Page: 1


Profile Information

Member since: Sun May 25, 2014, 02:43 PM
Number of posts: 20,367

Journal Archives

Some lightness in the midst of the political battle!!

When Trump goes low- Hillary goes Lower!

Thats the new campaign slogan for Hillary after listening to her on the stump after the nation found out there are 650,000 more emails to have to go through and Donna Brazile helped her cheat on the debates.

Back to her normal form trash trump and trash anyone who votes for him.

Which has more science Darwinisitc Evolution or Biblical Creation?

This thread is started at the request of Red nation for debate.

First agreeing to the basic premises of each. I found these as the basic definitions of evolution and creation if you agree:


Evolution, of the fish-to-philosopher type, requires that non-living chemicals organize themselves into a self-reproducing organism. All types of life are alleged to have descended, by natural, ongoing processes, from this ‘simple’ life form. For this to have worked, there must be some process which can generate the genetic information in living things today. Chapter 9 on ‘Design’ shows how encyclopedic this information is.

So how do evolutionists propose that this information arose? The first self-reproducing organism would have made copies of itself. Evolution also requires that the copying is not always completely accurate—errors (mutations) occur. Any mutations which enable an organism to leave more self-reproducing offspring will be passed on through the generations. This ‘differential reproduction’ is called natural selection. In summary, evolutionists believe that the source of new genetic information is mutations sorted by natural selection—the neo-Darwinian theory.


In contrast, creationists, starting from the Bible, believe that God created different kinds of organisms, which reproduced ‘after their kinds’ (Gen. 1:11–12, 21, 24–25). Each of these kinds was created with a vast amount of information. There was enough variety in the information in the original creatures so their descendants could adapt to a wide variety of environments.

I have challenged many here at DI to show the evolution of just one kind- the Bird.

Berkeley U. write this:

So evolutionists think it is now fact! But where is the real evidence?? they talk about feathers but do not show the evolution of the feather from scales. On paper this is an easy process but in real life?? Both are thermal regulators and both serve as external protectors as well as feathers needed fro flight.

1. So where is the evidence of scale to feather?
2. Then we need to discuss cold blooded to warm blooded
3. the evolution of the inverted "bird knee"
4. The atrophy of hind legs to claws
5. The growth of forelimbs to support flight
5. Mouths to beaks
6. The transition in lungs
7. The change in muscle structure and composition.

We can start here.

Go to Page: 1