Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
That is my point, there is a difference between: "evilution" and evolution. I have said many times there is no conflict between true science (evolution) and the Bible. The problem is that "evilution" is a fake, a copy or a counterfeit of the real thing. Science needs to clean up their own ranks to get rid of bad science. In time they do. That really is what science is suppose to be all about.
Excuse me, but since when is evolution "true science"?
...because there wouldbe evidence to support evolution,
...and DNA would be able to write itself by means of data corruption and selection of the viable remnants of mutated life.
So they say, but so they can't show...
The irony being that its science that destroys the famous 19th century conjecture...
But that will take a generation to trickle down to the sheeple, as usual...
I have more options.That is fine with me, call it theistic evolution if you want. So really our choice is are we going to endorse theistic evolution or atheistic evolution.
There are no good reasons to believe you.I have more options.
The explanatory power of a conscious supernatural causer and designer-manufacturer (God), or even a company of designer-manufacturers, having created living nature as a whole plus its premises (like the solar system, the laws of physics...)
is increasingly stronger, as the sciences still discover more characteristics of design, manufacturing and fine tuning in our common reality.
Sure, "science" still has this immense platform from which they preach their mandatory truths,
but the evidence only gives them more things they can not explain.
But you won't hear about that if you are not looking for it.
This is also the case when evolutionist claims turn out to be wrong.
That is fine with me, call it theistic evolution if you want. So really our choice is are we going to endorse theistic evolution or atheistic evolution.
Did someone tear out the first page?That is my point, there is a difference between: "evilution" and evolution. I have said many times there is no conflict between true science (evolution) and the Bible.
All we do here is refer to substance.Why do so many Creationists post vacuous rhetoric rather than something of substance that actually shows how evolution has been "destroyed"?
Do you prefer to be blown you off to an offline site?Hier, I don't appreciate it when someone blows me off by directing me to some online site.
You're not gonna believe me anyway, plus i might mess it up.I don't have the time to go online. I want to hear from you, your views, not some site online. When people blow me off this way, I get suspicious they really don't understand it and can't explain it in their own words.
All we do here is refer to substance.
Either by quoting or re-telling sources, or linking to it.
Browse my playlist for an idea of substance that evolution can not digest:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLzXkVr_R6Kg30l25sDsjipQRpUMQXVi9W
Yes i did.Indeed. You refer to it, but you never provide any of it.
In one centence actually.When have you ever done that?
Let me quote myself to refresh your memory:I see, now we've moved from vacuous rhetoric to links without comment.
What?That's another pattern of behavior from Creationists.
Would it change anything if i linked to pictures and commented on it or cut / paste quotes from sources?They want us to watch hour long You Tube videos or post links to Creationist websites because they cannot express their objections in their own words.
Of course, the ad hominem argumentation.I looked over his playlist. There's one from Carl Werner and this gem -"LATEST DNA SCIENCE supports NOAH'S FLOOD! Carl Gallups Explains"
Who is Carl Gallups? An expert in genetics? No, he's a former cop and pastor.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?