Topic: Evolution is a hoax - page 82. (Read 108050 times)
Quote
It's funny that you mention that the Quran was "gutted out" of the bible, since I'm sure you're aware that the bible itself contains literature that originated in the Torah?
No. The Bible does not originated from the Torah - it is the Torah and the book of prophets, and the New Testament
. It is Jewish Bible aka Tanah - the Old Testament is the Jewish holy book. It is our holy book. Because christians are the new Israel of the spirit. Talmud - the book that judaism mostly uses is not a holy book - the Rabbi themselves admitt that.
It is the original Tanah the Word of God. Muslims have deeply edited version of the same thing. They rewrote what they had not like just to justify their tribality. From a Jewish and Christian perspective - editing the Word of God is something noone should do - it is forbidden.
Editing the word of God resulted in muslims inventing the evolution. It came to Europe via Templars and their orders. Templars then have restructured themselfs to masons. So it was masons that are behind that evolution thingy. So it should be no surprise that a mason write another mason a peer-review and screw other nonmasons. Does that surprise anyone?
Darwin was teologian. His father was a teologian. It was a fully grown religious concept of evolution when Darwin had signed his silly book. His book was supposedly written by someone more intelligent as C. Darwin was supposed to be dumbest of all the Darwins family.
Just for your personal information. I know it sounds deeply confusing from a pop-culture perspective.
Quote
Abiogenesis is science fiction. Show proof, por favor.
They showed 1 out of many experiment involving meterorite that supposedly prove that. I am asking - why then all the rest gives from 5 to 8 aminoacids out of 20. It is deeply fraud like. It seems like this meteorite contained some dead bug in it - hence all aminoacids needed. But talking about the flying bug in the space is even dumber than evolution.
And I thought that a magical monkey fossils that noone had seen, but yet is believed to be true is dumb enough. Dead bug in the space beats it all.
They show the untested sample of their holy grail they supposedly found in 2008 - that is their only "prove". For it to be prove it should have to be retested. They fail to grasp the importance of retesting in science and yet call others willfuly ignorant. That is hipocritical.
Quote
''God the Creator has an enemy, Satan the devil, who opposes Him in everything. The influence of God’s enemy on the thinking of scientists becomes obvious when they dismiss the truth and accept such lies.''
LUL, very scientific source.
LUL, very scientific source.
Where are your repeatability of evolution? Where is your observability of evolution? Where is your falsifiability of evolution?
It is not science. It fails miserably at those things needed to be called science. It is a religion so... you know... it could as well be a religion of Satan for all I know.
The Fraud of Evolution
Read more at https://www.thetrumpet.com/594-the-fraud-of-evolution.
...
Another example worth mentioning is that of the peppered moths. “Most peppered moths were light-colored in the early part of the 19th century, but during the Industrial Revolution in Britain the moth populations near heavily polluted cities became predominantly ‘melanic,’ or dark-colored. … [E]xperiments suggested that predatory birds ate light-colored moths when they became more conspicuous on pollution-darkened tree trunks, leaving the dark-colored variety to survive and reproduce” (Wells, op. cit.).
To demonstrate the camouflage of the dark moths, many books, when explaining evolution, have pictures of peppered moths on tree trunks. The dark moths blend in and the light moths stand out clearly. This is supposed to prove the theory of “natural selection.” But fraud and lies permeate this deception as well.
As ridiculous as it may seem, the pictures are themselves faked. Peppered moths do not land on tree trunks in nature; they light on the undersurface of small horizontal branches higher in the trees. One researcher (Cyril Clarke) noted that in 25 years of observation he had only seen one peppered moth on a tree trunk. So where did the pictures of peppered moths on tree trunks come from? Dead moths were glued or pinned to the tree trunks. This fact has been known since about 1980, and still the faked pictures are being published in textbooks as proof of evolution.
...
Another example worth mentioning is that of the peppered moths. “Most peppered moths were light-colored in the early part of the 19th century, but during the Industrial Revolution in Britain the moth populations near heavily polluted cities became predominantly ‘melanic,’ or dark-colored. … [E]xperiments suggested that predatory birds ate light-colored moths when they became more conspicuous on pollution-darkened tree trunks, leaving the dark-colored variety to survive and reproduce” (Wells, op. cit.).
To demonstrate the camouflage of the dark moths, many books, when explaining evolution, have pictures of peppered moths on tree trunks. The dark moths blend in and the light moths stand out clearly. This is supposed to prove the theory of “natural selection.” But fraud and lies permeate this deception as well.
As ridiculous as it may seem, the pictures are themselves faked. Peppered moths do not land on tree trunks in nature; they light on the undersurface of small horizontal branches higher in the trees. One researcher (Cyril Clarke) noted that in 25 years of observation he had only seen one peppered moth on a tree trunk. So where did the pictures of peppered moths on tree trunks come from? Dead moths were glued or pinned to the tree trunks. This fact has been known since about 1980, and still the faked pictures are being published in textbooks as proof of evolution.
...
Read more at https://www.thetrumpet.com/594-the-fraud-of-evolution.
''“Evolutionists, geneticists, biologists, scientists in any field whatsoever, have never been able to demonstrate, nor to offer the slightest evidence that the living can come into existence from the not-living!''
Yes they have, it's called abiogenesis.
''God the Creator has an enemy, Satan the devil, who opposes Him in everything. The influence of God’s enemy on the thinking of scientists becomes obvious when they dismiss the truth and accept such lies.''
LUL, very scientific source.
''Here is where the links are missing. If reptiles somehow changed and became mammals, there should be fossils representing the intermediate steps. But there are none. These missing intermediate fossils are referred to as “missing links.”''
LUL, there is no such thing as the missing link. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o92x6AvxCFg
Is there anything right in your link?
Okay. I watched your video, LOL! It shows a bunch of animals that are similar in some ways, but different in other ways. Then it tries to suggest that some of these are intermediates.
Dawkins is so silly. He doesn't show any intermediates at all! All he says is that they are intermediates. But we can see by the looks of them, that they don't even look enough like each other enough to be an intermediate.
Also, his wording included the words, "... what we now believe is that... ." This shows that there isn't any stability in evolution science, that evolutionists constantly change what they believe in, making evolution one of the most unstable religions ever.
None of these things have any proof in the way that Dawkins explains them. So, thanks for helping to prove that evolution is a religion at best, but really a big fat hoax.
Yeah, maybe it's more trusty the theory that says woman is created by the rib of a man.
Sure
http://www.superofertard.com/uploads/coupons/KPD5-1NVF-CN8G.jpg
Sure
http://www.superofertard.com/uploads/coupons/KPD5-1NVF-CN8G.jpg
you are right... only GOD is the real explanation...
.
.
.
Ironic Mode OFF
.
.
.
COME ON! your comment is a joke, isn't?
.
.
.
Ironic Mode OFF
.
.
.
COME ON! your comment is a joke, isn't?
Since evolution is a hoax, God is the natural other choice. Somebody should develop an alternative to God that makes sense. Evolution doesn't.
Evolution is a hoax... or do you have even one proven fact for evolution?
Sooo... which one? Brahma? Jehova? Zeus? One of the other thousands of deities that mankind have made up? Err, I mean, believed in...
Tricky question? Tricky answer - the real one.
The God that says he is the only one. And there is only on such God that says so. Called a One God or tetragrammaton.
Quote
I take it back. You are equally clueless.
But.... but I thought we are smart evolutionists. Aren't we? Aren't we smart? I think you are very smart. Teach me.
Oh hey, didn't see your reply. So, let me get this straight. Scripture, according to which a god says it is the only god, is evidence enough for you to decide whether a god is the God? Because this deity of yours says it is the only one, it is? Did I get this right? Because if so, I wonder what you think of Allah. In the Quran it's frequently stated that Allah is the only god and that there is no god other than him. Muslims consider the Quran to be the word of God. So, from your point of view, could it also have been Allah that created everything? Really curious to read your answer.
Ofcourse it is not the only reason. I believe it because the theism is the most proven theory in the history of the world. Not a single thing contradicts it. The most briliant people around the world were absolutely sure theism is flawless. I think almost all of them.
You just asked what God? I told - you the special and the Only one that makes him distinct.
You asked a tricky question and you had tricky answer.
Later on you say something that I have not said. Wow. How sincere is that?
What I think of Allah? It is a false zaratrustrian moon god. You can find it if you search a bit. Do you even know what most of the Quran is? It is just a Bible that was gutted out and rewritten to fit the needs of their people... How Godly is that? The other part is some silly ought to have and history of the arab nation. It is not just my opinion - find out about it.
What I think about muslims? Children of the error just as much as every religious nutjobs.
Speaking about muslim - do you know it is a muslim who first had the idea about evolution? It was XIII century or so If I am not mistaken. They - Im speaking about muslims were 100% fine with it.
Almost no religion. Actually I think none says anything wrong about evolution. So do not construct a strawmen ok? They love this additional mythology.
Christ requires no religion.
You are deeply confused by this neo-ateistic ignorant pop-culture in your terms you are using.
I'm sorry that you feel attacked by me asking questions. I'm sure your faith can't be shaken by someone asking questions!? It's funny that you mention that the Quran was "gutted out" of the bible, since I'm sure you're aware that the bible itself contains literature that originated in the Torah? Like the Pentateuch? So what does that make your bible?
Again, not trying to be disrespectful, just trying to understand a religious person's perspective.You wont understand it. He will just say something random. He can be extremely skeptical about things but blindly believe in his god, just a classic example of cognitive dissonance.
you are right... only GOD is the real explanation...
.
.
.
Ironic Mode OFF
.
.
.
COME ON! your comment is a joke, isn't?
.
.
.
Ironic Mode OFF
.
.
.
COME ON! your comment is a joke, isn't?
Since evolution is a hoax, God is the natural other choice. Somebody should develop an alternative to God that makes sense. Evolution doesn't.
Evolution is a hoax... or do you have even one proven fact for evolution?
Sooo... which one? Brahma? Jehova? Zeus? One of the other thousands of deities that mankind have made up? Err, I mean, believed in...
Tricky question? Tricky answer - the real one.
The God that says he is the only one. And there is only on such God that says so. Called a One God or tetragrammaton.
Quote
I take it back. You are equally clueless.
But.... but I thought we are smart evolutionists. Aren't we? Aren't we smart? I think you are very smart. Teach me.
Oh hey, didn't see your reply. So, let me get this straight. Scripture, according to which a god says it is the only god, is evidence enough for you to decide whether a god is the God? Because this deity of yours says it is the only one, it is? Did I get this right? Because if so, I wonder what you think of Allah. In the Quran it's frequently stated that Allah is the only god and that there is no god other than him. Muslims consider the Quran to be the word of God. So, from your point of view, could it also have been Allah that created everything? Really curious to read your answer.
Ofcourse it is not the only reason. I believe it because the theism is the most proven theory in the history of the world. Not a single thing contradicts it. The most briliant people around the world were absolutely sure theism is flawless. I think almost all of them.
You just asked what God? I told - you the special and the Only one that makes him distinct.
You asked a tricky question and you had tricky answer.
Later on you say something that I have not said. Wow. How sincere is that?
What I think of Allah? It is a false zaratrustrian moon god. You can find it if you search a bit. Do you even know what most of the Quran is? It is just a Bible that was gutted out and rewritten to fit the needs of their people... How Godly is that? The other part is some silly ought to have and history of the arab nation. It is not just my opinion - find out about it.
What I think about muslims? Children of the error just as much as every religious nutjobs.
Speaking about muslim - do you know it is a muslim who first had the idea about evolution? It was XIII century or so If I am not mistaken. They - Im speaking about muslims were 100% fine with it.
Almost no religion. Actually I think none says anything wrong about evolution. So do not construct a strawmen ok? They love this additional mythology.
Christ requires no religion.
You are deeply confused by this neo-ateistic ignorant pop-culture in your terms you are using.
I'm sorry that you feel attacked by me asking questions. I'm sure your faith can't be shaken by someone asking questions!? It's funny that you mention that the Quran was "gutted out" of the bible, since I'm sure you're aware that the bible itself contains literature that originated in the Torah? Like the Pentateuch? So what does that make your bible?
Again, not trying to be disrespectful, just trying to understand a religious person's perspective. The Fraud of Evolution
Read more at https://www.thetrumpet.com/594-the-fraud-of-evolution.
...
Another example worth mentioning is that of the peppered moths. “Most peppered moths were light-colored in the early part of the 19th century, but during the Industrial Revolution in Britain the moth populations near heavily polluted cities became predominantly ‘melanic,’ or dark-colored. … [E]xperiments suggested that predatory birds ate light-colored moths when they became more conspicuous on pollution-darkened tree trunks, leaving the dark-colored variety to survive and reproduce” (Wells, op. cit.).
To demonstrate the camouflage of the dark moths, many books, when explaining evolution, have pictures of peppered moths on tree trunks. The dark moths blend in and the light moths stand out clearly. This is supposed to prove the theory of “natural selection.” But fraud and lies permeate this deception as well.
As ridiculous as it may seem, the pictures are themselves faked. Peppered moths do not land on tree trunks in nature; they light on the undersurface of small horizontal branches higher in the trees. One researcher (Cyril Clarke) noted that in 25 years of observation he had only seen one peppered moth on a tree trunk. So where did the pictures of peppered moths on tree trunks come from? Dead moths were glued or pinned to the tree trunks. This fact has been known since about 1980, and still the faked pictures are being published in textbooks as proof of evolution.
...
Another example worth mentioning is that of the peppered moths. “Most peppered moths were light-colored in the early part of the 19th century, but during the Industrial Revolution in Britain the moth populations near heavily polluted cities became predominantly ‘melanic,’ or dark-colored. … [E]xperiments suggested that predatory birds ate light-colored moths when they became more conspicuous on pollution-darkened tree trunks, leaving the dark-colored variety to survive and reproduce” (Wells, op. cit.).
To demonstrate the camouflage of the dark moths, many books, when explaining evolution, have pictures of peppered moths on tree trunks. The dark moths blend in and the light moths stand out clearly. This is supposed to prove the theory of “natural selection.” But fraud and lies permeate this deception as well.
As ridiculous as it may seem, the pictures are themselves faked. Peppered moths do not land on tree trunks in nature; they light on the undersurface of small horizontal branches higher in the trees. One researcher (Cyril Clarke) noted that in 25 years of observation he had only seen one peppered moth on a tree trunk. So where did the pictures of peppered moths on tree trunks come from? Dead moths were glued or pinned to the tree trunks. This fact has been known since about 1980, and still the faked pictures are being published in textbooks as proof of evolution.
...
Read more at https://www.thetrumpet.com/594-the-fraud-of-evolution.
''“Evolutionists, geneticists, biologists, scientists in any field whatsoever, have never been able to demonstrate, nor to offer the slightest evidence that the living can come into existence from the not-living!''
Yes they have, it's called abiogenesis.
''God the Creator has an enemy, Satan the devil, who opposes Him in everything. The influence of God’s enemy on the thinking of scientists becomes obvious when they dismiss the truth and accept such lies.''
LUL, very scientific source.
''Here is where the links are missing. If reptiles somehow changed and became mammals, there should be fossils representing the intermediate steps. But there are none. These missing intermediate fossils are referred to as “missing links.”''
LUL, there is no such thing as the missing link. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o92x6AvxCFg
Is there anything right in your link?
The Fraud of Evolution
Read more at https://www.thetrumpet.com/594-the-fraud-of-evolution.
...
Another example worth mentioning is that of the peppered moths. “Most peppered moths were light-colored in the early part of the 19th century, but during the Industrial Revolution in Britain the moth populations near heavily polluted cities became predominantly ‘melanic,’ or dark-colored. … [E]xperiments suggested that predatory birds ate light-colored moths when they became more conspicuous on pollution-darkened tree trunks, leaving the dark-colored variety to survive and reproduce” (Wells, op. cit.).
To demonstrate the camouflage of the dark moths, many books, when explaining evolution, have pictures of peppered moths on tree trunks. The dark moths blend in and the light moths stand out clearly. This is supposed to prove the theory of “natural selection.” But fraud and lies permeate this deception as well.
As ridiculous as it may seem, the pictures are themselves faked. Peppered moths do not land on tree trunks in nature; they light on the undersurface of small horizontal branches higher in the trees. One researcher (Cyril Clarke) noted that in 25 years of observation he had only seen one peppered moth on a tree trunk. So where did the pictures of peppered moths on tree trunks come from? Dead moths were glued or pinned to the tree trunks. This fact has been known since about 1980, and still the faked pictures are being published in textbooks as proof of evolution.
...
Another example worth mentioning is that of the peppered moths. “Most peppered moths were light-colored in the early part of the 19th century, but during the Industrial Revolution in Britain the moth populations near heavily polluted cities became predominantly ‘melanic,’ or dark-colored. … [E]xperiments suggested that predatory birds ate light-colored moths when they became more conspicuous on pollution-darkened tree trunks, leaving the dark-colored variety to survive and reproduce” (Wells, op. cit.).
To demonstrate the camouflage of the dark moths, many books, when explaining evolution, have pictures of peppered moths on tree trunks. The dark moths blend in and the light moths stand out clearly. This is supposed to prove the theory of “natural selection.” But fraud and lies permeate this deception as well.
As ridiculous as it may seem, the pictures are themselves faked. Peppered moths do not land on tree trunks in nature; they light on the undersurface of small horizontal branches higher in the trees. One researcher (Cyril Clarke) noted that in 25 years of observation he had only seen one peppered moth on a tree trunk. So where did the pictures of peppered moths on tree trunks come from? Dead moths were glued or pinned to the tree trunks. This fact has been known since about 1980, and still the faked pictures are being published in textbooks as proof of evolution.
...
Read more at https://www.thetrumpet.com/594-the-fraud-of-evolution.
you are right... only GOD is the real explanation...
.
.
.
Ironic Mode OFF
.
.
.
COME ON! your comment is a joke, isn't?
.
.
.
Ironic Mode OFF
.
.
.
COME ON! your comment is a joke, isn't?
Since evolution is a hoax, God is the natural other choice. Somebody should develop an alternative to God that makes sense. Evolution doesn't.
Evolution is a hoax... or do you have even one proven fact for evolution?
Sooo... which one? Brahma? Jehova? Zeus? One of the other thousands of deities that mankind have made up? Err, I mean, believed in...
Tricky question? Tricky answer - the real one.
The God that says he is the only one. And there is only on such God that says so. Called a One God or tetragrammaton.
Quote
I take it back. You are equally clueless.
But.... but I thought we are smart evolutionists. Aren't we? Aren't we smart? I think you are very smart. Teach me.
Oh hey, didn't see your reply. So, let me get this straight. Scripture, according to which a god says it is the only god, is evidence enough for you to decide whether a god is the God? Because this deity of yours says it is the only one, it is? Did I get this right? Because if so, I wonder what you think of Allah. In the Quran it's frequently stated that Allah is the only god and that there is no god other than him. Muslims consider the Quran to be the word of God. So, from your point of view, could it also have been Allah that created everything? Really curious to read your answer.
Ofcourse it is not the only reason. I believe it because the theism is the most proven theory in the history of the world. Not a single thing contradicts it. The most briliant people around the world were absolutely sure theism is flawless. I think almost all of them.
You just asked what God? I told - you the special and the Only one that makes him distinct.
You asked a tricky question and you had tricky answer.
Later on you say something that I have not said. Wow. How sincere is that?
What I think of Allah? It is a false zaratrustrian moon god. You can find it if you search a bit. Do you even know what most of the Quran is? It is just a Bible that was gutted out and rewritten to fit the needs of their people... How Godly is that? The other part is some silly ought to have and history of the arab nation. It is not just my opinion - find out about it.
What I think about muslims? Children of the error just as much as every religious nutjobs.
Speaking about muslim - do you know it is a muslim who first had the idea about evolution? It was XIII century or so If I am not mistaken. They - Im speaking about muslims were 100% fine with it.
Almost no religion. Actually I think none says anything wrong about evolution. So do not construct a strawmen ok? They love this additional mythology.
Christ requires no religion.
You are deeply confused by this neo-ateistic ignorant pop-culture in your terms you are using.
Rofl, you are funny. ''most proven theory'' definitely not a scientific theory first of all. ''Theism is broadly defined as the belief in the existence of the Supreme Being or deities.'' Belief =/= proven.
''Not a single thing contradicts it'' Not a single thing proves it you mean? I can find plenty of flaws in the bible and god's logic, all the rape and death is also contradictory of the description of god then again I'm not going to go into detail, you already made your position clear, you are obviously delusional and nothing can be done about that unfortunately.
You would not know what is scientific even if I would flash it over your face. Mmmk? All you neo-atheist pop-cultural teens know is to throw science here and there and have absolutely no idea what are their principles ok?
In science nothing is written in stone. You can only disprove things. Ofcourse something can be repeatable. That is one of the principles of science. Im sorry... noone else is God and could repeat the work of creation. So you ask impossible. But hey - if noone had done the assumed impossible - doesn't that prove God? Yeah it does. It proves that only him can do it. By elimination that is a BIIIIIG prove.
But noone in their right mind could say - God have not done it. Why do you try? Are you not out of touch with reality? Why do you even try to do things that noone in the world can do? To disprove God? What is your gain in that insane task?
you are right... only GOD is the real explanation...
.
.
.
Ironic Mode OFF
.
.
.
COME ON! your comment is a joke, isn't?
.
.
.
Ironic Mode OFF
.
.
.
COME ON! your comment is a joke, isn't?
Since evolution is a hoax, God is the natural other choice. Somebody should develop an alternative to God that makes sense. Evolution doesn't.
Evolution is a hoax... or do you have even one proven fact for evolution?
Sooo... which one? Brahma? Jehova? Zeus? One of the other thousands of deities that mankind have made up? Err, I mean, believed in...
Tricky question? Tricky answer - the real one.
The God that says he is the only one. And there is only on such God that says so. Called a One God or tetragrammaton.
Quote
I take it back. You are equally clueless.
But.... but I thought we are smart evolutionists. Aren't we? Aren't we smart? I think you are very smart. Teach me.
Oh hey, didn't see your reply. So, let me get this straight. Scripture, according to which a god says it is the only god, is evidence enough for you to decide whether a god is the God? Because this deity of yours says it is the only one, it is? Did I get this right? Because if so, I wonder what you think of Allah. In the Quran it's frequently stated that Allah is the only god and that there is no god other than him. Muslims consider the Quran to be the word of God. So, from your point of view, could it also have been Allah that created everything? Really curious to read your answer.
Ofcourse it is not the only reason. I believe it because the theism is the most proven theory in the history of the world. Not a single thing contradicts it. The most briliant people around the world were absolutely sure theism is flawless. I think almost all of them.
You just asked what God? I told - you the special and the Only one that makes him distinct.
You asked a tricky question and you had tricky answer.
Later on you say something that I have not said. Wow. How sincere is that?
What I think of Allah? It is a false zaratrustrian moon god. You can find it if you search a bit. Do you even know what most of the Quran is? It is just a Bible that was gutted out and rewritten to fit the needs of their people... How Godly is that? The other part is some silly ought to have and history of the arab nation. It is not just my opinion - find out about it.
What I think about muslims? Children of the error just as much as every religious nutjobs.
Speaking about muslim - do you know it is a muslim who first had the idea about evolution? It was XIII century or so If I am not mistaken. They - Im speaking about muslims were 100% fine with it.
Almost no religion. Actually I think none says anything wrong about evolution. So do not construct a strawmen ok? They love this additional mythology.
Christ requires no religion.
You are deeply confused by this neo-ateistic ignorant pop-culture in your terms you are using.
Rofl, you are funny. ''most proven theory'' definitely not a scientific theory first of all. ''Theism is broadly defined as the belief in the existence of the Supreme Being or deities.'' Belief =/= proven.
''Not a single thing contradicts it'' Not a single thing proves it you mean? I can find plenty of flaws in the bible and god's logic, all the rape and death is also contradictory of the description of god then again I'm not going to go into detail, you already made your position clear, you are obviously delusional and nothing can be done about that unfortunately.
you are right... only GOD is the real explanation...
.
.
.
Ironic Mode OFF
.
.
.
COME ON! your comment is a joke, isn't?
.
.
.
Ironic Mode OFF
.
.
.
COME ON! your comment is a joke, isn't?
Since evolution is a hoax, God is the natural other choice. Somebody should develop an alternative to God that makes sense. Evolution doesn't.
Evolution is a hoax... or do you have even one proven fact for evolution?
Sooo... which one? Brahma? Jehova? Zeus? One of the other thousands of deities that mankind have made up? Err, I mean, believed in...
Tricky question? Tricky answer - the real one.
The God that says he is the only one. And there is only on such God that says so. Called a One God or tetragrammaton.
Quote
I take it back. You are equally clueless.
But.... but I thought we are smart evolutionists. Aren't we? Aren't we smart? I think you are very smart. Teach me.
Oh hey, didn't see your reply. So, let me get this straight. Scripture, according to which a god says it is the only god, is evidence enough for you to decide whether a god is the God? Because this deity of yours says it is the only one, it is? Did I get this right? Because if so, I wonder what you think of Allah. In the Quran it's frequently stated that Allah is the only god and that there is no god other than him. Muslims consider the Quran to be the word of God. So, from your point of view, could it also have been Allah that created everything? Really curious to read your answer.
Ofcourse it is not the only reason. I believe it because the theism is the most proven theory in the history of the world. Not a single thing contradicts it. The most briliant people around the world were absolutely sure theism is flawless. I think almost all of them.
You just asked what God? I told - you the special and the Only one that makes him distinct.
You asked a tricky question and you had tricky answer.
Later on you say something that I have not said. Wow. How sincere is that?
What I think of Allah? It is a false zaratrustrian moon god. You can find it if you search a bit. Do you even know what most of the Quran is? It is just a Bible that was gutted out and rewritten to fit the needs of their people... How Godly is that? The other part is some silly ought to have and history of the arab nation. It is not just my opinion - find out about it.
What I think about muslims? Children of the error just as much as every religious nutjobs.
Speaking about muslim - do you know it is a muslim who first had the idea about evolution? It was XIII century or so If I am not mistaken. They - Im speaking about muslims were 100% fine with it.
Almost no religion. Actually I think none says anything wrong about evolution. So do not construct a strawmen ok? They love this additional mythology.
Christ requires no religion.
You are deeply confused by this neo-ateistic ignorant pop-culture in your terms you are using.
Evolution is a fact and the theory of evolution is what explains the fact.
Religious beliefs contradicts the theory of evolution.
Religious beliefs contradicts the theory of evolution.
Definitely evolution is a hoax. I have no doubt whatsoever. The world is not 6000 yrs old (has to be billions) . The "let there be light " is the 6000yrs ago.
you are right... only GOD is the real explanation...
.
.
.
Ironic Mode OFF
.
.
.
COME ON! your comment is a joke, isn't?
.
.
.
Ironic Mode OFF
.
.
.
COME ON! your comment is a joke, isn't?
Since evolution is a hoax, God is the natural other choice. Somebody should develop an alternative to God that makes sense. Evolution doesn't.
Evolution is a hoax... or do you have even one proven fact for evolution?
Sooo... which one? Brahma? Jehova? Zeus? One of the other thousands of deities that mankind have made up? Err, I mean, believed in...
Tricky question? Tricky answer - the real one.
The God that says he is the only one. And there is only on such God that says so. Called a One God or tetragrammaton.
Quote
I take it back. You are equally clueless.
But.... but I thought we are smart evolutionists. Aren't we? Aren't we smart? I think you are very smart. Teach me.
Oh hey, didn't see your reply. So, let me get this straight. Scripture, according to which a god says it is the only god, is evidence enough for you to decide whether a god is the God? Because this deity of yours says it is the only one, it is? Did I get this right? Because if so, I wonder what you think of Allah. In the Quran it's frequently stated that Allah is the only god and that there is no god other than him. Muslims consider the Quran to be the word of God. So, from your point of view, could it also have been Allah that created everything? Really curious to read your answer.
Quote
Yeast was put in a medium with very little sugar. After 450 generations, hexose transport genes had duplicated several times, and some of the duplicated versions had mutated further. (Brown et al. 1998)
Ok. Thanks. But how would you prove it is not the way I have told you that it could be? It could be a reverse engineering like with the car. You could make a car faster if you would scrap everything and leave only engine and the wheels.
Why are you so sure that the yeast living in the lower sugar enviroment gives any new information? Maybe it is just a decrease of information making some function of life weaker in order for the other to be stronger? It is like saying - we have created a man so full of energy and vigour, because we had cut off half of his brain. No wonder - you made his brain half dependend on energy that he could spend elsewhere.
Do not get me wrong. I do not want to be picky at all costs. It leaves a lot of room for interpretation. Ofcourse you can always argue with that, that it does not leave the room to argue. Go ahead.
Ok you give me materials to read I will give you them as well and lets comment them ok? Why should I waste my time if you are not wasting yours?
Genetic Entropy and The Mystery of the Genome by Dr. John Sanford,
In the Beginning Was Information by Dr. Werner Gitt
The Biotic Message by Walter ReMine
Quote
hexose transport genes had duplicated several times
Ooookkk..... You duplicated the amount of existing genes... How had that make any new information? It just made more of the same. I do not see what are you implying more of the same is something new?
Do not get shy. Im just asking questions.
Quote
For instance, it has been shown a simple change in gene activity in sea squirts can turn their one-chambered heart into a working two-chambered one. Surely this counts as increasing information?
But that one is interesting but if understand it right - the mutation just stops some enzymes to form the heart. So forming the heart is information that is blocked by some enzyme.
Is it increase in information? According to their sources ummm rather not as they say that formation of the heart is stopped by some process, so one should just stop the stopping and you have made what you want.
You would think I am picky maybe...... well...... no. I actually want to know the truth and the truth is sad to you. It is not a new information since it need to be stopped. It is like a guy that wants to run and the other is holding him up. If you would make one guy that is holding up not to hold you decrease the number of people and not give any more people.
Explain it to me. Maybe I had read that wrongly - it was highly technical language in the link they had given.
Quote
The result is a hybrid protein called TRIM5-CypA,
A cluster protein is like a cluster of LDL cholesterol. Technicly for the sake of the lab purposes you can name it something else, but it is still the same thing, but it for some reason - probably oxidation - had clustered. If one would say to me that making sick animal with increased oxidation is a good thing I would think he is probably mad. I am assuming those scientists are not mad.
Quote
The list of examples could go on and on, but consider this. Most mutations can be reversed by subsequent mutations – a DNA base can be turned from an A to a G and then back to an A again, for instance. In fact, reverse mutation or “reversion” is common.
Theory of evolution claims that the changes cannot go backward. So did the "evolution" sciences had just disproven the evolution claims? Seems like they did. It destroyed almost the whole premise of evolution being vaild.
Those evolutionists must stick to one version. In the law, if many witnesses would say different version of the same story, that would mean their stories:
you know what.
It does not mean it is impossible I could understand where are you coming from and I agree. Evolution might be possible, but well... Seems like it is not true. I might be wrong tho.
evolution is a hoax?,,no i dont believe that human came from apes couse until now the missing link does not exist to prove that human came from apes,, so that im only believe in god that human create by god using a dust,,GENESIS;1;26 god said let us make man in our image after are likeness ,,adam and eve is the first men and woman created by god,,,
Same, people was never apes. We just lost our hair on body because it wasn't necessary for living. I think that many stuff will happen to us in future.
evolution is a hoax?,,no i dont believe that human came from apes couse until now the missing link does not exist to prove that human came from apes,, so that im only believe in god that human create by god using a dust,,GENESIS;1;26 god said let us make man in our image after are likeness ,,adam and eve is the first men and woman created by god,,,
Jump to: