Evolutionism is not science but fool hypothesis

[Faith In God]

The rest of your comment is based on the false statement which I joked about. It's hardly my fault you chose to build your house on the sand...

in that case i don't see your meaning on how my statement is ironic. could you explain?

 

[Arikay]

I think because creationist groups Are trying to push creationism into our public schools.
although not ironic, I think there are more things than just how evolution is taught that we aren't getting our tax moneys worth when it comes to public schools. But thats a different topic.

in that case i don't see your meaning on how my statement is ironic. could you explain?

 

[Faith In God]

I think because creationist groups Are trying to push creationism into our public schools.
although not ironic, I think there are more things than just how evolution is taught that we aren't getting our tax moneys worth when it comes to public schools. But thats a different topic.

oh. my point was that evolutionists try to make creationists prove their side and vice versa, while we pay for instruction through an evolution light. we pay for evolution science, and have no more proof for evolution than creationism (i say this from evulution perspective)

 

[The Son of Him]

where the world came from has nothing to do with evolution.
abiogenesis has nothing to do with evolution.
. abiogenesis has nothing to do with evolution.

there is nothing to see here. move along, move along.

I disagree there must be a link between abiogenesis and evolution for abiogenesis gives birth to the very organisms affected by evolution.
Other wise you do not have a complete picture of life.

Your position is like saying the origin of the universe has nothing to do with the universe we see today.

 

[Arikay]

More,
"Proof"? No.
Evidence? Yes.

This can be seen even on this forum.
My thread asking for evidence for creationism, is silent.
threads asking for evidence for evolution, are not.
Threads refuting creationism, are never refuted by creationists.
Threads refuting evolution, are refuted by evolutionists.

Evolutionists try to make creationists show that creationism is a scientific theory and is supported and not falsified by the evidence. Just like we have done with evolution and with pretty much every other theory. Creationism doesn't stand up to this scrutiny, just like many other falsified theories.

oh. my point was that evolutionists try to make creationists prove their side and vice versa, while we pay for instruction through an evolution light. we pay for evolution science, and have no more proof for evolution than creationism (i say this from evulution perspective)

 

[Faith In God]

"Each creature brings forth after its own kind. That’s no theory; that’s a fact. Why then should we believe that man comes from another species? If evolution is true, then it is proof that the Bible is false. However, the whole of creation stands in contradiction to the theory of evolution. " -The Evidence Bible

this is about as simple as the argument can get.

 

[Mechanical Bliss]

"Each creature brings forth after its own kind. That’s no theory; that’s a fact. Why then should we believe that man comes from another species? If evolution is true, then it is proof that the Bible is false. However, the whole of creation stands in contradiction to the theory of evolution. " -The Evidence Bible

this is about as simple as the argument can get.

If kind = species, then consider creationism that entails that only "each creature brings forth after its own kind" proved false as the evolution of new species has been observed.

To say that the natural world contradicts the theory of evolution is a bald faced lie. The theory of evolution would simply not exist if that was true. Scientists derive the conclusion from evidence rather than the other way around like creationists do. It sounds like a case of psychological projection.

Oh yeah, and evolution does not equal atheism or that Christianity is false. But if you want to believe that, then consider your religion conclusively proved false. That's the danger to Christianity posed by dogmatic adherence to creationism such that "no true Christian" (as some creationists like to claim) can accept evolutionary biology (or old earth, or no global flood, etc.).

 

[Faith In God]

kind does not equal species. ie different races.

as for the rest of it, i learned when I first joined this site that i should steer clear of evolution debates, but then this thread was resurrected and I forgot about it(ie it's subscribed) so I could discuss it, but people get mad when I do so I'm outahere for the sake of the thread

in other words, i decline your challenge on the grounds that I don't want to start a flaming match. have a good day.

D pun unintended)

 

[Mechanical Bliss]

The implication of your quotation is that kind = species (and other creationists here also define it that way). Species does not equal race either.

 

[Arikay]

Please define "kind"
Until you do, your "fact" is meaningless.

 

[Mistermystery]

I disagree there must be a link between abiogenesis and evolution for abiogenesis gives birth to the very organisms affected by evolution.
Other wise you do not have a complete picture of life.

Your position is like saying the origin of the universe has nothing to do with the universe we see today.

Evolution simply accepts this fact. When you want to learn drive you don't first learn how the car is assembeled, or who the first car created, you simply accept these facts that they did happen.

 

[aeroz19]

Be well in truth...........Be well with truth......

Evolutionism it is not science, fool hypothesis about this-
If we would accept that God not created the world, then how the world could begin to had been? So it is simply imagination.
You can also imagine so, if you were not born from your mother, then how you can be created in 10 billion years from the mud by Evolution?
Scientists counted probability of life by Evolution; it is equal 0.0000000000000000000000…………. and so on.
Certainly this argument also means nothing for Evolutionists as all other scientific facts.

How billion dollars was wasted to prove this fool “evolution”
From all nations. Devil simply steal from us these billions…..



MY (((((((((Scientists counted probability of life by Evolution; it is equal 0.0000000000000000000000…………. and so on. )))))))))

Yours (((((((((((((So are the odds of 50 people winning a lottery in a particular order. Does that mean that lotteries are impossible? This argument doesn't work orange...and it really is a PRATT.)))))))))

Thank you for these words from you. From 1 minus 0.00000000000000000...===1
It is probability that God had Created the world.
Buy your lottery with 0.000000000.....probability. but I would buy lottery with 1* probability..........Here what is mean to be fooled!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Orange in Christ

I don't understand anything you're saying.

 

[kevkev]

Be well in truth...........Be well with truth......

Evolutionism it is not science, fool hypothesis about this-
If we would accept that God not created the world, then how the world could begin to had been? So it is simply imagination.
You can also imagine so, if you were not born from your mother, then how you can be created in 10 billion years from the mud by Evolution?
Scientists counted probability of life by Evolution; it is equal 0.0000000000000000000000…………. and so on.
Certainly this argument also means nothing for Evolutionists as all other scientific facts.

How billion dollars was wasted to prove this fool “evolution”
From all nations. Devil simply steal from us these billions…..



MY (((((((((Scientists counted probability of life by Evolution; it is equal 0.0000000000000000000000…………. and so on. )))))))))

Yours (((((((((((((So are the odds of 50 people winning a lottery in a particular order. Does that mean that lotteries are impossible? This argument doesn't work orange...and it really is a PRATT.)))))))))

Thank you for these words from you. From 1 minus 0.00000000000000000...===1
It is probability that God had Created the world.
Buy your lottery with 0.000000000.....probability. but I would buy lottery with 1* probability..........Here what is mean to be fooled!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Orange in Christ

There is intelligent life on this planet!!!

 

[Magnus Vile]

I disagree there must be a link between abiogenesis and evolution for abiogenesis gives birth to the very organisms affected by evolution.
Other wise you do not have a complete picture of life.

Your position is like saying the origin of the universe has nothing to do with the universe we see today.

Uh, what if god started the first life and left it to evolve? Then there's no need for Abiogenesis and evolution still works...

 

[revolutio]

Hi all

ORANGE!!

 

[Mistermystery]

There is intelligent life on this planet!!!

For your horible usage of smilies you'll get a $10 fine. Have a nice day, sir.

 

[Jet Black]

I disagree there must be a link between abiogenesis and evolution for abiogenesis gives birth to the very organisms affected by evolution.
Other wise you do not have a complete picture of life.

Your position is like saying the origin of the universe has nothing to do with the universe we see today.

no, evolutionary theory is a biogenic theory i.e. it assumes that life already exists. Wen we tak about life we mean an "object" which has the ability to reproduce, metabolize, maintain a form of homeostasis and so on. abiogenesis does not involve these things. the earliest replicators for example could only reproduce (fire can only reproduce) and from these replicators we start to edge towards life. Fine one can describe much of thi searly process in the same words as evolution i.e. the replicators mutate and are naturally selected, but the thing that is replicatong and being selected is different. Evolutionary theory does not require this kind of chemical abiogenesis to happen, and would survive equally well with the discovery that "in the beginning God created a bacterium and then let it get on with things" whereas abiogenesis could not survive that onslaught. So from this we can see that abiogenesis is not evolution, because the latter can survive without the former.