Evolution is not science

[Heissonear]

.

Evolution from Darwin's hypothesis of mutation, adaptation, and natural selection has been examined through the scientific method. Much has been presented by Naturalistic Scientists. But Scientism has twisted their conclusions. Rather than continuing to scrutinize through the Scientific Method godless man, Scientismists, stopped and called it a fact.

Now today to say Evolution is not true is "anti-science"? Has not many on this forum and even this thread stated there is enough conclusive evidence? To not agree that Evolution actual.happened is "not looking at the mountain of evidence that SUPPORTS it"?

Well I hate to kink you trousers but the "evidence for Evolution" is not conclusive "beyond doubt".

Once again, no transition fossils. None. Go look in the strata.

The very thing that "Evolution" said happened there is no proof of. Only species can be found.

Even the origin of life on earth shows a faint sun with physical conditions that are against "soup" of inorganic compounds to replicating biomolecules.

Is Evolution still based on the Scientific Method or has is shifted to the religion Scientism?

.

 

[bhsmte]

You gotta love Heiss when the cognitive dissonance kicks in, he is like the energizer bunny.

 

[Loudmouth]

Not so, firey, that would make them living fossils which you seem to not comprehend yet.

You post "evidence"in a dogmatic way, aye? There goes the scientific method and here now resides Scientism.

.

I guess you have never heard of genetics?

"Arguments against macroevolution, based on so-called gaps in the fossil records, are also profoundly weakened by the much more detailed and digital information revealed from the study of genomes. Outside of a time machine, Darwin could hardly have imagined a more powerful data set than comparative genomics to confirm his theory."--Dr. Francis Collins, "Faith and the Human Genome"
http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2003/PSCF9-03Collins.pdf

 

[bhsmte]

I guess you have never heard of genetics?

"Arguments against macroevolution, based on so-called gaps in the fossil records, are also profoundly weakened by the much more detailed and digital information revealed from the study of genomes. Outside of a time machine, Darwin could hardly have imagined a more powerful data set than comparative genomics to confirm his theory."--Dr. Francis Collins, "Faith and the Human Genome"
http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2003/PSCF9-03Collins.pdf

But Francis Collins is blind to the spiritual world and only listens to men.

Oh wait...........

 

[bhsmte]

I guess you have never heard of genetics?

"Arguments against macroevolution, based on so-called gaps in the fossil records, are also profoundly weakened by the much more detailed and digital information revealed from the study of genomes. Outside of a time machine, Darwin could hardly have imagined a more powerful data set than comparative genomics to confirm his theory."--Dr. Francis Collins, "Faith and the Human Genome"
http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2003/PSCF9-03Collins.pdf

We need to get copies of Francis Collin's science degrees.

 

[Loudmouth]

We need to get copies of Francis Collin's science degrees.

I would think that overseeing the NIH Human Genome Project and being current director of the NIH would be enough. His wiki contains all of the vital info:

Francis Collins - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But of course, creationists have a tough time doing google searches because they are afraid of what they will find.

 

[TLK Valentine]

They don't need to, do they?

A simple "none" will do.

If CF is any indication -- debate finds them.

And if they are any indication -- they run away.

Did Jesus go around encouraging debate, or did the Pharisees engage Him?

What does Jesus have to do with anything you guys do?

 

[HitchSlap]

They don't need to, do they?

If CF is any indication -- debate finds them.

Did Jesus go around encouraging debate, or did the Pharisees engage Him?

Well, he came to bring a sword and he vandalized the Jewish temple. Sounds like he went looking for it to me.

 

[TLK Valentine]

.

Evolution from Darwin's hypothesis of mutation, adaptation, and natural selection has been examined through the scientific method. Much has been presented by Naturalistic Scientists. But Scientism has twisted their conclusions. Rather than continuing to scrutinize through the Scientific Method godless man, Scientismists, stopped and called it a fact.

And what have you done, besides nothing?

Now today to say Evolution is not true is "anti-science"? Has not many on this forum and even this thread stated there is enough conclusive evidence? To not agree that Evolution actual.happened is "not looking at the mountain of evidence that SUPPORTS it"?

If the shoe fits...

Well I hate to kink you trousers but the "evidence for Evolution" is not conclusive "beyond doubt".

Well, perhaps like a courtroom trial, we should specify "beyond a reasonable doubt."

Once again, no transition fossils. None. Go look in the strata.

Plenty of transition fossils -- don't you know what they look like?

The very thing that "Evolution" said happened there is no proof of. Only species can be found.

And...?

Even the origin of life on earth shows a faint sun with physical conditions that are against "soup" of inorganic compounds to replicating biomolecules.

How so?

Is Evolution still based on the Scientific Method or has is shifted to the religion Scientism?

Scientific method -- with some details still in progress.

 

[bhsmte]

I would think that overseeing the NIH Human Genome Project and being current director of the NIH would be enough. His wiki contains all of the vital info:

Francis Collins - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But of course, creationists have a tough time doing google searches because they are afraid of what they will find.

Oh, I'm very familiar with Francis Collins. Heiss may think he is some kind of atheist plant though.

 

[sfs]

We need to get copies of Francis Collin's science degrees.

Long-form only, please.

 

[fireof god98]

All sounds reasonable. That is why you promote and think such.

Many others think the same and will agee with. Fair enough.

But one major problem: God did not die. In fact, He has watched everything you have said and done. Why is it you do not know this?

.

is there any proof of this great thing Jesus did? not that i know of. although i used to be a christian

 

[AV1611VET]

is there any proof of this great thing Jesus did?

Acts 1:3 To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:

You missed it.

 

[fireof god98]

Acts 1:3 To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:

You missed it.

where is the proof for this?

 

[AV1611VET]

where is the proof for this?

An empty tomb in Israel.

 

[HitchSlap]

Acts 1:3 To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:

You missed it.

Do you and your wife speak King Jim English to each other?

 

[fireof god98]

An empty tomb in Israel.

is it possible the disciples took his body?

 

[HitchSlap]

An empty tomb in Israel.

Least of which you don't have evidence for. Nice try.

 

[AV1611VET]

Do you and your wife speak King Jim English to each other?

If we did, we would understand each other.

Do you speak "original Hebrew" with yours?

 

[HitchSlap]

If we did, we would understand each other.

Do you speak "original Hebrew" with yours?

Shirley, you jest.