• 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.

Missing link was a lie

Status
Not open for further replies.

Tomatoman

Well-Known Member
Feb 3, 2010
1,338
51
✟1,829.00
Faith
Anglican
dad, you do realise that you'd fail the genetics and evolution section on even the most basic biology paper, don't you? The reason being that you don't understand it.

What did they study in your school? Was it one of those ID biology classes you hear about in education horror stories from the Bible Belt in America? Or did you have a normal curriculum and just not understand it?
 
Upvote 0

Nostromo

Brian Blessed can take a hike
Nov 19, 2009
2,343
56
Yorkshire
✟25,338.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I accept that evolution happened in spades, in a different state past, and was a created trait. The only real issue I have with 'evolution' is godless evolution over long ages, that has no known starting point, and is a complete satanic fabrication.
If there's anyone here who fits the description "The Great Deceiver", it's you.
 
Upvote 0

plindboe

Senior Member
Feb 29, 2004
1,965
157
47
In my pants
✟17,998.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship

If there's no reason (i.e. evidence) to indicate that laws were different, there's no reason to assume they were. One can always dream up an infinite amount of different laws and scenarios, and it's kinda silly to demand that science disprove them all.



I'm not wondering whether you have disgust with some faiths. I'm wondering why you use the word "faith" to put something down and describe it as unreliable. It's like you acknowledge that the label "faith" in itself makes something untrustworthy.


Nope. I knew they were wrong before. The disagreement on the silly false claim is just for the benefit of those poor sods that atill take these clowns seriously.

People here are well aware that scientists debate and disagree with each other. Your point with this thread seems to highlight a disagreement, and from that you somehow want people to come to the conclusion that they're all wrong. If you can't provide more premises, you're not making a logical argument.

Peter
 
Upvote 0

plindboe

Senior Member
Feb 29, 2004
1,965
157
47
In my pants
✟17,998.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
I accept that evolution happened in spades, in a different state past, and was a created trait. The only real issue I have with 'evolution' is godless evolution over long ages, that has no known starting point, and is a complete satanic fabrication.

Disagreements between evolutionists as highlighted by this thread must be Satan disagreeing with himself then. I guess Satan is a schizophrenic.

Peter
 
Upvote 0

Split Rock

Conflation of Blathers
Nov 3, 2003
17,607
730
North Dakota
✟22,466.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
More and more people everyday are leaving the theory of evolution and embracing ID or creationism.
Is that why the "doubter" lists all have the same names on them that never change over time?

Deep down all evolutionists know their belief is nothing but a lie and hoax.
Really? Since I don't, I guess that must mean you are the one embrasing a lie. Correct?

You claim you used to be a science researcher. May I ask what research you took part in?
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Disagreements between evolutionists as highlighted by this thread must be Satan disagreeing with himself then. I guess Satan is a schizophrenic.

Peter
Tweedleydee and tweedlydum, more like it. Of course a house divided against itself cannot stand. But it's fun watching them shoot each other in the foot.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
If there's no reason (i.e. evidence) to indicate that laws were different, there's no reason to assume they were.

No reason in science, no, they are deaf dumb and blind to anything but the present. Of course the bible and history are fantastic reasons to accept the obvious, that the past was sure not like now. Also...remember, If there's no reason (i.e. evidence) to indicate that laws were the same, there's no reason to assume they were



One can always dream up an infinite amount of different laws and scenarios, and it's kinda silly to demand that science disprove them all.
One can assume any state, including a same state and the same thing applies. So science is gutted. Useless in this matter. Yet it assumes a certain state, and fabricates all thing from there.




I'm not wondering whether you have disgust with some faiths. I'm wondering why you use the word "faith" to put something down and describe it as unreliable. It's like you acknowledge that the label "faith" in itself makes something untrustworthy.
Science is supposed to be something more than that. To be reduced to faith based arguments for it, is a death knell. Not for bible believers.



Nope. It was to highlight a claim made that a fossil was a missing link with man. Now they are exposed as wrong.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
If there's anyone here who fits the description "The Great Deceiver", it's you.
How would you know? You don't know the sytate of the past. Speculation. But thanks for the capitol G! It sounds like my ideas give you pause for thought.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Nope. You do not know what you are talking about. Illustrate for us here where I went wrong... Lurkers, well...you know
 
Reactions: brinny
Upvote 0

Tomatoman

Well-Known Member
Feb 3, 2010
1,338
51
✟1,829.00
Faith
Anglican
dad:

Let's start with this. You've stated that gene mutation as a means of change and evolution in the present day was not how it occurred in the past. Your examiner will now be agog to hear what you think happened in the past. Add in to that the phrase ' if evolving was a created trait' and you're heading for a big fat zero.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
My "examiner"? Is that like the Inquisition? How would I know how it happens in heaven? Or Eden? I can ask if it is the same though! And I can answer too, NO!
 
Reactions: brinny
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
The examiner, as in the person who marks your exam answers on a genetics and evolution course to judge your understanding of the subject.

He would need to understand it himself first.

I would conclude that He hadn't the foggiest idea of the subject.
 
Reactions: brinny
Upvote 0

Tomatoman

Well-Known Member
Feb 3, 2010
1,338
51
✟1,829.00
Faith
Anglican
So you'd fail the exam and prove you don't understand the subject. Well done.

Telling the examiner that he doesn't understand the subject he's testing you on proves only your own incompetence.

I'm guessing you avoided that tactic when you took exams. If you've taken any, that is.

Perhaps you tried it on your driving test examiner.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
So you'd fail the exam and prove you don't understand the subject. Well done.
Nonsense. What exam? I understand. I understand that they presume that this present evolving, and life processes are all there was...for NO reason. Address that. Don't you get it, I am examining the examiners. They fail.

Telling the examiner that he doesn't understand the subject he's testing you on proves only your own incompetence.
That depends...let's see what the imaginary examiner knows. Don't just tell us how smart and tough he would be! Get down.

I'm guessing you avoided that tactic when you took exams. If you've taken any, that is.
We are looking at their basis for claims here. Help them pass if you can.
 
Reactions: brinny
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I can only assume you don't have many qualifications, dad.
I have this qualification, I can say you do not seem to be able to produce an actual argument for us. Have you some point about how evolving works, and how we know it did work? Otherwise you are wasting our time.
I don't stand in the field of battle to hear someone whine. Let's see what you got.
 
Reactions: brinny
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.