Shoutbox

Refresh History
  • littlebit: Makes sense.
    July 16, 2017, 04:40:28 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Boards will stay open for a place people can find history information longer. I am not allowing anyone to sign up for now because of so many foreginers just wanting to promote their business..
    December 10, 2016, 05:10:27 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Not sure why didn't look, I may be shutting down these message boards..
    November 17, 2016, 12:42:43 AM
  • ~kathy~: rick why is the timestamp showing up a day in advance?
    September 13, 2016, 12:27:46 AM
  • Valor7: What I tried to say is that the actual money would not be there that quick. But a loan against that would work if they are willing to do that.
    August 08, 2016, 01:51:51 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Why so long before it comes online? 911 took out a loan or bond with the known guarantee payment and began building..
    August 08, 2016, 07:46:34 AM
  • Valor7: Actually no it is not, a dependable Revenue stream will not come on line until the 4th quarter of 2017 so 2018 budget will be up in the air, not quite sure what they will have. By 2019 budget all will be well.
    August 04, 2016, 09:27:17 PM
  • Valor7: You mean that tax that the Commissioners would not put on the ballot for so many years? Strange things happened when the citizens got a chance to vote on that issue.
    August 03, 2016, 06:43:06 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Back up is now available withe the new tax..
    August 03, 2016, 05:01:35 PM
  • Valor7: Thanks a lot Ladies!!
    July 29, 2016, 01:16:13 PM
  • littlebit: ((*(*&
    July 27, 2016, 03:47:52 PM
  • ~kathy~: lol
    July 15, 2016, 09:34:56 AM
  • Valor7: A guy could get killed around here while waiting for backup!
    July 13, 2016, 07:31:58 PM
  • Lepard LLC: You are not alone..
    July 13, 2016, 07:28:53 PM
  • Valor7: I just hate it when I talk to myself!!!!
    July 08, 2016, 12:54:09 PM
  • Valor7: I could have worded that better, we talked details, options, the pros and cons of each, in  order to arrive at the best ballot language to present to the voters. Hope that makes this clearer.
    April 15, 2016, 06:36:14 PM
  • Valor7: sorry about the typos still working with just one arm in action
    April 13, 2016, 01:10:42 PM
  • Valor7: Yes and no. We talked details and options until we were blue in the face but I never heardbring it over, it was always the time was not right for the issue to pass. Glad to see the time in now right and I for one shall vote yes on the ballot. I would urge all others to do the sameour county is busting at the seams crimewise and no matter how many bad guys we send off there always seems to someone to replace them. The Sheriff's Office needs the help.
    April 13, 2016, 01:08:35 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Is that true Valor? Did he ask you what you wanted?
    March 01, 2016, 04:55:37 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Gene Newkirk Rick I have waited for a Sheriff to bring it to me on what he wanted. I have pushed Mr long for a while to get it to me. He told me he was close to having or done. Now hopefully the people will get to decide on it. I spoke with Steve about this a few times.
    March 01, 2016, 04:54:54 AM
  • Kimberly: Wow- I have a new name..........
    February 23, 2016, 10:25:15 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Works on mine, improvements are being done here. I may kick back into her a lot and post but working on different technologies right now. Seeing how things interact.
    January 18, 2016, 09:01:20 AM
  • Valor7: Yes it is working. If you need a laugh the wife showed me how to correctly use the silly thing.
    January 04, 2016, 05:32:59 PM
  • Valor7: Think so, mine is trying to work but it is now user and password protected and I dont know mine
    December 17, 2015, 01:32:16 PM
  • "DJ": Is there still a working android app for the PCSD
    December 14, 2015, 08:14:53 PM

Author Topic: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?  (Read 20244 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mark

  • http://www.gayalpinesurvival.com/
  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 5138
  • Karma: +90/-81225007
  • Gender: Male
  • Proud Father
    • View Profile
Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« on: April 29, 2014, 10:09:44 AM »

Share/Bookmark

Fort Wood Hotel

Boards

Devils Elbow

Attractions

Sports

St. Robert

Waynesville

PC Daily

Dixon

Menu Guide

Fun Links

Homework

Crocker

Fort Wood

Swedeborg

Big Piney

Laquey

Classifieds

Restaurants

Richland

Fort  Hotels

If so, then provide an answer to the following questions. "Evolution" in this context is the idea that natural, undirected processes are sufficient to account for the existence of all natural things.
See this Conservapedia article for more information on the "theory of evolution" and what it teaches.
1.Something from nothing?
 The "Big Bang", the most widely accepted theory of the beginning of the universe, states that everything developed from a small dense cloud of subatomic particles and radiation which exploded, forming hydrogen (and some helium) gas. Where did this energy/matter come from? How reasonable is it to assume it came into being from nothing? And even if it did come into being, what would cause it to explode?
We know from common experience that explosions are destructive and lead to disorder. How reasonable is it to assume that a "big bang" explosion produced the opposite effect - increasing "information", order and the formation of useful structures, such as stars and planets, and eventually people?

2.Physical laws an accident?
 We know the universe is governed by several fundamental physical laws, such as electromagnetic forces, gravity, conservation of mass and energy, etc. The activities of our universe depend upon these principles like a computer program depends upon the existence of computer hardware with an instruction set. How reasonable is it to say that these great controlling principles developed by accident?
3.Order from disorder?
 The Second Law of Thermodynamics may be the most verified law of science. It states that systems become more disordered over time, unless energy is supplied and directed to create order. Evolutionists says that the opposite has taken place - that order increased over time, without any directed energy. How can this be?
ASIDE: Evolutionists commonly object that the Second Law applies to closed, or isolated systems, and that the Earth is certainly not a closed system (it gets lots of raw energy from the Sun, for example). However, all systems, whether open or closed, tend to deteriorate. For example, living organisms are open systems but they all decay and die. Also, the universe in total is a closed system. To say that the chaos of the big bang has transformed itself into the human brain with its 120 trillion connections is a clear violation of the Second Law.

We should also point out that the availability of raw energy to a system is a necessary but far from sufficient condition for a local decrease in entropy to occur. Certainly the application of a blow torch to bicycle parts will not result in a bicycle being assembled - only the careful application of directed energy will, such as from the hands of a person following a plan. The presence of energy from the Sun does NOT solve the evolutionist's problem of how increasing order could occur on the Earth, contrary to the Second Law.

4.Information from Randomness?
 Information theory states that "information" never arises out of randomness or chance events. Our human experience verifies this every day. How can the origin of the tremendous increase in information from simple organisms up to man be accounted for? Information is always introduced from the outside. It is impossible for natural processes to produce their own actual information, or meaning, which is what evolutionists claim has happened. Random typing might produce the string "dog", but it only means something to an intelligent observer who has applied a definition to this sequence of letters. The generation of information always requires intelligence, yet evolution claims that no intelligence was involved in the ultimate formation of a human being whose many systems contain vast amounts of information.
5.Life from dead chemicals?
 Evolutionists claim that life formed from non-life (dead chemicals), so-called "abiogenesis", even though it is a biological law ("biogenesis") that life only comes from life. The probability of the simplest imaginable replicating system forming by itself from non-living chemicals has been calculated to be so very small as to be essentially zero - much less than one chance in the number of electron-sized particles that could fit in the entire visible universe! Given these odds, is it reasonable to believe that life formed itself?
6.Complex DNA and RNA by chance?
 The continued existence (the reproduction) of a cell requires both DNA (the "plan") and RNA (the "copy mechanism"), both of which are tremendously complex. How reasonable is it to believe that these two co-dependent necessities came into existence by chance at exactly the same time?
7.Life is complex.
 We know and appreciate the tremendous amount of intelligent design and planning that went into landing a man on the moon. Yet the complexity of this task pales in comparison to the complexity of even the simplest life form. How reasonable is it to believe that purely natural processes, with no designer, no intelligence, and no plan, produced a human being.
8.Where are the transitional fossils?
 If evolution has taken place our museums should be overflowing with the skeletons of countless transitional forms. Yet after over one hundred years of intense searching only a small number of transitional candidates are touted as proof of evolution. If evolution has really taken place, where are the transitional forms? And why does the fossil record actually show all species first appearing fully formed, with most nearly identical to current instances of the species?
ASIDE: Most of the examples touted by evolutionists concentrate on just one feature of the anatomy, like a particular bone or the skull. A true transitional fossil should be intermediate in many if not all aspects. The next time someone shows you how this bone changed over time, ask them about the rest of the creature too!

Many evolutionists still like to believe in the "scarcity" of the fossil record. Yet simple statistics will show that given you have found a number of fossil instances of a creature, the chances that you have missed every one of its imagined predecessors is very small. Consider the trilobites for example. These fossils are so common you can buy one for under $20, yet no fossils of a predecessor have been found!.

9.Could an intermediate even survive?
 Evolution requires the transition from one kind to another to be gradual. And don't forget that "natural selection" is supposed to retain those individuals which have developed an advantage of some sort. How could an animal intermediate between one kind and another even survive (and why would it ever be selected for), when it would not be well-suited to either its old environment or its new environment? Can you even imagine a possible sequence of small changes which takes a creature from one kind to another, all the while keeping it not only alive, but improved?
ASIDE: Certainly a "light-sensitive spot" is better than no vision at all. But why would such a spot even develop? (evolutionists like to take this for granted). And even if it did develop, to believe that mutations of such a spot eventually brought about the tremendous complexities of the human eye strains all common sense and experience.

10.Reproduction without reproduction?
 A main tenet of evolution is the idea that things develop by an (unguided) series of small changes, caused by mutations, which are "selected" for, keeping the "better" changes" over a very long period of time. How could the ability to reproduce evolve, without the ability to reproduce? Can you even imagine a theoretical scenario which would allow this to happen? And why would evolution produce two sexes, many times over? Asexual reproduction would seem to be more likely and efficient!
ASIDE: To relegate the question of reproduction to "abiogenesis" does NOT address the problem. To assume existing, reproducing life for the principles of evolution to work on is a HUGE assumption which is seldom focused on in popular discussions.

11.Plants without photosynthesis?
 The process of photosynthesis in plants is very complex. How could the first plant survive unless it already possessed this remarkable capability?
12.How do you explain symbiotic relationships?
 There are many examples of plants and animals which have a "symbiotic" relationship (they need each other to survive). How can evolution explain this?
13.It's no good unless it's complete.
 We know from everyday experience that an item is not generally useful until it is complete, whether it be a car, a cake, or a computer program. Why would natural selection start to make an eye, or an ear, or a wing (or anything else) when this item would not benefit the animal until it was completed?
ASIDE: Note that even a "light-sensitive spot" or the simplest version of any feature is far from a "one-jump" change that is trivial to produce.

14.Explain metamorphosis!
 How can evolution explain the metamorphosis of the butterfly? Once the caterpillar evolves into the "mass of jelly" (out of which the butterfly comes), wouldn't it appear to be "stuck"?
15.It should be easy to show evolution.
 If evolution is the grand mechanism that has produced all natural things from a simple gas, surely this mechanism must be easily seen. It should be possible to prove its existence in a matter of weeks or days, if not hours. Yet scientists have been bombarding countless generations of fruit flies with radiation for several decades in order to show evolution in action and still have only produced ... more (deformed) fruit flies. How reasonable is it to believe that evolution is a fact when even the simplest of experiments has not been able to document it?
ASIDE: The artificial creation of a new species is far too small of a change to prove that true "macro-evolution" is possible. A higher-order change, where the information content of the organism has been increased should be showable and is not. Developing a new species changes the existing information, but does not add new information, such as would be needed for a new organ, for example.

16.Complex things require intelligent design folks!
 People are intelligent. If a team of engineers were to one day design a robot which could cross all types of terrain, could dig large holes, could carry several times its weight, found its own energy sources, could make more robots like itself, and was only 1/8 of an inch tall, we would marvel at this achievement. All of our life's experiences lead us to know that such a robot could never come about by accident, or assemble itself by chance, even if all of the parts were available laying next to each other. And we are certain beyond doubt that a canister of hydrogen gas, no matter how long we left it there or what type of raw energy we might apply to it, would never result in such a robot being produced. But we already have such a "robot" - it is called an "ant", and we squash them because they are "nothing" compared to people. And God made them, and he made us. Can there be any other explanation?
We are not human beings having a spiritual experience.
We are spiritual beings having a human experience.
~Teilhard de Chardin

Offline fish

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 8885
  • Karma: +349278/-349867
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #1 on: April 29, 2014, 12:47:06 PM »
and the atheists, anti- theists still can't prove the unproven scientific theories. truth and logic wins every time

Offline ebilly99

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 933
  • Karma: +338/-153
  • Go to your profile and put something here.
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #2 on: April 29, 2014, 02:49:44 PM »
If so, then provide an answer to the following questions. "Evolution" in this context is the idea that natural, undirected processes are sufficient to account for the existence of all natural things.
See this Conservapedia article for more information on the "theory of evolution" and what it teaches.
1.Something from nothing?
We can't even define nothing. Do you mean a vaccum, because even that is something. Please define nothing and give a example.

2.Physical laws an accident?
 
Is gods nature a accident. Why do you believe in a good god, isn't a evil or joking god more reasonable.
3.Order from disorder?
 
No, the universe as a whole is more disordered as time goes by. Just becuase one corner has some complexity doesn't break anything. If so then it is the second law, not evolution that is wrong.
4.Information from Randomness?
Accidents are impossible now?
5.Life from dead chemicals?
 
Either the dust of the earth or eons of evolution. Life came from nonlife. Now is there a natural way or just a magic.
6.Complex DNA and RNA by chance?
Well we now think TNA could have been the original building block of life. TNA molecular structure. The TNA backbone is composed of a threose sugar (4 carbon), while DNA and RNA has a ribose sugar (5 carbon). The molecular picture is available here. In TNA, the phosphate groups are bound to the 2 and 3 positions rather than the 3 and 5 positions as in DNA and RNA. - See more at: http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/02/before_there_wa055451.html#sthash.Rm4ovVNZ.dpuf

7.Life is complex.
 
God is more complex, so would require something even more complex.
8.Where are the transitional fossils?
Every fossil would be fully formed, why wouldn't it.

Many evolutionists still like to believe in the "scarcity" of the fossil record. Yet simple statistics will show that given you have found a number of fossil instances of a creature, the chances that you have missed every one of its imagined predecessors is very small. Consider the trilobites for example. These fossils are so common you can buy one for under $20, yet no fossils of a predecessor have been found!.
You mean we have hard shelled creatures but not soft shell. That we have fossils of creatures that lived for millions of years buy none of it's much shorter lived ancestor. 

9.Could an intermediate even survive?
 Evolution requires the transition from one kind to another to be gradual. And don't forget that "natural selection" is supposed to retain those individuals which have developed an advantage of some sort. How could an animal intermediate between one kind and another even survive (and why would it ever be selected for), when it would not be well-suited to either its old environment or its new environment? Can you even imagine a possible sequence of small changes which takes a creature from one kind to another, all the while keeping it not only alive, but improved?
ASIDE: Certainly a "light-sensitive spot" is better than no vision at all. But why would such a spot even develop? (evolutionists like to take this for granted). And even if it did develop, to believe that mutations of such a spot eventually brought about the tremendous complexities of the human eye strains all common sense and experience.
Um no, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jEhzAn1hDc

10.Reproduction without reproduction?
 
You are aware that cells split when they get to big right. And bacteria have sex of sorts so it is not new.

11.Plants without photosynthesis?
12.How do you explain symbiotic relationships?
actually it would make sense that evolution would grow synopsis.. Why would a all knowing god create symbiosis?
13.It's no good unless it's complete.
Watch the video.
14.Explain metamorphosis!
 How can evolution explain the metamorphosis of the butterfly? Once the caterpillar evolves into the "mass of jelly" (out of which the butterfly comes), wouldn't it appear to be "stuck"?
Are you asking about how can evolution explain change.
15.It should be easy to show evolution.
Explain evolution that takes place in millions of years, can't use micro? How about the nylon eating bacteria than. Not just micro there, it is eating something that down not exist in nature.


16.Complex things require intelligent design folks!
God requires more gods.
Gods are intelligent. If a team of gods were to one day design a human which could cross all types of terrain, could dig large holes, could carry several times its weight, found its own energy sources, could make more humans like itself, and was only 6 foot tall, Angels would marvel at this achievement. All of the angels experiences lead us to know that such a human could never come about by accident, or assemble itself by chance, even if all of the parts were available laying next to each other. And we are certain beyond doubt that a canister of hydrogen gas, no matter how long we left it there or what type of raw energy we might apply to it, would never result in such a human being produced. But we already have such a "human" - it is called an "Man", and God squashs them because they are "nothing" compared to god. And a greater God made them, and he made us. Can there be any other explanation?
Followed to the logical extreme

and the atheists, anti- theists still can't prove the unproven scientific theories. truth and logic wins every time
And how would we do that. What method would prove it... Of course now the name calling right?

Offline fish

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 8885
  • Karma: +349278/-349867
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #3 on: April 29, 2014, 04:30:02 PM »
referring to yourself?? LOL LOL LOL LOL

on how many threads/topics have you debated evolution? how many times were you PROVEN correct??? none. evolution is an unproven theory, no matter how many times you debate it. the result is always the same. Isn't the definition of insanity doing the same experiment over and over and trying for a different out come? LOL LOL of course if your theory isn't proven all you have to do is come up with a new one to try to prove what the old one couldn't! LOL LOL LOL LOL

Offline mark

  • http://www.gayalpinesurvival.com/
  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 5138
  • Karma: +90/-81225007
  • Gender: Male
  • Proud Father
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #4 on: April 29, 2014, 06:19:14 PM »
 If I were your teacher (ebilly) I would give you an F on this test. You failed miserably! "nylon eating bacteria proves evolution" Really dude?
We are not human beings having a spiritual experience.
We are spiritual beings having a human experience.
~Teilhard de Chardin

Offline ebilly99

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 933
  • Karma: +338/-153
  • Go to your profile and put something here.
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #5 on: April 29, 2014, 06:34:01 PM »
If I were your teacher (ebilly) I would give you an F on this test. You failed miserably! "nylon eating bacteria proves evolution" Really dude?
If you were a teacher you would have never passed certification. Please explain nylon eating bacteria being created when Nylon didn't exist until the 20th century.
referring to yourself?? LOL LOL LOL LOL

on how many threads/topics have you debated evolution? how many times were you PROVEN correct??? none. evolution is an unproven theory, no matter how many times you debate it. the result is always the same. Isn't the definition of insanity doing the same experiment over and over and trying for a different out come? LOL LOL of course if your theory isn't proven all you have to do is come up with a new one to try to prove what the old one couldn't! LOL LOL LOL LOL
I am correct every time. Your intellect or lack thereof does not hinder the truth of my statement.

Offline fish

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 8885
  • Karma: +349278/-349867
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #6 on: April 29, 2014, 09:15:22 PM »
in your mind you are correct? LOL LOL LOL the facts prove otherwise! LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL you and even the real scientists have failed miserably to prove evolution is fact.....still!
 LOL LOL LOL LOL

Offline mark

  • http://www.gayalpinesurvival.com/
  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 5138
  • Karma: +90/-81225007
  • Gender: Male
  • Proud Father
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #7 on: April 29, 2014, 10:58:03 PM »
There has not been a gene duplication event associated with Arthrobacter sp. K172 gaining the ability to digest the byproducts of nylon manufacture (what they essentially “eat” in the wastewater from nylon-producing plants). Rather, what happens is point mutations (single base pair changes in the DNA) that alter the active site of the enzyme EII, an enzyme the bacteria already possess. EII’s normal function is to break down a substance that is chemically similar to nylon. Thus, the mutations slightly alter EII so it can break down nylon that is very similar to the substance it normally breaks down. Clearly, this is not an example of a gain of information mutation but rather an alteration of currently existing information. Overall, the mutations are degenerative to EII because they reduce its specificity (now the bacteria can “eat” the normal product and nylon). Dr. Kevin Anderson and I in our paper addressing supposed beneficial mutations stated this about EII: Nonetheless, reduced specificity of a pre-existing enzyme is biochemically degenerative to the enzyme, even if it provides a presumed phenotypic benefit. The “beneficial” phenotype of nylon degradation requires the a priori existence of the enzyme and its specificity. Its degeneration is not a mechanism that accounts for the origin of either the enzyme or its specificity. The mutations that cause bacteria to gain the ability to eat nylon are not information-increasing, and therefore, they cannot serve as an example of the type of mutations necessary for molecules-to-man evolution.
We are not human beings having a spiritual experience.
We are spiritual beings having a human experience.
~Teilhard de Chardin

Offline ebilly99

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 933
  • Karma: +338/-153
  • Go to your profile and put something here.
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #8 on: April 30, 2014, 12:51:37 AM »
There has not been a gene duplication event associated with Arthrobacter sp. K172 gaining the ability to digest the byproducts of nylon manufacture (what they essentially “eat” in the wastewater from nylon-producing plants). Rather, what happens is point mutations (single base pair changes in the DNA) that alter the active site of the enzyme EII, an enzyme the bacteria already possess. EII’s normal function is to break down a substance that is chemically similar to nylon. Thus, the mutations slightly alter EII so it can break down nylon that is very similar to the substance it normally breaks down. Clearly, this is not an example of a gain of information mutation but rather an alteration of currently existing information. Overall, the mutations are degenerative to EII because they reduce its specificity (now the bacteria can “eat” the normal product and nylon). Dr. Kevin Anderson and I in our paper addressing supposed beneficial mutations stated this about EII: Nonetheless, reduced specificity of a pre-existing enzyme is biochemically degenerative to the enzyme, even if it provides a presumed phenotypic benefit. The “beneficial” phenotype of nylon degradation requires the a priori existence of the enzyme and its specificity. Its degeneration is not a mechanism that accounts for the origin of either the enzyme or its specificity. The mutations that cause bacteria to gain the ability to eat nylon are not information-increasing, and therefore, they cannot serve as an example of the type of mutations necessary for molecules-to-man evolution.

Creationist must have sticky fingers... They keep grasping at straws. Now it is ok if the information changes, but it isn't added. I wonder if your back hurts mark... You keep moving the goalpost.

Offline shadylane

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2196
  • Karma: +1060777/-13445
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #9 on: April 30, 2014, 01:26:01 AM »
Do You Believe that Evolution is True?

I don't know.
But the theory is more creditable than creationism.
"The problem with America is stupidity. I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?"

Offline fish

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 8885
  • Karma: +349278/-349867
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #10 on: April 30, 2014, 01:50:53 AM »
Creationism is perfectly logical. scientists have repeatedly failed to prove evolution or any of their other creation theories. the universe is too complex for scientists.  the logical conclusion is that it took a Creator to create the universe. that Creator is God. ya may not like it, but it is the ONLY logical explanation of how the universe was created and due to the complexity of everything in the universe it makes perfect sense that God created all. try as they might, scientists have tried for centuries to disprove God with what God created. an exercise in futility!

Offline littlebit

  • Cunning Linguist
  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 12946
  • Karma: +2370369/-241
  • Gender: Male
  • Home is what you make it.
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #11 on: April 30, 2014, 02:55:24 AM »
Creationism is perfectly logical. scientists have repeatedly failed to prove evolution or any of their other creation theories. the universe is too complex for scientists.  the logical conclusion is that it took a Creator to create the universe. that Creator is God. ya may not like it, but it is the ONLY logical explanation of how the universe was created and due to the complexity of everything in the universe it makes perfect sense that God created all. try as they might, scientists have tried for centuries to disprove God with what God created. an exercise in futility!

Saying something is logical doesn't make it so, no matter how many times you repeat it... Maybe you are trying to convince yourself?
Some people are like Slinkies... Not really good for anything, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down a flight of stairs.

I'd give my left arm to be ambidextrous...


“The truth is, everyone is going to end up hurting you. You just have to find the ones who are worth suffering for.”

Offline fish

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 8885
  • Karma: +349278/-349867
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #12 on: April 30, 2014, 03:25:21 AM »
nope. logic is the result of sound reasoning. scientists have for centuries tried to disprove God created the universe. none of their theories have been proven. they can't prove where the elements in their theories came from. the universe is so immense and complex, scientists are unable to prove how it was created. people that do not believe God created the universe, place their trust in scientific findings. many that support the scientific findings are blindly trusting the accuracy of the findings. they weren't there and many are not qualified to know if the experiments were conducted properly , or if there was a bias to begin with that would taint the results. when theory after theory fails to be proven, the complexity and size of the universe demands a Creator. because of scientists' repeated failings after centuries of experiments, to prove how the universe was created, it is perfectly logical to believe God created the universe. There is no other logical explanation. any human being regardless of education/ intelligence level, can understand the logic of believing God created the universe.

Offline mark

  • http://www.gayalpinesurvival.com/
  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 5138
  • Karma: +90/-81225007
  • Gender: Male
  • Proud Father
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #13 on: April 30, 2014, 11:43:40 AM »
Creationist must have sticky fingers... They keep grasping at straws. Now it is ok if the information changes, but it isn't added. I wonder if your back hurts mark... You keep moving the goalpost.
God made everything with the ability to change and adapt, has always been the creationists position. One "kind" of life does not turn into another kind!
We are not human beings having a spiritual experience.
We are spiritual beings having a human experience.
~Teilhard de Chardin

Offline ebilly99

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 933
  • Karma: +338/-153
  • Go to your profile and put something here.
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #14 on: April 30, 2014, 12:26:03 PM »
God made everything with the ability to change and adapt, has always been the creationists position. One "kind" of life does not turn into another kind!
You are not allowed to make up words. Define kind please. Are all monkeys one kind? How about rodents, are the mighty Checkachew really the same kind as the rabbit and Mouse. What about deer, are they the same kind as elk and moose, how about the horse. Take away the horns and they look similar. I want a list of all the kinds of mammals, or at least a example of when a kind isn't a kind.

Offline mark

  • http://www.gayalpinesurvival.com/
  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 5138
  • Karma: +90/-81225007
  • Gender: Male
  • Proud Father
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #15 on: April 30, 2014, 03:15:56 PM »
If they can reproduce (do it) they are the same kind! One must be very careful when using man made terms like mammal, or rodent, to describe a certain "kind" I don't have the time or energy to educate you or "make a list" of all animals. I can tell you that the words used to describe groups of animals are very misleading and probably adding to your confusion!
We are not human beings having a spiritual experience.
We are spiritual beings having a human experience.
~Teilhard de Chardin

Offline ebilly99

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 933
  • Karma: +338/-153
  • Go to your profile and put something here.
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #16 on: April 30, 2014, 03:24:42 PM »
If they can reproduce (do it) they are the same kind! One must be very careful when using man made terms like mammal, or rodent, to describe a certain "kind" I don't have the time or energy to educate you or "make a list" of all animals. I can tell you that the words used to describe groups of animals are very misleading and probably adding to your confusion!
So Species, you know like the over a million species of roaches... Or wolf, fox, Hyena would all be there own kind.

Offline littlebit

  • Cunning Linguist
  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 12946
  • Karma: +2370369/-241
  • Gender: Male
  • Home is what you make it.
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #17 on: May 01, 2014, 12:55:14 AM »
You want truth and logic? Wrap your nugget around this.

If there was a God that wanted people to know and love him he would give us emperical  evidence that he really exists. Something along the lines of him manifesting himself as a 3000ft tall living Jesus reincarnation.  I bet something like that would convert Athiest, Jews, and Muslims alike in one fell swoop.
Christians claim he is all powerful. They claim that he loves each and every one of us as his own children.  This would be a doable miracle that would save countless souls that would have suffered for eternity unnecessarily. Wouldn't you do everything in your power to save your children?
Some people are like Slinkies... Not really good for anything, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down a flight of stairs.

I'd give my left arm to be ambidextrous...


“The truth is, everyone is going to end up hurting you. You just have to find the ones who are worth suffering for.”

Offline fish

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 8885
  • Karma: +349278/-349867
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #18 on: May 01, 2014, 01:31:43 AM »
LOL LOL LOL April 1st was a month ago littlebit! LOL LOL LOL LOL  evidence of God is all around you! You just choose to deny the proof or just don't know what you are looking at!

Offline ebilly99

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 933
  • Karma: +338/-153
  • Go to your profile and put something here.
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #19 on: May 01, 2014, 01:37:49 AM »
You want truth and logic? Wrap your nugget around this.

If there was a God that wanted people to know and love him he would give us emperical  evidence that he really exists. Something along the lines of him manifesting himself as a 3000ft tall living Jesus reincarnation.  I bet something like that would convert Athiest, Jews, and Muslims alike in one fell swoop.
Christians claim he is all powerful. They claim that he loves each and every one of us as his own children.  This would be a doable miracle that would save countless souls that would have suffered for eternity unnecessarily. Wouldn't you do everything in your power to save your children?
You forget that god was kind of a jerk, you know such a jerk that he ordered the deaths of children if they disobeyed there parents or that allowed slavery. God loves to watch his creatures squirm.
Also about slavery... How do you feel about the new season of Boondocks. Biblical Slavery for the win... I guess fish and Mark would vote Uncle Ruckus.

LOL LOL LOL April 1st was a month ago littlebit! LOL LOL LOL LOL  evidence of God is all around you! You just choose to deny the proof or just don't know what you are looking at!
Nope, sorry. Your assertions are laughable. Your logic is a joke. Try to explain your evidence or just admit man was not specially created by a loving god but instead by millions of years from Primates. Evidence for a Universe without a god is all around you, you just choose to deny the proof or just don't know what you are looking at!!

Offline fish

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 8885
  • Karma: +349278/-349867
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #20 on: May 01, 2014, 02:15:24 AM »
you are a broken record ebilly! LOL LOL LOL you and the real scientists have yet to prove any of your "theories", yet you continually want to reject the one fact that makes perfect sense and is the result of sound reasoning. scientists have even resolved themselves to the fact God created the universe .Man was created by a loving god(God).if you want to believe you evolved from lower life forms, have at it! LOL LOL LOL LOL If you knew the bible inside and out like you say you do you would KNOW that believing in evolution is a waste of time and you are doing satans work!

"Evidence for a Universe without a god is all around you, you just choose to deny the proof or just don't know what you are looking at!!"

one of the stupidest things you have stated. makes no sense what so ever. the real scientists constantly try to disprove God, and they constantly fail miserably! follow the crowd of losers at your own peril! LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

 

Offline ebilly99

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 933
  • Karma: +338/-153
  • Go to your profile and put something here.
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #21 on: May 01, 2014, 02:53:12 AM »
you are a broken record ebilly! LOL LOL LOL you and the real scientists have yet to prove any of your "theories", yet you continually want to reject the one fact that makes perfect sense and is the result of sound reasoning. scientists have even resolved themselves to the fact God created the universe .Man was created by a loving god(God).if you want to believe you evolved from lower life forms, have at it! LOL LOL LOL LOL If you knew the bible inside and out like you say you do you would KNOW that believing in evolution is a waste of time and you are doing satans work!

"Evidence for a Universe without a god is all around you, you just choose to deny the proof or just don't know what you are looking at!!"

one of the stupidest things you have stated. makes no sense what so ever. the real scientists constantly try to disprove God, and they constantly fail miserably! follow the crowd of losers at your own peril! LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL
You are a broken record fish. ROFLOL you and your fake scientist have failed to even make a theory yet you continually want to reject the one that has all the evidence too it, and instead refuse to use sense or any form of reasoning. Creationist have even went so far as attack any evidence that points to natural causes because they are afraid of living life without a god. If you believe we were created from dust, have at it lol lol lol, if you knew logic inside and out like you say you do, you would know that stating something without evidence is a waste of time and you are doing nobodies work but setting mankind back...

Evidence for a god is all around you

one of the stupidest... Nope that is only the surface for you. Fake scientist can keep trying to disprove evolution. There is a reason they aren't real ones, Follow the crowd of Creatards at your own peril, just don't say it's fact.

Offline fish

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 8885
  • Karma: +349278/-349867
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #22 on: May 01, 2014, 12:57:53 PM »
Nope, I am consistant! LOL LOL I don't keep coming up with another "theory" to try and disprove God! LOL LOL LOL LOL

evolution is an incomplete and unproven theory!LOL LOL LOL LOL

the bbt is an incomplete and unproven theory! LOL LOL LOL LOL

Natural causes? LOL LOL LOL

The bible states we were created from dust. ! LOL LOL LOL LOL

I never said I knew logic inside and out. You just can't quit lying, eh? LOL LOL LOL LOL

The fact that God created the universe is self evident! if you knew the bible inside and out as you say you do, you would know that LOL LOL LOL

Evidence OF God is all around you! LOL LOL LOL

keep making your stupid statements! it is a toss up of whether you excell at lying or stupidity! LOL LOL LOL

you blindly follow the scientists disproven theories, when even someone of your substandard intelligience can understand the logic supporting God created the universe! LOL LOL LOL LO

evolution is being disproven by the lack of evidence from real scientists. LOL LOL LOL you can go back to your comic books now! LOL LOL LOL LOL

Creation is fact. It is proven everyday. the real scientists prove it everyday by not being able to prove their theories! LOL LOL LOL many resolve to the fact the universe was created by God. there is no other logical explanation!LOL LOL LOL LOL


Offline Hi

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 903
  • Karma: +13281/-13254
  • Go to your profile and put something here.
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #23 on: May 01, 2014, 03:10:58 PM »
I wanna cut and paste too!!!!

The Scientific Method

Creationists detest it so much that they've apparently invented their own, improved version, with the following highly logical rules:
Take as a given fact all those parts of the Bible we tell you to.
Use not the null hypothesis; make no attempt to disprove any creationist hypothesis; report not any negative findings.
Quote as authoritative anything a fellow creationist writes, regardless of his qualifications or subsequent discrediting of his methods or results.
Misquote or quote out of context famous "evolutionists" so that they appear to admit evolution isn't real.

The Holy Bible

That old Book persists in saying things that the creationists, who claim to take it as literal truth, have to admit are metaphorical (like the "doors" in the firmament that let the rain through). That means, of course, that they have to arbitrarily decide which parts are literally literal, and which are only metaphorically literal (and can't they twist the English language). I've never yet read a justification for who gets to make that determination and how, so I'll summarize it thus: Everything is literal except things that even we can't stomach. Even worse, the "scientifically accurate" Bible reveals not a single fact about nature that wasn't commonly known at the time. If only it had revealed the atomic structure of matter, or the inverse square law, or the existence of bacteria--or even the heliocentric solar system!

Plate Tectonics

Since this is such a new development in geophysics, creationists don't seem to have much to say about it yet. (They haven't been told yet that they can't believe in it.) Though they may not have heard it excoriated from the pulpit yet, it surely makes them uneasy, since it just doesn't jibe with young-Earth or Flood geology.

Universal Gravitation

Although "just a theory", universal gravitation continues to be, well, universal. It holds true in all places, under all conditions, so it renders the brainless quip about evolution being "just a theory" a bit specious, at best.

Ice Ages

Very inconvenient! They have to have occurred since the Flood, since, according to creationists, the surface of the Earth was reworked by the Flood (to create, for instance, the Grand Canyon practically overnight), which would have messed up all those marks of glaciers on the landscape. That means mile-thick ice sheets had to advance and retreat again and again, across half the Northern Hemisphere, with the speed of freight trains.

Size of the Earth

...has obviously expanded greatly since Noah's day, when he could, in a short period, collect pairs of all animals and birds from all over the world, without the benefit of modern air transport. Then after the Flood, the critters all had to migrate, at the double-quick, to their present habitats in Tasmania, the Galapagos, the coasts of Antarctica, Patagonia, the American Southwest, or wherever. It's clear the Earth was no more than a few hundred miles across, probably flat, and with no inconvenient oceans like, say, the Pacific.

The Slow Rate of Evolution

Having some time ago abandoned the completely silly proposition that Noah could actually have accommodated pairs--let alone sevens--of every animal species on Earth aboard the Ark, creationists have fallen back upon the rationalization that he collected not species but "kinds". They never, of course, clearly define "kind", because any such definition would create more problems in biological classification than it solved (and reveal how little they know about species diversity). Be that as it may, if a pair of the bovine "kind" walked off the Ark a few thousand years ago, they have had to evolve into all 24 present species and uncounted varieties of wild and domestic cattle since then. (Creationists: you really don't want to know how many species of the bat "kind" there are. And don't even think about beetles.) Creationists, then, are in the awkward position of believing in a much faster rate of evolution than is possible in nature, while detesting the term itself, and generally refusing to call diversification-since-the-Ark evolution (Lord, how they hate that word)!

The Number of Species in the World

There are just way too many of them! There are so many that we still don't even have a solid estimate of exactly how many--but five million is at least the right order of magnitude. That's so many that creationists have given up trying to stuff them all into the Ark (see above). A vanishingly tiny percent are even mentioned in the "scientifically accurate" Bible. Whole orders and phyla are left out. Of the few mentioned, there seems to be some slight confusion over such seemingly simple things as whether a bat is a bird or mammal, how many legs a grasshopper has, and who chews cuds and who doesn't. There's even embarrassing mention of creatures unknown to science, such as unicorns. My humbly-offered solution: Since the Bible is "scientifically accurate", then when it was written there were just a few hundred species! They could all fit onto the Ark.After the Flood (take your pick):

They speed-evolved into the millions we have now. God made a whole bunch more, just to test our faith in Holy Scripture.

Satan made a whole bunch more, just to ruin our faith in Holy Scripture. (I vote for this one, since I've been told recently by several good creationists that Satan invented evolution!)

Fossils

...have always been a thorn in the side of creationism. First of all, extinct creatures shouldn't even exist in a perfect Creation, since their very extinction implies that they were not so perfect. And there are so darn many of them, of so many different kinds. Every excuse they come up with for why there even are fossils of extinct organisms makes creationists look silly. And the very fact that they've come up with so many different, mutually exclusive explanations would seem to indicate that, essentially, they're clueless. I have personally been offered all these sound, creation-scientific explanations of what fossils are and how they got there:

Dinosaurs were too big to go on the Ark, so they got buried in the mud of the Flood.(How about extinct smaller creatures--and what about the "fact" that Noah collected pairs of all animals?)

Extinct creatures were on the Ark. They died out later. (How many seismosaurs, T. rexes, mastodons, and megatheria can you fit on the head of a pin?)

Fossils never were animals. They're a hoax by Satan and/or materialistic science.

Fossils never were animals. They're a hoax by God to test your faith. (And I will go to hell for falling for a trick pulled by the Almighty Himself? Doesn't that seem just a bit petty?)

Transitional Fossils
...can't possibly exist, since nothing ever gradually evolved into anything else. Less sophisticated creationists handle the issue by merely spouting the slogan "There are no transitional fossils". They heard that from a good born-again fundamentalist, so it must be true--no further research necessary. The few who are vaguely aware of the vast range of fossils that have been found, including beautiful examples of transitional series, merely draw lines: everything on that side of the line is ape, and everything on this side is human. If another fossil turns up with features exactly between the two, no problem--just assign it to one side or the other. No matter how fine the gradation, creationists will never admit seeing transition, because they know ahead of time that it can't exist. Amusingly, however, in series such as the hominid line leading to us, different creationist "experts" draw the line between ape and human in different places!

Human Embryos

...especially very small ones, actually have tails and gill slits. So do all mammal, bird, reptile, amphibian, and fish embryos. One would almost think they are related somehow. Thank goodness for modern Creation Science, which has taught us how to ignore, deny, or find some rationalization (anything at all will do) to explain away this and all other evidence of evolution.



158 of God's perfectly-created elephant species had already died out before the Flood.

Only one pair of the elephant "kind" (are they "clean" or "unclean"?) were aboard, and immediately afterward evolved into 160 different species, 158 of which immediately became extinct.

DNA

Nasty stuff. It's really a shame that it had to turn up and confirm predictions of relationships made by evolutionary theory perfectly. And what a dirty trick to have human DNA fit right into the distribution, right next door to the chimps'! It's just not fair. It almost looks like Someone arranged the whole thing just to make evolution appear to be true. Worse yet, this ultimate blueprint for building entire human beings turns out to be just plain chemicals, with nothing magical or even particularly unusual that sets humans aside from other living things. And those geneticists can even tinker with the stuff, and build new creatures. They can replace defective genes in people, and even put human genes into pigs. Why wasn't something put into Leviticus to forbid such ungodliness?

Their Own Coccyxes

...when examined closely via X-rays or a prepared skeleton, look disturbingly like the vestigial remnants of tails. They certainly serve no purpose nowadays, and if you've ever broken yours, you've probably wondered why we were Created with such a useless source of potential agony. (Besides, coccyx sounds downright obscene.)

Their Appendixes

Same problem as the coccyx, only it's even more likely to cause the average creationist great discomfort, and occasionally death. The scientifically literate, when cursed with appendicitis, might bewail the incomplete evolution that has left him with a useless and sometimes dangerous abdominal organ. Perhaps the creationist praises his Creator for blessing him with a "cross to bear".

Honesty and Moral Behavior

...among evolutionists. It must really irk creationists that the great majority of us "evolutionists" are basically upright, moral folks. We shouldn't be, because belief in evolution "destroys our faith in the Bible", so naturally we have "no moral guide" and "no fear of eternal damnation", and since "we think we came from monkeys", we see ourselves as "animals with no eternal souls". I'll confess it right now: my basically upright, honest, cleanly-lived life is all a sham. I'm part of the One World Government Evolutionist Conspiracy (OWGEC), and my apparent morality is merely a deception to lure unsuspecting young creationists over to the Dark Side!

Viruses

Viruses hardly fit into the creationist's view of the world at all. In the first place, nothing even remotely like them is even remotely alluded to in either Testament. About the only "biblical" disease that anyone can remember is leprosy (a bacterial disease), and there's no clue that any of the writers that mentioned it knew that it was caused by any sort of micro-organism, let alone a virus. Egyptian cattle suffered a "murrain"-- with no apparent cause other than a divine curse. A blight on crops is mentioned in a place or two, which, if it were naturally caused, might be a viral disease, but again only the disease is mentioned, not any organic cause. Then there are the "emerods" (hemorrhoids) with which God afflicted some folks he was miffed at. I have been told both of the following by "creation scientists":

The Devil created viruses.

Viruses are not in the Bible because they are "imperfect".

But the really disturbing thing about viruses is that they occupy the twilight zone between living and dead, a zone that would seem ought not to exist in a creation in which creatures were "given life", or have "the breath of life". Of course, the creationist may arbitrarily assign them to either the "living" or "dead" category, but either assignment is a forced fit. Can they be alive if they don't move, breathe, eat, excrete, or metabolize at all, and can even be crystallized, like other non-living chemicals? Can they be dead if they can self-replicate (reproduce) using the same basic methods as other living things, parasitize other creatures, and are made of nearly the same proteins and nucleic acids as we are? Evolutionary theory doesn't demand that there be a sharp distinction between living systems and nonliving molecules. That's the premise of abiogenesis, which creationists insist on lumping in with evolution, so what the heck... we'll take it. Evolutionary theory can also explain where viruses came from, or why they exist. The fact that there are presently several tentative explanations in no way threatens the structure of evolutionary theory; we're perfectly happy with hypotheses until the preponderance of evidence clearly favors one over all others. In evolutionary theory (with abiogenesis) there should be some hazy area between living and nonliving, and viruses are dwellers of that twilight zone.

The Order of Creation

...is a bottomless can of worms for literal creationists, especially if one takes literally and in their most obvious meanings both Genesis 1 and 2, which don't match in many particulars. But consider just a couple of minor difficulties in the first chapter. For one, the light of day is created before the sun from which it comes. If we assume it was some divine form of light, requiring no material source, then what need of the sun? In the same curious order were plants created before the sun, which is needed for photosynthesis (especially confounding to the day-age folks).

Goosebumps

(the bumps, not the books [although many creationists hate those "occult" books, too]) Goosebumps were obviously "created" to erect and "fluff up" the hair or fur on a hairy or furry mammal ancestor, thereby improving its insulation value against the cold. Since most of us nowadays have so little body hair as to render it useless for insulation purposes, goosebumps are another vestigial reaction whose tool (fur) is no longer with us.

Insects

...which have so many generations of nasty babies so often that in just a few years they can change. Those ugly boll weevils, for instance, develop resistance to pesticides; and those filthy peppered moths in England (Darwin's home--coincidence? I don't think so.) change the shade of their camouflage. Evolutionists want to call those piddlin' changes "evolution"--which just shows that they don't even know what the term means. So we creationists have to tell them that "evolution" means apes popping out human babies. You'd think them evil-utionists'd have that straight by now. (For folks who trust Rush Limbaugh to ever get any facts right: the above is sarcasm.)

Planets

Anybody notice that in the last few years astronomers, using improved techniques and instruments (like Hubble), have begun to discover other planets around other suns? Have we noticed that several of those solar systems are at several of the stages of planetary-system evolution hypothesized for the creation of our own system? To further increase the squirm factor for our reality-challenged fellow citizens, perhaps they would be kind enough to locate the passages in the "scientifically accurate" Bible which acknowledge that there are, in fact, other worlds.

"In our image"

That's how God made man, according to Genesis, and therefore according to creationists. But every moderately bright 8-year-old immediately comes up with two questions which are never satisfactorily answered. If any answers are offered, they are usually cobbled-up rationalizations from outside the Bible. Generally, the kid gets the message that he's better off not asking such things. The first is whom the One and Only God meant by "our"--but that's really a theological question, not related directly to creationism. The second question, however, is right on target: If man was made "in [God's] image", then Adam must have looked just like God--right? But wait--it gets more confusing. Man is immediately referred to as "them", so maybe it's not just Adam who looks like God. Then to further confound literal-minded youngsters, "...in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." If God is male (the assumption of 97.83% of all creationists), then how could a female be made in His image? Let's grant the general creationist assumptions (correct me if I'm wrong): God is male; men are made "in [His] image" in only a general way (maybe even Adam didn't look exactly like Him); and women were made with necessary differences to enable reproduction. Still a load of embarrassing questions arise. Much has been made of Adam's navel, and why he would have one, having never been attached to a placenta. I want to know if God has one. I want to know if He has a digestive tract. If so, why? Does He eat? If so, what, and why would he need to? Does He excrete? Where? What happens to it? Does He have lungs? Why would He need them? Does He have sweat glands? And naughty stuff: does He have genitals? Why would He need those? Does He even have two legs, and feet, and toes? Why would He need them, unless He's bound by gravity, as we are? Childish questions? Of course, but only because they arise from a literal (i.e., childish) reading of Genesis. But the point is profound: either God has human-like organs and glands and body parts, or He doesn't. If He does, why, and what does He use them for? If He doesn't, then made "in [His] image" has no literal meaning.

Thermodynamics according to Isaiah

The temperature of Heaven can be rather accurately computed. Our authority is the Bible, Isaiah 30:26, describing Heaven: Moreover, the light of the moon shall be as the light of the sun and the light of the sun shall be sevenfold as the light of seven days. Thus, Heaven receives from the moon as much radiation as the Earth does from the sun, and in addition seven times seven (forty-nine) times as much as the Earth does from the sun, or 50 times in all. The light we receive from the moon is 1/10,000 of the light we receive from the sun, so we can ignore that. The radiation falling on Heaven will heat it to the point where the heat lost by radiation is just equal to the heat received by radiation, i.e., Heaven loses 50 times as much heat as the Earth by radiation. Using the Stephan-Boltzmann fourth power law for radiation, we have (H/E)4 = 50 where E is the absolute temperature of the Earth, 300 K (27 C). This gives H, the absolute temperature of Heaven, as 798 K (525 C)! (For old-fashioned Americans, that's close to 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit. Your kitchen oven won't get nearly that hot.)

The exact temperature of Hell cannot be computed. However, Revelation 21:8 says: But the fearful and unbelieving... shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone. A lake of molten brimstone (or sulfur) means that its temperature must be at or below the boiling point, 444.6 C (above that point, it would be a vapor, not a lake). We have, then, that Heaven, at 525 C, is hotter than Hell, at less than 445 C.

So who says that the Bible has no accurate and useful scientific data?




Offline fish

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 8885
  • Karma: +349278/-349867
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #24 on: May 01, 2014, 04:33:54 PM »
LOL LOL LOL LOL Hi  LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

Offline littlebit

  • Cunning Linguist
  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 12946
  • Karma: +2370369/-241
  • Gender: Male
  • Home is what you make it.
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #25 on: May 01, 2014, 05:06:03 PM »
LOL LOL LOL April 1st was a month ago littlebit! LOL LOL LOL LOL  evidence of God is all around you! You just choose to deny the proof or just don't know what you are looking at!

You must have missed the part of my post that said emperical evidence.... Some thing so obviously a miracle (see 3000ft tall real life Jesus reference above) that even those crackpot secular scientist, athiest,  muslims, and Jews can't refute. Why wouldn't a loving God be willing to go above and beyond for his children?
Some people are like Slinkies... Not really good for anything, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down a flight of stairs.

I'd give my left arm to be ambidextrous...


“The truth is, everyone is going to end up hurting you. You just have to find the ones who are worth suffering for.”

Offline ebilly99

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 933
  • Karma: +338/-153
  • Go to your profile and put something here.
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #26 on: May 01, 2014, 11:31:56 PM »
Nope, I am consistant! LOL LOL I don't keep coming up with another "theory" to try and disprove God! LOL LOL LOL LOLCorrect you would have to have a theory first

evolution is an incomplete and unproven theory!LOL LOL LOL LOLIt is incomplete but it is proven. LOL LOL LOL

the bbt is an incomplete and unproven theory! LOL LOL LOL LOLAgain incomplete but it is proven. LOL LOL LOL

Natural causes? LOL LOL LOLDon't know whats so funny, it's bad you won't even consider that as a possibility. That fact alone proves that you are wrong. If you could prove god, I would be willing to listen. Heck if you could falsify evolution you would have a nobel prize. What would Falsify god, if nothing then your god is false.

The bible states we were created from dust. ! LOL LOL LOL LOLbible states that earth sits on a pillar. LOL LOL

I never said I knew logic inside and out. You just can't quit lying, eh? LOL LOL LOL LOLYou said that the bible it logical. You don't know what logic it.

The fact that God created the universe is self evident! if you knew the bible inside and out as you say you do, you would know that LOL LOL LOL The problem is that the bible isn't the only source of knowledge in the universe.

Evidence OF God is all around you! LOL LOL LOLAnd yet you can't point to a single one.

keep making your stupid statements! it is a toss up of whether you excel at lying or stupidity! LOL LOL LOLMaybe if I actually made stupid comments you would be able to understand them

you blindly follow the scientists disproven theories,Except you have failed to disprove a single one. Hollar bible all you want, but the bibles only real practical use in the real world in toilet paper. LOL LOL LOL It is not science and while there may be some good morals in it, you have to dispose of a lot of garbage first.    when even someone of your substandard intelligience can understand the logic supporting God created the universe! LOL LOL LOL LO

evolution is being disproven by the lack of evidence from real scientists.Fosil records, retroviral insertions, dna sequences, Forced evolution in agriculture, Medical advances. Seem like a lot of evidence. LOL LOL LOL you can go back to your comic books now! Yes because you don't believe in a all powerful hero that will save the day... OH WAIT LOL LOL LOL LOL

Creation is factOH Really.. It is proven everydaySo we have new creatures popping into existence... . the real scientists prove it everyday by not being able to prove their theoriesYes because real science can't do it, the fake ones do... LOL! LOL LOL LOL many resolve to the fact the universe was created by God. there is no other logical explanation!LOL LOL LOL LOL You refuse to accept there might even be one.
There is no one as blind as one that refuses to see. You might have a point, but when you refuse to even look at the other side you prove you are a ignorant fool.

Offline shadylane

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2196
  • Karma: +1060777/-13445
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #27 on: May 02, 2014, 01:31:53 AM »
Ok, lets assume the Universe is too complex for evolution.
Therefor, God must have created it.
But, the Universe is obviously older than the bible says it is.
Therefor a God other than the one in the bible must have created it....
"The problem with America is stupidity. I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?"

Offline fish

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 8885
  • Karma: +349278/-349867
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #28 on: May 02, 2014, 03:09:49 AM »
Nope I deal in facts, not theories. the universe was created by God. that is a self evident fact. none of the theories have been proven. incomplete but proven???????????LOL LOL LOL LOL

God is proven everyday. try as they might real scientists have failed miserably to disprove God. the wannabe scientists are just dumbassest. they blindly follow scienctific experiments they have not conducted and blindly believe the bs scientists shovel! LOL LOL LOL LOL

any evidence of  "natural causes" in the creation of the universe points to God! LOL LOL LOL LOL

logic is the result of sound reasoning. you wouldn't understand it! LOL LOL LOL I said the bible is logical. again I DID NOT say I knew logic inside and out. you are a liar by stating I said that. LOL LOL LOL LOL

I have given many proofs, you simply deny the truth and logic involved!

God is the source of all knowledge in the universe. scientists just twist it to try to disprove God, they have repeatedly failed miserably! LOL LOL LOL LOL

I don't have to disprove what hasn't been proven! LOL LOL LOL LOL you are a broken record!

odd you would say that about the bible. a book you say you know inside and out. that you chose to stop believing in God and it was the hardest thing you ever had to do.

Odd you have stated you would take a stand FOR Christianity, but still blaspheme God at every opportunity. Go ahead and slam about the inspired word of God. If you knew the bible inside and out like you say you do, you know what's coming!

 incomplete fosil(fossil) record proves evolution? LOL LOL LOL LOL

well at least you admit why you read comic books! LOL LOL LOL

the real scientists prove it everyday by not being able to prove their theories Yes because real science can't do it, the fake ones do... LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL real science can't prove creation, but the fake science can??????????? LOL LOL LOL LOL

when scientists include God in the "theorie" I might listen. which theory states "this is how we think God created the universe"?

only a fool blindly follows a theory that is unproven, as fact!


Offline fish

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 8885
  • Karma: +349278/-349867
    • View Profile
Re: Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
« Reply #29 on: May 02, 2014, 03:12:55 AM »
how old does the bible say the universe is? state the bible verse???

better read genesis again. God was around BEFORE the earth was created , and before the bible was written!