Some Evolutionists' Traits:
Evolutionists talk about fossils of extinct ape species, as if they belonged to half-human-half-ape creatures.
Surely you guys have seen a picture like the above somewhere. evolutionists use it to deceive people. Actually, such a creature never existed. In the past, there were human and hard, just like now. Both groups, past and present, are completely separate and unrelated to each other. none of the half-ape half-human creatures as seen in the drawings of the previous page, which once lived on earth. It will never happen. As we have stated before, no fossil was found to prove the claim
Topic: Evolution is a hoax - page 107. (Read 108165 times)
But the laws of the empty space itself have not been clearly defined. If someone does know, he isn't expressing it very well. OK let me try 
..
If your a tiny fish in the ocean and nothing around is nothing there?..
So what about the water..
Atoms like a fish in water..
..If your a tiny fish in the ocean and nothing around is nothing there?..
So what about the water
..Atoms like a fish in water..
So now we are back to cause and effect? Evolution does fit cause and effect because as you said god has no cause therefore everything he did is random.
Again, you show your deceptiveness. Just because we don't know much about the nature of God, doesn't mean that He doesn't use cause and effect, even if He, Himself, had no cause. It doesn't mean that He doesn't use random, either. But nature shows that random doesn't exist within it, simply by the fact that nature's cause was God.
And since god has no cause it renders everything random unless you now claim god has a cause. If the cause of everything is ultimately a causeless cause then everything is truly random.
God having no cause is simply something that shows that God is outside of the universe. C&E is a universe thing.
But you are not following the logic. Say a computer has a cause, the human that made it and the human itself has a cause and so on until god which is the cause of everything, right? However because god has no cause, as you claim, that makes everything else random in the sense that everything was created randomly by something with no cause. It doesn't matter that the computer had a cause because ultimately what made the computer exist in the first place is something without a cause therefore random. That's why evolution exists because mutations are essentially random.
Why do you assume randomness? It's not logical to say that something outside of the universe necessarily follows or doesn't follows laws - has or doesn't have randomness - but certainly not laws of the universe. If it were the laws of the universe that it followed, it would be part of the universe.
The closest that we easily, scientifically see within the universe, that doesn't follow the laws of the universe as we know them, is "nothing." We don't really know what the laws of empty space - nothing - are. We understand all kinds of laws regarding the material and energy that exist within the empty space of the universe. But the laws of the empty space itself have not been clearly defined. If someone does know, he isn't expressing it very well.
How much less can we understand if God, outside of the universe altogether, has laws or not, and what they might be, except when He reveals them to us?
We can't hear the voices but you can
..But with mental patients we must not give up on them
..And no you cannot have invalid benefits
..I wonder if we can make Badecker better
.. Evolution isn't a theory.
Correct. Evolution is fact.
But only within your religion/cult, or in the so-called theory of it.
Withing the whole scientific community and really most people. Statistics showed that the majority of the religious people, even your religion accepted evolution.
Now we see clearly how much of a hoax you are.
As I have been showing you throughout many pages, here, my personal religion is totally against evolution, because there are too many facts against evolution, and none in favor of evolution.
As for my formal religion, how do you know? I have never told you what my formal religion is. So you don't know.
You are like this with regard to evolution. You simply accept what others say, and you guess when you don't know. Evolution is a religion of no facts for you.
Evolution is a hoax.
I see you are starting to give up by the lack of arguments.
For further idiotic creationism questions:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html
Badecker will soon admit he lost guys, stay tuned.
My points stand.
Essentially, the evidence and proof for evolution is so limited that if that was all there was, evolution doesn't deserve to even have a theory.
The evidence and proof against evolution is so strong, that evolution is impossible.
If you take the evidence for, and the evidence against, and applied it all in the quantum model, evolution would be out of sight. Perhaps you could find it if you looked real hard.
Oh, that's right. That's what evolutionists have been doing. Looking real hard, and then saying things like "if", "maybe", "perhaps", and all kinds of other limiting words, just to make people feel that there is something to evolution.
..How are you able to chat on here?..Did the internet just appear OR did it evolve?..
THE COMPUTER EVOLVED
..It evolved many many times and still will evolve with many people theorising how they should create it..
Darwin never said EVOLUTION
..He studied many things and because he studied many things on how they worked we later on said
OH look at that Darwin he studies all sorts of things on how they evolve..
So we later on come up and said lets make a science called evolution theories and that means the study
of anything that as evolved ..So if it's there then study why how and many other questions how it come to be and what will happen to it from the start to the end..
You are on the INTERNET?..That evolved from this below
ENIAC
The ENIAC was invented by J. Presper Eckert and John Mauchly at the University of Pennsylvania and began construction in 1943 and was not completed until 1946. It occupied about 1,800 square feet and used about 18,000 vacuum tubes, ..
EVOLVED into a laptop ^^^^ what next no laptop and little tiny box and works with hologram and speak without having to type anything?..
proof for evolution is so limited that if that was all there was, evolution doesn't deserve to even have a theory. < YOUR ON THE INTERNET
..<Blockchains evolve ..
EVOLUTION is not about how a human come to be
..It about how everything come to be ..Does a plant go to heaven Badecker?..It evolved and it was created from a seed..
Now did your god create the plants? so do they go to heaven?..
Frogs froggy heaven ..Why i say this is because you bang on about god because you thinks of a heaven?..
You are scared to die so then with the heaven thought you must have death on your brains ..
If i do this then when i die i wont go to heaven..SO SAD
..What is it you want to do in heaven you cannot do it on earth?..
I mean Muslims they blow themselves up for virgins and rivers full of wine..
Do the MUSLIMS know plenty of night clubs around with plenty of wine and women
..So what do you expect from heaven Badecker..Because it's the main reason why your a god believer
..YOUR TICKET INTO HEAVEN..
Hay badecker family have you been picking on our little crazy badecker?
..Telling him if he doesn't behave he will burn in hell..
Tell your parents they should be ashamed of themselves for the threats of you burning in hell..
So now we are back to cause and effect? Evolution does fit cause and effect because as you said god has no cause therefore everything he did is random.
Again, you show your deceptiveness. Just because we don't know much about the nature of God, doesn't mean that He doesn't use cause and effect, even if He, Himself, had no cause. It doesn't mean that He doesn't use random, either. But nature shows that random doesn't exist within it, simply by the fact that nature's cause was God.
And since god has no cause it renders everything random unless you now claim god has a cause. If the cause of everything is ultimately a causeless cause then everything is truly random.
God having no cause is simply something that shows that God is outside of the universe. C&E is a universe thing.
But you are not following the logic. Say a computer has a cause, the human that made it and the human itself has a cause and so on until god which is the cause of everything, right? However because god has no cause, as you claim, that makes everything else random in the sense that everything was created randomly by something with no cause. It doesn't matter that the computer had a cause because ultimately what made the computer exist in the first place is something without a cause therefore random. That's why evolution exists because mutations are essentially random.
Why do you assume randomness? It's not logical to say that something outside of the universe necessarily follows or doesn't follows laws - has or doesn't have randomness - but certainly not laws of the universe. If it were the laws of the universe that it followed, it would be part of the universe.
The closest that we easily, scientifically see within the universe, that doesn't follow the laws of the universe as we know them, is "nothing." We don't really know what the laws of empty space - nothing - are. We understand all kinds of laws regarding the material and energy that exist within the empty space of the universe. But the laws of the empty space itself have not been clearly defined. If someone does know, he isn't expressing it very well.
How much less can we understand if God, outside of the universe altogether, has laws or not, and what they might be, except when He reveals them to us?
I did never beleive in evolution, becides this theory is not proven yet. I am not religious but strongly beleive that Earth and its life was created
Why there are still monkeys around if they were part of our evolutionary beginnings ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cz0gFarCfBE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cz0gFarCfBE
I do not believe in our evolution . I believe God Make Us With His own Image
I agree with BD that any imaginary god would have to exist outside the universe.
The law of evolution does not allow such a being to spontaneously create itself, or have always existed.
Badecker is a hoax.
The law of evolution does not allow such a being to spontaneously create itself, or have always existed.
Badecker is a hoax.
I don't believe in the evolution theory but I believe in adaptation. I strongly believe that all creatures are freated for a certain purpose and cannot decide on its own to change to something else.
So now we are back to cause and effect? Evolution does fit cause and effect because as you said god has no cause therefore everything he did is random.
Again, you show your deceptiveness. Just because we don't know much about the nature of God, doesn't mean that He doesn't use cause and effect, even if He, Himself, had no cause. It doesn't mean that He doesn't use random, either. But nature shows that random doesn't exist within it, simply by the fact that nature's cause was God.
And since god has no cause it renders everything random unless you now claim god has a cause. If the cause of everything is ultimately a causeless cause then everything is truly random.
God having no cause is simply something that shows that God is outside of the universe. C&E is a universe thing.
But you are not following the logic. Say a computer has a cause, the human that made it and the human itself has a cause and so on until god which is the cause of everything, right? However because god has no cause, as you claim, that makes everything else random in the sense that everything was created randomly by something with no cause. It doesn't matter that the computer had a cause because ultimately what made the computer exist in the first place is something without a cause therefore random. That's why evolution exists because mutations are essentially random.
You forgot to put "Evolution is a hoax" above the sunglasses smiley. Does the post still count as valid?
Hey, thanks. I'll do two of them here to make up.
Evolution is a hoax.
Evolution is a hoax.
You forgot to put "Evolution is a hoax" above the sunglasses smiley. Does the post still count as valid?
So now we are back to cause and effect? Evolution does fit cause and effect because as you said god has no cause therefore everything he did is random.
Again, you show your deceptiveness. Just because we don't know much about the nature of God, doesn't mean that He doesn't use cause and effect, even if He, Himself, had no cause. It doesn't mean that He doesn't use random, either. But nature shows that random doesn't exist within it, simply by the fact that nature's cause was God.
And since god has no cause it renders everything random unless you now claim god has a cause. If the cause of everything is ultimately a causeless cause then everything is truly random.
God having no cause is simply something that shows that God is outside of the universe. C&E is a universe thing.
So now we are back to cause and effect? Evolution does fit cause and effect because as you said god has no cause therefore everything he did is random.
Again, you show your deceptiveness. Just because we don't know much about the nature of God, doesn't mean that He doesn't use cause and effect, even if He, Himself, had no cause. It doesn't mean that He doesn't use random, either. But nature shows that random doesn't exist within it, simply by the fact that nature's cause was God.
And since god has no cause it renders everything random unless you now claim god has a cause. If the cause of everything is ultimately a causeless cause then everything is truly random.
So now we are back to cause and effect? Evolution does fit cause and effect because as you said god has no cause therefore everything he did is random.
Again, you show your deceptiveness. Just because we don't know much about the nature of God, doesn't mean that He doesn't use cause and effect, even if He, Himself, had no cause. It doesn't mean that He doesn't use random, either. But nature shows that random doesn't exist within it, simply by the fact that nature's cause was God.
Evolution isn't a theory.
Correct. Evolution is fact.
But only within your religion/cult, or in the so-called theory of it.
Withing the whole scientific community and really most people. Statistics showed that the majority of the religious people, even your religion accepted evolution.
Now we see clearly how much of a hoax you are.
As I have been showing you throughout many pages, here, my personal religion is totally against evolution, because there are too many facts against evolution, and none in favor of evolution.
As for my formal religion, how do you know? I have never told you what my formal religion is. So you don't know.
You are like this with regard to evolution. You simply accept what others say, and you guess when you don't know. Evolution is a religion of no facts for you.
Evolution is a hoax.
I see you are starting to give up by the lack of arguments.
For further idiotic creationism questions:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html
Badecker will soon admit he lost guys, stay tuned.
My points stand.
Essentially, the evidence and proof for evolution is so limited that if that was all there was, evolution doesn't deserve to even have a theory.
The evidence and proof against evolution is so strong, that evolution is impossible.
If you take the evidence for, and the evidence against, and applied it all in the quantum model, evolution would be out of sight. Perhaps you could find it if you looked real hard.
Oh, that's right. That's what evolutionists have been doing. Looking real hard, and then saying things like "if", "maybe", "perhaps", and all kinds of other limiting words, just to make people feel that there is something to evolution.
Provide evidence against evolution then, all of your arguments were debunked yet you still claim it's a hoax. You have no problems defending the theory of gravity in the flat earth thread. You claim here that evolution is just a theory yet in the other thread you oppose notbatman and defend gravity. Do you not believe in gravity? “Theory” is the best form of understanding we can every have about any process or model in the real world.
No matter what you randomly claim, the definition and meaning of a scientific theory is still that.
All you have to do is Google "evolution is impossible" to find all kinds of info that shows thatevolution is impossible.
When you look at how this information is rebutted, the rebuttals use all kinds of limiting words, such as if, maybe, perhaps, and many others. This shows that the rebuttals are simply so-called rebuttals.
Evolution is a hoax.
I just did.
http://www.icr.org/article/evolution-biologically-impossible/
http://www.icr.org/article/mathematical-impossibility-evolution/
These are the top searches, they are essentially the same argument, a wrong one by the way. It's explained here:
http://answers-in-reason.com/religion/mathematical-impossibility-evolution-debunked/
or here:
http://experimentalmath.info/blog/2012/01/does-probability-refute-evolution/
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=2384584
And since you don't like ''ifs'' There are plenty of those in the 2 ''arguments'' against evolution.
I know. You are simply getting away from the facts that you can't refute, like the fact that evolution theory doesn't fit cause and effect.
I guess we all have to look at the evidence (or not) and make up our own minds.
So now we are back to cause and effect? Evolution does fit cause and effect because as you said god has no cause therefore everything he did is random.
I don't have any followers. I don't have a cult.
You are all by yourself in your cult. :/
I haven't seen a single person who has been willing to say they believe in your fairy tale.
Quote
cult: a particular system of religious worship, especially with reference to its rites and ceremonies.
Evolution is not a religion and has no rites and ceremonies. A cult is made up of more members than just one.
If the members of the evolution cult who are studying it, don't obey their university leadership, they are kicked out of the university. Why? They haven't followed the rites and ceremonies of the university properly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acceptance_of_evolution_by_religious_groups#Acceptance
And that was in 2007, imagine now. You are losing badecker.
LOL! Anybody can edit Wikipedia. If a group has the desire to maintain a certain topic on Wikipedia, all they have to do is have 3 people monitor it around the clock, in shifts, to edit it back any time an opposing group edits it.
Wikipedia is full of facts and non-facts. Determining which are which is often difficult.
When Wikipedia just knows which editorial is correct, and then limits certain articles, they are setting them up as a behind-the-scenes panel to direct the way people think. If they allowed all editorials, with links to each of them at the beginning of the article, they would be opening people up to a lot of facts that are otherwise thrown out.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/30/5-facts-about-evolution-and-religion/
http://www.pewforum.org/2009/02/04/religious-groups-views-on-evolution/
Come on badecker, don't even try to attempt to say that religions don't accept evolution. Most of them do including yours.
Since you don't know what my religion is, why do you say "even yours?" This shows that you are acting deceptively.
What you believe is your religion. So, it is obvious that many religions believe in evolution. What's the point. Many religions are wrong... like the evolution religion.
Evolution is a hoax.
Evolution isn't a theory.
Correct. Evolution is fact.
But only within your religion/cult, or in the so-called theory of it.
Withing the whole scientific community and really most people. Statistics showed that the majority of the religious people, even your religion accepted evolution.
Now we see clearly how much of a hoax you are.
As I have been showing you throughout many pages, here, my personal religion is totally against evolution, because there are too many facts against evolution, and none in favor of evolution.
As for my formal religion, how do you know? I have never told you what my formal religion is. So you don't know.
You are like this with regard to evolution. You simply accept what others say, and you guess when you don't know. Evolution is a religion of no facts for you.
Evolution is a hoax.
I see you are starting to give up by the lack of arguments.
For further idiotic creationism questions:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html
Badecker will soon admit he lost guys, stay tuned.
My points stand.
Essentially, the evidence and proof for evolution is so limited that if that was all there was, evolution doesn't deserve to even have a theory.
The evidence and proof against evolution is so strong, that evolution is impossible.
If you take the evidence for, and the evidence against, and applied it all in the quantum model, evolution would be out of sight. Perhaps you could find it if you looked real hard.
Oh, that's right. That's what evolutionists have been doing. Looking real hard, and then saying things like "if", "maybe", "perhaps", and all kinds of other limiting words, just to make people feel that there is something to evolution.
Provide evidence against evolution then, all of your arguments were debunked yet you still claim it's a hoax. You have no problems defending the theory of gravity in the flat earth thread. You claim here that evolution is just a theory yet in the other thread you oppose notbatman and defend gravity. Do you not believe in gravity? “Theory” is the best form of understanding we can every have about any process or model in the real world.
No matter what you randomly claim, the definition and meaning of a scientific theory is still that.
All you have to do is Google "evolution is impossible" to find all kinds of info that shows thatevolution is impossible.
When you look at how this information is rebutted, the rebuttals use all kinds of limiting words, such as if, maybe, perhaps, and many others. This shows that the rebuttals are simply so-called rebuttals.
Evolution is a hoax.
I just did.
http://www.icr.org/article/evolution-biologically-impossible/
http://www.icr.org/article/mathematical-impossibility-evolution/
These are the top searches, they are essentially the same argument, a wrong one by the way. It's explained here:
http://answers-in-reason.com/religion/mathematical-impossibility-evolution-debunked/
or here:
http://experimentalmath.info/blog/2012/01/does-probability-refute-evolution/
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=2384584
And since you don't like ''ifs'' There are plenty of those in the 2 ''arguments'' against evolution.
I know. You are simply getting away from the facts that you can't refute, like the fact that evolution theory doesn't fit cause and effect.
I guess we all have to look at the evidence (or not) and make up our own minds.
I don't have any followers. I don't have a cult.
You are all by yourself in your cult. :/
I haven't seen a single person who has been willing to say they believe in your fairy tale.
Quote
cult: a particular system of religious worship, especially with reference to its rites and ceremonies.
Evolution is not a religion and has no rites and ceremonies. A cult is made up of more members than just one.
If the members of the evolution cult who are studying it, don't obey their university leadership, they are kicked out of the university. Why? They haven't followed the rites and ceremonies of the university properly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acceptance_of_evolution_by_religious_groups#Acceptance
And that was in 2007, imagine now. You are losing badecker.
LOL! Anybody can edit Wikipedia. If a group has the desire to maintain a certain topic on Wikipedia, all they have to do is have 3 people monitor it around the clock, in shifts, to edit it back any time an opposing group edits it.
Wikipedia is full of facts and non-facts. Determining which are which is often difficult.
When Wikipedia just knows which editorial is correct, and then limits certain articles, they are setting them up as a behind-the-scenes panel to direct the way people think. If they allowed all editorials, with links to each of them at the beginning of the article, they would be opening people up to a lot of facts that are otherwise thrown out.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/30/5-facts-about-evolution-and-religion/
http://www.pewforum.org/2009/02/04/religious-groups-views-on-evolution/
Come on badecker, don't even try to attempt to say that religions don't accept evolution. Most of them do including yours.
I don't have any followers. I don't have a cult.
You are all by yourself in your cult. :/
I haven't seen a single person who has been willing to say they believe in your fairy tale.
Quote
cult: a particular system of religious worship, especially with reference to its rites and ceremonies.
Evolution is not a religion and has no rites and ceremonies. A cult is made up of more members than just one.
If the members of the evolution cult who are studying it, don't obey their university leadership, they are kicked out of the university. Why? They haven't followed the rites and ceremonies of the university properly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acceptance_of_evolution_by_religious_groups#Acceptance
And that was in 2007, imagine now. You are losing badecker.
LOL! Anybody can edit Wikipedia. If a group has the desire to maintain a certain topic on Wikipedia, all they have to do is have 3 people monitor it around the clock, in shifts, to edit it back any time an opposing group edits it.
Wikipedia is full of facts and non-facts. Determining which are which is often difficult.
When Wikipedia just knows which editorial is correct, and then limits certain articles, they are setting them up as a behind-the-scenes panel to direct the way people think. If they allowed all editorials, with links to each of them at the beginning of the article, they would be opening people up to a lot of facts that are otherwise thrown out.
Jump to: