fallacies pointed out and corrected if you put in sufficient effort. But you must correct the first one before you are allowed to move on to the second.
To answer your questions, I am millions of years old I suppose, I live on earth, and the education I have is the kind that is logical, rational, and evidence based, not like the bull shit lies, propagandas, and blind faith education you apparently have. These are all based on truth and verifiable facts as usual. How about you ?
1
-
Mauri .tanga
1. Genetic codes, that serve to prove design, not evolution. Radio codes were designed, not evolved.
2. Fossil records prove some species die out over time, not new species having been created by God or popped out of rocks like you believed. Fossil studies are irrelevant and a waste of time.
3. Genetic commonalities, that serve to prove design also. General Motor cars and Ford cars have plenty of design commonalities too.
They were both designed, not evolved through some kind of baloney selection.
4. Common traits in embryos, common trait in adults, these serve to prove design. Genetic engineering can alter these designs by using human intelligence to redesign the DNA. Human intelligence is also evidence of intelligent design.
5. Bacterial resistance to antibiotics is proof that intelligence has been designed into bacteria to enable them to live, reproduce, and mutate. Antibiotics are proof that intelligence has been designed into humans to enable them to act, choose, select, and otherwise manipulate their natural (God made) environment. The natural environment
has not been designed with any intelligence to act, choose, select, or manipulate living organisms like human unless God choose to intervene.
There, four of the five are all based on scientific facts and studies and they all support design. Fossils are irrelevant and they are not scientific evidence. May the truth be with you and guide you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Mauri .tanga You said, "The evidence of thousands upon thousands of scientific research suggest that evolution is real , thats why i believe in it." Let me repeat what I told you before, there is zero evidence for evolution. There are plenty of scientific research on mutations and genetics, but mutations and genetics is not evolution. Mutation and genetics serve as proofs for intelligent design and we called the intelligent designer God. God is real, evolution is not. I explained to you four of five of these evidence you quoted how they serve to prove design, and one, fossil records, that is irrelevant of anything.
Read the above paragraph at least once everyday so you can appreciate what I have given you in return, truth and wisdom in return for lies and propagandas.
It is good that you realise human intelligent is proof that god is real. You should also realise all living organisms are proof for intelligent design and God the intelligent designer. It is intelligence designed into each and every living organism that enables living organism to live, reproduce, mutate, act, choose, select, and otherwise manipulate their natural (god made) environment which is not designed with any intelligence for it to act, choose, select, or otherwise manipulate living organisms. Case in point, humans, monkeys, and plants have lived in space and in ocean deep which is not their natural habitat.
You asked, "okay , So when did god create humans?" Okay, so you tell me when did God created humans. I don't know. The popular expression is "God knows". What God knows is unknowable by humans because God is metaphysical and what is metaphysical is unknowable to humans. For example, no one knows what is gravity, life, or time because these are metaphysical. We humans cannot know what is metaphysical. We can choose to believe or not believe based on logic applied towards our observations, the evidence, of the effects of these entities, not the entities themselves. We believe in gravity because we can observe falling objects. We believe in life because we can observe plants and animals are alive. We believe in time because we can observe the ticking of our clocks. We believe in God because we can observe all that we can observe and we applied the logic in the law of cause and effects to prove to ourselves everything that exist is caused to exist and therefor there must be a first cause. We call the first cause God. We can observe intelligence in human and all living organisms and we call the intelligent designer God. We can observe natural laws like the law of gravity, the law of thermodynamics, etc. and we call the law giver God. All these metaphysical entities are real, in fact more real than the physical object that we can observe and detect with our senses. What we can see is not real, they are illusions. What is real we cannot see, they are metaphysical.
1
-
Mauri .tanga Exactly, I did say "God is metaphysical", and you would have been correct to say science cannot be applied to prove God because what is metaphysical is unknowable to humans, like I told you.
I don't know how many times I have to tell you why there is zero research that prove evolution is real before the logic can get through your head. Evolution is not a single theory, therefore there is no theory of evolution that can be tested by the scientific method, and that is why no scientific testing has ever been conducted to prove evolution. The thousands of research everyday all over the world prove mutations and genetics, and mutations and genetics are not evolution, they are designed.
You said, "However there is not one ! piece of evidence that supports your theory". What theory of mine are you referring to ? The theory that says, GOD DID IT I suppose. Well, everything comprehensible and all those incomprehensible to you and to me supports the theory of GOD DID IT. I told you that already and explained why to you also. Go back and read what I wrote, and start learning rather than ranting.
There is no theory of gravity either. There is the law of gravity by Newton. A law is not a theory. Laws are observable facts that has not or cannot be explained. If there is any explanation for the law of gravity that would be called the theory of gravity, but there is none. Einstein attempted to explain gravity with the general theory of relativity but Einstein failed because his theory does not work in the quantum level. Some scientists are currently trying to find gravitons which are hypothetical subatomic particles that might explain gravity, but none has been found so far. So as science stood today there is no theory of gravity and no one knows when objects fall to the floor whether they were pushed to the floor, sucked to the floor, or carried gently to the floor by gravitons.
A FACT is not a theory. What you described there is the observable fact or the observable effects of gravity, not gravity itself. Gravity is metaphysical. It cannot be observed. We can only believe in gravity based on our logic applied towards these observable effects of gravity. It is the same way we believe in God, by applying our logic towards the observable effects of God. BTW, mass and forces are metaphysical too. They cannot be observed, only their effects can be observed.
The observable FACT that the genome/dna/ changes over a period of time is explained by design or the theory of GOD DID IT, not by evolution. There is no theory of evolution and evolution does not exist in real life, only in fairy tales. The engines of automobiles and the computer chips change over time too because they are designed, not because of evolution by some baloney selection.
The effects of gravity is a FACT, an observable fact. But gravity is not a fact. It is an unobervable metaphysical entity, a concept, a form, an idea, or an essence. Metaphysical entities like gravity, life, time, mass, force, God, etc. are real because they caused observable effects. Evolution on the other hand is not a FACT. No evolution can be observed and there is no observable effect of evolution. There are observable effects caused by intelligent design, like mutations and genetics, and that is why intelligent design is real.
1
-
Mauri .tanga God is proven whether you believe in God or not. Not scientifically proven though, mind you, because God, like gravity, life, time, etc. are metaphysical and cannot be proven by the scientific method. What is metaphysical is unknowable by humans. That is a verifiable fact.
There is no theory of gravity and there is no theory of evolution. The law of gravity which is the observable facts regarding the effects of gravity is as you described it. What you need to learn is laws and facts are unexplained. A theory is an explanation, a fact is not an explanation. Gravity and evolution, in fact anything , cannot be both a fact and a theory. Gravity is a fact. Evolution is neither a fact nor a theory. Per Wiki, "Evolutionary biologist Kirk J. Fitzhugh[39] wrote, "'Evolution' cannot be both a theory and a fact. Theories are concepts stating cause–effect relations...One might argue that it is conceivable to speak of 'evolution' as a fact by way of it being the subject of reference in explanatory hypotheses...In the strictest sense then, 'evolution' cannot be regarded as a fact even in the context of hypotheses since the causal points of reference continue to be organisms, and no amount of confirming instances for those hypotheses will transform them into facts...While evolution is not a fact, it is also not a single theory, but a set of theories applied to a variety of causal questions...An emphasis on associating 'evolution' with 'fact' presents the misguided connotation that science seeks certainty."
You asked, ""The observable FACT that the genome/dna/ changes over a period of time is explained by design or the theory of GOD DID IT," WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE ?" These observable facts are the evidence. Intelligence in living organism is logically required to carry out these changes, and intelligence logically required an intelligent designer. We call the intelligent designer God. This is how the theory of GOD DID IT explains these observable facts, these evidence.
You asked, ""The engines of automobiles and the computer chips change over time too because they are designed"
So thats your evidence for god?" No. that is proof of human intelligent design. Human intelligence is evidence for intelligent design. We call the intelligent designer God.
1
-
***** You said, "Genetics and mutation explain evolution because they are key parts of it." What kind of logic is that. Engine and wings are key parts of aeroplanes means engine and wings explain what is an aeroplane ? What about all the connecting parts of the aeroplane which is non existent in the case of evolution. This is another fallacy of yours. I shouldn't even allow you to move on to the next fallacy until you corrected this one. But being such a nice guy I'll allow you one more.
You said, "Long term evolution makes new species that branch off from others, which means that common descent means evolution." This is a typical logical fallacy called circular reasoning. That is x explain y and therefor y explains x. Case in point, x (evolution) explains y (common decent), therefor y (common decent) explains x (evolution). Much worse than this, evolution does not even exist in real life, only in fairy tales. It is design that explains species, and species are evidence for design, not explanations of design. Common decent is evidence for design, not explanation of design.
Now you must put some effort in if you like to be allowed to move on to the third point.
1
-
1
-
Mauri .tanga Why would I want to disprove your claim. If you seriously claimed that and not just use it as a hypothetical case for an argument, then it is true to you as you must have believed in this giant unicorn that is metaphysical and created "GOD" and gave life to the world based on your logic applied towards evidence. You might have vividly seen or even talked to or held hands with this unicorn, I don't know, I have not observed any evidence myself and therefor I can't form any logical reason to believe in it. Besides I have contrary evidence and logical proofs that God is metaphysical and eternal and it is God who created our physical universe. I suspect your giant unicorn was also created by God but if it is metaphysical like gravity, life, time, energy, force, mass, etc. there is no way I can verify my suspicion because what is metaphysical is unknowable to humans, only believable. Or you might have mistakenly referred the god of Abraham as God and called the real God by the label of a giant unicorn. You know which answer I gave is accurate, I don't., God means different thing to different people at different times, these are all parts of the One and the same God. God has infinite parts.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
***** The first grade here is how to correct two of your fallacies :
1) You said, "Genetics and mutation explain evolution because they are key parts of it." What kind of logic is that. Engine and wings are key parts of aeroplanes means engine and wings explain what is an aeroplane ? What about all the connecting parts of the aeroplane which is non existent in the case of evolution. This is another fallacy of yours. I shouldn't even allow you to move on to the next fallacy until you corrected this one. But being such a nice guy I'll allow you one more.
2) You said, "Long term evolution makes new species that branch off from others, which means that common descent means evolution." This is a typical logical fallacy called circular reasoning. That is x explain y and therefor y explains x. Case in point, x (evolution) explains y (common decent), therefor y (common decent) explains x (evolution). Much worse than this, evolution does not even exist in real life, only in fairy tales. It is design that explains species, and species are evidence for design, not explanations of design. Common decent is evidence for design, not explanation of design.
You must learn and correct these first grade fallacies before you can move on, get it ?
1
-
***** The fallacy is in your assertion, "Genetics and mutation explain evolution because they are key parts of it."
Now it is a double fallacy because you said, " Mutations explain evolution because mutations are a key part in the natural selection process. " Natural selection is an absurd concept and it does not exist in real life, unless by nature you mean God and by natural you mean God made or God designed. Even Darwin himself conceded that natural selection is absurd.
Now is triple fallacy when you said, "Genetics explains evolution because otherwise we would have no idea why our DNA is so similar to chimps and other organisms." DNA are designs just like computers are designed. Apple computers and any other generic computers share a high number of similar chips, these are all evidence for human intelligent design. If you don't like aeroplanes, we can use automobiles, photocopiers, or dildos, anything will do really, as long as it is designed like any living organism is designed.
Evolution is not natural selection. Evolution describe a mathematically impossible process of speciation with zero supporting evidence. Natural selection describes survival of the fittest which is a designed process with no selection involved. Poorly manufactured computers will break down first but not because of some baloney selection process. Even Darwin admitted that natural selection is absurd when it comes to complex organs. It would be like claiming sometimes the sun orbits the planets.
This is what you said, "Long term evolution makes new species that branch off from others, which means that common descent means evolution." This is not circular reasoning ? Ask anyone and you'll be told that's circular reasoning. even if you want to add mutation and genetics in the middle and make all four meaning the same process. This was what you said, "Evolution is natural selection".
You failed once again. No. you are not allowed to graduate from grade one until you learn how to correct the first two fallacies of yours, not "dealt with it" the way you did. That is, if you want to amount to anything when you grow up.
1
-
1
-
Mauri .tanga Exactly, I said, " I suspect your giant unicorn was also created by God but if it is metaphysical like gravity, life, time, energy, force, mass, etc. there is no way I can verify my suspicion because what is metaphysical is unknowable to humans, only believable. Or you might have mistakenly referred the god of Abraham as God and called the real God by the label of a giant unicorn. You know which answer I gave is accurate, I don't." You are now confirming my second suspicion is accurate. Good for you. Just like I said, " God means different thing to different people at different times, these are all parts of the One and the same God. God has infinite parts.
You said, "the evidence in Wedensedayism and The giant unicorn are life itself and you can never disprove those theories." The truth is I have no intention whatsoever to disprove your theories. I just don't see any reason to believe in any theory or any bull shit like evolution based on zero evidence or logical proof for them.
I never said your theories or evolution and natural selection are wrong. I said there is no evidence or logical proof to give anybody any reason to believe in them. I believe in the metaphysical God and the theory of GOD DID IT based on the overwhelming evidence and logical proofs for god and the absence of any contrary evidence. It would be irrational, illogical, and delusional for me to believe that there is no God. BTW life is also metaphysical. And it is true that life gives out the effects that living humans can fantasise about Wednesdayism, giant unicorns, and the evolution and natural selection craps.
If that's the logic of your theories then it is the logical fallacy of argument from ignorance. You are basing your argument on "we don't know". I am basing my argument on we "know" the metaphysical God is "unknowable to human" because we have proved that God is metaphysical and what is metaphysical is not knowable to humans.
May the truth be with you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Mauri .tanga You asked, "What do you mean what is real to me?" It is a simple question, isn't it. You demanded answers that God is REAL so you must know WTF you mean by REAL.
You, said, "The logical proof of computer simulation theory is life itself," Wrong, life is an evidence, not a proof.
You said, "do you have proof that cause and effect doesn't not aply to god?" No. I do not. God is metaphysical. What is metaphysical is unknowable to humans. We can't know, we can only believe or not believe based on logic applied against our observation of the EFFECTS of God, not of the entity God.
You asked, "Oh and can you actually disprove evolution? " Yes I can. But you have the burden of proof because you asserted evolution, I didn't. I am not just saying evolution is a fairy tale, I explained why it is a fairy tale : it is neither a fact nor a single theory but a collection of theories applied towards a variety of causal questions, in other words, a story, a godless fairy tale.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
***** What did I tell you ? An incoherent mind cannot distinguish logic, so logical fallacies are not recognisable to such minds.
X explains Y, Y explains Z, therefore Z explain X is not debunking circular reasoning. It is confirming it, bonehead.
If you can figure out the logic, just get on with the issue. Where did you see mutations and genetics is evolution ? Per Wiki,
"In biology, a mutation is a permanent change of the nucleotide sequence of the genome of an organism, virus, or extrachromosomal DNA or other genetic elements."
"Genetics is the study of genes, heredity, and genetic variation in living organisms. It is generally considered a field of biology, but it intersects frequently with many of the life sciences and is strongly linked with the study of information systems."
Where is evolution in these definitions, bonehead ?
1
-
1
-
***** Our physical universe has a beginning, that's the big bang hypothesis. There is a first cause, that's the law of cause and effect. We call the first cause God, that's a fact but you can call the first cause by any other name you like, no one can stop you. We choose to believe in God the same way we choose to believe in gravity, life, and time, by applying our logic towards our observation of the EFFECTS of these entities and not of these entities themselves because these entities are metaphysical and what is metaphysical is unknowable to humans, only believable.
Evolution is neither a fact nor a single theory. Since there is not a single theory to be tested, evolution cannot be science. I did not invent this. I'll quote you the evolutionary biologist who pointed this out. Per Wiki, "Evolutionary biologist Kirk J. Fitzhugh[39] wrote, "'Evolution' cannot be both a theory and a fact. Theories are concepts stating cause–effect relations...One might argue that it is conceivable to speak of 'evolution' as a fact by way of it being the subject of reference in explanatory hypotheses...In the strictest sense then, 'evolution' cannot be regarded as a fact even in the context of hypotheses since the causal points of reference continue to be organisms, and no amount of confirming instances for those hypotheses will transform them into facts...While evolution is not a fact, it is also not a single theory, but a set of theories applied to a variety of causal questions...An emphasis on associating 'evolution' with 'fact' presents the misguided connotation that science seeks certainty."
Learn much today ? You are welcome.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
***** You said, " It’s funny, to see you object to “evolution” and “natural selection” solely on the basis of semantics, I’ve never seen that before." The reason is giants are not made everyday. :) I don't reject "natural". Natural means God made, period.
I reject "selection", for God did not design intelligence into the inanimate God made (natural) environment that enables it to act, choose, or select. It is always living organisms that mutates because each and every living organism is designed with intelligence to enable them to survive, reproduce, mutate, and die by acting, choosing, selecting, and otherwise manipulating its inanimate natural (God given) environment. Plants and animals living in space is a good example of that.
Accidents do not exit in real life. You said, " “Accident” simply means something one did not expect", and " “random” simply means something we cannot predict. The creator is obviously not that someone. Everything that exist is caused to exist. This is the law.
No speciation has ever been observed whether created by God or popped out of another species by some bullshit selection process. Varieties with the same specie is not speciation. One specie cannot mate with another specie or mutate to become another specie. Speciation is a fantasy.
You can call God by any other name you like. But to call God evolution is to say evolution accounts for the solar system as well as life on earth. Well, go ahead, no one can stop you.
I never said ID is scientifically testable. It is not because the concept of God is involved and God is a non falsifiable fact. ID is testable and we test our ID all the time. Look in the mirror and use the logic designed in you to figure out what you see there. That's ID.
Clones are good examples of variety within the same specie. Cloned sheep are still sheep. Clones are not identical. Clones have souls.
You said, "The scientific method can be used to detect anything which has any influence what so ever over anything in the universe." No. Scientific method cannot tell us what is gravity, life, or time, yet we all know these metaphysical entities exist.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
MarcoManiac I said, "No doubt atoms are real, so are apples, they are real illusions." I never said atoms are not real. My point is, what we see is just illusions of the metaphysical reality. We can't see gravity, life, time, or God because they are metaphysical, not physical. The physical effects of these metaphysical entities are just effects like an illusion. Falling objects are the effects of gravity but is not gravity. Flying birds are the effect of life but is not life. Ticking clocks are the effects of time but is not time. Our physical universe and life on earth are the effects of God but is not God. We don't know what is gravity, life, time, or God. We can only choose to believe or not believe in these metaphysical entities based on our logic applied towards our observation of the effects of these metaphysical entities.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
***** Not evolved, designed. And you are on the right track : as scientifically illustrated, our entire existence is nothing more than a complex physical process of our mind, and that's the way we were designed by the metaphysical intelligent designer we called God.
Per Webster, "Metaphysics,
: of, relating to, or based on metaphysics
: of or relating to things that are thought to exist but that cannot be seen."
We cannot know metaphysical entities. We can only choose to believe or not to believe in metaphysical entities like God, gravity, and time based on our logic applied towards our observations of the effects of these metaphysical entities and not of the entities themselves. The birds and the galaxies are the observations or evidence that allowed us to believe in God, the falling object in gravity, the ticking of the clock in time.
May the truth set you free.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
***** Dream on. I won't be teaming up with you. Evolution does not exist in real life, period. In real life, it has always been designs. Mutation, genetics, gene pools, intelligent adaptation of living organisms, varieties in species are all parts of the original intelligent design, no intervention has ever been observed and no intervention is necessary. No one knows what gravity is but gravity is definitely not physical. Per Wiki, "Gravity (or gravitation) is a natural phenomenon by which all things attract one another including stars, planets, galaxies and even light and sub-atomic particles.", "Newton's law of universal gravitation states that any two bodies in the universe attract each other with a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them." a force is a metaphysical entity. Gravitational force does not even exist or is a fictitious force under Einstein's theories of relativity.
Physics is not physical either. In fact all scientific theories are in essence metaphysical. Don't believe me ? Look it up.
You don't need me to show you evidence of design. Just look in the mirror. You'll find it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
***** "Jesus fucking Christ" ? Don't be ridicules. There is Jesus but there is no Christ.
You don't have to wait for my E/IALO to be published, you can read my comments. And you can read online how gravity may not exist or is a fictitious force. Per Wiki, "In physics, a gravitational field is a model used to explain the influence that a massive body extends into the space around itself, producing a force on another massive body. Thus, a gravitational field is used to explain gravitational phenomena, and is measured in newtons per kilogram (N/kg).........
In a field model, rather than two particles attracting each other, the particles distort spacetime via their mass, and this distortion is what is perceived and measured as a "force". In such a model one states that matter moves in certain ways in response to the curvature of spacetime,[1] and that there is either no gravitational force,[2] or that gravity is a fictitious force."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Brandan09997 MRSA is a bacterium, a living organism, one who possess the intelligence that enables living organisms to survive, reproduce, adapt, and die, thus completing its life cycle. Antibiotic resistance of MRSA is part of its design.
You can define evolution any which way you like, but Darwin's evolution by the process of natural selection is neither a fact nor a single theory. It is a collection of theories applied towards a variety of causal questions. In other words, a fairy tale. It is not science. It is at best an unsubstantiated concept and at worst a lie and a conspiracy, with plenty of synthesized story telling in between. No speciation has ever been observed, whether created by God or popped out of other species by some bullshit selection. Evidence talk, bullshits walk. No evidence no talk. Get it ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Slickslash 27 First off I'm not being hostile. I was just calling a spade a spade, and bull shits bullshits. Second, Darwin's evolution is not development, and development has never been evolution. If evolution means merely change, or development, then hairdos and ladies' fashion evolve as well as dildos and condoms. Thirdly, chameleons : a 2008 University of Melbourne study suggests that the chameleon not only uses color change to make himself invisible to enemies, but is even capable of customizing his color palette to the visual capabilities of different predators. Fourth, saying white rabbits are the result of mutation without any proof is what we called a fairy tale. Besides, mutation is not evolution. Per Wiki,
"In biology, a mutation is a permanent change of the nucleotide sequence of the genome of an organism, virus, or extrachromosomal DNA or other genetic elements."
No evolution is mentioned, expressed or implied.
Since you don't like me calling bull shits bullshits, I just let you figure it out yourself.
1
-
Slickslash 27 First, that's just your opinion. I've never been called that before. Second, hairdos evolve because they are designs of human intelligence. The inanimate environment has no such intelligence to cause such development. Varieties within hairdos are not caused by "natural selection", and neither is varieties within species. They were all parts of design. Third, repeat, a 2008 University of Melbourne study suggests that the chameleon not only uses color change to make himself invisible to enemies, but is even capable of customizing his color palette to the visual capabilities of different predators. Forth, I never said such nonsense as "a man that controls the universe through special powers like hes a wizard". WTF are you smoking that made you so hostile to the truth ? Fifth, Mutations is a science, Darwin's evolution is not, regardless of how you want to define it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Slickslash 27 1) --
2) Per Wiki, " Darwinism is a theory of biological evolution developed by Charles Darwin and others, stating that all species of organisms arise and develop through the natural selection of small, inherited variations that increase the individual's ability to compete, survive, and reproduce. Also called Darwinian theory ...." It was called a theory but it was never substantiated and cannot be regarded as science.
3) God the creator is metaphysical and what is metaphysical is unknowable to humans. We believe our physical universe has a beginning according to the big bang hypothesis, but there is no reason for us to believe that the metaphysical universe is not eternal. We believe God is eternal, and eternity, like, infinity, is not knowable to humans.
4) Per Wiki, "A religion is an organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to an order of existence." Believing in God is a belief, not a religion. Einstein and I definitely do not follow any religion. We believe in God, we do not believe in religion.
5) As a collection of theories, Darwin's evolution is at best an unsubstantiated concept, and at worst a lie and a conspiracy. The conspiracy began with the support of Hitler because evolution helped to support the idea of ethnic cleaning and the supreme race. It continues this days as a mean to grab political power and government funding. Without a single scientific theory of evolution, the conspirators synthesize evolution. There is actually a modern synthesis of evolutionary theories where the conspirators are calling mutation, genetics, physics, and chemistry evolutionary science. WTF ? Can you imagine that ? Physics and Chemistry are evolutionary science ? You go and check the definition of mutation, genetics, physics, and chemistry and see if any evolution or natural selection is ever mentioned in these science.
Wake up and use your critical thinking. Do not regurgitate the garbage they fed you in schools and through the media.
May the truth set you free.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
stoneman472 You are the imbecile and the stupid brick.
1) I told you already. Evidence for God are the observable EFFECTs of God. Logic is the proof. I have told you about you which you can observe in the mirror, the mirror which is invented by humans using material created by God, objects which include all physical objects. How much longer a list do you need from me ? I'll tell you what. Look around and everything you see is evidence for God because they are all EFFECTS created by God the first cause.
2) "Natural processes" ? WTF is that ? What is natural if not God given, God designed, and God created. Mirrors are human designs using God given intelligence to assemble God created materials.
3) I have told you not to list evidence for mutations and genetics and called them evidence for evolution because mutations and genetics are not evolution. They are parts of design and they do not involve speciation. Varieties within species are part of the process of intelligent adaptation of living organisms, not involving some bullshit selection or Divine Intervention. So why are you still quoting me irrelevant studies ?
4) Read 1) and 2) above, and stop bitching.
5) Read 1) and 2) above, and stop swearing.
Your bitching and swearing only make you more of an imbecile and a stupid brick.
6) Per Wiki, "Philosophy of science is a branch of philosophy concerned with the foundations, methods, and implications of science. The central questions of this study concern what qualifies as science, the reliability of scientific theories, and the ultimate purpose of science. This discipline overlaps with metaphysics, ontology, and epistemology, for example, when it explores the relationship between science and truth." Science itself is hollow and meaningless materialism without its philosophy. The highest science degree is a PhD.
7) Google mutations and genetics and see if they mentioned Darwin's evolution. They don't. Google Kirk Fitzhugh, an evolutionary biologist, and read his explanation why evolution is neither a fact nor a single theory. Evolution is a collection of theories applied towards a variety of causal questions. In other words, evolution is at best an unsubstantiated opinion, and at worst a lie and a conspiracy, with plenty of synthesized story telling in between.
8) Space and ocean deeps are not natural habitats for humans, plants and other animals either. But humans use their God given intelligence to explore and conquer these frontiers because we humans, like any other living organisms have been designed with the intelligence to be born, to survive, to adapt, to reproduce, and to die. Each and every living organism is designed with the ability to act, choose, select, and otherwise manipulate their inanimate natural environment as a part of the process of their adaptation, survival, and reproduction. No bullshit selection or Divine Intervention is required.
May the truth open your eyes so you may begin to see. Remember this : GOD DID IT.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
stoneman472 WTF are you rambling about. The best contributors to science in the history of mankind are believers in God. For example, there is Socrates and Plato, Aristotle, Newton, and Einstein. Only Newton was religious. Socrates and Plato, Aristotle, and Einstein are not religious. And I am not religious. We believe in God based on overwhelming evidence and logical proofs for God and there is zero contrary evidence. You are irrational and illogical to not believe in God, and you are delusional if you believe that there is no God. So, do you believe in God or are you irrational, illogical, and perhaps even delusional ? Tell us which one do you choose.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
stoneman472 You are a liar. I never said evolution is false. I said evolution is neither a fact nor a single theory, that it is a fairy tale, and that it does not exist in real life. I quoted Dr. Kirk Fitzhugh's explanation as support for my assertion.
You said, "Jesus and Einstein were both indeed Jewish." They were born of Jewish parents but that does not mean they believed in or follow the religion of Judaism. See how stupid and ridiculous you are ?
You are a liar again when you said, "But "believe" in Jesus as the son of God...." I never said such a thing. Just the opposite, I said Jesus is not the only Son of God as the Christians claimed he was.
You lied again when you said, "You then for some reason claimed that "righteousness was bad"" I never said righteousness is bad. I said you were self-righteous when you claim to be a "righteous man". Do you even understand what it means by being self-righteous ? It means you believe, act, and said you are right when you are not or you don't even know what is "right". I asked you WTF do you mean by "right" and you couldn't answer my question.
Liar, I never defined Humanism. I quoted the definition by Wiki, and I asked you, "So WTF that has to do with ""The only true salvation for mankind', and where is your critical thinking and evidence ?" To which you still could not find an answer.
You lied again when you said that I "proceeded to blame Humanism for all the deaths of Iraqi citizens...." I did not blame humanism. I blame what the U.S. believed was humanism. And I pointed out what the U.S. humanism and yours are : "Clearly their (U.S.) humanism and yours are subjective and self-righteous, a mask worn by bigots."
You lied again when you said, "Now you blame Atheist Humanists as the cause for abortion in America." I never made such an accusation or blame. I cited the millions of aborted babies as an example of how belief systems can cause millions of death, which was the fact that you denied. I said, " In the U.S. alone, the belief that abortions are consistent with their so called humanism bullshit led to millions of unborn human lives being murdered each year."
Why were you quoting statistics about religious people committing murder by abortion ? It is belief systems and humanism bullshit that I cited as cause for the murder of millions, not religions or atheism. Besides you are confused, Christians believe in Christ, not in the man Jesus.
"everything we have said this far is easily referenced by scrolling up." Exactly. Everything I said is based on truth and verifiable facts and every lie of yours that I pointed out can be easily verified by scrolling up.
I don't know how you can find your own lies amusing and expect me to show that they are true when they are not. All three items you listed are your lies and your made up stories.
I am getting tired babysitting kids like you. Grow up, and stop lying, alright ? May the truth set you free.
1
-
stoneman472 Okay, let's count your lies.
Lie #1: "I never said Evolution was false"
"Evolution is a godless fairytale"
Evolution is a real and true godless fairy tale, not false. Similarly, Santa and tooth fairies are real and true fictional characters, not false.
To say that evolution is a science is a false statement because it is not. There is not a single theory of evolution, scientific or otherwise, only opinions.
Lie#2: "Einstein was a believer in the Jewish God ....." Per Wiki, "Albert Einstein's religious views have been studied extensively. He said he believed in the "pantheistic" God of Baruch Spinoza, but not in a personal god, a belief he criticized. He also called himself an agnostic, while disassociating himself from the label atheist, preferring, he said, "an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our own being"."
Lie#3: You said Jesus is religious because he is Jewish. Jesus is Jewish by birth because he was born of Jewish parents. That doesn't mean he believed in Judaism as a religion. He pointed out that the religious leaders of his time were hypocrites. He disobeyed the ten commandments which were the Jewish law and gave reasons why they were not the laws of God. He was crucified for that same reason by the Jewish religious leaders of his time even when the Roman governor offered to release him. Religions are political organisations. Jesus did not hold any political office or associations. He was a teacher, not a politician like Abraham and Moses.
Lie#4: You said I am a Christian and that I am religious. I already told you Jesus is not Christ. He never said he was. And I told you that Jesus, Einstein, and I are not religious, and that we do not follow any religion. We believe in God, not religions.
Lie#5: you accused me of saying righteousness is bad. And you said, "Allow me to quote you sir
"Love out of righteousness is not love. It is bigotry."
"Jesus taught us love not righteousness"
Where in that quote can you find me saying "righteousness is bad" ? You are a liar and a self-righteous and obnoxious bigot just like those militant atheistic hate mongers.
"In Matthew Jesus says that, if His hearers want to enter into the kingdom of heaven, their righteousness must exceed that of the Pharisees, who were the experts in the Law."
Exactly, self-righteous, hypocritical people like you and the Pharisees don't get to enter the kingdom of heaven. Like I said and I repeat, "Love out of righteousness is not love. It is bigotry."
"Jesus taught us love, not righteousness"
You assumed wrong. I don't give a shit about the Bible. I only believe in the teachings of Jesus, not the Bible. People believe Jesus is righteous. Jesus is not self-righteous. He condemned self-righteousness and hypocrisy as displayed by the Pharisees and now you.
"Also as a bonus:
The term "right" means
morally good, justified, or acceptable."
Exactly. Good, justified, or acceptable are all subjective and self professed, thus the term "self-righteousness". I demonstrated that the torture and murder of Muslim and the murder of unborn babies are justified by the U.S. self-righteousness which they called their
humanism, a pure bullshit you seemed to endorse. You even profess that gay marriages is humanism and the self-righteous law of your government is unquestionably "right". How ridiculous is that ? LMAO !
Lie#6: You said, "... that by reciting the wiki def of a word you in turn then successfully def the word?" I quoted Wiki's definition of humanism which I suppose and which you later confirmed is the meaning of humanism to you. But that is not my definition because it is not what humanism means to me. Humanism is a synthesized bullshit to justify subjective political agendas. People like you who profess humanism are self-righteous and hypocritical. They use some bullshit to justify torturing and killing of Muslims, murdering millions of unborn babies each and every year, and even gay marriages. You are the imbecile 1 and 2.
Lie#7: "So now your blaming Americans for the deaths of Iraqi citizens? You mean the same America that follow the teachings of Jesus?"
No. I mean the same Americans that believed in their bullshit humanism rather than following the teachings of Jesus which include "Love thy enemy", "Let the one without sin throw the first stone", and "those who live by the sword die by the sword". The Americans chose to live by the sword rather than by the love and peace of Jesus, and they called that their humanism.
Lie#7: " I can easily make the claim that the rise of Humanism is playing a key roll in this trend."
No. The belief in the humanism bullshit is what brought forth the murder of unborn babies by the millions in the first place. It is as I said which you initially rejected and now concurred, "a belief system can cause the death of millions." You and the U.S. are still stuck in this self-professed, self-righteous, hypocritical belief system you folks called your humanism. I have nothing against the law of your government. Just don't call it "righteous". Political laws are made by politicians and has nothing to do with righteousness other than self-righteousness.
Lie#8: You called it a lie my assertion ""Christians believe in the Christ, not the man Jesus". By doing so you were in effect asserting that Christians believe Jesus is a man rather than Christ the Messiah, God, the only Son of God, and a prophet. Now that is your lie.
I don't give a shit what your stupid mother in law or her stupid Catholic priest said. They are your imbecile 3. Ask them what is the Holy Trinity and whether or not they believe in it (The Holy Trinity referred to Jesus as the Son of God and as God). Tell them to come to this debate. My first challenge to them is "Jesus never claimed he is Christ, God, or the only Son of God". Jesus claimed he is the way, the truth, and the life. Jesus also never prophecies because to prophecies is to undermine, marginalise, and misrepresent God. Jesus warned us of false prophets. Abraham, Moses, and Muhammad are false prophets because they undermined, marginalized, and misrepresented God by self-professed that they knew God and the Will of God. No one knows God or the Will of God, not even Jesus. God is unknowable to humans, and God cannot be God if God needs a human to do God's bidding.
Stop lying and let the truth set you free. May the love and the peace of Jesus be with you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Slickslash 27 Why ? I have always backed up my arguments with evidence and logical explanations, and everything I said is based on truth and verifiable facts. In addition to that I have always been consistent with my argument which I believe is what he took as insistent. Insistency can be just being stubborn, but consistency means integrity. My presentation is full of integrity, yet you guys are just being stubborn regarding your blind faith in Darwinism and it's godless fairy tale.
I can understand that due to the fact a lot of religious people in power are hypocrites and they use their power to control and manipulate others, thus causing plenty of resentments particular among the young who is not yet in a position of power until they get on a debate on YT and that's the time they stubbornly resist any arguments for God regardless of logic and evidence. These young felt particularly lost when confronted with the truth that what they learned in school, or more appropriately what they were stuffed with in school, were in fact garbage, lies, and propagandas. They have been screwed both ways, by the hypocritical religious people in power as well as by the godless conspirators in power. That is the reason I am here. My mission is to save the souls of our youth from these pollution and mishandling by sharing the truth with logic and evidence and to empower them with the truth and the style of free expression without guilt, uncertainty, or shame. Take heart and learn. You can be like me if you can just stop resisting and start embracing the truth. You can then not be intimidated by any rejection but be able to boomerang back with powerful, awakening, and life transforming ideas that is true and consistent to the core. I have successfully transformed the lives of doctors, engineers, physicists, biologists, teachers, grad students, college students, Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, and Atheists. Everyone can benefit from the truth I share.
May the love and the peace of Jesus be with you.
1
-
1
-
a stoneman472Â 1) I was busy with other students.
2) For sure science cannot prove or disprove God. Science is very limited in scope. Besides, God is metaphysical  and is therefore unobservable and unknowable to humans, same as other metaphysical entities like gravity, life, and time.
3) No, I am sober. I don't give a shit how many great-great-great grand fathers you have, you have zero empirical evidence to prove any one of them was a man and not a female pig.Â
4) The only ones asking stupid questions here were you and Slickslash 27.You two were asking for empirical evidence for God, knowing that it was a ridiculous request.  And no one gives a shit about the Bible here besides your mother in law and her Catholic priest boyfriend.
Slickslash 27 No. You cannot observe gravity, life, or time. What we measure are the effects of gravity, life, and time but not the entities themselves because they are unobservable and unknowable to humans. We measure the effects of God also, we count the human and whales population, and we count and measure the stars and the planets, all effects caused by God the Creator.
May the truth open your eyes so the two of you can begin to see.
1
-
stoneman472 1) You think you two are the only students I have ? You two are not my only students. LOL.
2) No, we cannot measure gravity, life, or time, only their effects like we do with effects of God.
3) We are talking empirical evidence, not some stupid opinion by some stupid web site. Just admit it, you have zero empirical evidence to prove any one of your many great-great-great grand father was a human and not a female pig.
4) "major Fallacy of Creationism" ? WTF is that ? Why you believe your great-great-great grand father was a man and not a female pig without a single piece of empirical evidence and you don't consider that a major Fallacy ? Why don't you ask your mother in law and her Catholic priest boyfriend if they may have some empirical evidence to prove their great-great-great grand father was a man and not a female pig ?
"The Creation model" ? WTF are you talking about ? No one here is talking about any model. We have been talking about God the creator which is metaphysical, unobservable, and unknowable to humans. WTF are you thanking me for ? I said if you do not believe in God you are irrational and illogical, and if you believe that there is no God you are outright delusional, in view of the overwhelming evidence and logical proofs for God.
May the truth set you free.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@DriftLV1 You wrote, "There is plenty of evidence for evolution." If that is the case, you should be able to provide at least one piece of valid evidence for Evolution, and the argument is over, isn't that right ? But you have zero evidence. Don't forget, there is also zero logic for Evolution, and zero theory of Evolution that has been or can be scientifically tested. Evolution is a fairytale.
"creationist website" ??? What creationist website ? Who gives a shit for creationists ? You ? Not me. The following is unsubstantiated. But hypothetically, new species could have been manufactured by intelligent beings living in planets billions of light years away from earth and deliberately or accidentally transported to earth through meteors once in a while. So creationists are wrong but closer to the truth whereas Evolutionists are totally out to lunch.
"Evolution is so gradual" ??? You mean it's like "once upon a time" ? I've heard that one before, but that's to fool kids. Scientifically speaking, complexity and order always disintegrate into simplicity and chaos in time, and never ever the other way round, unless there is intelligence involved. The ancient Greek and Egyptian ruins are good example of this fact. The more time is involved, the less likely is Evolution. Period.
You asked, "So are you saying that at one point every single extinct species that ever existed occupied the earth at the same time as all the species that are on the earth now? Since no new species can be created, right?" I never said no new species can be created. I said there is no Evolution in real life. All species exists on earth at the same time is a possibility, but that doesn't have to be the case, because new species may pop out of rocks in some other galaxies and transported to earth via meteors from time to time. That, at least is logical, considering there are trillions of galaxies out there we don't have a clue what life is like there.
You asked, "why don't we find fossils of current species? Only ones that don't exist?" You tell me. May be you have not looked thoroughly enough. May be many species were transported to earth recently. Evolutionists have the burden of proof, not non-evolutionists.
You wrote, "trying to apply everything we know about the world to creationism literally doesn't make sense." I agree. Creationists also have no evidence for their claim, and no theory that can be scientifically tested. One thing they do have, and that is logic. Intelligence is definitely involved, though it is not likely human intelligence. Aliens, perhaps.
You asked, "Mislead people for what purpose exactly?" Money, power, fame, status, all of the above, same purpose creationists are misleading people for. Obviously.
You wrote, "it's easier to fool someone than to convince them that they've been fooled." Exactly. You are speaking about yourself. Learn the truth. The truth will set you free.
May the love and the peace of Jesus be with us.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
***** What you described there is an opinion, not a theory. Darwin's opinion cannot be tested by the scientific method because there is not a single theory, there is a collection of theory each applied towards a different casual question. For example, there is theories in mutation and there are theories in genetics, but there is nothing linking these theories to speciation or evolution. You said "...creatures will adapt to their surroundings via natural selection ...." This is bull shit because natural selection does not exist in real life unless by nature you mean God and by natural you mean God's design and creation. Creatures adapt to their surrounding via the intelligence designed into each and every living organism that enables living organisms to live, reproduce, mutate, act, choose, select, and otherwise manipulate their natural environment which has been designed to be inanimate and impotent. This is a fact like " organisms better adapted to their environment tend to survive and produce more offspring." is a fact, but there is no theory to explain these facts other than GOD DID IT.
1
-
***** There is zero evidence for evolution, and evolution has never been observed. Fossil records only proved that some species had died out in the past. They are not proofs of speciation by design or by spontaneous existence which is what evolution boils down to. We have evidence for mutation and genetics, but mutation and genetics are not evolution. Mutation and genetics are parts of design.
Darwin's opinion cannot be tested by the scientific method and has never been tested by the scientific method. Natural selection makes no sense unless by nature we mean God, and by natural we mean God's design and creation. That is the reason evolution cannot be tested by the scientific method. God cannot be tested by the scientific method. You need to understand varieties within species is not speciation. White cats and black cats are still cats, white humans and black humans are still humans (don't let the white supremacists fool you into believing whites are fitter, they are not), and big dogs and small dogs are still dogs.
You said, "...what we define as species is inherently tied to evolution and as a result genetics." May be we should revise or remove these definitions for they are arbitrary and they don't mean squat anyways.
What cheery picking are you talking about ? I was saying " organisms better adapted to their environment tend to survive and produce more offspring." is a fact because that is what we can observe, but it is not a definition like you said that's what natural selection is defined as, and there is no theory that explains this fact. The rest of what you said in that paragraph is irrelevant.
You said, "the theory explaining that animals that are unfit for an environment are weeded out and the ones that are fittest for the environment survive and reproduce is called evolution." Bull shit. You just made that up. Prove me wrong. Quote a credible source that says that is the theory of evolution.
I can tell you how even Darwin himself admitted that his so called theory of evolution by the process of natural selection is absurd. Darwin wrote, "…Natural selection acts only by taking advantage of slight successive variations; she can never take a great and sudden leap, but must advance by short and sure, though slow steps." Thus, Darwin conceded that, "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down." Our eyes are one of such complex organ to which Darwin confessed, "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree."
1
-
1
-
***** You made up what you called the theory. I did not try to redefine natural, evolutionists did. Natural has always means the way of God by believers of God and "nothing" by believers of Nothingness.
I have explained how the hypothetical evidence for evolution you quoted are not facts. They are still evidence though as anything can be called evidence. But you need logical proof to tie these evidence to evolution. l pointed out the logical proof is not there and I explained why : the causal points of reference continue to be organisms. In fact you can use these hypothetical evidence for design and that would make logical sense. You should deal with it yourself.
There is zero confirming evidence for evolution in what you have presented. These evidence you quoted only serve to prove design because they are all based on living organisms and the intelligence designed into each and everyone of them. You should know that rocks are not designed with this intelligence and that is why rocks cannot reproduce, mutate, and carry out life functions like act, choose, select, and otherwise manipulate their surroundings.
You said, "so you agree evolution exists? because nowhere in there did you say this process didn't happen. sure its a processes but a processes can be a theory." I have never agreed evolution exists. I said it numerous times evolution does not exist in the real world. We were arguing if evolution is a theory and you showed me proof that it is not by quoting me that it is a process. It is true processes can hypothetically be theories but all the evidence you have proved only serve to prove design and not evolution because they are all based on living organism as the causal point of reference. The process describes GOD DID IT, not the inanimate and impotent natural environment.
Re. the videos you quoted, they have not debunk design. Darwin said it himself that natural selection is absurd and he said what seemed absurd can still be true as in earth orbiting the sun. His logic is flawed because what is absurd does not only sometimes seemed absurd and sometime not, it is absurd, period. The earth orbiting the sun seemed absurd but is not absurd, the sun orbiting the earth is absurd. Design is one of the causes, the primary one or the nucleus, for mutations to be orbiting around, and it is not absurd. Evolution is basically saying the surrounding is the primary cause and the nucleus of mutations and mutations orbit around the surrounding, that is absolutely absurd. The author of these videos can explain how eyes can be constructed piece by piece because they are using human intelligence designed in humans, inanimate environments are not designed with this intelligence. No matter how much time is involved, an eye cannot be formed without intelligence and human intelligence is currently not sufficient to perform such a task. But humans may be able to clone eyes using God's design in stem cells. I must therefor say that these videos you quoted only proved design, not evolution. Let me remind you also that time works against evolution. The more time is involved, the less likely is evolution.
May the truth be with you and help you deal with it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
***** I thought so, like a dog, when you run out of valid argument you bark and run away with your tail stuck between your hind legs. Dogs don't understand embarrassment but you should. It is an embarrassing sight. In your situation I would rather acknowledge the truth and thank my teacher.
"what cannot be settled by experiment is not worth debating" is equivalent to saying "the truth is not worth pursuing". Even Alder admitted, ""While the Newtonian insistence on ensuring that any statement is testable by observation [...] undoubtedly cuts out the crap, it also seems to cut out almost everything else as well", as it prevents taking position on several topics such as politics or religion." That is just MATERIALISM, like I was saying, metaphysics is the foundation of science, science without metaphysics is empty and is not science but MATERIALISM. Also, Alder was being dishonest here. Newton said "testable by observation", not "testable by the scientific method", There is no scientific method employed to test Newton's law of gravity. That is why it remained a law, an unexplained observation. No one knows what gravity is. We can only believe in gravity based on our observation applying our logic. Logic and mathematics cannot be tested by the scientific method but that's what all science is based on. Without the metaphysical logic and mathematics there is no science, only MATERIALISM.
Appeal to emotion or not, everything I said is based on truth and verifiable facts. Just watch a few video by militant atheists and evolutionists like Dawkins, Krauss, Harris, and Hitchens, and see if you agree they all promote hate, violence, and bigotry. Sure, it cannot be scientifically tested, but it is the truth.
If that was your last response to me, may you find truth and wisdom to replace the lies and propagandas that plagues you brain.
1
-
1
-
1
-
***** Are you trying to lie again ? May be you are just confused. I have never tried to re-define science. Evolution is not science, never has been science, and never been tested by the scientific method because evolution is not a single theory and so there is no theory to be scientifically tested. I never challenged the definition of scientific theories you quoted. Your definition is perfectly fine : "A scientific theory is an explanation of observable fact, backed up by empirical evidence and subject to repeated testing against said observable fact."
Without an explanation, you ranted, "You similarly and arbitrarily decide to turn reality on its head to conform with your delusions." What delusions are you referring too ? Everything I said is based on truth and verifiable facts. Don't throw temper tangent like a spoiled brad, use your words if you don't understand anything that I said, say so, okay ?
The 404,626 published papers PubMed listed explain mutation and genetics, not evolution. I'll repeat it so hopefully it will get through to you head, mutations and genetics are not evolution, they are designed. The many designed and re-designed computers and space stations are products of human intelligent design, not evolution by some baloney selection process.
Thank you anyways, but I do not believe in luck. Only naïve and ignorant people believe in luck and evolution. The law of cause and effects does not allow any random chance, accidents, or luck to exist, and therefore they don't exist in real life, only in fairy tales like evolution. The space capsule that carried Armstrong landed on the moon not by luck, random chance, or accident. It landed by design and by cause and it could not have landed on Mar or Jupiter by luck either because it was not designed to land on those planets.
May the truth deliver you from the conspiracy of lies and propagandas, and may the love and the peace of Jesus be with you.
1
-
***** Wow ! that's your logic ? If b is (b) and a is not b then I have re-defined b. Talking about morons ! You disappoint me.
Use your words and explain. Everything I said is based on truth and verifiable facts. How can that be hypocritical ? You have not explained what delusion you were referring to either.
You are a good example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. I am not a Christian. I do not follow any religion. I believe in Jesus. Jesus is not Christ, not God, not the only Son of God, not the messiah, and Jesus never prophecies. Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life as he claimed, and he never claimed what he is not.
I cannot be regarded as a troll precisely because I never call white black and black white nor do I ever call day night and night day, I call a spade a spade, white as white, black as black, day as day, and night as night.
You find me amusing because you are very fortunate to come across someone so wise and so truthful. For the sake of humanity, I hope you can carry forward these wisdom and truth bestowed on me to you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
*****
You should be teaching this kid logic and reasoning based on evidence, not luck. Only naïve and ignorant people like believers of evolution would believe in luck. Luck, random chance, and accidents do not exist in real life. Everything that exist is caused to exit. This is the law, the law of cause and effect. And this law does not allow random chance, accident, and luck to exist. The capsule carrying Armstrong did not land on the moon by random chance, accidents, or luck. It was designed and caused to land on the moon. It couldn't have landed on Mars or Jupiter by random chance, accidents, or luck either because it was not designed and caused to land anywhere other than the moon. For a young person to believe in luck and evolution is the recipe for disaster, superstition and credulity most often leads to no good. This is the truth.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1