Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Except it's not, because you basically said "Are they fruits or apples? Your answer must be one or the other." Nonsense isn't very good at exposing nonsense.I have no argument with you. It is an exercise in exposing the nonsense that there are no transitional forms.
They are different branches in the same tree.
Who created the universe with all its natural laws and naturalistic mechanisms? It still all comes back on God.The website claims only naturalistic mechanisms 'created' all life we observe today. This automatically dismisses God as not wanted, needed or allowed.
Anywhere it doesnt say it, it doesn't say it. You can't provide the quote, so it doesn't say it.If you can find anywhere on the site that their view of Darwinist evolutionary 'creation' is not random, mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless, I'd appreciate a link with associated content supporting that claim.
I asked you a question: Can you quote directly from their site where it specifically says "mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless"
Stop making things up.
Not possible, because that would go against the sacred cow of the hypothesis macroevolutionIf you can find anywhere on the site that their view of Darwinist evolutionary 'creation' is not random, mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless, I'd appreciate a link with associated content supporting that claim.
Who created the universe with all its natural laws and naturalistic mechanisms? It still all comes back on God.
Anywhere it doesnt say it, it doesn't say it. You can't provide the quote, so it doesn't say it.
They have evolved apart from one another, just as tree branches grow out from the trunk.
But you can't even show synonyms, or you would be quoting from the site and documenting your case. All you can do is say "Anything that isn't literal B I B L E is random mindless meaningless purposeless and goalless."You're wanting a verbatim quote and this isn't about a verbatim quote. This is about the view of evolution promoted by the UC-Berkeley website and it's definitely one of Darwinist evolutionary 'creation' which is random, mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless.
The proper way to do it is to quote the particular parts (succinctly) that support your case, and provide the link in case anyone wants to make sure you aren't making it up.I can provide the link to the UC-Berkeley site which promotes that particular view of Darwinist evolution.
But you can't even show synonyms, or you would be quoting from the site and documenting your case. All you can do is say "Anything that isn't literal B I B L E is random mindless meaningless purposeless and goalless."
Things happen either because they are planned, or they happen spontaneously -- without thought, without a purpose, and without design.
Consider a bird, a plane and ‘intelligent design.’
We all agree that a plane is ‘designed,’ that it ‘has a purpose,’ and we agree that it ‘has a creator.’ But there is controversy regarding the bird. Some will say: The bird has no design, no purpose, and no creator.
http://lifefromgod.com/
Unless the design is for things to spontaneously occur within a general idea that a sentient being will come into existence.
Generally speaking, evolutionists reject any notion of intelligent design.
More like they have been divinely designed. Natural Selection can, over time, transform an organism into a more specialized species of an organism. It is more like a bush then a tree.They have evolved apart from one another, just as tree branches grow out from the trunk.
That is YOUR SLANT. It is NOT the ONLY way to see things, so you can't pin all those things on evolution as being Berkleys view.That still doesn't dismiss the fact that the UC-Berkeley view of evolution is one of humanity being the result of random, mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless naturalistic mechanisms though.
The proper way to do it is to quote the particular parts (succinctly) that support your case, and provide the link in case anyone wants to make sure you aren't making it up.
That is YOUR SLANT. It is NOT the ONLY way to see things, so you can't pin all those things on evolution as being Berkleys view.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?