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.
1) Sounds good to me.How about:
1) Lucy and other members of her species lived.
2) And eventually they died.
3) The next generation repeated that pattern.
I can't speak for other creationists here, but for the record, I believe the merging of evolution with abiogenesis is something the Antichrist himself is going to do; a point I have made many times here.And that brings up the obvious question: Why do so many creationists insist on such misuse of terminology. (In this case, they try to combine abiogenesis and evolution into one "macroevolution" of their own imagination.)
If someone wants to get a few laughs while wasting as many minutes, you should read the Kent Hovind "newsletter from prison" where he says that he's having a great time in prison: "It gives me lots of time for earning additional doctorates!"
Considering that Hovind has yet to earn a college bachelor's degree, those many Ph.D.'s are incredible achievements. [Sarcasm alert.]
In my opinion, if his grave was robbed by paleoarchaeologists, they would conclude he was either Neanderthal or Cro-magnon.
I can't speak for other creationists here, but for the record, I believe the merging of evolution with abiogenesis is something the Antichrist himself is going to do; a point I have made many times here.
I can't speak for other creationists here, but for the record, I believe the merging of evolution with abiogenesis is something the Antichrist himself is going to do; a point I have made many times here.
Of course not.
If it was, then evolution would be too hard to demonstrate.
After all, if you can't daisy-chain, do the next best thing -- connect the dots.
Right?
I love the point Mr. Hovind made concerning this:
You can't show that any of those missing links had offspring.
Mainly on paper though, right?What we can show is that the mixture of characteristics found in these fossils exactly matches the predictions made by the theory of evolution. Creationism makes no such predictions.
Mainly on paper though, right?
Some scientists might be able to demonstrate that Roundup needs to be stronger this year than last, but that's a far cry from demonstrating we came from a previous race of hominids.So AVET will still look at the sketchiest of evidence for the Bible and say that it is true and look at the evidence for evolution, which is greater than the evidence provided at any murder trial in the history of the world and state that evolution is false.
Hmm, sounds like somebody has a problem with reality.
Some scientists might be able to demonstrate that Roundup needs to be stronger this year than last, but that's a far cry from demonstrating we came from a previous race of hominids.
I can't.So you admit that the Roundup resistance is due to evolution. Then explain to us how how the "boundary" works, which prevents evolution from traversing some imagined line that is somewhere between Roundup-resistance evolution and hominid evolution.
Mainly on paper though, right?
Some scientists might be able to demonstrate that Roundup needs to be stronger this year than last, but that's a far cry from demonstrating we came from a previous race of hominids.
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?