Evolution is a farce: Evidence

a reply to: Noinden

Thanks, but I was responding to BornToWatch. Cool, good to see you live in the "top of the world" hemisphere...hehe

a reply to: Barcs

Haven't you seen Waterworld? Sheesh! God obviously gave him gills.

As so Jonah is here masquerading as borntowatch. Poor whale.

originally posted by: BlackManINC

originally posted by: ManFromEurope
a reply to: BlackManINC
..


Lets start at the beginning: the beginning of life didn't rely on evolution.

According to the evolutionist, the beginning of life relied on the evolution of amino acids into proteins, so yes evolution does rely on the origin of life,...

But... that is exactly the opposite of what I wrote?! Do you understand that the transition from amino acids into proteins didn't have ANYTHING to do with evolution? As there is no evolutionary pressure for this transition as there is no competition between amino acids to form a "fitter" form like a protein?

a reply to: Daedalus

and then there are the ones who just live, believe what they believe, don't try to convert people, and don't belittle, ridicule, or divorce themselves (socially) from people who don't think and believe as they do..

Amen!

To all Zealots out there. There is still hope for you.

a reply to: borntowatch

I am the one asking for scientific evidence, you are the one believing evolution in a vacuum, the pseudo science.

So apart from one "altered" dubious paragraph from Josephus no other historian deemed jesus worthy of a mention. Vacuum indeed.

a reply to: borntowatch

Passive aggressive? If my passive aggressive slip is showing then does that surprise you, I just follow a Roman cult run by Paul.

My apologies, yes the semites like the romans wore skirts or togas or kaftans.

a reply to: borntowatch

Dont think they needed an ark and protection from a flood

Conveniently you miss the point."gods" own words "take 2 of every animal/bird/reptile" etc

Questions about whether a mythological creature was real or not, notwithstanding ...

Where is the "evidence" promised in the title again?

Where is the "evidence" that evolution is a farce?

The only thing I've seen are a few fringe videos from Youtube, which of course, can be used to "prove" things like the existence of ghosts, Bigfoot and even Superman (hey, I saw the documentary clip of him flying around!)

Please. Evidence?

Facts?

Counter-arguments, theories, reasoning based on facts?

Anything, anything?

a reply to: raymundoko

From the OP

I am sharing these with you to "prove" that your religion is wrong. Many people do that to what they consider religious people on this site so "don't hate me for doing the same." I am doing the same except I am doing it not to ridicule or mock but to "show you the light."

Welcome and be a comrade in Jesus. What I highlighted about the OP above is what I call "baiting" the non beleiver atheist agnostic etc.

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: borntowatch

Dont think they needed an ark and protection from a flood

Conveniently you miss the point."gods" own words "take 2 of every animal/bird/reptile" etc

Yerah thats right, just read a 2 to 6000 year old book and believe its written with modern scientific concepts and in English.

I miss the point?

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: borntowatch

I am the one asking for scientific evidence, you are the one believing evolution in a vacuum, the pseudo science.

So apart from one "altered" dubious paragraph from Josephus no other historian deemed jesus worthy of a mention. Vacuum indeed.

So what, we both disagree, get over it.
Your faith is channelled differently to mine, live with it.

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: borntowatch

Ahh the "I can't deny evolution so I will place false distinction in it" gambit. Evolution is neither micro nor macro. It just is. Wither it happens or it does not, and there is ample evidence it happens, and its been shown here.

Well show me the evidence of micro turning in to macro, then you win
Easy peasy isnt it.

Now remember science is by definition
Repeatable
Observable and
Testable

or its a pseudo science like astrology

a reply to: borntowatch

If you still want to consider your 6000 years old calendar, I suggest you have a look at this thread.

a reply to: borntowatch

I accept that you believe in evolution,

They dont believe in evolution. They hold the theory as "best model" with sufficient evidence, and it keeps getting refined. So stop trying to use the word belief. It belongs in metaphysics. To most that are truly spiritual the matter of "god" is not faith, but gnosis.
Faith comes into the equation when you hope that the Emperor Constantines motives were "godly" when formalizing the christian cult.

So which of the Deutoronomical laws (god the same yesterday, today and tomorrow and all that jazz) do you adhere to?

Or do you just chuck them out on "faith" in Paul?

a reply to: borntowatch

So you accept that "microevolution" occurs. What then is the biological mechanism that prevents the small changes of "microevolution" from accruing into the larges changes of "macroevolution?"

a reply to: borntowatch

Well Gryph, if its science then show me irrefutable evidence.
Its in your court

Interesting that you would use the word court; got me thinking....

If you were to put the biblical account as opposed to evolution to a court of law and bought in expert witness' then it would still be down to a judge to have the final say. Doesnt mean the truth will out. Just means that it depends on the judge, how well the expert witnesses argue, what the jurors are daydreaming about during a technical testimony...

Shot yourself in the foot; please show me irrefutable evidence of Young Earth Creation

a reply to: ManFromEurope

Yes they realized that a long time ago which is what I pointed out in my video. So what exactly is your point? No actual mechanism has been given for the transition from water based life to man either. I have pointed out that every example you people have given thus far on this thread as mechanisms for common ancestry are nothing more than your interpretations of what is actually observed.

Meanwhile you people demand that creationists provide evidence for their worldview. Well, when it comes to science I`m really not concerned about trying to mold what are often mutually exclusive scientific observations into my worldview like you people laughably try and do with your evolutionary view. I cut through the bull sh!t evolutionist interpretations to get to the observations, to make it known that whats observed is no proof at all for evolution.

a reply to: borntowatch



so once again...you're not making much sense.....

so do you like kent, because you believe he is genuine, legitimate, and support his views? or do you just like him because the mention of his name pisses people off, but you acknowledge that he's a complete fraud?

speaking within the confines and framework of religious dogma, Kent Hovind is more like tap water...

a reply to: borntowatch

Bit like me asking you what bible verse makes you not believe in the bible.

I am a vengeful god...OT

I am a changing god...OT

I never change...OT

I am the Son of Man...NT

forgive them...NT

as your god forgives you...NT

(and then they became the "trinity")

I think you get the picture and I cant be bothered looking up the quotes.

originally posted by: borntowatch

Yerah thats right, just read a 2 to 6000 year old book and believe its written with modern scientific concepts and in English.

I miss the point?

That kind of explains it all. Amish?
What are 4000 years in a time span, what could possibly happen in such a short period of time? Why are you using a PC? There is no word in the Bible that you are aloud to, is there? Uh oh, you willingly took the markof the devil...
0110100101100100011010010110111101110100