Your Second Brain Is Your Gut

jamesbond007

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Mar 26, 2018
1,080
280
Sacramento
✟118,568.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
OK, dude..

No does evolution - please do not tell me that you think cooperation and 'survival of the fittest' are two sides of the same coin...

No it isn't. Survival of the fittest is in Darwin's book. Cooperation of the common good showed Darwin was wrong. Now evos are trying to say both. That's having your cake and eat it, too. Sorry, another evolution fail which you did not recognize. See what I mean by looking in the mirror.


What does that even mean? A nervous system for a single cell? Do you know what "ENS" means?

Read post #134. You really should keep up before criticizing others.

Sure - if you consider Rube Goldberg arrangements, inefficiencies, multiple means of doing the same things, etc., to be God's work. But to do so sort of makes God look inept.

Question begging.

Ha ha. It's begging the question, not question begging. However, it's not when it's the scientific method and observational science. Thus, you are wrong again and continue to fail more each time. Might as well give up this round.
 
Upvote 0

Justatruthseeker

Newbie
Site Supporter
Jun 4, 2013
10,132
996
Tulsa, OK USA
✟155,004.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Odd that you totally ignored this part of my post:

Please present your evidence and the proposed mechanism by which the POOFer turned silicates into cytochromes.
He didn't. He created cytochromes at the same time He created the life they work in, not separately. That's why they function as a unit, not haphazardly.....

By bonding the electron's, neutron's and proton's that make up dust into unique configurations. In this case by allowing the electrons to be highly mobile.
 
Upvote 0

tas8831

Well-Known Member
May 5, 2017
5,611
4,000
55
Northeast
✟101,040.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
No it isn't. Survival of the fittest is in Darwin's book. Cooperation of the common good showed Darwin was wrong.

It did?

How so?
Now evos are trying to say both. That's having your cake and eat it, too. Sorry, another evolution fail which you did not recognize. See what I mean by looking in the mirror.
No, I do not see that, since you seem to be taking cues from YEC websites.
Read post #134. You really should keep up before criticizing others.
What does that mean? I asked you a question. Post 134 says nothing of "A nervous system for a single cell?"

You also wrote:

"Some of which has to do with just having an ENS for the single cells."

Again, what does that even mean?
Ha ha. It's begging the question, not question begging.
So you admit it.

Good.

But silly me, I didn't put in the hyphen... :rolleyes:
However, it's not when it's the scientific method and observational science. Thus, you are wrong again and continue to fail more each time. Might as well give up this round.

Right, Ok....

So maybe you should look up "question-begging" AND "begging the question", as you don't seem to understand either.

Science, either, for that matter.
 
Upvote 0

tas8831

Well-Known Member
May 5, 2017
5,611
4,000
55
Northeast
✟101,040.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
He didn't. He created cytochromes at the same time He created the life they work in, not separately. That's why they function as a unit, not haphazardly.....

And I note you provide nothing in the way of supporting evidence for that question-begging assertion.

Thus, I dismiss it.
By bonding the electron's, neutron's and proton's that make up dust into unique configurations. In this case by allowing the electrons to be highly mobile.
And how did the tribal deity do this?

Mechanism please.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Brightmoon
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟150,895.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
We should. The Cambrian Explosion was discovered by an evolutionist and quickly discarded because it didn't fit ToE.

Who told you that lie?
The cambrian explosion isn't discarded at all, nore does it pose any kind of problem for evolution.

You seem to be yet another victim of creationist propaganda and lies.

Yet, it's the best evidence of creation and no evolution.

No it isn't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tas8831
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟150,895.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
The Cambrian Explosipn is how every current complex phylum appeared all together at one time in the fossil record.

"all together at one time", in geological timescales.
In reality, this took anywhere between 40 and 80 million years.
Geologically, that's a short time compared to earth's 4.5 billion year old history, off course.

In reality, we are talking about millions of generations worth of evolution in many many different lineages / populations.

This contradicts what Charles Darwin hypothesized with his ToE of long time and slow, slow, slow evolution of lifeforms.

1. Darwin discovered the core process of descend with modification followed by natural selection and that was huge and still very much relevant. At the same time, Darwin was also wrong about lots of things. This was some 200 years ago. Biology has made quite some progress since then. I suggest you stick to 21st century biology instead of the state of the core theory of biology stemming from a time where we didn't even know about DNA....

2. While the cambrain explosion was "fast" in terms of geological time, 40 to 80 million years, really isn't overnight. We're talking MILLIONS of generations worth of evolution.
To put into perspective: the cambrian explosion took at least 4-5 times as long as it took for humans and chimps to diverge from a common ancestor!!!

The Darwinists went uh, uh, uh as they were dumbfounded.

No. No matter what lies creationist are telling you.



Furthermore, there is not fossilized evidence of life, except for sponges, just below the Cambrian layer.

Do you also know why there is little fossil evidence from that time (not "none" btw)?

Atheist scientists claim this is due to contamination.
No.

Above the Cambrian layer, no new species ever appears.

LOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!!

That was probably the most hilariously wrong thing you've said in that entire post.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟150,895.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
We also find these Cambrian fossils and fish fossils very high in the mountains. How did they get there?

Newsflash: plate tectonics triggers both lift and sinking of crust.
Some mountains of today, were the bottom of the ocean eons ago.
Some bottoms of the ocean today, were mountain tops eons ago.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: tas8831
Upvote 0