sweetycakes Posted January 15, 2008 Group: Royal Member Followers: 8 Topic Count: 162 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 7,858 Content Per Day: 1.13 Reputation: 2,113 Days Won: 0 Joined: 04/21/2005 Status: Offline Birthday: 03/23/1964 Share Posted January 15, 2008 the big bang wasnt an explosion it was a rapid expansion of space time, caused by the debstabilization of a proto atom that lay outside our univserse Right...........that clears that up, then. :whistling: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharonvinchrist Posted January 15, 2008 Group: Members Followers: 1 Topic Count: 0 Topics Per Day: 0 Content Count: 57 Content Per Day: 0.01 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/13/2008 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/11/1963 Share Posted January 15, 2008 We are not froom the ape family God made us in His image................. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fraught Posted January 15, 2008 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 105 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 1,741 Content Per Day: 0.28 Reputation: 28 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/23/2007 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/30/1959 Share Posted January 15, 2008 Species are only in our minds..it is a human idea that is not mirroed in reality Agreed, partially. There are groups of living organisms bearing resemblance that are taken as different species thanks to the essentially arbitrary nature of definitions and systematics. God said He created different kinds which do not necessarily correlate with our definition of species. That aspect alone can greatly undermine the overrated issue of observed speciation. ...the strongest evidence of evolution is genetics..where we can trace precisely our lineage back to chimp like ancestors..and then farther back into the great apes..then primates etc etc etc Can you provide any online reference in this regard? Surely you have seen the evidence that humans and chimps are 98% the same in our DNA..well as you go back into the great ape family the fartheer away from chimps you get, the farther away from humans you get..now if you found a say worm..that had 98% DNA in common with a man..that would be a huge problem for evolution..but we have never found such a worm and infact it simply couldnt exist..because in order to have 98% of your DNA be the same as man..you would be very very very similar to man..just like chimps are using answers in genesis as a source? LOL *edit links* look at the link on the right labeled why medicine needs evolution or do some research on the best hope for curing aids..heres a hint..it is based 100% on darwin's natural selection hmmmmm . . . i can't remember where i read this, but some are now saying we are even more closely related to dogs. are not all creature of dna related? i bring this up only in the hopes that you will know right where to look for that fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HopesDaughter Posted January 15, 2008 Group: Members Followers: 0 Topic Count: 13 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 47 Content Per Day: 0.01 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/04/2007 Status: Offline Author Share Posted January 15, 2008 (edited) It is sad to say but I am no closer to the answer of why atheists assume evolution is fact. No one has been helpful with that answer as they try to aviod the question. I must resort to what I believe is the real answer and that is Darwinism gives them the perfect alibi to deny God or so they think. This is a letter from a friend of mine who wanted me to print it here. I don Edited January 15, 2008 by HopesDaughter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Simian Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 What does Ken Ham have to do with it? You are the one giving the excuses as to why the evidence is not there. You are actually admiting there is no evdence for evolution. You can't even admit that science (including youself) has to make certain assumptions so that it can collect data to prove and disprove the assumption. Darwin Himself said: "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 breack down." Well Darwin set the logical paramaters and now we know the truth. Do you admit it? No you do like most good evolutionists you ignore evidence hence this thread. IDers play by the scientific rules you keep trying to change them than you accuse us of operating on the basis of faith not science "the big bang wasnt an explosion it was a rapid expansion of space time, caused by the debstabilization of a proto atom that lay outside our univserse the big bang's name is a bit of a misnomer and several people would love to see it renamed something else because so many people think it is an explosion..but its not even close" Now how can we devise a test to what you have written. It is a downright dogmatic statement of faith! ken ham is one of the stupid IDers and Creationists that think the bacterial flaggelum couldnt have evolved give me ONE just ONE well understoof biological process that couldnt have evolved ID is not science..its ideas are not testable..evolution is I dont make excuses..the evidence is there..but what you demand is not..you set unreasonable goals given the reality of our planet..can you trace every human back to adam and eve and say with 100% accuracy that is their lineage? if so..i want my ENTIRE family tree how could we test for the big bang? well first off the easiest way would be a cosmic backgoround radiation that is almost 100% consistent evrywhere in the universe...ever turn to a radio station and get static instead of radio broadcasts? wow..we just proved cosmic background radiation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Simian Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 It is sad to say but I am no closer to the answer of why atheists assume evolution is fact. No one has been helpful with that answer as they try to aviod the question. I must resort to what I believe is the real answer and that is Darwinism gives them the perfect alibi to deny God or so they think. This is a letter from a friend of mine who wanted me to print it here. I don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Simian Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 . Evolution is used by Satan to keep deceiving the lost. Interesting. Did Satan plant all those nasty fossils? No. The fossils are real. But fossils don't prove evolution, only extinction of species. Your sarcasm is uncalled for and unappreciated. Ah, sorry about the saracasm. But you seem to be suggesting that the hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of scientists who are studying evolution are somehow being "used by Satan". There are by the way, many fossils of extant species as well. A question---You agree that fossils show that, for example, T rex is extinct. When did that extinction take place? Evolution is of satan..go here for proof!!! http://img150.imageshack.us/img150/7493/25...eciestitom4.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HopesDaughter Posted January 15, 2008 Group: Members Followers: 0 Topic Count: 13 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 47 Content Per Day: 0.01 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/04/2007 Status: Offline Author Share Posted January 15, 2008 Might I also add that within a species there is a threshold or boundary, if you will, that cannot be crossed for that species. It is to say there is only a certain number of times that a species can be manipulated. This was proven by a certain monk with breeding of pea plants. Forgot his name but I can look him up if you are interested. What is the basis for that boundary for a species? What do you mean by manipulation of a species? How many times can it be manipulated? The monk was Gregor Mendel. He did work with pea plants, mid 1800's I think. Please explain to me about his "proof" regarding that species boundary. Wait, don't bother. That is not what he did. Actually he did some of the really early work on dominant and recessive traits. His work was pretty much ignored for some time, it was rediscovered in the early 1900's. It was about as basic as you can get. It has nothing to do with any species boundary. Please learn some science and make some attempt to understand what you are writing about. Thanks. You started out fairly convincingly but what an ugly and spiteful remark you have made at the end of your post and for what reason? If this is how you attract others (Christians) to engage you in conversations I can see why so few (that is to say nil) have been engaged over the length of time you have been on the message boards circuit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HopesDaughter Posted January 15, 2008 Group: Members Followers: 0 Topic Count: 13 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 47 Content Per Day: 0.01 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/04/2007 Status: Offline Author Share Posted January 15, 2008 It is sad to say but I am no closer to the answer of why atheists assume evolution is fact. No one has been helpful with that answer as they try to aviod the question. I must resort to what I believe is the real answer and that is Darwinism gives them the perfect alibi to deny God or so they think. This is a letter from a friend of mine who wanted me to print it here. I don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HopesDaughter Posted January 15, 2008 Group: Members Followers: 0 Topic Count: 13 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 47 Content Per Day: 0.01 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/04/2007 Status: Offline Author Share Posted January 15, 2008 (edited) What does Ken Ham have to do with it? You are the one giving the excuses as to why the evidence is not there. You are actually admiting there is no evdence for evolution. You can't even admit that science (including youself) has to make certain assumptions so that it can collect data to prove and disprove the assumption. Darwin Himself said: "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 breack down." Well Darwin set the logical paramaters and now we know the truth. Do you admit it? No you do like most good evolutionists you ignore evidence hence this thread. IDers play by the scientific rules you keep trying to change them than you accuse us of operating on the basis of faith not science "the big bang wasnt an explosion it was a rapid expansion of space time, caused by the debstabilization of a proto atom that lay outside our univserse the big bang's name is a bit of a misnomer and several people would love to see it renamed something else because so many people think it is an explosion..but its not even close" Now how can we devise a test to what you have written. It is a downright dogmatic statement of faith! ken ham is one of the stupid IDers and Creationists that think the bacterial flaggelum couldnt have evolved give me ONE just ONE well understoof biological process that couldnt have evolved ID is not science..its ideas are not testable..evolution is I dont make excuses..the evidence is there..but what you demand is not..you set unreasonable goals given the reality of our planet..can you trace every human back to adam and eve and say with 100% accuracy that is their lineage? if so..i want my ENTIRE family tree how could we test for the big bang? well first off the easiest way would be a cosmic backgoround radiation that is almost 100% consistent evrywhere in the universe...ever turn to a radio station and get static instead of radio broadcasts? wow..we just proved cosmic background radiation When I asked you. Edited January 15, 2008 by HopesDaughter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts