No Missing Links?

[Loudmouth]

Yes, test the prediction that a Boeing 777 and the human body are products of anything but design.

Want to guess the outcome?

Boeing 777's do not come about through reproduction. Designed.

Humans DO come about through natural reproduction and fall into a nested hierarchy. Evolved.

There's a reason airplanes fall into the category of being designed by a designer.

Notice how airplanes do not fall into a nested hierarchy.

You use it as a monolithic term. When one claims that Christians believe in evolution, that is just part of the story, a half truth.

It is just something you have made up in order to call evolutionists "creationists". It is childish.

 

[justlookinla]

Boeing 777's do not come about through reproduction. Designed.

Humans DO come about through natural reproduction and fall into a nested hierarchy. Evolved.

Boeing 777s are the result of the reproducing of the design by the creator. Complexity and function prove this. Use the same test for the human body.

Notice how airplanes do not fall into a nested hierarchy.

Notice how every example of complex function of any machine is the result of a creator/designer?

 

[Loudmouth]

Boeing 777s are the result of the reproducing of the design by the creator.

They are not the result of natural reproduction nor do they fall into a nested hierarchy.

Use the same test for the human body.

Already did. Natural reproduction and a nested hierarchy, bot the opposite of Boeings.

Notice how every example of complex function of any machine is the result of a creator/designer?

You haven't shown that this is the case.

 

[justlookinla]

They are not the result of natural reproduction nor do they fall into a nested hierarchy.

They are examples of a complex machine, with specific functions, which would not exist without a creator/designer. The human machine is infinitely more complex and functional, but you claim, without evidence, that it's a machine with no creator or designer, other than a series of random/chance mutations.

Already did. Natural reproduction and a nested hierarchy, bot the opposite of Boeings.

Did the test for the complex and functional machine of the human body pass the test as a series of only random/chance mutations when compared to a Boeing 777.

You haven't shown that this is the case.

I can't name a single complex and functional machine which isn't the product of a creator/designer. Maybe you could give an example?

 

[Loudmouth]

They are examples of a complex machine, with specific functions, which would not exist without a creator/designer. The human machine is infinitely more complex and functional, but you claim, without evidence, that it's a machine with no creator or designer, other than a series of random/chance mutations.

I do have evidence. I have shown you that evidence over and over and over. You won't even address it.

You are back on ignore.

 

[justlookinla]

I do have evidence. I have shown you that evidence over and over and over. You won't even address it.

You are back on ignore.

You given nothing other than atheistic Darwinist creationist guesses and suppositions.

 

[RickG]

You given nothing other than atheistic Darwinist creationist guesses and suppositions.

Does that mean the Christian denomination I belong to is atheistic Darwinist?

 

[justlookinla]

Does that mean the Christian denomination I belong to is atheistic Darwinist?

Does it eliminate God as creator? You're the fella who'd have to aanswer that.

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

atheistic Darwinist creationist

This is an unusual combination -- care to explain it?

 

[justlookinla]

This is an unusual combination -- care to explain it?

Sure. A very simple concept. All life that we observe today is the result of only random/chance, mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless naturalistic mechanism acting on an alleged single life form of long long ago.

 

[DerelictJunction]

They are examples of a complex machine, with specific functions, which would not exist without a creator/designer. The human machine is infinitely more complex and functional, but you claim, without evidence, that it's a machine with no creator or designer, other than a series of random/chance mutations.



Did the test for the complex and functional machine of the human body pass the test as a series of only random/chance mutations when compared to a Boeing 777.

I can't name a single complex and functional machine which isn't the product of a creator/designer. Maybe you could give an example?

Right.
All complex and functional machines for which we can show a designer were designed by humans.

Humans are complex and functional machines.

Therefore, humans were designed by humans.

Wait...

 

[justlookinla]

Right.
All complex and functional machines for which we can show a designer were designed by humans.

Humans are complex and functional machines.

Therefore, humans were designed by humans.

Wait...

Yeah, hold on here!

All complex and functional machines are the result of a designer except for those for which we cannot identify the designer, which are then the result of random/chance events. An example of this would be the complex and functional machine below which was created by random/chance events of water, wave and sand on the seafloor. And we haven't even addressed the issue of information being added to the complex and functional machine....by random/chance events of course. Quite a theory of random creation you have going!

 

[USincognito]

Yes, I do classify that as verbal abuse and I consider that you are discounting it, even considering it acceptable to virtually accuse someone who is not lying of being a liar. That's fine. Do what you want. You wanted to be on ignore. And you are now on it. Bye!

And if you were my wife madam, I would drink it.

 

[RickG]

Does it eliminate God as creator? You're the fella who'd have to aanswer that.

It does not eliminate God as creator. However, it has no problem with the theory of evolution.

 

[justlookinla]

It does not eliminate God as creator. However, it has no problem with the theory of evolution.

Which theory of evolution? The theory which promotes the idea that humanity is the product of only random/chance mutations or another one?

 

[RickG]

Which theory of evolution? The theory which promotes the idea that humanity is the product of only random/chance mutations or another one?

The one and only one promoted by mainstream science.

 

[justlookinla]

The one and only one promoted by mainstream science.

Is it this one.....the theory which promotes the idea that humanity is the product of only random/chance mutations or another one?

 

[RickG]

Is it this one.....the theory which promotes the idea that humanity is the product of only random/chance mutations or another one?

What part of "mainstream science" do you not understand?

 

[DerelictJunction]

What part of "mainstream science" do you not understand?

Almost all of it.

 

[Shemjaza]

Is it this one.....the theory which promotes the idea that humanity is the product of only random/chance mutations or another one?