The Fossil Record Proves Speciation, Not Evolution of Lifeforms Observed

[Kylie]

I am using YOUR definition and criteria. And you still can not argue. What does that say?

No you are not using the modern scientific definition of life.

 

[juvenissun]

You use many words, but they have little content. You seem to be utterly incapable of having any kind of meaningful discussion on this subject.

I will give you whatever content you wish to hear.

 

[juvenissun]

And how do you expect anyone to take you seriously when you claim you don't need to produce evidence for your claims? Your argument is ludicrous and falls apart.

I never said that.
You started OK. Now, you are losing control. I think you should stop.

 

[Shemjaza]

I say a rock is alive. YOU DO NOT KNOW how to refute that.
People (include you) tried and failed.
I don't need to give my definition of life (yet). I just illustrated: yours failed.

Nonsense.

You made vague claims and were never able to present clear and specific examples as to why rocks matched standard definitions of life.

Even when you hinted at your own preferred definition you needed to hand wave away inconsistencies and flaws.

I suspect that your pride and self image as a master educator stop you from backing down even on a single point you have presented.

I don't think you are trolling us, I just find it frustrating and a little sad.

 

[juvenissun]

No you are not using the modern scientific definition of life.

I am.
Name ONE I did not.

 

[juvenissun]

Nonsense.

You made vague claims and were never able to present clear and specific examples as to why rocks matched standard definitions of life.

Even when you hinted at your own preferred definition you needed to hand wave away inconsistencies and flaws.

I suspect that your pride and self image as a master educator stop you from backing down even on a single point you have presented.

I don't think you are trolling us, I just find it frustrating and a little sad.

If you really care, come back to talk about the meat.
Otherwise, you may go away.

 

[Kylie]

I will give you whatever content you wish to hear.

Fine. Give me a definition of "LIFE" so that we can see if rocks fit it.

 

[Kylie]

I never said that.

Yes you did. When you were asked to provide evidence to support your claim that rocks are alive - such as providing a definition of life that rocks fit into - You said, "I don't need to give my definition of life (yet)."

It's in post 552.

 

[Kylie]

I am.
Name ONE I did not.

In post 477, you claim that the modern definition of life is not good enough for you. You said it was too narrow.

In other words, the definition of life that most people use isn't enough for you to say that rocks are alive, so you decide to expand that definition until you can say that rocks are alive, and then you proclaim that since your expanded definition lets you say rocks are alive, rocks must be alive.

It's like if I claimed you were a wristwatch. You would say that you don't fit the definition of a wristwatch. I would then say, "Not if you use the narrow definition of wristwatch we have today." I would then expand my definition of wristwatch to include anything that is identified as "juvenissun" on Christian Forums. And using that definition, it is quite clear you are a wristwatch.

 

[juvenissun]

Fine. Give me a definition of "LIFE" so that we can see if rocks fit it.

It is useless and you won't accept it. (see if I am right)
Anyway, here is what you asked for: A life must have blood.
Any clue?

 

[juvenissun]

Yes you did. When you were asked to provide evidence to support your claim that rocks are alive - such as providing a definition of life that rocks fit into - You said, "I don't need to give my definition of life (yet)."

It's in post 552.

Did I say it wrong? I don't need to do that yet. Because you won't take it due to poor understanding.

 

[juvenissun]

In post 477, you claim that the modern definition of life is not good enough for you. You said it was too narrow.

Why did I say that? I said that based on scientific argument, which you do not know where did I say it, and you do not care to ask.

You made me a little angry. I gave my scientific argument to another person and you never care to read it. Then you accused me not to talk about science. If you do that again, then I will leave you alone.

 

[Shemjaza]

It is useless and you won't accept it. (see if I am right)
Anyway, here is what you asked for: A life must have blood.
Any clue?

You're going to have to define what you mean by blood before people can make heads or tails of your definition.

 

[Tayla]

All scientific words and terms are made up.

All words are made up.

 

[juvenissun]

You're going to have to define what you mean by blood before people can make heads or tails of your definition.

No question, no answer.
I don't have to defend anything.

 

[bhsmte]

No question, no answer.
I don't have to defend anything.

LOL

 

[Shemjaza]

No question, no answer.
I don't have to defend anything.

Okay.

When you say blood, what do you mean?

 

[juvenissun]

Okay.

When you say blood, what do you mean?

Good question. Are you asking the definition of blood?

 

[Shemjaza]

Good question. Are you asking the definition of blood?

Yes. It is essential for me to understand your definition of life, and that seems to be what this thread is about now.

 

[juvenissun]

Yes. It is essential for me to understand your definition of life, and that seems to be what this thread is about now.

Use human as an example, the fluid flows in our circulation system is blood. There are several requirements need to be satisfied there. I think you know all of them. If any one of the requirement is not satisfied, then it is not blood.