Why evolution isn't scientific

[dad]

A "gravity was somehow able to be reduced" fantasy based on argument from incredibility about the sizes of past birds and flying dinosaurs. It is a fantasy because he gives is no evidence of gravity reducing and does not even think about other consequences.

A evidence-less story that birds were created: Evolution of birds.

An ignorant fantasy that flatworms have been unchanged since they first appeared and this falsifies evolution. Flatworms are a group of species and some have changed. Evolution states that a species that is adapted to an environment does not greatly change.

Some have not changed much. Your religious interpretation of the fossil record is a cross between an old wives tales and yesterdays news.

 

[dad]

A spate of nonsense from dad.
A "the oldest living ancestor of man" lie. The oldest living ancestor of man would be a bacteria about 4 billion years ago.
A "a flatworm to man" misleading assertion when it is a primitive (different looking!) flat worm species that is an ancestor to all bilateral species including us.

Yes, we know the religious story. The point is that some little imaginary flatworm like creature is believed by you to be the ancestor or mankind.

Irrelevancy and ignorance about Bodies Of Tardigrades, Crustaceans Found In Antarctica's Lake Mercer. He writes "arctic" (wrong Pole!). The puzzle is how they got to the lakes and rational, reasonable answers are given

Grasping at same nature past based scenarios with precisely zero proof is not reasonable it is religious.

An ignorant and evidence-less "actual reality time. (ART)" fantasy. He has another thread that he can use for that fantasy: Real time or evo time? (about 3 years old).

Since your pretend science time (PST) is a billion miles away from actual real time (ART) it is purely a matter of what belief we chose to interpret evidences not of evidence itself!

 

[dad]

Imaginary time nonsense from dad. The dating of fossils is science producing real dates.

You accept imaginary godless same natured past based dream dates. You do this wholeheartedly and purposefully. To you that is what is 'real'.

Sorry, your little religion and fables are not real.

 

[dad]

You provide no evidence to back up your claim that the Time of Babel was the point at which the states allegedly changed.

The only thing basically against it is the religious dating schemes and dreams of same nature past based so called dating methods.

History itself and ancient records and the bible all converge together to support great differences in nature and realities of the world. There are also divergent stories of the flood and the great tower relating to languages! There is also Jesus rising from the stone cold dead who was seen by friends and family and many many witnesses, Who verified the ancient record in Genesis was true as true ever could be. There is also the perfect fit with ALL evidences from science for a different nature in the past.

Only the obstinate interpreting machine of godless so called origin sciences screams at us to obey it's religion, and demands that we all accept it's narrow minded selective little impudent view of all evidences and how they are looked at and interpreted.

You provide no evidence to back up the claim that a creature that died 4200 years ago would be dated to 25 million years old.

Yes, the evidence is that the only so called dating regime used is the one that reads patterns and ratios of isotopes as if they all came to exist by and in this present nature! No date is any better than that one belief.

Why would we expect different proportions?

Why would wet expect some strange and different proportions of creatures who lived in that different past!? If the world was not the same in many ways, we might expect some huge birds and dinos and etc though! Things that no longer make sense in the current nature and that do not therefore exist here!!!

Furthermore, what we would expect is that we may no longer see many of them, which is precisely what we do see!!!!! The evidence mounts.

Let's say that the laws of nature were different so that gravity was weaker. Then we would see birds the size of a crow with wings the size of a modern sparrow's wings. Why would the wings be so small? Because with lower gravity, less force is needed to support the bird. Thus the ratio of wing length to body length would be different.

The degree of difference in that one aspect of nature (gravity) was not so great as to make eagles only need sparrow wings. Let's get real here. The whole package that is nature was similar in many ways. Birds still flew. Man still worked metals. We still walked and reproduced and traveled and spoke to other people etc etc. Yet in that ancient time some birds were so huge that they seem to make little real sense in this present world. The spirits who married women and had kids and who lived (at least part time) on earth does not make sense NOW. Building a tower up to their level does not make sense NOW. Trees that grew in weeks does not make sense in this present nature. Living 1000 years does not make sense NOW. Possibly being able to have reduced gravity or mitigate, or countermand it at least at certain times of the day or week or month does not make sense NOW. (some say the great stones of ancient pyramids and structures may have involved some sort of gravity contravention). Talking to animals, or being able to talk to all people on earth makes no sense NOW. etc etc. Yet science has tried to explain all things about the past using the NOW only!!!!!

First of all, there are more than 20,000 different species of flatworm. Only an ignorant would claim they are all the same.

The ones in the articles cited were very much similar. Don't try to stretch out what I said.

I would explain the concept of speciation to you, but I'm not going to, for two reasons.

Speciation is based on how nature now works! The times involved in speciating are all based on present nature! The start of creatures that speciated is some imaginary comet or ocean vent or pond..totally made up! What creatures speciated from what is largely derived from the fossil record, and the belief that record indicates a good sampling of what lived at the various times, rather than just some super partial record of a very few animals that somehow could leave fossil remains in the nature of yesterday! In other words RELIGION.

So you just pick and choose whether change occurred rapidly or not at all in order to fit the conclusion you've already decided on. That's a terrible way to find the truth.

I look at the evidences and I do not ignore and omit the records of God and man about the ancient times as you do. There is NO reason to accept same nature past based hooey dates. To ignore them is required to get at the truth.

So you are claiming that fossil birds are not the ancestors of modern birds, and they just coincidentally look like modern birds?

Any fossil bird we have might be one of thousands of types and kinds of birds that also lived at the same time. To pick the one bird that happened to be one that was able to be fossilized and try to say all the other living birds at that time evolved from it is ridiculous! Just as it is ridiculous to claim all modern birds descended from it! The few animals and creatures that could decompose and leave fossil remains in that former nature do NOT represent life on earth then in any way!! They sure do not provide any record of what adapted or evolved from what today either!

Of course, when we see convergent evolution (that's the proper name for what you are describing), there are tell-tale traits that give it away. For example, dolphins and sharks. They both look reasonably similar to each other since they are both aquatic predators and thus have to face the same environmental pressures - they have to be able to move easily in water, they have to be able to catch fish. But there are plenty of differences that reveal their different lineages. If birds were the same, then we would see traits in the fossil birds that are not there in modern birds (and don't say teeth, the genes for teeth are still in modern birds), and there are no such traits.

Just because some dolphin like or shark like creature (teeth etc) happened to be able to leave remains in the former nature does not mean much! There also swam at that same time with them all the creatures you think evolved from them!

 

[Kylie]

I know what God's record of the past and history say. I do not have to explain how Nimrod was born to you to say Nimrod existed because we have a record of the guy. I don't have to explain how God changed nature to know it happened.

You seem incapable of differentiating between mythology and reality.

Science DOES have to explain why it claims a same nature in the past.

Did I say it doesn't? Why do you resort to strawman arguments?

Science cannot test anything to do with the forces and laws that existed in the past and doesn't so much as know what they are today! About all they know is that they seem to exist and work a certain way now!

Once again, bluster without any substance.

A few hundred years ago is actually well known and documented. No weird changes in nature exist since then. Try to deal in reality.

Your argument is nothing more than, "Things were different back then, and since I can't imagine how such things could have been, I must invent an idea that the universe worked differently back then in order to explain it."

Great, find one that knows what gravity was like on earth in the past, and let's have at him! I should note that NONE of your experts even know what gravity is!!!!!!! And I daresay every single one of your own witnesses will admit it!

Very well, since you dismiss these people on those grounds, I challenge you to answer those questions about your ideas. What was gravity like in your DSP? Was it stronger or weaker? What evidence do you have to support your conclusion? And what do you think gravity is? What causes it? Was the cause of gravity different in your DSP or was it simply a different value in the same basic causal mechanism we have today?

If you can't answer those questions, you really have no right to try to be insisting that your idea is the truth.

We should look at all factors such as how the animals used oxygen, maybe even atmospheric pressure?

" Hence, at sea level, we carry about 6.6 kilograms of weight on every inch of our body."
What is the Weight of Air? | Pitara Kids Network

Then there is the general composition of the soil that footprints are left in. If the consistency of rock and soil was not the same, we could not look at the way a weigh on similar soil would leave a footprint..etc etc.

So far you have not offered a single dino leg width and showed why it had to exist in a nature exactly like the present time!

Very well, we are getting somewhere here.

Please one thing before we continue.

If the laws of the universe were different in the past, we should find things that cannot be explained if we have present state past assumptions. Please describe what these could be.

No. It seems to me differences were huge! People do not live 1000 years now for example. The problem on your end is the inability to be able to measure nature in the past. Everything you look at you religiously view as having come about in our nature!

So then the gravity would have been hugely different as well, then, yes?

Why then do we not see any indications of greatly different gravity? Please show me something in the fossil record that has no explanation in a same state past.

Dino leg width really is not much of a measure of nature in the past!

Why not?

Nor does it tell us about the forces that governed atoms at the time, which in turn govern how molecules and cells behave (DNA also of course).

Yes it is.

We can look at the bones and use that to make an estimation of the size of the animal by using present state laws, and then when we look at the complete fossil, we can see if the complete fossil matches what we expected as a result of our calculations.

If the complete fossil matches with our calculations, it is evidence that the calculations were correct.

There is no way science as of looking at that, and even how it looks at forces and laws right now is limited!

Spoken like someone who has no idea how science actually works.

In case it is news, the forces of nature that existed in the past are not able to be seen by science. Science is too small!

Once again, bluster with no substance.

I understand a point when I see one. Are you trying to get toward one?? What about rocks?

I was pointing out how rocks could be piled up on top of each other. Back in post 1441, you seemed confused by the concept.

"Decades ago paleontologists imagined that the large sauropods were like hippos in that they spent their time standing in the water so as to support their weight. Back then it was fairly common for mass estimates to be around 100 tons or more. But ever since the paleontologists brought the large dinosaurs out of the water, the mass estimates for large dinosaurs have steadily dropped until now some paleontologists are proposing that the mass of a Brachiosaurus was only 23 tons.

This is unacceptable. Since the paleontology community has taken the position that there is no paradox regarding the dinosaurs being so large, there is an obvious conflict of interest for them when it comes to estimating the masses of the largest dinosaurs.

It may be helpful to learn what is involved in making an estimate of a dinosaur’s mass. To determine the mass of a dinosaur we just need to know its volume and its overall density, since multiplying the volume and density together gives us the mass. Let us start with determining the volume.

The paleontologists have already completed the work of determining the volume of the various dinosaurs. Using the dinosaur skeleton displays as references, paleontologists have filled out the form of these animals. Paleontologists usually work off of computer generated images or full size replicas to determine the volume. .."

The Problem with Big Dinosaurs

Apparently they are changing their tune. However, there are some issues that need to be resolved... such as...from the same link
"

1. Inadequate bone strength to support the largest dinosaurs
2. Inadequate muscle strength to lift and move the largest dinosaurs
3. Unacceptable high blood pressure and stress on the heart of the tallest dinosaurs
4. Aerodynamics principles showing that the pterosaurs should not have flown"

Yeah, David Esker has no idea what he is talking about. THIS page does a decent job of refuting his points.

Nothing REQUIRES in your mind nature to be different! However the accumulated differences in basic realities of life on earth long ago do add up to things your religion grasps at straws to explain.

Such a shame you have never been able to explain HOW. All you do is repeat the claim that things were different, apparently hoping that if you say it often enough people will believe it.

Look at gulls today. They sit in the water. It doesn't seem feasible to me that giant birds had to have some extraordinary circumstances to be able to get off the ground or water. Your explanations are contrived and convoluted and strain common sense.

Except we have large seabirds today that take off by running across the surface of the water faster and faster until they are moving fast enough to take off.

Please, explain to me why this method doesn't work for larger seabirds.

BTW, many seabirds today nest on cliffs to make it even easier to get into the air. You've been totally incapable of explaining why this method wouldn't work for the largest birds in the past.

And this was the eleventh post in which you were incapable of supporting your claims with actual evidence.

 

[Kylie]

The only thing basically against it is the religious dating schemes and dreams of same nature past based so called dating methods.

Once again, when you have no rational argument against something, you resort to insulting it? That's a poor debate technique.

History itself and ancient records and the bible all converge together to support great differences in nature and realities of the world.

Aesop's fables also talks of great differences in the world, where animals could talk. Doesn't mean it is real.

There are also divergent stories of the flood and the great tower relating to languages!

There are many places in the world that experience flooding, many places in which that flooding can be absolutely devastating. You really think that no one living in one of these places could have thought of a flood greater than any other that could have destroyed the world as they knew it?

As for the story of the Tower of Babel...

There is a Sumerian story that is similar, but that was written BEFORE the Biblical one, so the Bible may have copied it.

There is a story in Mexico, but that's on the other side of the planet, and it was unrelated to a confounding of languages.

And another story attributed to the Toltecs, but they built that tower to preserve themselves in case of another flood.

A story from Arizona about people trying to reach Heaven, but that wasn't related to a confounding of languages.

There doesn't seem to be too many cases where the story of the Tower of Babel is repeated in the same way as it is related in the Bible.

And why would God get so upset about them reaching Heaven anyway. Were people back then REALLY capable of building a tower capable of reaching Heaven? I mean, they must have had some pretty sophisticated building techniques if we aren't able to build anything as high. I mean, we've sent space probes out to the edge of the SOLAR SYSTEM and God hasn't been worried about us reaching Heaven. And yet a bunch of guys building a tower a few thousand years ago were able to cause God enough concern?

Really, the story is obviously myth, not fact.

There is also Jesus rising from the stone cold dead who was seen by friends and family and many many witnesses, Who verified the ancient record in Genesis was true as true ever could be. There is also the perfect fit with ALL evidences from science for a different nature in the past.

Okay, some questions...

The people who went to the tomb? Who were they? Matthew says Mary Magdalene and the other Mary, Mark says Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, Luke says Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary the mother of James, and John says it was only Mary Magdalene.

What time of the day was it? Mark 16:2 states "the sun had risen" at the time of this visit, while John 20:1 states "it was still dark."

Matthew 28:2 says "an angel" "came and rolled away the stone and sat upon it"; Mark 16:5 says the women encountered "a young man sitting at the right" of the tomb (rather than upon the stone); Luke 24:4 says they saw "two men" who "suddenly stood near them in dazzling clothing"; in John 20:1, Mary Magdalene saw nothing other than a moved stone.

Which disciples went to the tomb: Peter alone (Luke 24:12)? Peter and John (John 20:2-8)? Did the disciples believe the reports of the women (or woman) and proceed to Galilee, as Matthew 28:16 claims? Or did they disbelieve these reports as Mark 16:11 and Luke 24:11 claim?

In Acts and Luke, the disciples were told to stay in Jerusalem, and that is where they met Jesus. But in Matthew and Mark, they were told to go to Galilee, and THAT'S where they met Jesus.

Also, please show the scientific evidence for the resurrection.

Only the obstinate interpreting machine of godless so called origin sciences screams at us to obey it's religion, and demands that we all accept it's narrow minded selective little impudent view of all evidences and how they are looked at and interpreted.

"Only science demands we blindly believe it," says the guy who insists that his Different State Past ideas are real while being unable to provide a shred of evidence to support them.

Yes, the evidence is that the only so called dating regime used is the one that reads patterns and ratios of isotopes as if they all came to exist by and in this present nature! No date is any better than that one belief.

I've told you why this is wrong. The many different techniques all agree with each other, which is impossible if the laws of the universe changed. I'm not going to waste my time explaining it any more in depth than that because you have already demonstrated that you will not listen/will not understand.

Why would wet expect some strange and different proportions of creatures who lived in that different past!? If the world was not the same in many ways, we might expect some huge birds and dinos and etc though! Things that no longer make sense in the current nature and that do not therefore exist here!!!

Wow, you really seem incapable of understanding what I am trying to say.

If the laws of the universe were different in the past, why don't we see flying creatures the size of elephants with wings the size of a DVD case?

Furthermore, what we would expect is that we may no longer see many of them, which is precisely what we do see!!!!! The evidence mounts.

That logic is terrible. The presence of extinct animals is not evidence that the laws of the universe were different in the past.

The degree of difference in that one aspect of nature (gravity) was not so great as to make eagles only need sparrow wings. Let's get real here. The whole package that is nature was similar in many ways. Birds still flew. Man still worked metals. We still walked and reproduced and traveled and spoke to other people etc etc. Yet in that ancient time some birds were so huge that they seem to make little real sense in this present world. The spirits who married women and had kids and who lived (at least part time) on earth does not make sense NOW. Building a tower up to their level does not make sense NOW. Trees that grew in weeks does not make sense in this present nature. Living 1000 years does not make sense NOW. Possibly being able to have reduced gravity or mitigate, or countermand it at least at certain times of the day or week or month does not make sense NOW. (some say the great stones of ancient pyramids and structures may have involved some sort of gravity contravention). Talking to animals, or being able to talk to all people on earth makes no sense NOW. etc etc. Yet science has tried to explain all things about the past using the NOW only!!!!!

And yet you provide no evidence at all to support any of your claims.

The ones in the articles cited were very much similar. Don't try to stretch out what I said.

You do not have the required knowledge to make any sort of statement about flatworms.

Speciation is based on how nature now works! The times involved in speciating are all based on present nature! The start of creatures that speciated is some imaginary comet or ocean vent or pond..totally made up! What creatures speciated from what is largely derived from the fossil record, and the belief that record indicates a good sampling of what lived at the various times, rather than just some super partial record of a very few animals that somehow could leave fossil remains in the nature of yesterday! In other words RELIGION.

Please describe for me what mechanism existed in the DSP that prevented speciation in the way we currently understand it.

I look at the evidences and I do not ignore and omit the records of God and man about the ancient times as you do. There is NO reason to accept same nature past based hooey dates. To ignore them is required to get at the truth.

So you read an old story, decide that it agrees with your worldview, and on that basis you decide that it must be real.

I, however, do not base my conclusions about what is correct on whether I agree with what it says.

Any fossil bird we have might be one of thousands of types and kinds of birds that also lived at the same time. To pick the one bird that happened to be one that was able to be fossilized and try to say all the other living birds at that time evolved from it is ridiculous!

Firstly, I'm not aware of any reputable scientist who phrases things like that; in fact I have seen many scientists who claim that we SHOULDN'T say that, since it is extremely unlikely that any particular individual that we find fossilised is part of the unbroken line of generations that lead to the modern animals.

I suspect that you will completely misunderstand the point I am making here, but it is extremely hot here today and I honestly can't be bothered explaining it for you when I suspect you will ignore any such explanation anyway.

Just as it is ridiculous to claim all modern birds descended from it!

Again, I have seen many scientists who point out that we should NOT make the claim that a particular fossil is part of the line that lead to modern organisms.

The few animals and creatures that could decompose and leave fossil remains in that former nature do NOT represent life on earth then in any way!!

They sure do not provide any record of what adapted or evolved from what today either!

That is one of the most ridiculous statements you have ever posted on here.

Just because some dolphin like or shark like creature (teeth etc) happened to be able to leave remains in the former nature does not mean much! There also swam at that same time with them all the creatures you think evolved from them!

Who somehow were incapable of leaving fossils.

What an amazing coincidence that creatures only became able to be fossilized in the right order to look like millions of years of evolution. What an amazing coincidence!

Post 12 in the series of you being unable to provide any evidence to support your claims.

 

[dad]

Did I say it doesn't? Why do you resort to strawman arguments?

If science does need to defend it's use and claim of a same nature in the past then get to it.

Very well, since you dismiss these people on those grounds, I challenge you to answer those questions about your ideas. What was gravity like in your DSP? Was it stronger or weaker? What evidence do you have to support your conclusion? And what do you think gravity is? What causes it? Was the cause of gravity different in your DSP or was it simply a different value in the same basic causal mechanism we have today?

How would I know? Not sure it matters. I suspect that some planets and or heavenly objects may have been in different positions. That could at least sometimes affect gravity on earth as the moon affects it now. But who really knows?

If you can't answer those questions, you really have no right to try to be insisting that your idea is the truth.

No one insisted gravity was somehow smaller or greater.

If the laws of the universe were different in the past, we should find things that cannot be explained if we have present state past assumptions. Please describe what these could be.

Not the laws of the universe, the forces and laws of the fishbowl! As far as interpreting evidences on earth as if they had to come about by present nature, well how else could they possibly see things when that is all they look for?!

So then the gravity would have been hugely different as well, then, yes?

I doubt that.

Please show me something in the fossil record that has no explanation in a same state past.

Or different!?

The trick is not just to use your beliefs to explain all things, but to admit you don't know. The fossil record is almost useless in determining the variety of life that lived at any given time.

Why not?

Why legs? How about the eyes of a dragon fly? How about the size of birds that used to be able to fly? How about the size in general of dinos and some other things that require extraordinary explanations and convoluted assumptions to make them fit the present nature world? How about the sudden burst of different kinds of life in the Cambrian? How about moving huge ancient stones and pics in the ground that seem to have been drawn for folks in the air? What exactly is it you claim any dino leg tells you?? You might as well read tea leaves.

We can look at the bones and use that to make an estimation of the size of the animal by using present state laws, and then when we look at the complete fossil, we can see if the complete fossil matches what we expected as a result of our calculations.

Name an example. Show how the leg bone shows exactly how fat the leg was? You do realize many many species of fossilized remains have precious little to work with? You thought they were all complete skeletons?

I was pointing out how rocks could be piled up on top of each other. Back in post 1441, you seemed confused by the concept.

So can legos...so??

Yeah, David Esker has no idea what he is talking about. THIS page does a decent job of refuting his points.

From your link

"d) Why the abundant fossil footprint are proportionately comparable
(They'd have sunk up to the armpits were they standing on dry land)"

--The depth to which an animal sinks is a product of the shear imposed on the substrate, not simply total mass. This depends on the stress on each foot, as well as duty factors and substrate conditions. In short, there is no reason to think that a large dinosaur would sink appreciably deep on dry land. Elephants, for example, do not leave footprints much deeper than those of humans."

The depth to which anything sank depended on the ground that existed that they stood on. If consistency/constitution/density etc of ground and rock were different, then we could not measure how deep some weight sinks today in a particular soil we think the prints were laid down in. The point of the article was that the guy claimed that decades ago they used to claim a lot of dinos spent most of their time in water. Now they changed their tune and have more elaborate same past nature explanations! As usual, they get busted and conflate issues better!

Except we have large seabirds today that take off by running across the surface of the water faster and faster until they are moving fast enough to take off.

Yeah, and make those giant freakazoid birds did something like that. Or maybe life was just easier for them in that former different nature.

BTW, many seabirds today nest on cliffs to make it even easier to get into the air. You've been totally incapable of explaining why this method wouldn't work for the largest birds in the past.

How many of those have to stay in the air all day and feed from the air while gliding?

They look at what their belief system NEEDS to have as truth.

""There is no way that pterosaurs could have managed sustained flapping flight unless they had an elevated metabolic rate, unless they could get oxygen into their cells and carbon dioxide out rapidly," he said. "They couldn't have flapped for more than a few minutes if they had been cold-blooded. They would have crashed to the ground."

Pterosaurs Article, Pterosaurs Information, Facts -- National Geographic

This could be correct. However, maybe nature was different, so we don't need the extraordinary explanation!? Ha.

From the same link, we see a creature with a crest. They have no modern use for this, so they invent same nature past reasons it had to exist!

" Pteranodon and its crest have perplexed researchers since the 1870s, when its bones turned up in the chalk layers of western Kansas. Some viewed the crest as a forward rudder, enabling the almost tailless pterosaur to steer while flying. Other scientists proposed that Pteranodon's crest served as an air brake: To slow down for landing, the animal would simply turn its head broadside to the wind."

Then we see this
"Although the mating rituals of Pteranodon remain speculative, one aspect of its behavior is clear from the fossil record. The remains of Pteranodon are found in rocks that lay more than a hundred miles (160 kilometers) out to sea in the Cretaceous period. This fish catcher, which had a wingspan of up to 24 feet (7.3 meters), must have regularly soared vast distances over the waves, its wings outspread to catch the steady ocean winds."

Well, how about let's look at the basis for claiming that the area was out to sea when the creature lived?? Can you give us that?


we continue in same link
"
The triumphant reign of pterosaurs ended with this giant flier. At the end of the Cretaceous period 65 million years ago, a meteorite or comet slammed into Earth. That calamity—and other events—wiped out roughly three-quarters of all animal species, including all remaining pterosaurs and dinosaurs. But the number of pterosaur species appears to have dwindled for millions of years before the cataclysm, suggesting that something else contributed to their fate.

It could be that the evolutionary achievements of pterosaurs ultimately led to their downfall."
Since I place the timing of the flood at that time, what I read here is that the few remaining big fliers didn't make it through the flood event. When I see that they declined before the flood, that tells me that probably the world was changing and maybe many started adapting rapidly another way..or that other creatures maybe started to like their bacon...etc etc. The only song and dance we hear from origin fable science is how evolution dunit.

"
Whatever the cause of their demise, pterosaurs enjoyed unparalleled success. They trailblazed a path into sun-drenched skies before any other vertebrate. For 150 million years they sailed the winds on the strength of a fragile finger. What a glorious ride they had."
This even reads like a fable!! Evo brain freeze dreaming! But they did not live before other creatures! They simply fossilized while others did not!

 

[Kylie]

If science does need to defend it's use and claim of a same nature in the past then get to it.

How would I know? Not sure it matters. I suspect that some planets and or heavenly objects may have been in different positions. That could at least sometimes affect gravity on earth as the moon affects it now. But who really knows?

No one insisted gravity was somehow smaller or greater.


Not the laws of the universe, the forces and laws of the fishbowl! As far as interpreting evidences on earth as if they had to come about by present nature, well how else could they possibly see things when that is all they look for?!
I doubt that.
Or different!?

The trick is not just to use your beliefs to explain all things, but to admit you don't know. The fossil record is almost useless in determining the variety of life that lived at any given time.
Why legs? How about the eyes of a dragon fly? How about the size of birds that used to be able to fly? How about the size in general of dinos and some other things that require extraordinary explanations and convoluted assumptions to make them fit the present nature world? How about the sudden burst of different kinds of life in the Cambrian? How about moving huge ancient stones and pics in the ground that seem to have been drawn for folks in the air? What exactly is it you claim any dino leg tells you?? You might as well read tea leaves.

Name an example. Show how the leg bone shows exactly how fat the leg was? You do realize many many species of fossilized remains have precious little to work with? You thought they were all complete skeletons?

So can legos...so??

From your link

"d) Why the abundant fossil footprint are proportionately comparable
(They'd have sunk up to the armpits were they standing on dry land)"

--The depth to which an animal sinks is a product of the shear imposed on the substrate, not simply total mass. This depends on the stress on each foot, as well as duty factors and substrate conditions. In short, there is no reason to think that a large dinosaur would sink appreciably deep on dry land. Elephants, for example, do not leave footprints much deeper than those of humans."

The depth to which anything sank depended on the ground that existed that they stood on. If consistency/constitution/density etc of ground and rock were different, then we could not measure how deep some weight sinks today in a particular soil we think the prints were laid down in. The point of the article was that the guy claimed that decades ago they used to claim a lot of dinos spent most of their time in water. Now they changed their tune and have more elaborate same past nature explanations! As usual, they get busted and conflate issues better!

Yeah, and make those giant freakazoid birds did something like that. Or maybe life was just easier for them in that former different nature.
How many of those have to stay in the air all day and feed from the air while gliding?

They look at what their belief system NEEDS to have as truth.

""There is no way that pterosaurs could have managed sustained flapping flight unless they had an elevated metabolic rate, unless they could get oxygen into their cells and carbon dioxide out rapidly," he said. "They couldn't have flapped for more than a few minutes if they had been cold-blooded. They would have crashed to the ground."

Pterosaurs Article, Pterosaurs Information, Facts -- National Geographic

This could be correct. However, maybe nature was different, so we don't need the extraordinary explanation!? Ha.

From the same link, we see a creature with a crest. They have no modern use for this, so they invent same nature past reasons it had to exist!

" Pteranodon and its crest have perplexed researchers since the 1870s, when its bones turned up in the chalk layers of western Kansas. Some viewed the crest as a forward rudder, enabling the almost tailless pterosaur to steer while flying. Other scientists proposed that Pteranodon's crest served as an air brake: To slow down for landing, the animal would simply turn its head broadside to the wind."

Then we see this
"Although the mating rituals of Pteranodon remain speculative, one aspect of its behavior is clear from the fossil record. The remains of Pteranodon are found in rocks that lay more than a hundred miles (160 kilometers) out to sea in the Cretaceous period. This fish catcher, which had a wingspan of up to 24 feet (7.3 meters), must have regularly soared vast distances over the waves, its wings outspread to catch the steady ocean winds."

Well, how about let's look at the basis for claiming that the area was out to sea when the creature lived?? Can you give us that?


we continue in same link
"
The triumphant reign of pterosaurs ended with this giant flier. At the end of the Cretaceous period 65 million years ago, a meteorite or comet slammed into Earth. That calamity—and other events—wiped out roughly three-quarters of all animal species, including all remaining pterosaurs and dinosaurs. But the number of pterosaur species appears to have dwindled for millions of years before the cataclysm, suggesting that something else contributed to their fate.

It could be that the evolutionary achievements of pterosaurs ultimately led to their downfall."
Since I place the timing of the flood at that time, what I read here is that the few remaining big fliers didn't make it through the flood event. When I see that they declined before the flood, that tells me that probably the world was changing and maybe many started adapting rapidly another way..or that other creatures maybe started to like their bacon...etc etc. The only song and dance we hear from origin fable science is how evolution dunit.

"
Whatever the cause of their demise, pterosaurs enjoyed unparalleled success. They trailblazed a path into sun-drenched skies before any other vertebrate. For 150 million years they sailed the winds on the strength of a fragile finger. What a glorious ride they had."
This even reads like a fable!! Evo brain freeze dreaming! But they did not live before other creatures! They simply fossilized while others did not!

I was going to go through this and respond to each point, but I see nothing here that you haven't done already. More of the same old, "You can't support your position, so mine is right," the same claims presented without evidence, the same inability to remember what was discussed and the same complete lack of understanding of how science works.

From now on, I'm only going to respond to your posts if you can have an actual discussion rather than just repeating the same old claims I have dealt with already.

In any case, you still have not presented a single shred of evidence to support your position, the 13th such post of yours.

 

[dad]

Aesop's fables also talks of great differences in the world, where animals could talk. Doesn't mean it is real.

Good point, they should relabel it origin sciences!

There are many places in the world that experience flooding, many places in which that flooding can be absolutely devastating. You really think that no one living in one of these places could have thought of a flood greater than any other that could have destroyed the world as they knew it?

Why not think of a space invasion, or the sun exploding, or donald duck lassoing the moon and crashing it down...or etc etc etc.

The common thread of a world flood is evidence.

As for the story of the Tower of Babel...

There is a Sumerian story that is similar, but that was written BEFORE the Biblical one, so the Bible may have copied it.

Sumer was post flood and post Babel! Once again your wonky religious dating attempts skew reality.

There is a story in Mexico, but that's on the other side of the planet, and it was unrelated to a confounding of languages.

Wrong the continents were joined!!!! The evidence mounts.

And another story attributed to the Toltecs, but they built that tower to preserve themselves in case of another flood.

Jewish tradition says Nimrod had the same motive!

A story from Arizona about people trying to reach Heaven, but that wasn't related to a confounding of languages.

Maybe the peyote made them forget

There doesn't seem to be too many cases where the story of the Tower of Babel is repeated in the same way as it is related in the Bible.

This link mentions several stories of a tower.


Tower of Babel - New World Encyclopedia

And why would God get so upset about them reaching Heaven anyway. Were people back then REALLY capable of building a tower capable of reaching Heaven? I mean, they must have had some pretty sophisticated building techniques if we aren't able to build anything as high. I mean, we've sent space probes out to the edge of the SOLAR SYSTEM and God hasn't been worried about us reaching Heaven. And yet a bunch of guys building a tower a few thousand years ago were able to cause God enough concern?

Looking at the link above I see some records indicate a flying tower! Ha. However my longstanding feeling about the tower is that it was meant to reach somewhere around the clouds, where in that area, at that time, probably a spiritual level existed where some spirits lived.
One of the great notable signs of the nature change was a separation between the physical and the spiritual realms apparently. Remember that before the flood (former nature) there were spirits marrying earth women. It is possible that they had a spirit level not too far away up there where they also lived when not on earth. It would be to that level I assume that thee people tried to build the tower.

The real actual heaven is where God lives, and I think that is out beyond the stars.

The people who went to the tomb? Who were they? Matthew says Mary Magdalene and the other Mary, Mark says Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, Luke says Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary the mother of James, and John says it was only Mary Magdalene.

People arrived at different times!

What time of the day was it? Mark 16:2 states "the sun had risen" at the time of this visit, while John 20:1 states "it was still dark."

Some got there before the sun rose some just after.

Matthew 28:2 says "an angel" "came and rolled away the stone and sat upon it"; Mark 16:5 says the women encountered "a young man sitting at the right" of the tomb (rather than upon the stone); Luke 24:4 says they saw "two men" who "suddenly stood near them in dazzling clothing"; in John 20:1, Mary Magdalene saw nothing other than a moved stone.

Angels appear to different people however they like! This is bible 101.

Which disciples went to the tomb: Peter alone (Luke 24:12)? Peter and John (John 20:2-8)? Did the disciples believe the reports of the women (or woman) and proceed to Galilee, as Matthew 28:16 claims? Or did they disbelieve these reports as Mark 16:11 and Luke 24:11 claim?

All

In Acts and Luke, the disciples were told to stay in Jerusalem, and that is where they met Jesus. But in Matthew and Mark, they were told to go to Galilee, and THAT'S where they met Jesus.

He could tell you to go to New Zealand and He will meet you there, and me to go to Chile and He's meet me there. He can get around real good! Remember some folks with Him were suddenly on the other side of a big body of water in no time at all. Travel in the coming New Jerusalem (heaven) will be like that. Want to visit mom? Boom you are in her living room. Off to a friend's mansion next? Boom, you are out in her balcony 897 miles high overlooking earth out through the transparent gold walls!

Also, please show the scientific evidence for the resurrection.

That's like saying please show how a flatworm can build a drug store on the dark side of the moon! Science is too small too limited too ignorant and too religious to be able to deal in the real science that was involved in the Resurrection!

I've told you why this is wrong. The many different techniques all agree with each other, which is impossible if the laws of the universe changed.

There are no different techniques there is only different application of the same belief on different things! THAT IS their technique!

If the laws of the universe were different in the past, why don't we see flying creatures the size of elephants with wings the size of a DVD case?

God created them and He did not do it that way. If there was a different amount of gasses in our air, that does not mean we still did not breathe! If the ground had a different consistency so that water could pass through it from deep below the earth, that does not mean we could not walk on the ground! Etc.

That logic is terrible. The presence of extinct animals is not evidence that the laws of the universe were different in the past.

The fact that there was a big change in the sorts of animals that can live is evidence something changed!

Please describe for me what mechanism existed in the DSP that prevented speciation in the way we currently understand it.

Prevented?? Ha. Who says things could not adapt and do so super fast back then? In what way do you claim that species ability to change are unique to this present time??

Again, I have seen many scientists who point out that we should NOT make the claim that a particular fossil is part of the line that lead to modern organisms.

I know. they tap dance around so as ot to get nailed in their fraud!

Who somehow were incapable of leaving fossils.

Correct...like man kind! From DUST we were created and apparently we went back to dust too fast to leave fossils!!! Ha.

What an amazing coincidence that creatures only became able to be fossilized in the right order to look like millions of years of evolution. What an amazing coincidence!

Not at all. The creatures did exist and were related to created kinds somehow. Naturally they would resemble other creatures that came from the kinds.

 

[Kylie]

Why not think of a space invasion, or the sun exploding, or donald duck lassoing the moon and crashing it down...or etc etc etc.

What in the world are you going on about?

The common thread of a world flood is evidence.

You have no evidence. Old books telling stories are not evidence.

Sumer was post flood and post Babel! Once again your wonky religious dating attempts skew reality.

I would have thought by now you would have realized that when you make claims like this and provide no evidence, I call you out on it and ask that you provide evidence. Given that you constantly ignore my requests that you provide evidence and yet you repeatedly present claims without evidence, I can only copnclude that you are just trolling.

Wrong the continents were joined!!!! The evidence mounts.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

This link mentions several stories of a tower.


Tower of Babel - New World Encyclopedia

I can give you many sources that tell stories of spaceships, therefore they must all be talking about the Enterprise from Star Trek.

Looking at the link above I see some records indicate a flying tower! Ha. However my longstanding feeling about the tower is that it was meant to reach somewhere around the clouds, where in that area, at that time, probably a spiritual level existed where some spirits lived.
One of the great notable signs of the nature change was a separation between the physical and the spiritual realms apparently. Remember that before the flood (former nature) there were spirits marrying earth women. It is possible that they had a spirit level not too far away up there where they also lived when not on earth. It would be to that level I assume that thee people tried to build the tower.

Yet we have far surpassed anything they could have accomplished back then, and the actions that caused so much anger in God then have met with NOTHING now.

Why is that?

The real actual heaven is where God lives, and I think that is out beyond the stars.

More assumptions?

People arrived at different times!

Do you have Biblical evidence for this or are you just making an assumption to fit what the Bible says into your insistence that everything must be true?

Some got there before the sun rose some just after.

Do you have Biblical evidence for this or are you just making an assumption to fit what the Bible says into your insistence that everything must be true?

Angels appear to different people however they like! This is bible 101.

And why would they do that in this case?

All

So Peter went alone, but John was with him. How could Peter be alone if there John was there too?

And how can a person believe the reports while at the same time NOT believe the reports?

Your self contradictory ideas prove themselves to be wrong by those very contradictions.

He could tell you to go to New Zealand and He will meet you there, and me to go to Chile and He's meet me there. He can get around real good!

Remember some folks with Him were suddenly on the other side of a big body of water in no time at all. Travel in the coming New Jerusalem (heaven) will be like that. Want to visit mom? Boom you are in her living room. Off to a friend's mansion next? Boom, you are out in her balcony 897 miles high overlooking earth out through the transparent gold walls!
That's like saying please show how a flatworm can build a drug store on the dark side of the moon! Science is too small too limited too ignorant and too religious to be able to deal in the real science that was involved in the Resurrection!

Only if different people split up. That is not supported by what is in the Bible. You are inventing things to explain away contradictions.

There are no different techniques there is only different application of the same belief on different things! THAT IS their technique!

Once again, claims, no evidence. Come on, stop wasting everyone's time.

God created them and He did not do it that way. If there was a different amount of gasses in our air, that does not mean we still did not breathe! If the ground had a different consistency so that water could pass through it from deep below the earth, that does not mean we could not walk on the ground! Etc.

Once again, claims, no evidence. Come on, stop wasting everyone's time.

The fact that there was a big change in the sorts of animals that can live is evidence something changed!

Not if the animals that were alive follow the rules of the present state. You argument is incredibly weak.

Prevented?? Ha. Who says things could not adapt and do so super fast back then? In what way do you claim that species ability to change are unique to this present time??

Biological organisms have always been able to evolve. There is no evidence that it happened in the kind of compressed time frame you are claiming, because (as usual) you have provided no evidence at all.

I know. they tap dance around so as ot to get nailed in their fraud!

No, they make that claim because it is true.

Just as it is true that if we find some human remains from 1000 years ago, it is not likely to be one of your ancestors.

Correct...like man kind! From DUST we were created and apparently we went back to dust too fast to leave fossils!!! Ha.

Remember that thing called "evidence" I keep bugging you about? You need to provide some.

Not at all. The creatures did exist and were related to created kinds somehow. Naturally they would resemble other creatures that came from the kinds.

Once again you have no idea what you are talking about.

And that's 14 posts in which your inability to present evidence has been painfully obvious.

I'm hoping that one day you'll get tired of just making the same claims over and over again and actually try to give them some support.

BTW, you never said what you thought of my idea to actually ASK the people here if they've found your claims convincing.

 

[lasthero]

I'm hoping that one day you'll get tired of just making the same claims over and over again and actually try to give them some support.

You hope in vain.

 

[dad]

Aesop's fables also talks of great differences in the world, where animals could talk. Doesn't mean it is real.

If they talked of it being the same, they would have no more weight than science.

There are many places in the world that experience flooding, many places in which that flooding can be absolutely devastating. You really think that no one living in one of these places could have thought of a flood greater than any other that could have destroyed the world as they knew it?

You have an opinion. Nothing really to do with facts.

As for the story of the Tower of Babel...

There is a Sumerian story that is similar, but that was written BEFORE the Biblical one, so the Bible may have copied it.

Check your dates. They are religion, Sumer was post Babel.

There is a story in Mexico, but that's on the other side of the planet, and it was unrelated to a confounding of languages.

The continents were joined when Babel happened most likely.

And another story attributed to the Toltecs, but they built that tower to preserve themselves in case of another flood.

Part of the inspiration some accredit Nimrod with also.

A story from Arizona about people trying to reach Heaven, but that wasn't related to a confounding of languages.

Without details who knows?

There doesn't seem to be too many cases where the story of the Tower of Babel is repeated in the same way as it is related in the Bible.

The religions all started at Babel. They specialized in avoiding God.

And why would God get so upset about them reaching Heaven anyway. Were people back then REALLY capable of building a tower capable of reaching Heaven? I mean, they must have had some pretty sophisticated building techniques if we aren't able to build anything as high. I mean, we've sent space probes out to the edge of the SOLAR SYSTEM and God hasn't been worried about us reaching Heaven. And yet a bunch of guys building a tower a few thousand years ago were able to cause God enough concern?

The heaven may refer to merely a spirit layer up in the sky at that time. Men were smarter then than now, so yes they could have done it. God Personally intervened to stop it, that should tell us it was a credible threat.

The people who went to the tomb? Who were they? Matthew says Mary Magdalene and the other Mary, Mark says Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, Luke says Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary the mother of James, and John says it was only Mary Magdalene.

What time of the day was it? Mark 16:2 states "the sun had risen" at the time of this visit, while John 20:1 states "it was still dark."

Matthew 28:2 says "an angel" "came and rolled away the stone and sat upon it"; Mark 16:5 says the women encountered "a young man sitting at the right" of the tomb (rather than upon the stone); Luke 24:4 says they saw "two men" who "suddenly stood near them in dazzling clothing"; in John 20:1, Mary Magdalene saw nothing other than a moved stone.

Which disciples went to the tomb: Peter alone (Luke 24:12)? Peter and John (John 20:2-8)? Did the disciples believe the reports of the women (or woman) and proceed to Galilee, as Matthew 28:16 claims? Or did they disbelieve these reports as Mark 16:11 and Luke 24:11 claim?

In Acts and Luke, the disciples were told to stay in Jerusalem, and that is where they met Jesus. But in Matthew and Mark, they were told to go to Galilee, and THAT'S where they met Jesus.

If you don't have the timing of who went where when correct it seems garbled to you.

Also, please show the scientific evidence for the resurrection.

Easy...name any two prominent scientists who were there!?

I've told you why this is wrong. The many different techniques all agree with each other, which is impossible if the laws of the universe changed. I'm not going to waste my time explaining it any more in depth than that because you have already demonstrated that you will not listen/will not understand.

To have a point you need to be able to name one technique NOT based on a same nature in the past belief. Good luck with that.

If the laws of the universe were different in the past, why don't we see flying creatures the size of elephants with wings the size of a DVD case?

Learn the difference between complete insane conjecture and a very smart creator.

That logic is terrible. The presence of extinct animals is not evidence that the laws of the universe were different in the past.

You thought it was?

Please describe for me what mechanism existed in the DSP that prevented speciation in the way we currently understand it.

Who says kinds never used to speciate??

This post is starting to seem awfully familiar. I guess I already responded. Oh well, maybe this response has a few new gems.

 

[Kylie]

The continents were joined when Babel happened most likely.

More guessing from you? Don't you have any facts?

Without details who knows?

So you just assume it supports your beliefs because it doesn't outright contradict them? That's a terrible way to get evidence.

The heaven may refer to merely a spirit layer up in the sky at that time. Men were smarter then than now, so yes they could have done it. God Personally intervened to stop it, that should tell us it was a credible threat.

So the tower back then was a more credible threat than ANYTHING we've got today? How can that be?

If you don't have the timing of who went where when correct it seems garbled to you.

Then please, describe the sequence of events clearly and unambiguously including all the details from the different sources.

Easy...name any two prominent scientists who were there!?

Are you a child? Asking me questions is NOT you providing evidence to support your position. Grow up and support your position.

To have a point you need to be able to name one technique NOT based on a same nature in the past belief. Good luck with that.

Fine, if the laws were different, different techniques based on an assumed same state past would disagree with each other and give contradictory ages.

Learn the difference between complete insane conjecture and a very smart creator.

You have provided a great deal of conjecture. You have also provided zero evidence.

You thought it was?

No, what makes you think I did. You are the one bringing up the different forms of extinct animals in an effort to justify your DSP ideas.

Who says kinds never used to speciate??

I said IN THE WAY WE CURRENTLY UNDERSTAND IT. You are claiming there were differences, it's time to put your money where your mouth is.

This post is starting to seem awfully familiar. I guess I already responded. Oh well, maybe this response has a few new gems.

It's familiar because it's you making the same tired claims without providing any evidence.

 

[dad]

So you just assume it supports your beliefs because it doesn't outright contradict them? That's a terrible way to get evidence.

I need no more support for my beliefs. The issue is false science lying to people who are confused or have little clue.

So the tower back then was a more credible threat than ANYTHING we've got today? How can that be?

I think the tower is accepted as fact these days due to new evidences. The strategy now for the godless is to try to insinuate it was not the tower of the bible.

Then please, describe the sequence of events clearly and unambiguously including all the details from the different sources.

I think my sig picture does that. Look for the little ark and tower and modern flags.

Fine, if the laws were different, different techniques based on an assumed same state past would disagree with each other and give contradictory ages.

Weird claim that has no basis in fact. You have only one belief and several techniques that all use the same one belief.

You have provided a great deal of conjecture. You have also provided zero evidence.

Science does not deal in evidence when it comes to origin issues nor can it.

No, what makes you think I did. You are the one bringing up the different forms of extinct animals in an effort to justify your DSP ideas.

They fit better in the different past than here.

I said IN THE WAY WE CURRENTLY UNDERSTAND IT. You are claiming there were differences, it's time to put your money where your mouth is.

Science does NOT currently understand at all. Hence the problem.

 

[dad]

I would have thought by now you would have realized that when you make claims like this and provide no evidence, I call you out on it and ask that you provide evidence. Given that you constantly ignore my requests that you provide evidence and yet you repeatedly present claims without evidence, I can only copnclude that you are just trolling.

No one can provide evidence to you. because you deny history and the bible and the same state past basis of your religion, nor would you recognize evidence if it bit your ankle. You toss out words like trolling while spamming non answers and providing no support for your religious claims.

I can give you many sources that tell stories of spaceships, therefore they must all be talking about the Enterprise from Star Trek.

This is not a thread to help people gain some sense of reality and balance and ability to know fable from fact.

Yet we have far surpassed anything they could have accomplished back then, and the actions that caused so much anger in God then have met with NOTHING now.

Actually, now there is no spirit layer up above the clouds we could build a trump tower to. God changed things. The scary thing is that He says things will change back to like they were then. Not only that, but the changes will happen soon, before Jesus returns!

Do you have Biblical evidence for this or are you just making an assumption to fit what the Bible says into your insistence that everything must be true?

There is no reason to assume God is crazy or a liar or incompetent. If different gospels record different aspects of the same event, the question you should ask is can they be harmonized. The answer is heck yes. To look at part of the story of events a certain day as related by several people and try to contort this into a contradiction displays a glaring lack of understanding or desire to understand.

And why would they do that in this case?

God's angels may not be welcome in this fallen world right now, or possibly God just prefers to test us sometime, rather than making it obvious He and His angels are here...etc.

Only if different people split up. That is not supported by what is in the Bible. You are inventing things to explain away contradictions.

Show us the verse that everyone visiting the empty tomb came at the same time? You can't.

Not if the animals that were alive follow the rules of the present state. You argument is incredibly weak.

Simple way to know is see if science knows what nature did exist when they existed. The game is not to try to cook up ignorance based convoluted ever changing arguments as to how the animals could possibly survive in this nature! The trick is to demonstrate that you know what nature existed. You can't.

Biological organisms have always been able to evolve. There is no evidence that it happened in the kind of compressed time frame you are claiming, because (as usual) you have provided no evidence at all.

Yes there is, but not in the little religious sandbox of so called science. They may sit there like toddlers making towers and going vroom to little tractors, but they may not preach to adults about what lies outside their sandbox.

Just as it is true that if we find some human remains from 1000 years ago, it is not likely to be one of your ancestors.

1000 years is known to be in the same nature we live in...irrelevant.

Remember that thing called "evidence" I keep bugging you about? You need to provide some.

Denying evidence while saying the word is useless.

BTW, you never said what you thought of my idea to actually ASK the people here if they've found your claims convincing.

Let's start off asking if they find God's claims convincing.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Why do you people expect things in the past to be the same as they are now? If things were the same, even under your own theory there would be no reason for life to evolve and adapt to the changing conditions, but as one of you stated would remain in stasis being adapted to the conditions......

So are you promoting stasis with no evolution, or change with evolution? I'm not sure anymore from your arguments against Dad.....

Seems the only one arguing for change is Dad.....

 

[Queller]

many are called but few are chosen and the foolish will never gain wisdom. To take a page from their beliefs. trying to explain the truth to the blind and ignorant is like trying to explain quantum mechanics to a monkey.its a waste of time because God will never open the eyes of the wicked.

Then I guess the wicked can't be saved.

 

[Kylie]

I need no more support for my beliefs.

So you refuse to provide support for your ideas? Then they are worthless.

 

[dad]

So you refuse to provide support for your ideas? Then they are worthless.

The bible needs no more support far as I am concerned, your religious so called science has no support. Evolution is not knowledge, it is contrived blasphemy.

 

[Kylie]

The bible needs no more support far as I am concerned, your religious so called science has no support. Evolution is not knowledge, it is contrived blasphemy.

If you are going to claim ANYTHING as being factually correct, then you must provide evidence to support the claim that it is correct.

Otherwise anyone could present anything, claim it is factually correct, then argue that they don't need to support it, and it is up to others to disprove it. And that's just silly, isn't it?