Adolf Hitler - The World's Most Infamous Creationist

[Subduction Zone]

Your reply is a nice tap dance - around the fact there are only gap fossils. Why are there millions of fossils but no finely graduated ones between the gaps? If they DO NOT exist, then say so. Say they do not exist - that the process of Evolution has NO FOSSIL EVIDENCE. The Evolutionary Tree becomes conjecture. A trained Stratigrapher is teaching you this.

Pure nonsense and you know it. You will not even define "gap fossils". That is a sign that you know that you are wrong. And there are finely graduated ones. You were shown the examples with foraminifera more than once. You will also find it with crinoids and other sea creatures.

You are clearly not a "trained stratigrapher". A trained stratigrapher would not keep making the countless gross errors that you keep making. You are not even fooling your creationists allies.

Tap dance number 2: you we're mute on THE VERY FOUNDATION of evolution. Evolution cannot exist if life did not come about through physical-chemical processes. Since there is no evidence of the origin of life your walking by faith to say it occurred. No scientist has a clue of how to go into a lab with pristine conditions and chemicals and make ANY form of life, much less a horse or bird.

Wrong. Why do you claim that? Now odds are that life did arise by abiogenesis. We are not going to find direct evidence of that. The single cellular life that first arose would not be preserved in the fossil record and a trained stratigrapher would have know that. See, you are the one who keeps proving that you are not what you claim that you are. And what evidence do you have that even if the first life was created that it could not evolve? If you cannot supply any evidence to back up that claim we all know it is worthless.

Tap dance number 3: you cannot say this Physical realm IS NOT a Creation, nor can you say what you are made of WAS NOT Created.

What tap dance? Again, you are being absurdly foolish. There are a lot of things that cannot be proven absolutely. So what? You cannot prove that everything on Earth was due to a Magic Teapot on the far side of the Moon. Does that mean we should give any credence to such a belief? Why or why not?

You really avoid looking at the foundation Naturalism is built upon. You will lie before all if you say you walk by evidence and evidence alone.

Whoa!! Watch that lie word. What I said is absolutely true and you do not have one whit of evidence against my claim. I have more evidence that I am telling the truth about "Naturalism" than you have evidence that supports your claim that you are a stratigrapher.

We ARE NOT talking about Creationism, although you insert such. We are talking about your foundation, the foundation you stand on to claim what you do.

I'm pointing at your foundation.


.

If you are pointing at my foundation you are pointing at logic, reason, and evidence.

And you brought up creation and creationism several times in this post. Who are you trying to fool?

 

[dad]

Wrong. You could not refute that simple claim. But then, failure is your game.

Nothing simple about dancing around avoiding any and everything! If you had some clear honest point all would be aware of it long ago.

Then they would all starve to death. I am not telling the lions this, nature is.

Idiocy. Present nature tells future lions nothing.

They are not set up to digest grass.

Duh. Try dealing with the future context of lions in a different nature, that you know nothing about, rather than your boring fishbowl routine.

So it seems that you are claiming your god in his cruelty will force lions and other predators to starve to death.

In a different nature, lions eat grass, that is more feasting than starving.

Loudmouth has presented it several times. I have posted it too. You cannot answer to the fact that we can observe radioactive decay through telescopes in the gas of novas many hundreds of thousands of years ago.

Ha. What lard. You have NO clue as to distances because you only assumed time existed out there and space and laws as we know it. All you have is decay ON earth being observed from somewhere. Even that is subject to debate. You have vague religion that you cannot defend or even put on the table.

The rate of radioactive decay was the same then as it is now.

There is no then. We see what we see now. The then is manufactured and belief only.

We can show rocks on the Earth with two totally different parent and daughter products.

Just because different materials exist in rocks does not mean anything like you want it to mean. Unless the present state had existed, then HOW the materials got there is NOT determined by this nature and how things now work.

Once more in English please.

There was no first lifeform, so if you define evolution as including or involving one, you are wrong.

Wrong all counts.

No, actually exactly correct.

Simply pro-science.

So called science you mean.

My beliefs are based upon observable evidence only.

False. You color what we can observe with beliefs. Then you try to pretend you have none. Hypocritical.

How can you be anti something that does not exist?

The bible exists.
The God of the bible exists for millions of people, and known. Creation is no secret either. What you preach is against creation and God and the bible. It will do no good to be childish and pretend they don't exist.

 

[biggles53]

Ha. What lard. You have NO clue as to distances because you only assumed time existed out there and space and laws as we know it. All you have is decay ON earth being observed from somewhere. Even that is subject to debate. You have vague religion that you cannot defend or even put on the table.
There is no then. We see what we see now. The then is manufactured and belief only.

Ok...now you've done it........now you've entered MY bailiwick of mathematics.....

And you couldn't be more wrong...!

The distances you speak of can, yes, be calculated by the time that it takes light to reach us..........HOWEVER, it's not the only way....

Remember the trigonometry you learnt (or should have) in high school...? It's a very simple means of calculating DISTANCE by triangulating the distant point with two other points that have a known separating distance......and guess what....!?

Thanks to those ancient Greeks, combined with the technology such as the Hubble telescope, we can accurately measure the distances to those stars and galaxies so far away.....

I'm sure you'll want to know the results.....?

 

[USincognito]

Your reply is a nice tap dance - around the fact there are only gap fossils.

Are you ever going to define "gap fossils" for us?

Tap dance number 2: you we're mute on THE VERY FOUNDATION of evolution. Evolution cannot exist if life did not come about through physical-chemical processes.

Horsefeathers and poppycock! The advent of life is not the very foundation of evolution. That would be the imperfect replication the transferrance of genetic material to subsequent generations. Life on earth could come about due to directed panspermia, fiat creation by God or be an experiment by hyper-dimensional high schoolers. NONE of those sources for the advent of life on earth would effect evolution one iota.

Tap dance number 3: you cannot say this Physical realm IS NOT a Creation, nor can you say what you are made of WAS NOT Created.

What does this have to do with evolution?

I'm pointing at your foundation.

It is one that's a photo but you claim that it's a cartoon?

 

[dad]

Ok...now you've done it........now you've entered MY bailiwick of mathematics.....

And you couldn't be more wrong...!

The distances you speak of can, yes, be calculated by the time that it takes light to reach us..........HOWEVER, it's not the only way....

Bailiwick smailiwick..the point was that if some basics were different in deep space, such as time itself, then maybe a plastic ruler constantly stuck end over end, may not be able to measure distances to far stars.

Even within the standard fishbowl silly models, you think space is expanding, so now, you would have to face that. If you finally got your little ruler foot by foot to a star say, (by man's reckoning) 1,000,000 ly away, by the time you got the next million ly years, space may have expanded (in man's models) many thousands of ly.

Remember the trigonometry you learnt (or should have) in high school...? It's a very simple means of calculating DISTANCE by triangulating the distant point with two other points that have a known separating distance......and guess what....!?

No. That doesn't apply in space and time that are different! So maybe it will not work. It will work on and near earth.

Thanks to those ancient Greeks, combined with the technology such as the Hubble telescope, we can accurately measure the distances to those stars and galaxies so far away.....

I'm sure you'll want to know the results.....?

There again, leaving aside the differences in laws or space, TIME is still a part of the trig measurement! Earth time, to be exact! For example it might be several months for 2 separate measurements from earth in a parallax measurement!



You guys are hooped.

 

[Subduction Zone]

And yet dad to date can show no evidence for his claims.

Call me when you have something.

 

[dad]

And yet dad to date can show no evidence for his claims.

Call me when you have something.

No thanks. I'd rather talk over you.

Leaving aside the differences in laws or space, TIME is still a part of the trig measurement! Earth time, to be exact! For example it might be several months for 2 separate measurements from earth in a parallax measurement!

 

[Subduction Zone]

No thanks. I'd rather talk over you.

Leaving aside the differences in laws or space, TIME is still a part of the trig measurement! Earth time, to be exact! For example it might be several months for 2 separate measurements from earth in a parallax measurement!

You can't talk over me when you have nothing but delusions.

Not even your fellow Christians believe you.

The simple math of radiometric dating shows that you are wrong. Until you can explain how to different elements, decaying at two different decay rates can give us the same date, and with math and not with nonsense you have nothing.

Not even the few creation "scientists" that can do math have been able to show that. So how are you going to do it?

 

[dad]

You can't talk over me when you have nothing but delusions.

Not even your fellow Christians believe you.

The simple math of radiometric dating shows that you are wrong. Until you can explain how to different elements, decaying at two different decay rates can give us the same date, and with math and not with nonsense you have nothing.

Not even the few creation "scientists" that can do math have been able to show that. So how are you going to do it?

The religion of present state decay dating involves math, yes. So does making Disney land.

As for 'decaying at two different decay rates' I have no idea where you dredged that up. Can you show any decay at all existed??

 

[Subduction Zone]

The religion of present state decay dating involves math, yes. So does making Disney land.




dad, don't try to insult people with your misunderstandings. Acceptance of the world as it is is not a religion. The acceptance of radioactive dating is based upon direct observation, not by faith.

Now those who cannot do the math may think it is magical and a religion. People who know better know that is not the case.

As for 'decaying at two different decay rates' I have no idea where you dredged that up. Can you show any decay at all existed??

Every radioactive element decays at a different rate. That is something you should have learned in high school. You can observe decay yourself, you don't have to trust me.

 

[AV1611VET]

The religion of present state decay dating involves math, yes. So does making Disney land.

As for 'decaying at two different decay rates' I have no idea where you dredged that up. Can you show any decay at all existed??

Everything is decaying and running down.

Even DNA is described as "twisted."

Is it any wonder we "mutants" look forward to a New Earth?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Everything is decaying and running down.

Even DNA is described as "twisted."

Is it any wonder we "mutants" look forward to a New Earth?

The "everything is running down claim" is a poor way to try to express the Second Law of Thermodynamics. It is poor since it is not correct. We can show things "running up" in nature. The very existence of life debunks that definition of the SLoT.

And the fact that DNA is in a helical shape does not mean that it is decaying at all. That is simply the shape that it takes due to the laws of physics. No more, and no less.

 

[AV1611VET]

The "everything is running down claim" is a poor way to try to express the Second Law of Thermodynamics. It is poor since it is not correct. We can show things "running up" in nature. The very existence of life debunks that definition of the SLoT.

In the end though, the law of averages will gitcha.

 

[dad]

Everything is decaying and running down.

Even DNA is described as "twisted."

Is it any wonder we "mutants" look forward to a New Earth?

Right. Entropy. It seemed subduction z was claiming that there was decay in the former days, such as say, Noah's. If so, I would have been interested to see evidence.

 

[dad]

The "everything is running down claim" is a poor way to try to express the Second Law of Thermodynamics. It is poor since it is not correct. We can show things "running up" in nature. The very existence of life debunks that definition of the SLoT.

And the fact that DNA is in a helical shape does not mean that it is decaying at all. That is simply the shape that it takes due to the laws of physics. No more, and no less.

Man dies a lot faster now than Noah did. According to God, then, there is a lot more or less going on now!

 

[dad]

Now those who cannot do the math may think it is magical and a religion. People who know better know that is not the case.

I agree. Actual math doesn't support your religion of a same state past in any way. If it did, you would post some rather than making much ado about nothing, and tip toeing in the tulips all day.

Every radioactive element decays at a different rate.

Duh, ya think?

That is something you should have learned in high school. You can observe decay yourself, you don't have to trust me.

The issue is you talking about some different decay in the past, for example in Noah's day. Once again, prove there was any decay at all then, or stop claiming some.

 

[HitchSlap]

Man dies a lot faster now than Noah did. According to God, then, there is a lot more or less going on now!

Actually, Noah wasn't a real person, and we're living longer than we ever have.

 

[dad]

Actually, Noah wasn't a real person, and we're living longer than we ever have.

Actually you have no way of knowing that whatsoever. Abraham visited Noah according to Jewish traditions.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Right. Entropy. It seemed subduction z was claiming that there was decay in the former days, such as say, Noah's. If so, I would have been interested to see evidence.

Radioactive decay has existed as long as the universe has existed. We have given you evidence. You denied it. Denial of evidence only shows that you do not understand science and have no business arguing against it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Actually you have no way of knowing that whatsoever. Abraham visited Noah according to Jewish traditions.

Don't you mean according to Jewish myth?