Just for final clarification yes, we evolved from monkeys.

[AV1611VET]

We have no other choice, but to act as primates.
Just like we have no other choice, but to act as mammals.
Just like we have no other choice, but to act as tetrapods.

Just like we have no other choice, but to act as bacteria?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Just like we have no other choice, but to act as bacteria?

Rather: just like we have no other choice but to ack like eukaryotes.

 

[AV1611VET]

Rather: just like we have no other choice but to ack like eukaryotes.

No, I asked about bacteria.

(I'm about to spring Klebold & Harris on you: my favorite examples of evolutionists acting out their nomenclature. )

Question: Do we have no other choice than to act like bacteria? YES or NO?

 

[SteveB28]

Rather: just like we have no other choice but to ack like eukaryotes.

We act as bacteria, in that we reproduce, take in nutrients, produce wastes.......

 

[AV1611VET]

We act as bacteria, in that we reproduce, take in nutrients, produce wastes.......

... produce mycotoxins?

 

[Larniavc]

they don't kill them

Lions practice infanticide.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

No, I asked about bacteria.

(I'm about to spring Klebold & Harris on you: my favorite examples of evolutionists acting out their nomenclature. )

Question: Do we have no other choice than to act like bacteria? YES or NO?

We act according to our nature.
As Steve says, bacteria have a metabolism, reproduce etc.
Yes, we do that too.

 

[Radrook]

I'm so glad to see your shtick hasn't changed since JREF Forums. You spent five times the amount of your reply talking about me as you did repeating your debunked arguments.

I don't know you and don't understand what it is you are referring to.
I direct my replies at the argument and concepts not at the person.
As for debunked? That is a matter of opinion and nothing more.


As for my methodology here being identical to the one at Randi many years ago?
I beg to differ. Judging by the reactions, I am far more efficiently devastating now than I was then at pointing out the inane, evolutionist atheistic inanities and illogical inconsistencies than I was then.

 

[SteveB28]

I don't know you and don't understand what it is you are referring to.
I direct my replies at the argument and concepts not at the person.
As for debunked? That is a matter of opinion and nothing more.


As for my methodology here being identical to the one at Randi many years ago?
I beg to differ. Judging by the reactions, I am far more efficiently devastating now than I was then at pointing out the inane, evolutionist atheistic inanities and illogical inconsistencies than I was then.

Only in your own mind, I'm afraid......

 

[Radrook]

DNA message from creator indicates that evolution is bunk?

Very impressive if indeed authentic.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I don't know you and don't understand what it is you are referring to.
I direct my replies at the argument and concepts not at the person.
As for debunked? That is a matter of opinion and nothing more.


As for my methodology here being identical to the one at Randi many years ago?
I beg to differ. Judging by the reactions, I am far more efficiently devastating now than I was then at pointing out the inane, evolutionist atheistic inanities and illogical inconsistencies than I was then.

And yet you have done nothing of the sort.

 

[Radrook]

No need to go to the extreme. The predictive ability is quite clear. Dr. Shubin was able to accurately predict where he and his team would find Tiktaalik. Evolution also predicts a fused chromosome in the human genome, which is also a falsifiable test, one of many that evolution passes with flying colors. Evolution accurately predicts a nested hierarchy in the fossil record, which is also confirmed with DNA.



Using proven liars that admit to intellectual dishonesty on their own site is not going to help your case.

Well, if evolutionists sometimes admit dishonesty then why are you taking umbrage with their honesty? If indeed evolutionists admit to practicing chicanery, they are to be commended for being forthright.. As to predictive, I find nothing predictive in evolution that can not be interpreted differently. Neither do I trust evolutionists in their predictive claims. Such claims can be simply discoveries followed by evolutionist interpretations claimed to be predictions followed by discoveries. Evolutionist dishonesty records do not make for trust in their ethical adherence to scientific mores. Because of that unsavory evolutionist reputation, I suspect the latter instead of the former.

 

[Radrook]

And yet you have done nothing of the sort.

That is untrue. I repeatedly request a rebuttal to my claims aimed at evolutionists but all I get in reply is what you just did.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

That is untrue. I repeatedly request a rebuttal to my claims aimed at evolutionists but all I get in reply is what you just did.

That's because your claims have been refuted time and again but you still keep coming back with them time and again.

 

[Radrook]

Let's not insult the primates.
They do not torture their young, they do not rape them, they do not abort their babies, they do not starve them so they can go party or do drugs, they don't kill them, they have been known to kill, abandon sick or deformed ones as they will not survive. Males will sometimes kill to preserve their own blood line. And only one group has a heavy infant death due to mothers ignoring injured ones or killing them because they have no other way to deal with them, the tamarin monkey. They have twins and can not raise them when there are not enough males to support them. What they do is for the preservation of the species, not for sport, not for inconvenience. Otherwise, mothers have been known to fight to the death to protect their young. We throw them in the garbage--that's a favorite here in Las Vegas.

I witnessed that throwing of a newborn baby in an incinerator as a child myself.
Humans can be extremely cruel and do things unknown in the animal world.
Yet we claim we are made in God's image?
If indeed true and God is good, then our image must have become extremely warped in order to allow such things.

 

[Radrook]

That's because your claims have been refuted time and again but you still keep coming back with them time and again.

Untrue! I never receive a direct reply to my requests for a rebuttal to my claims.
All I get is what you are doing.

BTW
Here is a very relevant video which illustrates my points:

You see, you folks evade such things. You never respond directly to any of them. You simply respond with irrelevant claims.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Untrue! I never receive a direct reply to my requests for a rebuttal to my claims.
All I get is what you are doing.

BTW
Here is a very relevant video which illustrates my points:

You see, you folks evade such things. You neve respond directly to any of them. You simply make irrelevant claims.

No, a video is nothing. A video that says that it shows that there is a message in human DNA is fundamentally worth jack. And besides, your claims are also WILDLY off-topic since the thread is about human's evolving from ancestral monkeys. If you're going to make any comment, stick to the OP topic.

 

[Radrook]

No, a video is nothing. A video that says that it shows that there is a message in human DNA is fundamentally worth jack. And besides, your claims are also WILDLY off-topic since the thread is about human's evolving from ancestral monkeys. If you're going to make any comment, stick to the OP topic.

Once more it isn't the medium in which the message is conveyed. That is irrelevant and clearly demonstrates that you lack the basic requirement to reason cogently. It is the message itself-the info that is conveyed that either stands or falls on its own merit. If indeed it is bogus, then prove it. Otherwise your reply constitutes only a criticism of the medium and leaves the argument which you immediately and mindlessly seek to ridicule totally intact.

About being off topic? Well, that depends on whether the claim that evolution is a process is totally devoid of divine guidance or not. There are those who are deistic evolutionists. But your stance seems to be atheistic evolutionist. The foundation of that atheist position is of necessity abiogenesis which you, strangely, claim is irrelevant to your position but without which your claim, obviously, becomes totally meaningless.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Once more it isn't the medium in which the message is conveyed. That is irrelevant and clearly demonstrates that you lack the basic requirement to reason cogently. It is the message itself-the info that is conveyed that either stands or falls on its own merit. If indeed it is bogus, then prove it. Otherwise your reply constitutes only a criticism of the m4dium and leaves the argument which you immediately and mindlessly seek to ridicule totally intact.

I'm not ridiculing the video. I am stating, clearly, that a video made by a non scientist with zero scientific training, is worth jack all and, as I said before, you are taking the thread off-topic. The OP topic is about the fact that humans evolved from ancestral monkeys.
But you don't care since you'll continue to spew your non-scientific vitriol without a care in the world and will continue to think that you know better than all the scientists in the world because the scientific facts don't mesh with your religious views.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

If indeed true and God is good, then our image must have become extremely warped in order to allow such things.

Why? It's not like this god you believe in, never commanded the killing of babies. Or did it himself, for that matter.

(that is, according to the mythology, off course)