• 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.

Evolution - and their take over/destruction of science

Status
Not open for further replies.

Arius

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 31, 2017
681
201
Phoenix
✟149,280.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Marital Status
Married

Now if they could find some fossilized bones of his, even a partial skull, or a jawbone with some teeth left in it like they found of Lucy, now THAT would be something! This could be reconstructed to the point we would know what he ate, what was his occupation, how much calorie intake he had, and his lifestyle, like if he prayed on his knees a lot or not? Now that would be proof that he existed.

But his message written by non-accredited scientists, by some goat herders and dumb fisherman about all that love, peace, afterlife mumbo-jumbo, .. well, .. that's not really proof of anything. In Evolution (which in itself means; science, history, truth and science, .. must emphasize the science part) paleontologists look for evidence, not some holy-books about some magical sky daddy, .. right?
 
Upvote 0

klutedavid

Well-Known Member
Dec 7, 2013
9,346
4,337
Sydney, Australia.
✟252,364.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Upvote 0

Arius

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 31, 2017
681
201
Phoenix
✟149,280.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Marital Status
Married
We have no empirical evidence that "kinds" (by creationist meaning, whatever that is) even exist.
Oh come now, you know "them kind', .. like those dark skinned kind like Ota Benga, .. them kind. Or the Aborigines kind whose skulls fill in a lot of gaps in the Evolution, .. err I mean scientific Theory!
 
Upvote 0

Arius

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 31, 2017
681
201
Phoenix
✟149,280.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Marital Status
Married

Yes, .. a whole new family, in only one generation. What's that have to do with speciation from one distinct species into another completely different species, like a gorilla into a human?

God didn't create us, or anything else like it all just came off a production line.
 
Upvote 0

bhsmte

Newbie
Apr 26, 2013
52,761
11,792
✟254,941.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others

LOL
 
Upvote 0

Arius

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 31, 2017
681
201
Phoenix
✟149,280.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Marital Status
Married

- Darwin's finches on the Galápagos Islands are particularly suitable for asking evolutionary questions about adaptation and the multiplication of species: how these processes happen and how to interpret them. Darwin's finches on the Galápagos Islands are particularly suitable for asking evolutionary questions about adaptation and the multiplication of species: how these processes happen and how to interpret them. All 14 species of Darwin's finches are closely related, having been derived from a common ancestor 2 million to 3 million years ago.

You see, right there, telling humans how to interpret animals after their own kind, and then they add after 2 to 3 million years those finches have turned into anything, .. like a flying lizard for instance, and then point to fossil record to prove it.

Yes, good observation Mr. Darwin: "All 14 species of finches are closely related!" you have found 14 finches "after their kind", .. very good. But what you didn't observe is: "having been derived from a common ancestor 2 million to 3 million years ago" That part comes from your Religion Mr. Darwin.
 
Reactions: Heissonear
Upvote 0

Arius

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 31, 2017
681
201
Phoenix
✟149,280.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Marital Status
Married

You said: "Start with a species. That species evolves into two species, by speciation.", .. YES, that's what I want to see, how does a species evolve into two separate species, when we both agree that "No family of one species evolves/speciate/morphs or give birth to another distinct individual species"!?
 
Upvote 0

Arius

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 31, 2017
681
201
Phoenix
✟149,280.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Marital Status
Married

Wow, thank you and God bless you my Brother!

Yes, it is them (hiding behind the scenes) principalities and powers that I am hoping to bring to the forefront, to reveal them, their intentions, which is best shown in this relatively new but the most powerful, and most dangerous Religion of all times, this atheistic Big-Bang Evolution Religion that has caused hundreds of millions of lives by creating seemingly positive ideologies like Communism which is really what Jesus taught (love one another, do not see yourself above others, share with those who have not etc.) yet as we seen the death toll in its wake shows what it was really about.

Evolution and the BB-theory has taken over science, just as the RCC-under Constantine has taken over both the writings of the Prophets, and those of the Apostles.

Yes, I agree with you about: "Keep up the Shield. And the Sword.", .. only that too has been switched on us, from Ephesians 6:10-18 to Constantine's version of sword, with which he went to slaughter the last remaining Believers with his new Christian army who refused to bow to their Trinity-gods.

I also agree that it is God who will move anyone towards Him, all we can do is blow that trumpet, and make sure it is a distinct sound of an alarm (not somebody playing music to entertain, which is what the Christian churches are doing) Talking about sound, I found this interesting:


Nice to have someone who actually understands.

God bless you my friend.
 
Upvote 0

Jimmy D

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2014
5,147
5,995
✟277,099.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married

You originally said scientists hadn’t found examples of speciation, I demonstrated that this is not the case. Your answer shows that you don’t actually know what speciation actually means so maybe these debates aren’t really suitable for you if your level of understanding is so poor.

Your post also utterly fails to address the empirical evidence presented, mere hand waving only demonstrates your ignorance of what those papers show and why.
 
Upvote 0

Jimmy D

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2014
5,147
5,995
✟277,099.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married

A) that’s what the links I gave showed.
B) this debate was settled over 100 years ago. Your ignorance of science is your own responsibility, maybe try reading proper scientific literature rather than creationist propaganda sites if you are genuinely interested in learning.
 
Upvote 0

FrumiousBandersnatch

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2009
15,405
8,144
✟349,292.00
Faith
Atheist
Ring species of seagulls, are seagulls on both ends, same with your beetles, lizards, moths, bacteria, all the different kind of apes, .. and the 7 billion humans covering every corner of the world, are still the same species.
Ring species are an interesting example of how speciation involves populations that, over many generations, have become different enough to be considered separate species. What you mean by "beetles, lizards, moths, bacteria..." being "still the same species" isn't clear - as you quoted in your post there are hundreds of thousands of beetle species alone, so they're clearly not "still the same species".

... why not get some camera on them, an entire population of them, and see when it speciate into another distinct species!? If it wakes up the next day as a seagull, or lays a seagull egg, you have no proof for this 'Evolution Theory'.
Because it doesn't happen that way; the population gradually changes over many generations; there is no overnight change. The process is analogous to the changing stages of human life; there's no overnight change between baby and child, child and youth, youth and adult, etc., life is a continuous process of change; so different cultures and societies make a decision on when they will consider a transition to have occurred according to some selected criteria, e.g. appearance of body hair, or voice change, or age in years, or arrival of periods, etc.

Declaring that speciation has occurred is a similar process - it means we've decided to distinguish two populations as distinctively different based on selected criteria, e.g. reproductive capability, or genetic differences, or stable phenotypic differences, etc.

No species will ever evolve into another existing or past species - they will always evolve into new species; and those new species will eventually evolve in turn (unless they go extinct) into one or more new species, and so-on. The species they evolve into will become ever more distinct/different from the original parent species until, many species down the line, they may appear to be completely different from the original parent species. Ring species show a speciation stage of this process in detail, where the intermediate populations between one species and the next still exist.

The tree of all life on Earth is the result of this process of branching speciation, where so many changes have occurred between early species and contemporary species that the contemporary species look very different from the original ancestor species, and the many ends of the branches (lineages) look different from each other according to how far up the tree their branches separated.

Fossils are the evidence of past speciation of populations that lived in those times.

You've misunderstood - a species can give rise to a new species and still continue to exist. If part of a population of a species is isolated in a new environment, it will progressively adapt to that environment over many generations, eventually becoming a new species. Meanwhile, the other population(s) of the species, if well-adapted to the original environment, may remain relatively unchanged; so you will have a new species that has branched off from the original species, where both species exist at the same time. This has often occurred when breeding pairs become isolated on islands, for example. Of course, given enough time, the original species (if it doesn't go extinct) will change sufficiently to be considered a new species too.
 
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟158,395.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship


The irony is strong in this post.

2 words: cdesign proponentsists

In this discussion, I ask Darwinians, who support and proselytize their BB-Evolution doctrines to;

1. prove that either biological or cosmological Evolution is based on "science"?

Pick up a scientific journal.

2. show why the word 'faith' can only mean 'blind faith'?

It doesn't.
It only does when you prefix it with "religious". As in: religious faith.

In the colloquial, every-day, use of the word, it can also mean "trust" (which is evidence-based).

"Religious faith", is not evidence based. It is "faith based". Faith based beliefs are not based on evidence by definition. Making it blind.
 
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟158,395.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
No evidence you say?

What do you call the new Testament, that is not evidence?

The bible is the collection of claims.
Claims are not evidence of themselves. It is, in fact, the claims of the NT that are in need of evidence. And since such evidence does not exist, the claims must be believed "on faith".

It's what makes christianity a religion. If "faith" wasn't required, and thus actual evidence would exist, then christianity would not be a religion. Then it would just be common knowledge.

How do you understand the growth of the Christian church through the centuries, not any evidence?

In the exact same way as the growth of any other religion.

In 1945, scientology did NOT exist.
Today, it has millions of followers. And that's even during times that are also called "the information age", where an answer to just about anything is potentially only a few clicks away.

The world's religions are mostly of ancient times.... During those times, superstitution was pretty much the law of the land. Everything was magical because almost nothing was understood.

So seeing how EASY it seems to be to make people today believe just about anything, I have no problem at all understanding that it must have been even easier during the bronze age.

The apostle Paul said, there were more than five hundred witnesses of the risen Christ, that is not evidence?


No, that's a claim in need of evidence.

The messianic prophecies predicted the advent of the Christ, that is not evidence?

No because there is no way to independently verify them, as both the supposed "prophecy" and supposed "fullfilment" are in the same biased source. They are, again, just claims in need of actual evidence.

Scholars do not even doubt that Jesus Christ existed and was crucified.

That is not really accurate.

The Christian faith is a weighty fact with overwhelming evidence.

That is demonstrably false.
 
Reactions: tyke
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟158,395.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
False, faith is not purely a set of beliefs backed by no evidence.
Having faith in your spouse, is backed by evidence that your spouse is a good person.
Having faith that an elevator wont snap, is backed by the evidence that it's structurally sound.

True, but having faith that an undetactable non-natural entity is looking out for you and knows all your thoughts, is not really backed by anything.

It's just blind faith.

Religious faith in supernatural things, is blind faith not backed on evidence.
 
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟158,395.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
I noted that, there exists abundant evidence for the death and resurrection of the Christ.

What evidence of that exists?

Remember that the bible is the claim and claims aren't evidence.

Simply without the resurrection of Jesus Christ, Christianity would not exist.

Actually.... christianity would not exist if there would be no people who believe those claims of christianity.

You ARE aware that people can believe things that never actually occured, right?

For example, muslims frantically believe that Mohammed flew to heaven on a winged horse.
Do you believe that?

Because the quran says so and muslims believe it.
Following your logic, that would be enough evidence to not only believe it, but even call it a fact.

The existence of the Christian religion is the proof of the reality of the resurrection.

Then the existance of any religion is the proof of the supernatural claims of that religion being true.

The Gospel is the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ!

Every religion is about something.
 
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟158,395.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
That's what it means, having faith in Jesus, trusting Jesus.

The convenient re-defining of faith was a tricky trick.
Important to study where words come from, to know what you're talking about.

I can certainly say that I "trust" the undetectable cookie monster under my bed.

But I bet that you'ld immediatly notice that there is something wrong with the use of that word, correct?
 
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟158,395.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Energy, infinite energy or approaching an infinite energy, sorry about that.

If science permits the use of undefined concepts such as, 'infinite'.

Science doesn't claim at all that the energy of the universe is infinite.
 
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟158,395.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship

The big bang theory makes scientific predictions that can be tested.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.