proving evolution as just a "theory"

[AV1611VET]

No, it's because science.

QV my tagline.

 

[pitabread]

QV my tagline.

Your tagline can take a hike.

 

[Bugeyedcreepy]

When you use "must have happened," "If they occurred," "This is almost certainly" and other such phrase of doubt, it makes what you offer as proof doubtful.

Are you of that silly camp that thinks 99.99% certain is the same as 0% certain? Good one, Sye Ten Bruggencate...

To claim all life, animal, fish, birds, and humans and plants originated from one source, and you have no idea what that source was, is not only absurd, it can't be proved and the laws of genetics say it is impossible.

Where does the 'law of genetics' say anything, let alone 'impossible'? Also, not entirely sure how to refute incredulous huffing.

So tell me how a life or with no bones, not gene for bones and no need for bones produce a kid with bones.

Please include how the first life form originated from lifeless elements.

Also tell me what the first lie form evolved into and the science that cause it to evolve.

So tell me how a God with no body, no genes at all for bodies and no need for bodies, or worlds, or universes for that matter produce a living body with genes.

Please include how a God originated from a nothingness before lifeless elements were even a thing.

Also tell me why the first God existed and the science that cause it to exist.

Even if what you say is true and there is a lot of doubts in it, Surviving is not a mechanism for a change of species.

There is No doubt in the Scientific Community - on Survival, it Absolutely Is a mechanism for change! If two gazelles are born, one a tawny colour that melds in quite nicely with the savanna plains, and the other a hot fluorescent pink with bright orange glittery stars - have a wild guess at which one will likely be spotted, chased down and eaten by predators and which one will be likely to blend in with its environment to have further offspring? If you have no idea, you have no place being here on this part of the forum.

And the ancestor of the whale could have been similar to an otter.

There's an otter, it isn't extinct, has paws, runs on land and primarily eats food that isn't on land, so there it is.

What you tell me is that you can only whine about something you don't understand and can't produce any evidence for what evo fundies have believed by faith alone.

Pot calling the Silverware black...

News flash, unless you can proved what they say is wrong and what you accept by faith alone is true, guess who is lying.

Self-deception much?

They are only incompatible for one reason--some of them can no longer mate and produce kids. Becoming sterile does not make a new species. I also understand that all of them did not become sterile.

Not sterile in the least. They all breed with their like just fine, they don't breed with the other end of the ringspecies chain. Address that part please...

All life forms, animals and plants descend from the species they are. Dogs descend from dogs and corn descends from corn. Corn always produces the same variety of corn. If dogs are the same breed, they will have a kid exactly the same species as they are. If the breeds are different, they will have a different variety of dog because bull dogs and collies are both dogs.

The Very Definition of Species is that they don't interbreed! The two ends of a Ringspecies don't interbreed, yet breed quite heartily with their own, and the connected subspecies beside it!

It is a waste of time to present me with opinions. It is not a waste of time to present me with verifiable evidence.

This is Demonstrably false. You've been presented with evidence galore which you either "don't understand, so pick something out of the peer reviewed article to look at" or "it's just your opinion/cartoon pictures for kids" - you've never actually addressed the evidence, let alone countered it with anything meaningful. I contend it is a waste of time engaging you at all.

Pigeon Chess.

 

[Speedwell]

Actually I got it backward.

Jonah 1:17 Now the LORD had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah. And Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights.

Matthew 12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

Nowhere in the Bible is Jonah's fish called a "whale."

 

[AV1611VET]

Nowhere in the Bible is Jonah's fish called a "whale."

I beg your pardon?

 

[Speedwell]

I beg your pardon?

Chapter and verse?

 

[AV1611VET]

Chapter and verse?

For the second time:

Matthew 12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

 

[tas8831]

Cheetahs are their own kind and all 4 legged animals have some dogf-like features---4 legs.

That is quite a low-bar criterion.

So according to you, a Komodo dragon is like a dog?

So, you do not understand that there is a difference between unfalsifiable (e.g., creationism) and not yet falsified?

You have had over 100 years to falsify it and can't. That should tell you something.

Yes - it really does.

It tells me that evolution is likely NOT FALSE. Because evolution IS falsifiable, but has not been falsified, whereas creationism - being a scam - is unfalsifiable and therefore a mere fantasy.

I'm guessing that you did not even notice that you trolled yourself into a big old fail.

 

[Speedwell]

For the second time:

Matthew 12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

Mistranslation of the underlying Greek ketos which means "great fish" just like the Hebrew of the OT.

 

[Aman777]

Have you seen humans created?

No and neither have you. Humans being created is an invisible Spiritual experience. It happens when a temporary person is changed into an immortal person who will NEVER die. It takes the agreement of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit to create an immortal creature. Gen 1:26 Gen 5:1-2 John 14:16

 

[Aman777]

That's odd. Because Habilis was here and died out a million years before humans. How can you possibly claim he was created 2 days after humans?

You just ignoring the evidence?

The scientific assumption is that the sons of God (prehistoric people) were Humans. This is totally FALSE and teaches our children that they are nothing but animals. The "common ancestor" of ALL Humans was FIRST made by the Hands of Jesus (His kind) on the 3rd Day Gen 2:4-7 and mankind was created and brought forth from WATER by the Trinity (Their kind) on the 5th Day. Gen 1:21 This is WHY Humans (descendants of Adam) MUST be born again Spiritually by the Trinity in order to enter Heaven.

Today's Humans (descendants of Adam) are a combination of His kinds and prehistoric people. (Their kinds) This also explains WHY today's humans have the superior intelligence of God AND the DNA and ERVs of prehistoric people. God told us the whole story in Gen 6:1-4. IF you cannot understand it, I will be happy to show you the correct meaning of those four verses. Amen?

 

[Aman777]

That's odd, because brain size has been shown to have increased incrementally in hominids over several million years. If suddenly--KABOOM--there were new creatures with bigger brains, why does the fossil record not confirm your claim?

The premise is false since Neanderthal had a bigger brain than Cro-Magnon. Brain size is NOT an indication of the difference between Humans (descendants of Adam) and the sons of God (prehistoric people). The difference between Humans and animals is shown by the superior intelligence of Humans who inherited our superior intelligence from Adam.

Mindless Nature, given eons of time with numerous mutations does NOT produce the intelligence of God in Apes, no matter how many times that lie is repeated. In order to be an Ape, one must inherit Ape intelligence. In order to be a Human, one must inherit Human intelligence because Nature does NOT have the ability to produce something which it does NOT have, in Humans. That's WHY the False ToE is such a terrible assumption. Amen?

 

[2tim_215]

Why is common ancestor more "logical" or "rational" than Common Creator? That would certainly explain the similarities in DNA and closeness of some Genomes, in a much simpler fashion BTW. Why is more complex better? And the more complex, the more difficulties and more problematic. Putting aside "Earth Age" which many seem to want to continue to "harp" on, really proves nothing either way, it's in the eye of the beholder. I take a Creator God which has documentary evidence going back 4000 years (or more) over billions of years of "supposed" evolutionary theory any day of the week.

 

[Aman777]

If Jesus called a whale a fish, then he was mistaken.

A submarine is sometimes called a fish and Adam's entire firmament was like a submarine, surrounded by water. Gen 1:6-8 It would have been really easy for Jesus to prepare a great fish, like a submarine, to keep Jonah safe underwater. Amen?

 

[2tim_215]

Actually I got it backward.

Jonah 1:17 Now the LORD had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah. And Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights.

Matthew 12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

The Bible doesn't specifically says "whales" (KJV) it calls it a big fish (back then the word mammal didn't exist, it's just a man made term which came later on). However, it could have been a whale, we just don't know. Just like, the fruit that Adam and Eve ate off the tree of "the Knowledge of Good and Evil" was probably not an apple. We just don't know what it was.

Is that so important? What's important is that we know what it resulted in. Just like the Bible doesn't specify Earth Age. It's just that men (on both sides of the fence) like to speculate on what they don't really know.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Thanks for confirming that there is NO evidence of implanting the superior intelligence, which ONLY God and Adam have, Gen 3:22 into any other creature.

You didn't say "superior intelligence" before, you said reason.

It must be such an inconvenience when people call you out for shifting goalposts.

God gave creatures just ONE way to change the intelligence of their offspring and that is through inheritance.

Are you saying that animals are incapable of learning... anything?

Godless evolution falsely assumes that God's superior intelligence can be magically evolved. That is the biggest false assumption in Science and requires Blind Faith in the concept of "godless evolution".

Now you're just babbling. "Superior intelligence..." To what?

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Becoming sterile does not make a new species.

Do you understand how babies are made? If so you should know that becoming sterile would lead to extinction.

 

[omega2xx]

That is quite a low-bar criterion.

So according to you, a Komodo dragon is like a dog?

Take a course in remedial reading.



Yes - it really does.

It tells me that evolution is likely NOT FALSE. Because evolution IS falsifiable, but has not been falsified, whereas creationism - being a scam - is unfalsifiable and therefore a mere fantasy.

I'm guessing that you did not even notice that you trolled yourself into a big old fail.

 

[omega2xx]

Are you of that silly camp that thinks 99.99% certain is the same as 0% certain? Good one, Sye Ten Bruggencate...

Where does the 'law of genetics' say anything, let alone 'impossible'? Also, not entirely sure how to refute incredulous huffing.

So tell me how a God with no body, no genes at all for bodies and no need for bodies, or worlds, or universes for that matter produce a living body with genes.

Please include how a God originated from a nothingness before lifeless elements were even a thing.

Also tell me why the first God existed and the science that cause it to exist.

There is No doubt in the Scientific Community - on Survival, it Absolutely Is a mechanism for change! If two gazelles are born, one a tawny colour that melds in quite nicely with the savanna plains, and the other a hot fluorescent pink with bright orange glittery stars - have a wild guess at which one will likely be spotted, chased down and eaten by predators and which one will be likely to blend in with its environment to have further offspring? If you have no idea, you have no place being here on this part of the forum.

There's an otter, it isn't extinct, has paws, runs on land and primarily eats food that isn't on land, so there it is.

Pot calling the Silverware black...

Self-deception much?

Not sterile in the least. They all breed with their like just fine, they don't breed with the other end of the ringspecies chain. Address that part please...

The Very Definition of Species is that they don't interbreed! The two ends of a Ringspecies don't interbreed, yet breed quite heartily with their own, and the connected subspecies beside it!

This is Demonstrably false. You've been presented with evidence galore which you either "don't understand, so pick something out of the peer reviewed article to look at" or "it's just your opinion/cartoon pictures for kids" - you've never actually addressed the evidence, let alone countered it with anything meaningful. I contend it is a waste of time engaging you at all.

Pigeon Chess.

Evidently you do not understand what verifiable means.

 

[omega2xx]

Uh no, creatures at other ends of a ring species are not sterile. Those at each end of the ring can breed with members on their end, but not with members on the other end. So if you agree that all the members of a ring species began from one species, then, if the members in the middle disappear, you are left with two species. That is the mechanism by which one species can begin, and end up with two species, and we are seeing that in progress.

Do you ever include the evidence for your dogmatic statements?

Uh when did wild poodles roam the earth? Hint--it never happened. Rather, all modern dogs descended from a breed of wild dogs. And that involved a lot of differences as time went on.

So no, it is not poodles all the way back to Adam.