15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense

[Indeependent]

Explain grass, shrubs, bushes, trees that don't grow fruit, trees that grow fruit, fruits and vegetables, insects of millions of varieties, birds of millions of varieties, animals of all shapes and sizes, humans.
And how they all survived for hundreds of millions of years evolving into a perfect eco-system.

Those haven't "all survived" so not "perfect" and certainly not humans "for hundreds of millions of years"

Tell that to the evolutionists.

Why don't you offer a competing argument? The complimentary sciences of biology, chemistry, paleontology, etc. are not some grand conspiracy theory as religionists want to believe.

How does letting biological adaptations work over billions of years equate to supernatural "design"? It doesn't. It is an anthropomorphism, and it clearly doesn't apply. Any detailed comparison of the adaptations of nature vs. the claims to supernaturalism, a young earth and claims to various gods leaves religionism as a safe place for fear and ignorance.

The counter argument is that the Creator/Sustainer is the obvious master of all knowledge possessed by mankind and has been more than happy to encourage mankind to discover it and use it to benefit mankind.
Mankind, however, habitually uses it for the powerful few.
Jews do not envision a cruel, jealous, limited God.

An argument in favor of supernaturalism is not a counter argument. It's an unrealized supposition.

Until theology or creation science can come up with a plausible means to investigate the method of supernatural creation, some tentative hypothesis, the beginnings of a framework, then what useful role can they have in advancement of knowledge?

I think arguments are cheapened when people negligently toss around claims of ''creators / sustainers'' and that proof is nothing more than the copy and paste of articles that someone found while scouring the internet. I have no reason to accept the claim that some alleged, supernatural ''master of all knowledge'' is extant in the natural, rational world.

Hollie you have no clue as to how stupid you are. How is life creating itself out of nothing in a pond not supernatural.

Lol

At least you’re consistently pointless. An achievement of some merit, I guess.

Have you found a study on evolution that deals with the Slime Scheme?
Focus.

Remember, this is not MSNBC or CNN where you can spout bullshit without expecting questions.

What is Slime Scheme?

Is that something you study at your madrassah?

Are you so stupid that you forget other people can read your posts?

How did millions of asexual slime get together and decide to form, over hundreds of millions of years, into millions of male/female species.
Now stop being an idiot and address the question of find an atheist that does address the issue.

So how did all the different animals come about?

You sided with evolution from slime and I challenged you to find a study that addresses the impossibility of evolution.
If you want to ignore my input, at least don't be lazy and not back up what you believe.

What study? Make sense for crissakes.

It's obvious you are being purposely moronic concerning your "faith" in evolution.
You believe that single celled creatures became millions of male/female insects, animals and humans over hundreds of millions of years.
So you believe that these "unique", "freak, "Accidental" occurrences occurred millions of times.
How many times have you won a 100+ million dollar lottery.
If you continue to prove you are too stupid to under this simple question, I will no longer respond to you.

 

[Indeependent]

Explain grass, shrubs, bushes, trees that don't grow fruit, trees that grow fruit, fruits and vegetables, insects of millions of varieties, birds of millions of varieties, animals of all shapes and sizes, humans.
And how they all survived for hundreds of millions of years evolving into a perfect eco-system.

Those haven't "all survived" so not "perfect" and certainly not humans "for hundreds of millions of years"

Tell that to the evolutionists.

Why don't you offer a competing argument? The complimentary sciences of biology, chemistry, paleontology, etc. are not some grand conspiracy theory as religionists want to believe.

How does letting biological adaptations work over billions of years equate to supernatural "design"? It doesn't. It is an anthropomorphism, and it clearly doesn't apply. Any detailed comparison of the adaptations of nature vs. the claims to supernaturalism, a young earth and claims to various gods leaves religionism as a safe place for fear and ignorance.

The counter argument is that the Creator/Sustainer is the obvious master of all knowledge possessed by mankind and has been more than happy to encourage mankind to discover it and use it to benefit mankind.
Mankind, however, habitually uses it for the powerful few.
Jews do not envision a cruel, jealous, limited God.

An argument in favor of supernaturalism is not a counter argument. It's an unrealized supposition.

Until theology or creation science can come up with a plausible means to investigate the method of supernatural creation, some tentative hypothesis, the beginnings of a framework, then what useful role can they have in advancement of knowledge?

I think arguments are cheapened when people negligently toss around claims of ''creators / sustainers'' and that proof is nothing more than the copy and paste of articles that someone found while scouring the internet. I have no reason to accept the claim that some alleged, supernatural ''master of all knowledge'' is extant in the natural, rational world.

Hollie you have no clue as to how stupid you are. How is life creating itself out of nothing in a pond not supernatural.

Lol

At least you’re consistently pointless. An achievement of some merit, I guess.

Have you found a study on evolution that deals with the Slime Scheme?
Focus.

Remember, this is not MSNBC or CNN where you can spout bullshit without expecting questions.

What is Slime Scheme?

Is that something you study at your madrassah?

Are you so stupid that you forget other people can read your posts?

How did millions of asexual slime get together and decide to form, over hundreds of millions of years, into millions of male/female species.
Now stop being an idiot and address the question of find an atheist that does address the issue.

Ah, a name-caller. That adds a great deal to your saliva-slinging tirades.

Ad hominem.
I have posted the same, clearly stated question at least 20 times and you continue to either make believe you don't understand the question or you are not a very intelligent person.

For the 21st and last time...
How did millions of asexual slime get together and decide to form, over hundreds of millions of years, into millions of male/female species.

 

[Indeependent]

Explain grass, shrubs, bushes, trees that don't grow fruit, trees that grow fruit, fruits and vegetables, insects of millions of varieties, birds of millions of varieties, animals of all shapes and sizes, humans.
And how they all survived for hundreds of millions of years evolving into a perfect eco-system.

Those haven't "all survived" so not "perfect" and certainly not humans "for hundreds of millions of years"

Tell that to the evolutionists.

Why don't you offer a competing argument? The complimentary sciences of biology, chemistry, paleontology, etc. are not some grand conspiracy theory as religionists want to believe.

How does letting biological adaptations work over billions of years equate to supernatural "design"? It doesn't. It is an anthropomorphism, and it clearly doesn't apply. Any detailed comparison of the adaptations of nature vs. the claims to supernaturalism, a young earth and claims to various gods leaves religionism as a safe place for fear and ignorance.

The counter argument is that the Creator/Sustainer is the obvious master of all knowledge possessed by mankind and has been more than happy to encourage mankind to discover it and use it to benefit mankind.
Mankind, however, habitually uses it for the powerful few.
Jews do not envision a cruel, jealous, limited God.

An argument in favor of supernaturalism is not a counter argument. It's an unrealized supposition.

Until theology or creation science can come up with a plausible means to investigate the method of supernatural creation, some tentative hypothesis, the beginnings of a framework, then what useful role can they have in advancement of knowledge?

I think arguments are cheapened when people negligently toss around claims of ''creators / sustainers'' and that proof is nothing more than the copy and paste of articles that someone found while scouring the internet. I have no reason to accept the claim that some alleged, supernatural ''master of all knowledge'' is extant in the natural, rational world.

Hollie you have no clue as to how stupid you are. How is life creating itself out of nothing in a pond not supernatural.

Lol

So everything is god. How quaint.

God represents intelligence, which is far more likely to create things than nothing.

Do you disagree?

Intelligence doesn’t make deformed and retarded babies.

Have you found a study on evolution that deals with the Slime Scheme?
Focus.

That’s 2 posts in a row in which I have no fucking idea what the fuck you’re on about. Are you drunk like the Pope?

You never know what anybody is discussing because you're an idiot.

Now address the Slime Scheme or find an atheist that can.

You rarely make any sense, now focus, how old is the earth?

I answered that yesterday.
Admit you either ignored the answer or didn't want to see it and I will tell you how old the earth is.
The earth is way older than 6,000 of our years and scripture supports that fact.

“way older than 6,000 of our years”.

How many in dog years?

I explicitly posted this answer for you from the Torah yesterday and you responded that I shouldn't reference the Torah to answer your question from a Bible.
It seems you are either a person filled with hate or have the IQ of a tadpole.

You have trouble with me getting annoyed that I am annoyed that you unwilling to respond to anything I post with nothing but disdain.
Tough.

 

[Indeependent]

Explain grass, shrubs, bushes, trees that don't grow fruit, trees that grow fruit, fruits and vegetables, insects of millions of varieties, birds of millions of varieties, animals of all shapes and sizes, humans.
And how they all survived for hundreds of millions of years evolving into a perfect eco-system.

Those haven't "all survived" so not "perfect" and certainly not humans "for hundreds of millions of years"

Tell that to the evolutionists.

Why don't you offer a competing argument? The complimentary sciences of biology, chemistry, paleontology, etc. are not some grand conspiracy theory as religionists want to believe.

How does letting biological adaptations work over billions of years equate to supernatural "design"? It doesn't. It is an anthropomorphism, and it clearly doesn't apply. Any detailed comparison of the adaptations of nature vs. the claims to supernaturalism, a young earth and claims to various gods leaves religionism as a safe place for fear and ignorance.

The counter argument is that the Creator/Sustainer is the obvious master of all knowledge possessed by mankind and has been more than happy to encourage mankind to discover it and use it to benefit mankind.
Mankind, however, habitually uses it for the powerful few.
Jews do not envision a cruel, jealous, limited God.

An argument in favor of supernaturalism is not a counter argument. It's an unrealized supposition.

Until theology or creation science can come up with a plausible means to investigate the method of supernatural creation, some tentative hypothesis, the beginnings of a framework, then what useful role can they have in advancement of knowledge?

I think arguments are cheapened when people negligently toss around claims of ''creators / sustainers'' and that proof is nothing more than the copy and paste of articles that someone found while scouring the internet. I have no reason to accept the claim that some alleged, supernatural ''master of all knowledge'' is extant in the natural, rational world.

Hollie you have no clue as to how stupid you are. How is life creating itself out of nothing in a pond not supernatural.

Lol

So everything is god. How quaint.

God represents intelligence, which is far more likely to create things than nothing.

Do you disagree?

Intelligence doesn’t make deformed and retarded babies.

Have you found a study on evolution that deals with the Slime Scheme?
Focus.

That’s 2 posts in a row in which I have no fucking idea what the fuck you’re on about. Are you drunk like the Pope?

You never know what anybody is discussing because you're an idiot.

Now address the Slime Scheme or find an atheist that can.

You rarely make any sense, now focus, how old is the earth?

I answered that yesterday.
Admit you either ignored the answer or didn't want to see it and I will tell you how old the earth is.
The earth is way older than 6,000 of our years and scripture supports that fact.

“way older than 6,000 of our years”.

How many in dog years?

Whatever science says.
There was no sun until the 4th day.
If that doesn't answer your question, out conversing is over with.

 

[esalla]

Explain grass, shrubs, bushes, trees that don't grow fruit, trees that grow fruit, fruits and vegetables, insects of millions of varieties, birds of millions of varieties, animals of all shapes and sizes, humans.
And how they all survived for hundreds of millions of years evolving into a perfect eco-system.

Those haven't "all survived" so not "perfect" and certainly not humans "for hundreds of millions of years"

Tell that to the evolutionists.

Why don't you offer a competing argument? The complimentary sciences of biology, chemistry, paleontology, etc. are not some grand conspiracy theory as religionists want to believe.

How does letting biological adaptations work over billions of years equate to supernatural "design"? It doesn't. It is an anthropomorphism, and it clearly doesn't apply. Any detailed comparison of the adaptations of nature vs. the claims to supernaturalism, a young earth and claims to various gods leaves religionism as a safe place for fear and ignorance.

The counter argument is that the Creator/Sustainer is the obvious master of all knowledge possessed by mankind and has been more than happy to encourage mankind to discover it and use it to benefit mankind.
Mankind, however, habitually uses it for the powerful few.
Jews do not envision a cruel, jealous, limited God.

An argument in favor of supernaturalism is not a counter argument. It's an unrealized supposition.

Until theology or creation science can come up with a plausible means to investigate the method of supernatural creation, some tentative hypothesis, the beginnings of a framework, then what useful role can they have in advancement of knowledge?

I think arguments are cheapened when people negligently toss around claims of ''creators / sustainers'' and that proof is nothing more than the copy and paste of articles that someone found while scouring the internet. I have no reason to accept the claim that some alleged, supernatural ''master of all knowledge'' is extant in the natural, rational world.

Hollie you have no clue as to how stupid you are. How is life creating itself out of nothing in a pond not supernatural.

Lol

So everything is god. How quaint.

God represents intelligence, which is far more likely to create things than nothing.

Do you disagree?

Intelligence doesn’t make deformed and retarded babies.

Have you found a study on evolution that deals with the Slime Scheme?
Focus.

That’s 2 posts in a row in which I have no fucking idea what the fuck you’re on about. Are you drunk like the Pope?

You never know what anybody is discussing because you're an idiot.

Now address the Slime Scheme or find an atheist that can.

You rarely make any sense, now focus, how old is the earth?

I answered that yesterday.
Admit you either ignored the answer or didn't want to see it and I will tell you how old the earth is.
The earth is way older than 6,000 of our years and scripture supports that fact.

“way older than 6,000 of our years”.

How many in dog years?

Whatever science says.
There was no sun until the 4th day.
If that doesn't answer your question, out conversing is over with.

Makes no sense actually because without a Sun there could be no night and day so how would day 1 2 3 be defined

 

[ding]

Explain grass, shrubs, bushes, trees that don't grow fruit, trees that grow fruit, fruits and vegetables, insects of millions of varieties, birds of millions of varieties, animals of all shapes and sizes, humans.
And how they all survived for hundreds of millions of years evolving into a perfect eco-system.

Those haven't "all survived" so not "perfect" and certainly not humans "for hundreds of millions of years"

Tell that to the evolutionists.

Why don't you offer a competing argument? The complimentary sciences of biology, chemistry, paleontology, etc. are not some grand conspiracy theory as religionists want to believe.

How does letting biological adaptations work over billions of years equate to supernatural "design"? It doesn't. It is an anthropomorphism, and it clearly doesn't apply. Any detailed comparison of the adaptations of nature vs. the claims to supernaturalism, a young earth and claims to various gods leaves religionism as a safe place for fear and ignorance.

The counter argument is that the Creator/Sustainer is the obvious master of all knowledge possessed by mankind and has been more than happy to encourage mankind to discover it and use it to benefit mankind.
Mankind, however, habitually uses it for the powerful few.
Jews do not envision a cruel, jealous, limited God.

An argument in favor of supernaturalism is not a counter argument. It's an unrealized supposition.

Until theology or creation science can come up with a plausible means to investigate the method of supernatural creation, some tentative hypothesis, the beginnings of a framework, then what useful role can they have in advancement of knowledge?

I think arguments are cheapened when people negligently toss around claims of ''creators / sustainers'' and that proof is nothing more than the copy and paste of articles that someone found while scouring the internet. I have no reason to accept the claim that some alleged, supernatural ''master of all knowledge'' is extant in the natural, rational world.

Hollie you have no clue as to how stupid you are. How is life creating itself out of nothing in a pond not supernatural.

Lol

So everything is god. How quaint.

God represents intelligence, which is far more likely to create things than nothing.

Do you disagree?

Intelligence doesn’t make deformed and retarded babies.

Maimonides responds...

"...Whatever is formed of any matter receives the most perfect form possible in that species of matter ; in each individual case the defects are in accordance with the defects of that individual matter...."

MOSES MAIMONIDES, THE GUIDE FOR THE PERPLEXED
Part 3, Chapter XII, Titled "Three Kinds of'Evil : (1) That caused by the Nature "of Man" ; (2) Caused by Man to Man ; (3) Caused by Man to himself" Page 267 - 272

 

[ding]

Bam!

 

[Hollie]

Explain grass, shrubs, bushes, trees that don't grow fruit, trees that grow fruit, fruits and vegetables, insects of millions of varieties, birds of millions of varieties, animals of all shapes and sizes, humans.
And how they all survived for hundreds of millions of years evolving into a perfect eco-system.

Those haven't "all survived" so not "perfect" and certainly not humans "for hundreds of millions of years"

Tell that to the evolutionists.

Why don't you offer a competing argument? The complimentary sciences of biology, chemistry, paleontology, etc. are not some grand conspiracy theory as religionists want to believe.

How does letting biological adaptations work over billions of years equate to supernatural "design"? It doesn't. It is an anthropomorphism, and it clearly doesn't apply. Any detailed comparison of the adaptations of nature vs. the claims to supernaturalism, a young earth and claims to various gods leaves religionism as a safe place for fear and ignorance.

The counter argument is that the Creator/Sustainer is the obvious master of all knowledge possessed by mankind and has been more than happy to encourage mankind to discover it and use it to benefit mankind.
Mankind, however, habitually uses it for the powerful few.
Jews do not envision a cruel, jealous, limited God.

An argument in favor of supernaturalism is not a counter argument. It's an unrealized supposition.

Until theology or creation science can come up with a plausible means to investigate the method of supernatural creation, some tentative hypothesis, the beginnings of a framework, then what useful role can they have in advancement of knowledge?

I think arguments are cheapened when people negligently toss around claims of ''creators / sustainers'' and that proof is nothing more than the copy and paste of articles that someone found while scouring the internet. I have no reason to accept the claim that some alleged, supernatural ''master of all knowledge'' is extant in the natural, rational world.

Hollie you have no clue as to how stupid you are. How is life creating itself out of nothing in a pond not supernatural.

Lol

At least you’re consistently pointless. An achievement of some merit, I guess.

Have you found a study on evolution that deals with the Slime Scheme?
Focus.

Remember, this is not MSNBC or CNN where you can spout bullshit without expecting questions.

What is Slime Scheme?

Is that something you study at your madrassah?

Are you so stupid that you forget other people can read your posts?

How did millions of asexual slime get together and decide to form, over hundreds of millions of years, into millions of male/female species.
Now stop being an idiot and address the question of find an atheist that does address the issue.

Ah, a name-caller. That adds a great deal to your saliva-slinging tirades.

Ad hominem.
I have posted the same, clearly stated question at least 20 times and you continue to either make believe you don't understand the question or you are not a very intelligent person.

For the 21st and last time...
How did millions of asexual slime get together and decide to form, over hundreds of millions of years, into millions of male/female species.

I’m going to count to three....

 

[Hollie]

Explain grass, shrubs, bushes, trees that don't grow fruit, trees that grow fruit, fruits and vegetables, insects of millions of varieties, birds of millions of varieties, animals of all shapes and sizes, humans.
And how they all survived for hundreds of millions of years evolving into a perfect eco-system.

Those haven't "all survived" so not "perfect" and certainly not humans "for hundreds of millions of years"

Tell that to the evolutionists.

Why don't you offer a competing argument? The complimentary sciences of biology, chemistry, paleontology, etc. are not some grand conspiracy theory as religionists want to believe.

How does letting biological adaptations work over billions of years equate to supernatural "design"? It doesn't. It is an anthropomorphism, and it clearly doesn't apply. Any detailed comparison of the adaptations of nature vs. the claims to supernaturalism, a young earth and claims to various gods leaves religionism as a safe place for fear and ignorance.

The counter argument is that the Creator/Sustainer is the obvious master of all knowledge possessed by mankind and has been more than happy to encourage mankind to discover it and use it to benefit mankind.
Mankind, however, habitually uses it for the powerful few.
Jews do not envision a cruel, jealous, limited God.

An argument in favor of supernaturalism is not a counter argument. It's an unrealized supposition.

Until theology or creation science can come up with a plausible means to investigate the method of supernatural creation, some tentative hypothesis, the beginnings of a framework, then what useful role can they have in advancement of knowledge?

I think arguments are cheapened when people negligently toss around claims of ''creators / sustainers'' and that proof is nothing more than the copy and paste of articles that someone found while scouring the internet. I have no reason to accept the claim that some alleged, supernatural ''master of all knowledge'' is extant in the natural, rational world.

Hollie you have no clue as to how stupid you are. How is life creating itself out of nothing in a pond not supernatural.

Lol

So everything is god. How quaint.

God represents intelligence, which is far more likely to create things than nothing.

Do you disagree?

Intelligence doesn’t make deformed and retarded babies.

Have you found a study on evolution that deals with the Slime Scheme?
Focus.

That’s 2 posts in a row in which I have no fucking idea what the fuck you’re on about. Are you drunk like the Pope?

You never know what anybody is discussing because you're an idiot.

Now address the Slime Scheme or find an atheist that can.

You rarely make any sense, now focus, how old is the earth?

I answered that yesterday.
Admit you either ignored the answer or didn't want to see it and I will tell you how old the earth is.
The earth is way older than 6,000 of our years and scripture supports that fact.

“way older than 6,000 of our years”.

How many in dog years?

Whatever science says.
There was no sun until the 4th day.
If that doesn't answer your question, out conversing is over with.

Finally.

 

[Indeependent]

Explain grass, shrubs, bushes, trees that don't grow fruit, trees that grow fruit, fruits and vegetables, insects of millions of varieties, birds of millions of varieties, animals of all shapes and sizes, humans.
And how they all survived for hundreds of millions of years evolving into a perfect eco-system.

Those haven't "all survived" so not "perfect" and certainly not humans "for hundreds of millions of years"

Tell that to the evolutionists.

Why don't you offer a competing argument? The complimentary sciences of biology, chemistry, paleontology, etc. are not some grand conspiracy theory as religionists want to believe.

How does letting biological adaptations work over billions of years equate to supernatural "design"? It doesn't. It is an anthropomorphism, and it clearly doesn't apply. Any detailed comparison of the adaptations of nature vs. the claims to supernaturalism, a young earth and claims to various gods leaves religionism as a safe place for fear and ignorance.

The counter argument is that the Creator/Sustainer is the obvious master of all knowledge possessed by mankind and has been more than happy to encourage mankind to discover it and use it to benefit mankind.
Mankind, however, habitually uses it for the powerful few.
Jews do not envision a cruel, jealous, limited God.

An argument in favor of supernaturalism is not a counter argument. It's an unrealized supposition.

Until theology or creation science can come up with a plausible means to investigate the method of supernatural creation, some tentative hypothesis, the beginnings of a framework, then what useful role can they have in advancement of knowledge?

I think arguments are cheapened when people negligently toss around claims of ''creators / sustainers'' and that proof is nothing more than the copy and paste of articles that someone found while scouring the internet. I have no reason to accept the claim that some alleged, supernatural ''master of all knowledge'' is extant in the natural, rational world.

Hollie you have no clue as to how stupid you are. How is life creating itself out of nothing in a pond not supernatural.

Lol

So everything is god. How quaint.

God represents intelligence, which is far more likely to create things than nothing.

Do you disagree?

Intelligence doesn’t make deformed and retarded babies.

Have you found a study on evolution that deals with the Slime Scheme?
Focus.

That’s 2 posts in a row in which I have no fucking idea what the fuck you’re on about. Are you drunk like the Pope?

You never know what anybody is discussing because you're an idiot.

Now address the Slime Scheme or find an atheist that can.

You rarely make any sense, now focus, how old is the earth?

I answered that yesterday.
Admit you either ignored the answer or didn't want to see it and I will tell you how old the earth is.
The earth is way older than 6,000 of our years and scripture supports that fact.

“way older than 6,000 of our years”.

How many in dog years?

Whatever science says.
There was no sun until the 4th day.
If that doesn't answer your question, out conversing is over with.

Makes no sense actually because without a Sun there could be no night and day so how would day 1 2 3 be defined

I explained this yesterday.
Erev (Evening) and Boker (Morning) and incorrect translations.
These words are translated later on correctly as Erev (Mixture) and Boker (Clarity).
A Yome (supposedly Day, and I don't know what Yome really means) is a Mixture/Clarity, which requires energy, but not an actual star.
A Yome, from a kaballistic standpoint, is an allotted spark of life force.

 

[esalla]

Explain grass, shrubs, bushes, trees that don't grow fruit, trees that grow fruit, fruits and vegetables, insects of millions of varieties, birds of millions of varieties, animals of all shapes and sizes, humans.
And how they all survived for hundreds of millions of years evolving into a perfect eco-system.

Those haven't "all survived" so not "perfect" and certainly not humans "for hundreds of millions of years"

Tell that to the evolutionists.

Why don't you offer a competing argument? The complimentary sciences of biology, chemistry, paleontology, etc. are not some grand conspiracy theory as religionists want to believe.

How does letting biological adaptations work over billions of years equate to supernatural "design"? It doesn't. It is an anthropomorphism, and it clearly doesn't apply. Any detailed comparison of the adaptations of nature vs. the claims to supernaturalism, a young earth and claims to various gods leaves religionism as a safe place for fear and ignorance.

The counter argument is that the Creator/Sustainer is the obvious master of all knowledge possessed by mankind and has been more than happy to encourage mankind to discover it and use it to benefit mankind.
Mankind, however, habitually uses it for the powerful few.
Jews do not envision a cruel, jealous, limited God.

An argument in favor of supernaturalism is not a counter argument. It's an unrealized supposition.

Until theology or creation science can come up with a plausible means to investigate the method of supernatural creation, some tentative hypothesis, the beginnings of a framework, then what useful role can they have in advancement of knowledge?

I think arguments are cheapened when people negligently toss around claims of ''creators / sustainers'' and that proof is nothing more than the copy and paste of articles that someone found while scouring the internet. I have no reason to accept the claim that some alleged, supernatural ''master of all knowledge'' is extant in the natural, rational world.

Hollie you have no clue as to how stupid you are. How is life creating itself out of nothing in a pond not supernatural.

Lol

At least you’re consistently pointless. An achievement of some merit, I guess.

Have you found a study on evolution that deals with the Slime Scheme?
Focus.

Remember, this is not MSNBC or CNN where you can spout bullshit without expecting questions.

What is Slime Scheme?

Is that something you study at your madrassah?

Are you so stupid that you forget other people can read your posts?

How did millions of asexual slime get together and decide to form, over hundreds of millions of years, into millions of male/female species.
Now stop being an idiot and address the question of find an atheist that does address the issue.

Ah, a name-caller. That adds a great deal to your saliva-slinging tirades.

Ad hominem.
I have posted the same, clearly stated question at least 20 times and you continue to either make believe you don't understand the question or you are not a very intelligent person.

For the 21st and last time...
How did millions of asexual slime get together and decide to form, over hundreds of millions of years, into millions of male/female species.

I’m going to count to three....

Four comes next doofy

 

[Indeependent]

Explain grass, shrubs, bushes, trees that don't grow fruit, trees that grow fruit, fruits and vegetables, insects of millions of varieties, birds of millions of varieties, animals of all shapes and sizes, humans.
And how they all survived for hundreds of millions of years evolving into a perfect eco-system.

Those haven't "all survived" so not "perfect" and certainly not humans "for hundreds of millions of years"

Tell that to the evolutionists.

Why don't you offer a competing argument? The complimentary sciences of biology, chemistry, paleontology, etc. are not some grand conspiracy theory as religionists want to believe.

How does letting biological adaptations work over billions of years equate to supernatural "design"? It doesn't. It is an anthropomorphism, and it clearly doesn't apply. Any detailed comparison of the adaptations of nature vs. the claims to supernaturalism, a young earth and claims to various gods leaves religionism as a safe place for fear and ignorance.

The counter argument is that the Creator/Sustainer is the obvious master of all knowledge possessed by mankind and has been more than happy to encourage mankind to discover it and use it to benefit mankind.
Mankind, however, habitually uses it for the powerful few.
Jews do not envision a cruel, jealous, limited God.

An argument in favor of supernaturalism is not a counter argument. It's an unrealized supposition.

Until theology or creation science can come up with a plausible means to investigate the method of supernatural creation, some tentative hypothesis, the beginnings of a framework, then what useful role can they have in advancement of knowledge?

I think arguments are cheapened when people negligently toss around claims of ''creators / sustainers'' and that proof is nothing more than the copy and paste of articles that someone found while scouring the internet. I have no reason to accept the claim that some alleged, supernatural ''master of all knowledge'' is extant in the natural, rational world.

Hollie you have no clue as to how stupid you are. How is life creating itself out of nothing in a pond not supernatural.

Lol

At least you’re consistently pointless. An achievement of some merit, I guess.

Have you found a study on evolution that deals with the Slime Scheme?
Focus.

Remember, this is not MSNBC or CNN where you can spout bullshit without expecting questions.

What is Slime Scheme?

Is that something you study at your madrassah?

Are you so stupid that you forget other people can read your posts?

How did millions of asexual slime get together and decide to form, over hundreds of millions of years, into millions of male/female species.
Now stop being an idiot and address the question of find an atheist that does address the issue.

Ah, a name-caller. That adds a great deal to your saliva-slinging tirades.

Ad hominem.
I have posted the same, clearly stated question at least 20 times and you continue to either make believe you don't understand the question or you are not a very intelligent person.

For the 21st and last time...
How did millions of asexual slime get together and decide to form, over hundreds of millions of years, into millions of male/female species.

I’m going to count to three....

I doubt you can.

How did millions of asexual slime get together and decide to form, over hundreds of millions of years, into millions of male/female species.\
I can't answer this question because it didn't happen.

 

[Dr Grump]

There is a spiritual component to life, which is not explained by science or by trials of scientific experimentation.

It is easily explainable though.. It's called peoples' imagination.

 

[Taz]

Explain grass, shrubs, bushes, trees that don't grow fruit, trees that grow fruit, fruits and vegetables, insects of millions of varieties, birds of millions of varieties, animals of all shapes and sizes, humans.
And how they all survived for hundreds of millions of years evolving into a perfect eco-system.

Those haven't "all survived" so not "perfect" and certainly not humans "for hundreds of millions of years"

Tell that to the evolutionists.

Why don't you offer a competing argument? The complimentary sciences of biology, chemistry, paleontology, etc. are not some grand conspiracy theory as religionists want to believe.

How does letting biological adaptations work over billions of years equate to supernatural "design"? It doesn't. It is an anthropomorphism, and it clearly doesn't apply. Any detailed comparison of the adaptations of nature vs. the claims to supernaturalism, a young earth and claims to various gods leaves religionism as a safe place for fear and ignorance.

The counter argument is that the Creator/Sustainer is the obvious master of all knowledge possessed by mankind and has been more than happy to encourage mankind to discover it and use it to benefit mankind.
Mankind, however, habitually uses it for the powerful few.
Jews do not envision a cruel, jealous, limited God.

An argument in favor of supernaturalism is not a counter argument. It's an unrealized supposition.

Until theology or creation science can come up with a plausible means to investigate the method of supernatural creation, some tentative hypothesis, the beginnings of a framework, then what useful role can they have in advancement of knowledge?

I think arguments are cheapened when people negligently toss around claims of ''creators / sustainers'' and that proof is nothing more than the copy and paste of articles that someone found while scouring the internet. I have no reason to accept the claim that some alleged, supernatural ''master of all knowledge'' is extant in the natural, rational world.

Hollie you have no clue as to how stupid you are. How is life creating itself out of nothing in a pond not supernatural.

Lol

At least you’re consistently pointless. An achievement of some merit, I guess.

Have you found a study on evolution that deals with the Slime Scheme?
Focus.

Remember, this is not MSNBC or CNN where you can spout bullshit without expecting questions.

What is Slime Scheme?

Is that something you study at your madrassah?

Are you so stupid that you forget other people can read your posts?

How did millions of asexual slime get together and decide to form, over hundreds of millions of years, into millions of male/female species.
Now stop being an idiot and address the question of find an atheist that does address the issue.

So how did all the different animals come about?

You sided with evolution from slime and I challenged you to find a study that addresses the impossibility of evolution.
If you want to ignore my input, at least don't be lazy and not back up what you believe.

What study? Make sense for crissakes.

It's obvious you are being purposely moronic concerning your "faith" in evolution.
You believe that single celled creatures became millions of male/female insects, animals and humans over hundreds of millions of years.
So you believe that these "unique", "freak, "Accidental" occurrences occurred millions of times.
How many times have you won a 100+ million dollar lottery.
If you continue to prove you are too stupid to under this simple question, I will no longer respond to you.

So you think an invisible being magically poofed everything into being out of nothing?

 

[Hollie]

Explain grass, shrubs, bushes, trees that don't grow fruit, trees that grow fruit, fruits and vegetables, insects of millions of varieties, birds of millions of varieties, animals of all shapes and sizes, humans.
And how they all survived for hundreds of millions of years evolving into a perfect eco-system.

Those haven't "all survived" so not "perfect" and certainly not humans "for hundreds of millions of years"

Tell that to the evolutionists.

Why don't you offer a competing argument? The complimentary sciences of biology, chemistry, paleontology, etc. are not some grand conspiracy theory as religionists want to believe.

How does letting biological adaptations work over billions of years equate to supernatural "design"? It doesn't. It is an anthropomorphism, and it clearly doesn't apply. Any detailed comparison of the adaptations of nature vs. the claims to supernaturalism, a young earth and claims to various gods leaves religionism as a safe place for fear and ignorance.

The counter argument is that the Creator/Sustainer is the obvious master of all knowledge possessed by mankind and has been more than happy to encourage mankind to discover it and use it to benefit mankind.
Mankind, however, habitually uses it for the powerful few.
Jews do not envision a cruel, jealous, limited God.

An argument in favor of supernaturalism is not a counter argument. It's an unrealized supposition.

Until theology or creation science can come up with a plausible means to investigate the method of supernatural creation, some tentative hypothesis, the beginnings of a framework, then what useful role can they have in advancement of knowledge?

I think arguments are cheapened when people negligently toss around claims of ''creators / sustainers'' and that proof is nothing more than the copy and paste of articles that someone found while scouring the internet. I have no reason to accept the claim that some alleged, supernatural ''master of all knowledge'' is extant in the natural, rational world.

Hollie you have no clue as to how stupid you are. How is life creating itself out of nothing in a pond not supernatural.

Lol

At least you’re consistently pointless. An achievement of some merit, I guess.

Have you found a study on evolution that deals with the Slime Scheme?
Focus.

Remember, this is not MSNBC or CNN where you can spout bullshit without expecting questions.

What is Slime Scheme?

Is that something you study at your madrassah?

Are you so stupid that you forget other people can read your posts?

How did millions of asexual slime get together and decide to form, over hundreds of millions of years, into millions of male/female species.
Now stop being an idiot and address the question of find an atheist that does address the issue.

Ah, a name-caller. That adds a great deal to your saliva-slinging tirades.

Ad hominem.
I have posted the same, clearly stated question at least 20 times and you continue to either make believe you don't understand the question or you are not a very intelligent person.

For the 21st and last time...
How did millions of asexual slime get together and decide to form, over hundreds of millions of years, into millions of male/female species.

I’m going to count to three....

I doubt you can.

How did millions of asexual slime get together and decide to form, over hundreds of millions of years, into millions of male/female species.\
I can't answer this question because it didn't happen.

Well, you did write: “For the 21st and last time...”. And here you are, again.

The gods are not going to be happy about this.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Makes no sense actually because without a Sun there could be no night and day so how would day 1 2 3 be defined

This topic is about nonsense. So stop making sense.. or Maimonides will slap you silly with his evil wet Man noodle!

 

[esalla]

Explain grass, shrubs, bushes, trees that don't grow fruit, trees that grow fruit, fruits and vegetables, insects of millions of varieties, birds of millions of varieties, animals of all shapes and sizes, humans.
And how they all survived for hundreds of millions of years evolving into a perfect eco-system.

Those haven't "all survived" so not "perfect" and certainly not humans "for hundreds of millions of years"

Tell that to the evolutionists.

Why don't you offer a competing argument? The complimentary sciences of biology, chemistry, paleontology, etc. are not some grand conspiracy theory as religionists want to believe.

How does letting biological adaptations work over billions of years equate to supernatural "design"? It doesn't. It is an anthropomorphism, and it clearly doesn't apply. Any detailed comparison of the adaptations of nature vs. the claims to supernaturalism, a young earth and claims to various gods leaves religionism as a safe place for fear and ignorance.

The counter argument is that the Creator/Sustainer is the obvious master of all knowledge possessed by mankind and has been more than happy to encourage mankind to discover it and use it to benefit mankind.
Mankind, however, habitually uses it for the powerful few.
Jews do not envision a cruel, jealous, limited God.

An argument in favor of supernaturalism is not a counter argument. It's an unrealized supposition.

Until theology or creation science can come up with a plausible means to investigate the method of supernatural creation, some tentative hypothesis, the beginnings of a framework, then what useful role can they have in advancement of knowledge?

I think arguments are cheapened when people negligently toss around claims of ''creators / sustainers'' and that proof is nothing more than the copy and paste of articles that someone found while scouring the internet. I have no reason to accept the claim that some alleged, supernatural ''master of all knowledge'' is extant in the natural, rational world.

Hollie you have no clue as to how stupid you are. How is life creating itself out of nothing in a pond not supernatural.

Lol

At least you’re consistently pointless. An achievement of some merit, I guess.

Have you found a study on evolution that deals with the Slime Scheme?
Focus.

Remember, this is not MSNBC or CNN where you can spout bullshit without expecting questions.

What is Slime Scheme?

Is that something you study at your madrassah?

Are you so stupid that you forget other people can read your posts?

How did millions of asexual slime get together and decide to form, over hundreds of millions of years, into millions of male/female species.
Now stop being an idiot and address the question of find an atheist that does address the issue.

Ah, a name-caller. That adds a great deal to your saliva-slinging tirades.

Ad hominem.
I have posted the same, clearly stated question at least 20 times and you continue to either make believe you don't understand the question or you are not a very intelligent person.

For the 21st and last time...
How did millions of asexual slime get together and decide to form, over hundreds of millions of years, into millions of male/female species.

I’m going to count to three....

I doubt you can.

How did millions of asexual slime get together and decide to form, over hundreds of millions of years, into millions of male/female species.\
I can't answer this question because it didn't happen.

Well, you did write: “For the 21st and last time...”. And here you are, again.

The gods are not going to be happy about this.

Sorry Doofy that is not evidence that DNA wrote itself

 

[Indeependent]

Explain grass, shrubs, bushes, trees that don't grow fruit, trees that grow fruit, fruits and vegetables, insects of millions of varieties, birds of millions of varieties, animals of all shapes and sizes, humans.
And how they all survived for hundreds of millions of years evolving into a perfect eco-system.

Those haven't "all survived" so not "perfect" and certainly not humans "for hundreds of millions of years"

Tell that to the evolutionists.

Why don't you offer a competing argument? The complimentary sciences of biology, chemistry, paleontology, etc. are not some grand conspiracy theory as religionists want to believe.

How does letting biological adaptations work over billions of years equate to supernatural "design"? It doesn't. It is an anthropomorphism, and it clearly doesn't apply. Any detailed comparison of the adaptations of nature vs. the claims to supernaturalism, a young earth and claims to various gods leaves religionism as a safe place for fear and ignorance.

The counter argument is that the Creator/Sustainer is the obvious master of all knowledge possessed by mankind and has been more than happy to encourage mankind to discover it and use it to benefit mankind.
Mankind, however, habitually uses it for the powerful few.
Jews do not envision a cruel, jealous, limited God.

An argument in favor of supernaturalism is not a counter argument. It's an unrealized supposition.

Until theology or creation science can come up with a plausible means to investigate the method of supernatural creation, some tentative hypothesis, the beginnings of a framework, then what useful role can they have in advancement of knowledge?

I think arguments are cheapened when people negligently toss around claims of ''creators / sustainers'' and that proof is nothing more than the copy and paste of articles that someone found while scouring the internet. I have no reason to accept the claim that some alleged, supernatural ''master of all knowledge'' is extant in the natural, rational world.

Hollie you have no clue as to how stupid you are. How is life creating itself out of nothing in a pond not supernatural.

Lol

At least you’re consistently pointless. An achievement of some merit, I guess.

Have you found a study on evolution that deals with the Slime Scheme?
Focus.

Remember, this is not MSNBC or CNN where you can spout bullshit without expecting questions.

What is Slime Scheme?

Is that something you study at your madrassah?

Are you so stupid that you forget other people can read your posts?

How did millions of asexual slime get together and decide to form, over hundreds of millions of years, into millions of male/female species.
Now stop being an idiot and address the question of find an atheist that does address the issue.

So how did all the different animals come about?

You sided with evolution from slime and I challenged you to find a study that addresses the impossibility of evolution.
If you want to ignore my input, at least don't be lazy and not back up what you believe.

What study? Make sense for crissakes.

It's obvious you are being purposely moronic concerning your "faith" in evolution.
You believe that single celled creatures became millions of male/female insects, animals and humans over hundreds of millions of years.
So you believe that these "unique", "freak, "Accidental" occurrences occurred millions of times.
How many times have you won a 100+ million dollar lottery.
If you continue to prove you are too stupid to under this simple question, I will no longer respond to you.

So you think an invisible being magically poofed everything into being out of nothing?

Not magic...there's science behind creation, unlike there being no science behind evolution.
We disagree on whether or not there is a Supreme Being.

But I notice you're are incapable of finding any evolutionist to explain my question.
And I know you will continue to ignore what you can't answer.

 

[Indeependent]

Makes no sense actually because without a Sun there could be no night and day so how would day 1 2 3 be defined

This topic is about nonsense. So stop making sense.. or Maimonides will slap you silly with his evil wet Man noodle!

Maimonides...Just one of the greatest scientists in the history of mankind...what the heck.

 

[Taz]

Explain grass, shrubs, bushes, trees that don't grow fruit, trees that grow fruit, fruits and vegetables, insects of millions of varieties, birds of millions of varieties, animals of all shapes and sizes, humans.
And how they all survived for hundreds of millions of years evolving into a perfect eco-system.

Those haven't "all survived" so not "perfect" and certainly not humans "for hundreds of millions of years"

Tell that to the evolutionists.

Why don't you offer a competing argument? The complimentary sciences of biology, chemistry, paleontology, etc. are not some grand conspiracy theory as religionists want to believe.

How does letting biological adaptations work over billions of years equate to supernatural "design"? It doesn't. It is an anthropomorphism, and it clearly doesn't apply. Any detailed comparison of the adaptations of nature vs. the claims to supernaturalism, a young earth and claims to various gods leaves religionism as a safe place for fear and ignorance.

The counter argument is that the Creator/Sustainer is the obvious master of all knowledge possessed by mankind and has been more than happy to encourage mankind to discover it and use it to benefit mankind.
Mankind, however, habitually uses it for the powerful few.
Jews do not envision a cruel, jealous, limited God.

An argument in favor of supernaturalism is not a counter argument. It's an unrealized supposition.

Until theology or creation science can come up with a plausible means to investigate the method of supernatural creation, some tentative hypothesis, the beginnings of a framework, then what useful role can they have in advancement of knowledge?

I think arguments are cheapened when people negligently toss around claims of ''creators / sustainers'' and that proof is nothing more than the copy and paste of articles that someone found while scouring the internet. I have no reason to accept the claim that some alleged, supernatural ''master of all knowledge'' is extant in the natural, rational world.

Hollie you have no clue as to how stupid you are. How is life creating itself out of nothing in a pond not supernatural.

Lol

So everything is god. How quaint.

God represents intelligence, which is far more likely to create things than nothing.

Do you disagree?

Intelligence doesn’t make deformed and retarded babies.

Maimonides responds...

"...Whatever is formed of any matter receives the most perfect form possible in that species of matter ; in each individual case the defects are in accordance with the defects of that individual matter...."

MOSES MAIMONIDES, THE GUIDE FOR THE PERPLEXED
Part 3, Chapter XII, Titled "Three Kinds of'Evil : (1) That caused by the Nature "of Man" ; (2) Caused by Man to Man ; (3) Caused by Man to himself" Page 267 - 272

Why should I give a fuck what that dude says?