Adolf Hitler - The World's Most Infamous Creationist

[Golan]

We do not know what happened at the singularity which formed the universe, no. Not yet. Also we do not know what were the first chemical steps to the origin of life.

No one is allowed to answer 'I don't know' because 'I don't know' is just not good enough, that's why creationists must say 'a magic man did it', it answers nothing but it makes them feel good all over.

 

[mathetes123]

No one is allowed to answer 'I don't know' because 'I don't know' is just not good enough, that's why creationists must say 'a magic man did it', it answers nothing but it makes them feel good all over.

What makes more sense, an intelligent creator was the cause for the creation or that everything created itself from nothing?

Yours is not the reasonable, logical position. In fact, evolution requires much more faith than creationism.

 

[dad]

...an intelligent creator who came from nothing

Oh? Did God say that?

making everything from nothing,

People in the fishbowl think everything that is or was must be here in the fishbowl. The terms something and nothing are relative.

Your position is logical even though you have turned one problem into two, I don't think it's supposed to work like that?

If you do not know, then who cares how many problems it is you do not know?

Surly the idea is to solve the problem not add another problem to the one we already have.

I don't think man can solve the problem of how creation worked. That is the problem!

 

[fireof god98]

What makes more sense, an intelligent creator was the cause for the creation or that everything created itself from nothing?

Yours is not the reasonable, logical position. In fact, evolution requires much more faith than creationism.

evolution dos not need faith when it has enough evidence for it. its easy to say god did it but how did god do it. why.

 

[dad]

evolution dos not need faith when it has enough evidence for it. its easy to say god did it but how did god do it. why.

Come on now, can you even define evolution!?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Come on now, can you even define evolution!?

I can, can you define kind? I bet that you cannot. Most creationist can only give a list of kinds. They have no working definition of kind. One that would tell us what criteria to use to judge whether animal A and animal B are different kind or not.

 

[fireof god98]

Come on now, can you even define evolution!?

at least i learned it from somewhere other than a creationist book

 

[dad]

I can,

Great, so do it.

can you define kind? I bet that you cannot.

Depends on the context.

Most creationist can only give a list of kinds. They have no working definition of kind. One that would tell us what criteria to use to judge whether animal A and animal B are different kind or not.

If you already know A is different than B, obviously you must have some reason. Let me try that then. ... Animal A is a lion. Animal B is a wolf. The criteria I use is that God gave me a brain and eyes.

 

[dad]

at least i learned it from somewhere other than a creationist book

So you can define evolution? I don't care where you learned it! What are you waiting for..Christmas?

 

[fireof god98]

So you can define evolution? I don't care where you learned it! What are you waiting for..Christmas?

Evolution is the slow process that changes animals and plants (i kept it simple for you) natural selection, variation,common descent,gradualism all play a role in evolution. great Christmas reference

 

[Subduction Zone]

Great, so do it.


Depends on the context.


If you already know A is different than B, obviously you must have some reason. Let me try that then. ... Animal A is a lion. Animal B is a wolf. The criteria I use is that God gave me a brain and eyes.

That is an outright failure. If you want to play that way you lost already.

 

[dad]

Evolution is the slow process that changes animals and plants (i kept it simple for you)

Excellent!!! Now the question arises, how long was the process of evolving slow, and how can you prove it?

The evolving just after the flood and before it would have had to have been very very fast.

 

[dad]

That is an outright failure. If you want to play that way you lost already.

No. I already won. A kind is now any kind of animal. A created kind was the original created kind.

 

[fireof god98]

Excellent!!! Now the question arises, how long was the process of evolving slow, and how can you prove it?

The evolving just after the flood and before it would have had to have been very very fast.

i forgot to mention Species multiply. we split from the chimps 6-9 million years ago. the pattern of resemblance you see when you compare genes using Modern DNA techniques compare the genes of any animals and then plot out how they are similar and they fit perfect it is a family tree. a police man dos not see a crime and yet can still solve the crime think of evolution in this manner

 

[Subduction Zone]

No. I already won. A kind is now any kind of animal. A created kind was the original created kind.

Except you cannot define it.

You lost.

One more time, you have an animal A and an animal B. How do you tell if they are the same kind or not. I can tell you how to tell if two animals are the same species or not. Why can't you define kind? Here is a hint, assuming that kinds were "created kinds" is begging the question. Do so again and you lost.

 

[fireof god98]

evolutionary change occurs through incremental small changes within populations; new species are not created suddenly

 

[Subduction Zone]

No need to rush your definition of kind dad.

I am going to bed now. This is not an easy challenge. I have not seen a creationist that can do rise to it yet.

 

[dad]

i forgot to mention Species multiply. we split from the chimps 6-9 million years ago.

Speak for yourselves.

the pattern of resemblance you see when you compare genes using Modern DNA techniques compare the genes of any animals and then plot out how they are similar and they fit perfect it is a family tree.

False. Take away the assumptions used and we have nothing like that. Specify exactly how your dna is similar to any animal?

 

[dad]

Except you cannot define it.

You lost.

How can I define 'it', when you do not say what it is? A created kind? That was a kind long long ago. The created trait of evolving obviously would muddy the waters by the present time.

One more time, you have an animal A and an animal B. How do you tell if they are the same kind or not.

Name the animals.

I can tell you how to tell if two animals are the same species or not.

Can you really though? Then do it using an example.

Why can't you define kind?

Created kind?

Here is a hint, assuming that kinds were "created kinds" is begging the question. Do so again and you lost.

So define kinds then, if you do not mean created kind? You mean current kind of animal? We are not mind readers here.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

How can I define 'it', when you do not say what it is? A created kind? That was a kind long long ago. The created trait of evolving obviously would muddy the waters by the present time.
Name the animals.



Can you really though? Then do it using an example.


Created kind?

So define kinds then, if you do not mean created kind? You mean current kind of animal? We are not mind readers here.

As if you hadn't lost enough already.