Beliefsbeliefs

Wed Nov 22, 2017, 12:24 PM

Science the bible declared before "scientists" discovered it.



God's Word once again more accurate than mans knowledge.

46 replies, 1593 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 46 replies Author Time Post
Reply Science the bible declared before "scientists" discovered it. (Original post)
nolidad Nov 2017 OP
Mr.Solis Nov 2017 #1
SatansSon666 Nov 2017 #2
rampartb Nov 2017 #3
SatansSon666 Nov 2017 #4
rampartb Nov 2017 #5
SatansSon666 Nov 2017 #6
nolidad Nov 2017 #10
SatansSon666 Nov 2017 #13
nolidad Nov 2017 #8
SatansSon666 Nov 2017 #14
nolidad Nov 2017 #7
SatansSon666 Nov 2017 #9
nolidad Nov 2017 #11
SatansSon666 Nov 2017 #12
nolidad Nov 2017 #16
SatansSon666 Nov 2017 #18
SatansSon666 Nov 2017 #15
nolidad Nov 2017 #17
_eek Nov 2017 #23
nolidad Nov 2017 #24
_eek Nov 2017 #25
nolidad Nov 2017 #26
_eek Nov 2017 #29
SatansSon666 Nov 2017 #31
nolidad Nov 2017 #33
SatansSon666 Dec 2017 #36
nolidad Dec 2017 #39
SatansSon666 Dec 2017 #41
Tovera Dec 2017 #38
nolidad Dec 2017 #40
Meowmenow Nov 2017 #19
nolidad Nov 2017 #20
Meowmenow Nov 2017 #21
nolidad Nov 2017 #27
Meowmenow Nov 2017 #30
nolidad Nov 2017 #34
Cold Warrior Nov 2017 #22
nolidad Nov 2017 #28
SatansSon666 Nov 2017 #32
nolidad Nov 2017 #35
SatansSon666 Dec 2017 #37
nolidad Dec 2017 #42
SatansSon666 Dec 2017 #43
nolidad Dec 2017 #44
SatansSon666 Dec 2017 #45
nolidad Dec 2017 #46

Response to nolidad (Original post)

Wed Nov 22, 2017, 12:49 PM

1. Science can only discover the latent information left by the intelligent designer

Science relies on the designers order to predict an outcome.

Science must obey the design before science can operate within it.

Science relies on the perfection of the creators design for relevance


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Original post)

Wed Nov 22, 2017, 01:24 PM

2. heheh

15. People knew you needed blood to survive before the bible. People that have never heard of the bible knew that you can bleed to death.
The bible didn't say.. "The blood has nutrients and blood cells that transport oxygen and nutrients to your organs."
If it had said that, he might have a point, but it doesn't.
If you don't have blood, you die, we figured that out before the bible, and in some places, without even hearing of the bible.
FAIL

14. We have the same elements in our bodies that are in the earth. wow, imagine that. The bible doesn't mention elements, if it did, he may have a point, but it doesn't, so he doesn't.
We also have a certain amount of salt in our blood, close to the concentrations there were in the oceans, which shows we came from the ocean. See how easy that is?
Also it says breath of life, but right before he said blood gives life.. Why didn't god give Adam the blood of life?
Ask any pro-lifer and they'll disagree that breath gives life, can't be both.
FAIL

13. That's just ridiculous. His explanation makes no sense.
FAIL

12. Saying that verse explains that light can be divided into the spectrum and back again is ridiculous. It also doesn't mention the light coming back together again like he decided to add science figured that out. Wind also has nothing to do with light.
FAIL

11. Paths of the sea might mean currents. Even if it did, any seafaring civilization would have known about these currents with or without the bible. You'll see that it doesn't mention currents or where they go or how far they go. If it had mentioned "a path from A to B" he might have a point, but it doesn't, so he doesn't.
FAIL

10. That has nothing to do with thermodynamics.. hahahah
FAIL

9. Evolution doesn't contradict the second law of thermodynamics. hahahah wow..
FAIL

8. Bottom feeders are good to eat. Some don't taste that good. Lobster, crab, etc.
This guy is really starting to grasp at straws now.. He should have stopped at 15. You don't think people got sick from pork before the bible and maybe that's why they added that in there? That's not a scientific revelation from God.. hahah
FAIL

7. Stretched out the heavens doesn't mean "expanding universe". If it did, why did people think we lived under a dome and the stars could fall from the sky? Why would the churches have argued and fought against this idea if it was right there in the bible? because it wasn't right there in the bible.
FAIL

6. Lightning isn't light. the gas molecules become so excited that they emit light, the flow of electrons create plasma. Lightning emits radio waves in all kinds of frequencies. You can hear it as static on your radio. However, saying lightning in that verse is referring to radio waves back then that people could actually pick up or receive is fucking dumb.
FAIL

5. Laughter is the best medicine. This from a time when people didn't even know germs caused disease.
FAIL

4. So people figured out that olive oil and/or alcohol could help heal wounds or prevent infection. They knew this before Luke. What they didn't mention is how it works, because they didn't know about germs and bacteria. if they had mentioned it killed germs and bacteria he might have a point, but it doesn't, so he doesn't.
FAIL

3. People had boats before the ark. They already knew the best dimensions for buoyancy. This wasn't some revelation of the bible. The size of the ark makes it impossible to be seaworthy and it would twist and bend in every direction, causing it to leak constantly, pitch or not. Physics explains it, no wooden ship has ever been built that large because as they got bigger and bigger they leaked more and more. Master ship-builders couldn't do it, no way an unskilled family would have stood a chance at making such a large vessel.
FAIL

2. You can't enter the springs of the sea, this isn't talking about hydrothermic vents in the ocean floor. There are lakes with no clear water source keeping them full and not enough rain to do it. Not hard to put 2 and 2 together and determine they are fed by springs.
FAIL

1. That one makes no sense. The verse doesn;t make sense and his dumb explanation doesn't make sense.
FAIL





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #2)

Wed Nov 22, 2017, 01:36 PM

3. you have restored my faith

when jesus cured disease by casting out demons i always thought he could have cured more disease by revealing his omniscient knowledge of bacteria etc. but maybe, "demons" is what they call "bacteria" in aramaic?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rampartb (Reply #3)

Wed Nov 22, 2017, 01:41 PM

4. Must be that.

Millions of little demons multiplying and killing us. Only Jesus, some booze and oil can effectively cast these demons out. Too bad they didn't use cannabis oil, more effective at killing demons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #4)

Wed Nov 22, 2017, 01:45 PM

5. worked for my ptsd

maybe you can explain ....

when jesus cast out the demons the landed in a herd of pigs but where in all judea did the kosher citizens keep herds of pigs?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rampartb (Reply #5)

Wed Nov 22, 2017, 01:48 PM

6. I'll have to quote Ken Ham here and say

"I wasn't there"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rampartb (Reply #5)

Wed Nov 22, 2017, 03:29 PM

10. Well a look at an ancient map

Would show you this exorcism occurred in modern Syria and not in the area of ancient Judea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #10)

Wed Nov 22, 2017, 05:47 PM

13. Even if it did.

Who were those folks in Syria worshipping?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rampartb (Reply #3)

Wed Nov 22, 2017, 03:27 PM

8. Well you seem to want to box Jesus in .

He didn't cure one disease by exorcism. He freed people from demonic control by casting out the demons.

There were symptoms of demonic control and these showed themselves in physical imparments- but it was the freeing of the people from demonism that mattered.

The restr were just diseases He healed because He is God. He still heals today according to the same formula used after Matthew 1`2.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #8)

Wed Nov 22, 2017, 05:54 PM

14. demonic control.

Where do you come up with this stuff?
Did demons cause disease or did demons make it look like people were sick?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #2)

Wed Nov 22, 2017, 03:24 PM

7. misinterpretations by you

15. People knew you needed blood to survive before the bible. People that have never heard of the bible knew that you can bleed to death.
The bible didn't say.. "The blood has nutrients and blood cells that transport oxygen and nutrients to your organs."
If it had said that, he might have a point, but it doesn't.
If you don't have blood, you die, we figured that out before the bible, and in some places, without even hearing of the bible.
FAIL

It is also that the bible said the life of the flesh (health is in the blood.

9. Evolution doesn't contradict the second law of thermodynamics. hahahah wow..
FAIL

Yes it does evolution goes against increased entropy in information systems.

11. Paths of the sea might mean currents. Even if it did, any seafaring civilization would have known about these currents with or without the bible. You'll see that it doesn't mention currents or where they go or how far they go. If it had mentioned "a path from A to B" he might have a point, but it doesn't, so he doesn't.
FAIL

But there were no seafaring civilizations before JOb and they currents or pathways were not ddiscovered till the 1800's

12. Saying that verse explains that light can be divided into the spectrum and back again is ridiculous. It also doesn't mention the light coming back together again like he decided to add science figured that out. Wind also has nothing to do with light.
FAIL

Wrong the verse does sayi light is parted.

8. Bottom feeders are good to eat. Some don't taste that good. Lobster, crab, etc.
This guy is really starting to grasp at straws now.. He should have stopped at 15. You don't think people got sick from pork before the bible and maybe that's why they added that in there? That's not a scientific revelation from God.. hahah
FAIL

The verses are talking about the healthiest foods.

6. Lightning isn't light. the gas molecules become so excited that they emit light, the flow of electrons create plasma. Lightning emits radio waves in all kinds of frequencies. You can hear it as static on your radio. However, saying lightning in that verse is referring to radio waves back then that people could actually pick up or receive is fucking dumb.
FAI

So it emts light like a star isn't light but emits light. HHMM

5. Laughter is the best medicine. This from a time when people didn't even know germs caused disease.
FAIL

No you fail. Just because they didn't have all modern knowledge God knew laughter does the body good- (a positive outlook is proven medically)

I could do all the rest- but you are indicitng the writers because they did notr mention modern terms. They just showed that these things were waiting to be discovered by man. Sorry Satan's son- you seem to love prevaricating like your father!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #7)

Wed Nov 22, 2017, 03:29 PM

9. You could do all the rest, sure.

You and the narrator would still be wrong.
It says light parted, but not that it came back again.
The narrator added that because science figured it out.
Yes, it is well known why lighnting emits light, what radio waves it produces, sound etc..
I could have went into more detail with those examples, but I'm not gonna waste my time. 10 minute video and 5 mins of rebuttal was enough.
There is science in the bible. Primitive attempts at science, before the scientific method was developed.
One of our first attempts at describing the world. The more we know, the more we know they had some stuff right, but in the wrong ways and for the wrong reasons.

Nothing in that video proves the bible got anything right about science. Common knowledge for the time was what was recorded.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #9)

Wed Nov 22, 2017, 03:54 PM

11. you will find your outs any way you can!

Thje bible declared light parted long before "science" discovered it. nuance it any way you can to deny God- but it is still true.
but in the wrong ways and for the wrong reasons.

Would love to see your "opinion" on why had it for teh wrong ways and for the wrong reasons.

Nothing in that video proves the bible got anything right about science. Common knowledge for the time was what was recorded.

Well if it was common knowledge- then please show what history you learned to show it was widely known and settle that generic statement of yours.

Hey how does one block out a quote to show you are quoting someone?? I tried excerpt and blockquote and they do not work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #11)

Wed Nov 22, 2017, 04:06 PM

12. The bible also declared

the earth was flat and under an ice dome that had windows in it for the rain.
So technically, before the flood, it could have rained buckets in the desert without clouds or precipitation in the air. Yet, there were still people dying in the desert and droughts.
Saying the light parted could mean anything. The light "parts" when it shines through clouds, everyone has seen this. They would have all have seen it, do you really think the author meant the light spectrum with that verse?
That's a pretty big leap.
They had all seen rainbows too, but for some reason, color isn't mentioned in that verse.
Light parted east or west would be what they saw as the rays came through the clouds.
Doesn't that make more sense than the spectrum, that doesn't even mention colors.
"and the light parted, into all the colors of the rainbow"
how hard is that.. then you might have something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #12)

Sun Nov 26, 2017, 12:34 PM

16. No i t didn't.

that was unbiblical tribes that said the earth was flat. as for the "windows of heaven" too bad for you. Just because they did not have a 21st century vocabulary you think them uninformed.

They had all seen rainbows too, but for some reason, color isn't mentioned in that verse.

No they hadn't because the bible clearly said it had not rained yet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #16)

Sun Nov 26, 2017, 08:45 PM

18. Hadn't rained yet?

Like ever? lol
You don't need rain for a rainbow.
Since we now know how rainbows become visible, rain is not required. Sure, it's usually after rain but doesn't have to be.
Unless you are gonna tell me there was no moisture in the air or clouds in the sky either.
Which would be pretty funny.
The firmament is also incredibly ridiculous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #11)

Wed Nov 22, 2017, 06:30 PM

15. No seafarers before Job..

forgot to mention that one.
When was Job written?

http://www-labs.iro.umontreal.ca/~vaucher/History/Prehistoric_Craft/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #15)

Sun Nov 26, 2017, 12:39 PM

17. JOb is the oldest book of the bible.

c. 2500B.C. Well if by seafaring you mean any ship that plied any sea, then yes I agree with you. But if we use the accepted definition of seafaring meaning ocean going many many miles from shore into the oceans- no.

They did not even cross the med. till long long after job was written. And seafaring (oceangoing) vessels were not until at least 1000A.D.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_maritime_history

These are not vessels that plied their way in the "paths of the seas (oceans) but through the med, near teh coasts etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #17)

Tue Nov 28, 2017, 03:57 PM

23. Somehow you missed Polynesia ..

Though it is right there in your link.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to _eek (Reply #23)

Tue Nov 28, 2017, 06:30 PM

24. Because it is of dubious history with no

known ship skills to navigate large ocean routes. there are much better answers that do not require relying on unknown ship types.

You make them sound like the fictitious Mormon folk who sailed form Israel to South and Central America- but no history shows any skills in building the requisite ships that would survive such a voyage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #24)

Tue Nov 28, 2017, 11:11 PM

25. yeah

They were miracled there.

Oh, wait.. my bad. Gilgamesh's flood left them washed up on the high ground.

Look, you sourced Wiki, and now are pissed it pokes a hole in your derivative religious mantra.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to _eek (Reply #25)

Wed Nov 29, 2017, 06:37 AM

26. Well gilgamesh is the fable spun off the bible

and I am not upset in the least about wiki's hypotheses.

If the polynesians were able to travel 2400 miles on the pacific long before everyone else then they were a super advanced civilization as far as sea craft are concerned.

There is no evidence that is the case. Especially given the time frame that secuylar science attributes to it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #26)

Wed Nov 29, 2017, 09:52 AM

29. odd the Sumerians and Babylonians

Plagiarizing something not even written yet.

Oh I know, the Hebrew story came first, but they didn't have writing.

Funny God, leaving his chosen people all illiterate while those nasty polytheist were writing sagas and shit...

Dat YHWH tho, he so funny.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to _eek (Reply #29)

Thu Nov 30, 2017, 07:43 AM

31. It's funny because the bible rips off Gilgamesh.

It's proven it was written before the bible.
Of course he doesn't believe in radiometric dating, so he can just throw all the evidence out the window, pretty convenient.
We do know when they lived though and when cuneiform was used.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #31)

Thu Nov 30, 2017, 04:07 PM

33. No what is shown is that the giglamesh was written before Moses jotted down from th ejournals

what would become Genesis. MOses wrote Genesis from the accounts, stiles and journals that were kept by Israel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #33)

Sat Dec 2, 2017, 10:18 AM

36. The story is older.

There was another 'noah' too before the noah of the bible.
The epic of Gilgamesh is just one of the stories containing a flood. The flood in the epic of Gilgamesh is very similar to the flood of noah, right down to a boat with animals on it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #36)

Sun Dec 3, 2017, 02:29 PM

39. There are 220 flood narratives around the world.

The gilgamesh epic is the 2 nd oldest and has inaccuracies. The ark of Noah as recorded int eh Bible is considered a highly stable barge. All the other narratives (including the Gilgamesh which has a cube if I remember) do not show any maritime viability for he boat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #39)

Sun Dec 3, 2017, 03:53 PM

41. The Gilgamesh flood isn't being

Touted as true. Even though we have found evidence of a local flood in that time, nobody believes it covered the entire earth because it didn't.
Noahs flood borrowed off the epic of Gilgamesh.

So what if there are 220 flood stories?
Who survived the flood to tell these stories in their languages if they were all wiped out.
Some believe someone knocked a jug of water off the table.. a magic jug and it spilled until the entire earth was flooded. Some his in oyster shells until the flood subsided and other ridiculous shit. They also all didn't happen at the same time. People lived near rivers for obvious reasons. Rivers flood for obvious reasons. These stories were told for obvious reasons.

Japan doesn't have a flood story. The flood never slowed down the Egyptians or Chinese or anyone else. It's a myth. So obvious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #33)

Sat Dec 2, 2017, 03:33 PM

38. Moses also quite possibly copped monotheism itself...

...from the living memories of Akhenaten's "Amarna heresy."

Moses = all-time master of revisionist history.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tovera (Reply #38)

Sun Dec 3, 2017, 02:32 PM

40. Or as is recorded

He met the living God and was responsible for the freeing of the slaves and receiving the law of God!

wHAT EVIDENCE CAN YOU PRESENT OTHER THAN A PHARAOH introducing a quasi monotheistic religion in Egypt that lasted all of his own lifetime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Original post)

Mon Nov 27, 2017, 12:00 AM

19. Fascinating.

 

Scary that adult citizens can believe such nonsense, but still fascinating. Ever been interviewed by an anthropologist?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meowmenow (Reply #19)

Tue Nov 28, 2017, 06:31 AM

20. I have debated

anthropologists, physicists and biologists.

The bible in non modern terms shows many science facts that took society many centuries to put in practice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #20)

Tue Nov 28, 2017, 01:20 PM

21. I meant as a subject of study, not a debate.

 

Debating creationists is a waste of time. But the culture of anachronistic belief is interesting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meowmenow (Reply #21)

Wed Nov 29, 2017, 06:39 AM

27. Well faith in the living God

is timeless and His Word is true.

Christianity is not a religion but a relationship with the living God- noit just some religious expression.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #27)

Wed Nov 29, 2017, 03:01 PM

30. No, it is just a religion.

 

One among many. Most adherents of many of them think they have the one true story, but they are all constructs of human brains. Observing them from a clear, objective perspective allows one to see the commonalities.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meowmenow (Reply #30)

Thu Nov 30, 2017, 04:08 PM

34. You only say that because you do not know Jesus!

Baptist or Cathokic or methodist is a religion- Christianity is a relationship!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #20)

Tue Nov 28, 2017, 02:06 PM

22. Was your debating technique quoting scripture?

If so, whether you realise it or not, you lost.

As for science in the Bible: NSFW. WARNING STRONG LANGUAGE

https://m.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cold Warrior (Reply #22)

Wed Nov 29, 2017, 06:41 AM

28. Maybe to you

But the atheists and agnostics who turned to Christ beg to differ.

But I have argued with scientific fact and showing the "claims" of Scripture are true as opposed to the myths of evolution and the big bang.

And if you want to debate the idiot who made that video- please pick a point at a time andI will gladly show you why he is prejudiced and uninformed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #28)

Thu Nov 30, 2017, 07:45 AM

32. Scientific facts from ICR?

Hahah
Like Cold Warrior said. Whether you realize it or not, you lost.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #32)

Thu Nov 30, 2017, 04:10 PM

35. I hope you never need an MRI

that was designed and invented by a YEC scientist.

Creationists hold hundreds of patents and have made many critical discoveries. Only your bigotry keeps you from seeing that.

How much of ICR scientist research have you actually studied and debunked scientifically? Or are you only parroting the standard skeptics mantra??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #35)

Sat Dec 2, 2017, 10:23 AM

37. Just because someone invented something

Through the scientific method doesn't mean they are correct in allowing their beliefs to override the evidence they see and understand.
Someone's religious belief has no bearing on how well they conduct science.
It does when they reject the same science they know to be true because of a belief.
I'm sure there are Scientologists who invented shit too, doesn't mean Xenu is real.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #37)

Wed Dec 6, 2017, 04:30 AM

42. Well present your evidence for

evolution.

Show us how random undirected mutations (secular beliefs) took us from goo to you by way of the zoo!

Show by evidence how something that did not exist in space time blew upi and created space/time and all matter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #42)

Wed Dec 6, 2017, 04:49 AM

43. There is evidence everywhere for evolution.

You expect me to explain evolution to you and cite everything and show pics and stuff in a message board post?

Maybe tell me how proving evolution to be false will help the case for god.
It won't evolution is real. It happened.
Speciation is documented in the lab and controlled conditions in the field. We see new species coming to be.
We simply do not have enough time to actually see them turn into what some would consider to be a new animal all together.
We see the process though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #43)

Thu Dec 7, 2017, 04:40 AM

44. Are you talking Darwinian Evolution or just evolution.

there is a difference.

And your complaint about citing everything is a red herring!

YOu haven't cited one thing yet to prove that random undirected mutations and selection have changed one kind of creature to another.

I cited for you to show that evolutionists call fact and you cannot even cite one verified "proof". But show the evolution of theropod to bird or just simply scales to feathers and you win

Don't just regurgitate the the theory and use that as proof- show the theory happened in the real world.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #44)

Thu Dec 7, 2017, 06:11 AM

45. It's easy to say that.

Grab something that you know we haven't found fossil evidence of and say..
Do that and you win.
They said the same thing about the missing link.. and we've found several.. so now they move on. Explain everything or you are wrong. Pretty shitty way to win an argument.
The fossil record is pretty clear.
It isn't a coincidence that the deeper you go, I. E. Older, everything gets less complex and smaller until only tiny organisms exist as fossils.
It's all out there for you. Read for yourself. Don't take the words of dishonest people like ICR or AiG.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #43)

Fri Dec 8, 2017, 06:54 AM

46. No one is arguing speciation.

That is one mouse changing in to another mouse- they stay the same genus, family, order.

But for the theory of evolution to be a "fact" you have to show a "lizard" becoming a "bird".

And FYI in the lab and "controlled" conditions just show intelligence, not the random undirected mutations that the theory of evolution requires. You are making an argument for the existence of an intelligence behind it all.

You write:

"We simply do not have enough time to actually see them turn into what some would consider to be a new animal all together.
We see the process though"

But it is the process that is required to turn one family into another! and we do not see that happen, ever! What evolutionary believers have done is take horizontal changes ( mice staying mice- just with different features).,
extrapolate those horizontal changes and hypothesize that microbiotic creatures through random undirected mutations produced all the biodiversity we see today.

That is scientifically impossible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Beliefsbeliefs