Atheists are hoping aliens from outer space will contact us...

[RWS]

Because your posts, and your answer of 4.5 billion years, do not coincide.

Really? How do you figure that?

Because you're full of shit dude. I have been telling you this from the beginning. You pick the opposite side to argue in a thread, even if you don't agree with it, and argue it forever for giggles. Maybe to make yourself feel smart or engage some mental muscles. But you don't stop after obvious dismissals. You change your story and the intention of the OP to something that suits your never-ending ego and need for attention. And obviously others here realize that too. And we're also obviously happy to give you what you want. Otherwise it would be boring here...

You're fun to pick on!

 

[Vastator]

[QUOTE="RWS, post: 18099463, member: 45327




This is because you're a punk. You don't have the mental capacity to debate on an intellectual level with people who know what they're talking about so you resort to punkish behavior like this. I guess you think that impresses the ladies?

Irony alert!!!

 

[RWS]

But spirituality is a human trait, as you said. And like you said as well, we did not evolve from apes.

When did the creator/god drop off all of this interdependent life, including humans, on the planet? In Earth years? Consider that dropping off a few beings of each type of life is not going to be good enough to survive. The environment has to be already saturated with that ecosystem, for life forms to be dropped off on the planet and flourish.

I don't know what you mean by "drop off" ...Spiritual Nature is all around us all the time. It doesn't have to "drop off" things.

For the record, I didn't say we didn't evolve from apes. I don't know. However we came to be, something greater than self bestowed upon us the ability to spiritually connect and be spiritually aware, and this is where human civilization began.

From Atheists are hoping aliens from outer space will contact us...

Boss said:
Humans are NOT apes. If we were, we could breed with apes. The biochemistry is NOT the same, if it were, there would be no reason for the RNA World theory your article is about. I already said the DNA structure (sequences) is remarkably similar. We share 53% commonality with DNA of bananas but no serious person thinks we're descendants of a banana.... although, you might believe that!

And then you just said: "For the record, I didn't say we didn't evolve from apes."

Technically, you didn't say it in those exact words, but... that's exactly what your previous post implied.

 

[RWS]

[QUOTE="RWS, post: 18099463, member: 45327




This is because you're a punk. You don't have the mental capacity to debate on an intellectual level with people who know what they're talking about so you resort to punkish behavior like this. I guess you think that impresses the ladies?

Irony alert!!!

lol, he's having another temper tantrum, that's ok

 

[MarkDuffy]

No evidence?

Where did land animals come from? Explain the fossil record.

The fossil record shows species suddenly coming into existence and suddenly disappearing.

LOL, and the pattern of increased complexity with time? Fish to amphibians to reptiles to vertebrates? Related organisms on different continents that can only be explained by plate tetonics & others clearly different for the same reason?

There are very few examples of transitional fossils and no examples of cross-genus speciation.

We have lots of those. You demand dots that are close together but evolution does not work that way. When evolution occurs, it is fast not slow like Daddy Chuck hypothesized.

There should be trillions of these examples.

You clearly do not understand the fossilization process nor evolution. Fossils are RARE.

Here is where people like you will usually say... Well, we haven't looked everywhere! ...Well... your fossils don't prove your case then!

Do you always win arguments you make up in your puny brain?

Look man... I would LOVE to believe that, when God created Life, it was something SO incredible it was able to evolve from a single-cell organism into the billions of assorted life forms we know today.

You mean like the fossil record proves?

If ANYTHING would be capable of creating such a thing, it would indeed be God. But I don't believe that's how we came about having all the life we see today. I believe whatever created life was intelligent and created numerous forms of interdependent life... some of it evolved, some of it went extinct. I don't need to define the Creator and it doesn't need to be the Biblical God.

What you need to do is edit posts so your older nonsense is not in them.

 

[Boss]

LOL, and the pattern of increased complexity with time? Fish to amphibians to reptiles to vertebrates? Related organisms on different continents that can only be explained by plate tetonics & others clearly different for the same reason?

Again, there is evidence for microevolution. I've never denied that. There may even be evidence for macroevolution some day-- god's pretty amazing. As it stands, there isn't any valid evidence to show evolution across genus taxonomy.

We have lots of those. You demand dots that are close together but evolution does not work that way. When evolution occurs, it is fast not slow like Daddy Chuck hypothesized.

Oh, this is absolutely priceless! How many times have we been told that evolution takes millions of years to happen? It sounds pretty "convenient" for it to also happen very quickly. Maybe evolution is like the collapsing wave function, where it normally happens slowly but if it's being observed, happens quickly? *snickers*

For the record, about 80% of what "Daddy Chuck" hypothesised has been completely debunked by modern science. He comes from a time when they still believed in spontaneous generation.

 

[Boss]

From Atheists are hoping aliens from outer space will contact us...

Boss said:
Humans are NOT apes. If we were, we could breed with apes. The biochemistry is NOT the same, if it were, there would be no reason for the RNA World theory your article is about. I already said the DNA structure (sequences) is remarkably similar. We share 53% commonality with DNA of bananas but no serious person thinks we're descendants of a banana.... although, you might believe that!

And then you just said: "For the record, I didn't say we didn't evolve from apes."

Technically, you didn't say it in those exact words, but... that's exactly what your previous post implied.

No, not technically... FACTUALLY.

You are drawing implications that weren't made.

 

[Boss]

Because you're full of shit dude. I have been telling you this from the beginning. You pick the opposite side to argue in a thread, even if you don't agree with it, and argue it forever for giggles. Maybe to make yourself feel smart or engage some mental muscles. But you don't stop after obvious dismissals. You change your story and the intention of the OP to something that suits your never-ending ego and need for attention. And obviously others here realize that too. And we're also obviously happy to give you what you want. Otherwise it would be boring here...

You're fun to pick on!

I'm sorry that I am smarter than you and it makes you feel inferior. I don't argue for giggles, nor do I pick the opposite side to argue in a thread even if I don't agree. SOMETIMES, I will engage in what we call "playing devil's advocate" on a topic, in order to challenge intellectually. I guess that must be what you keep referring to but it happens very rarely and I usually say that right up front.

You're not qualified to dismiss me. That's why you are having to create an imaginary group.. "obviously others here realize that too... and we..." You see, when people do that it's because they are insecure. It's a psychological reaction you are having because you know that I am smarter than you.

What's fun for you is to come here and relieve your anxiety by attacking me personally. Normally, I would just kick your ass and send you home crying to your mother, but on a message board, that's not possible and you know that. Faced with the realization you're no match for me in the arena of thought, you resort to childish little games and name calling. I should respond by just putting you on ignore but you're too dang entertaining sometimes.

 

[MarkDuffy]

LOL, and the pattern of increased complexity with time? Fish to amphibians to reptiles to vertebrates? Related organisms on different continents that can only be explained by plate tetonics & others clearly different for the same reason?

Again, there is evidence for microevolution. I've never denied that. There may even be evidence for macroevolution some day-- god's pretty amazing. As it stands, there isn't any valid evidence to show evolution across genus taxonomy.

You IDers make me laugh. You don't even understand that to surrender to microevolution, you also surrender to macroevolution. It's like you claim it is possible to be a little bit pregnant!

We have lots of those. You demand dots that are close together but evolution does not work that way. When evolution occurs, it is fast not slow like Daddy Chuck hypothesized.

Oh, this is absolutely priceless! How many times have we been told that evolution takes millions of years to happen? It sounds pretty "convenient" for it to also happen very quickly. Maybe evolution is like the collapsing wave function, where it normally happens slowly but if it's being observed, happens quickly? *snickers*

A million years is pretty fast! You expect an organism to show up in the fossil record with 1/4 of an eye. Then 1/2 of an eye. Then 3/4 of an eye. Finally an eye! Those are your missing links. You won't ever see that.

For the record, about 80% of what "Daddy Chuck" hypothesised has been completely debunked by modern science. He comes from a time when they still believed in spontaneous generation.

80% eh? Wow, that's a lot. What should I use to destroy the pedestal we have put him on? A micro or macro-sledgehammer?

Moving onto another question you will do everything but try to explain.

What made you deny the Christian God? It appears you do deny the Bible. I take it you used to be religious but that finally God got too much for even you.

 

[Hawkins]

You IDers make me laugh. You don't even understand that to surrender to microevolution, you also surrender to macroevolution. It's like you claim it is possible to be a little bit pregnant!

It's you who are laughable. Science is about how to bring the theoretical process predictable. Microevolution bears a good chance to be made predictable but not macroevolution.

 

[Boss]

You IDers make me laugh. You don't even understand that to surrender to microevolution, you also surrender to macroevolution. It's like you claim it is possible to be a little bit pregnant!

Well, sorry... One is proved by observation and the other is not. Small changes (micro) happen within a genus taxon, producing new species. This has happened continually. What isn't apparent in the fossil record or through any experiment is cross-genus speciation. It fucking just doesn't happen. Now maybe it DID happen and we've just not found the evidence yet? I'll agree that's possible. But let's be clear, even THAT doesn't disprove intelligent design. It just makes the intelligent designer more clever.

What bugs me to no end is Atheists who cling to a FAITH in something they cannot prove. AND... acting as if they have proven it! You're actually worse than any fundamentalist creationist that ever came down the pike.

 

[MarkDuffy]

You IDers make me laugh. You don't even understand that to surrender to microevolution, you also surrender to macroevolution. It's like you claim it is possible to be a little bit pregnant!

It's you who are laughable. Science is about how to bring the theoretical process predictable. Microevolution bears a good chance to be made predictable but not macroevolution.

Evolution is not predictable.

Evolution is random mutation and other processes acted upon by non-random selection.

 

[Boss]

A million years is pretty fast! You expect an organism to show up in the fossil record with 1/4 of an eye. Then 1/2 of an eye. Then 3/4 of an eye. Finally an eye! Those are your missing links. You won't ever see that.

You see... you have a severe reading comprehension problem. Given your propensity for also not understanding basic English definitions, you might be slightly mentally retarded... have you been checked?

I didn't say "a million" ...I said "millions" as in MORE THAN ONE! Idiot!

And no... a 1/4 eye is not functional. The human eye requires ALL it's parts to work. It is totally useless as an eye without ALL it's parts. Again... MANY years ago, science thought the eye had evolved from a simpler photovoltaic cell but in studying and further understanding how the optic nerve works, we discovered this is not possible.

What I won't see is what you don't have evidence to support. I don't take your word for things, I need to see the evidence and evaluate it for myself. That's how I form my beliefs.

 

[Hawkins]

You IDers make me laugh. You don't even understand that to surrender to microevolution, you also surrender to macroevolution. It's like you claim it is possible to be a little bit pregnant!

It's you who are laughable. Science is about how to bring the theoretical process predictable. Microevolution bears a good chance to be made predictable but not macroevolution.

Evolution is not predictable.

Evolution is random mutation and other processes acted upon by non-random selection.

Any claimed science behave the same. Any scientific claims will have to be backed up by a successful predictable model.

That is, you have to predict what could possibly happen genetically in the case of a micro/macro evolution, say, you should be able to predict under what random selections that a heart or a brain or an eye can possibly be formed through the theoretical process.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

No evidence?

Where did land animals come from? Explain the fossil record.

The fossil record shows species suddenly coming into existence and suddenly disappearing. There are very few examples of transitional fossils and no examples of cross-genus speciation. There should be trillions of these examples. Here is where people like you will usually say... Well, we haven't looked everywhere! ...Well... your fossils don't prove your case then!

Look man... I would LOVE to believe that, when God created Life, it was something SO incredible it was able to evolve from a single-cell organism into the billions of assorted life forms we know today. If ANYTHING would be capable of creating such a thing, it would indeed be God. But I don't believe that's how we came about having all the life we see today. I believe whatever created life was intelligent and created numerous forms of interdependent life... some of it evolved, some of it went extinct. I don't need to define the Creator and it doesn't need to be the Biblical God.

"The fossil record shows species suddenly coming into existence and suddenly disappearing. There are very few examples of transitional fossils "

Nobody who knows anything about this topic at all would ever say something so ridiculous. I think it is now fair to question your motives, after having said something so misguided.


For example, we have extensive fossil record of the evolution of the eyeball. We know how it evolved, gradually, over 100s of millions of years.

I can understand you saying these things out of ignorance, but I am no longer very apt to give someone the "ignorance pass". If you have the time and wherewithall to post on internet forums, you have enough of both to do the most basic of research into this topic to learn about it. I suggest you do so, because you are saying things that we know are false.

 

[Boss]

What made you deny the Christian God? It appears you do deny the Bible. I take it you used to be religious but that finally God too much for even you.

I don't deny the Christian God or the The Bible. I just don't believe in them. I never have.

I find it hard to believe God has humanistic attributes... Love, caring, compassion, anger, jealousy, desire and need. Why would an omnipotent and omniscient being need these attributes? I've never gotten a satisfactory answer to that question, therefore, I don't believe in such a God.

I believe that man has to invent a God he can relate to and this is why God has these attributes. MY God is more like an energy source... like nuclear power or electricity. It's there for our benefit if we choose to utilize it. It doesn't "care" if we do or not. It doesn't get hurt feelings if we don't worship it.

However.... I do believe that our spirits will ultimately be judged based on our earthly deeds. Why do I believe this? Because Spiritual Nature seems to steer us on a particular path and course of goodness and righteousness. I believe there is a purpose for this. Perhaps our mortal existence is a test of our souls to see if we are ready for a higher plane of existence?

 

[Boss]

No evidence?

Where did land animals come from? Explain the fossil record.

The fossil record shows species suddenly coming into existence and suddenly disappearing. There are very few examples of transitional fossils and no examples of cross-genus speciation. There should be trillions of these examples. Here is where people like you will usually say... Well, we haven't looked everywhere! ...Well... your fossils don't prove your case then!

Look man... I would LOVE to believe that, when God created Life, it was something SO incredible it was able to evolve from a single-cell organism into the billions of assorted life forms we know today. If ANYTHING would be capable of creating such a thing, it would indeed be God. But I don't believe that's how we came about having all the life we see today. I believe whatever created life was intelligent and created numerous forms of interdependent life... some of it evolved, some of it went extinct. I don't need to define the Creator and it doesn't need to be the Biblical God.

"The fossil record shows species suddenly coming into existence and suddenly disappearing. There are very few examples of transitional fossils "

Nobody who knows anything about this topic at all would ever say something so ridiculous. I think it is now fair to question your motives, after having said something so misguided.

Not seeing any evidence here. I'm just seeing you refute what I said based on nothing but your opinion.

 

[MarkDuffy]

You IDers make me laugh. You don't even understand that to surrender to microevolution, you also surrender to macroevolution. It's like you claim it is possible to be a little bit pregnant!

Well, sorry... One is proved by observation and the other is not. Small changes (micro) happen within a genus taxon, producing new species. This has happened continually. What isn't apparent in the fossil record or through any experiment is cross-genus speciation. It fucking just doesn't happen. Now maybe it DID happen and we've just not found the evidence yet? I'll agree that's possible. But let's be clear, even THAT doesn't disprove intelligent design. It just makes the intelligent designer more clever.

Not more clever, rather very busy. He needs to keep on begetting. I wonder why that simple fact is not in the Bible. He claimed he was done on Day 6.

What bugs me to no end is Atheists who cling to a FAITH in something they cannot prove. AND... acting as if they have proven it! You're actually worse than any fundamentalist creationist that ever came down the pike.

We must being doing well if we got you all to surrender to microevolution!

This is the way it's been done for billions of years. Small moves, Ellie. Small moves.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You IDers make me laugh. You don't even understand that to surrender to microevolution, you also surrender to macroevolution. It's like you claim it is possible to be a little bit pregnant!

It's you who are laughable. Science is about how to bring the theoretical process predictable. Microevolution bears a good chance to be made predictable but not macroevolution.

Evolution is not predictable.

Evolution is random mutation and other processes acted upon by non-random selection.

Any claimed science behave the same. Any scientific claims will have to be backed up by a successful predictable model.

That is, you have to predict what could possibly happen genetically in the case of a micro/macro evolution, say, you should be able to predict under what random selections that a heart or a brain or an eye can possibly be formed through the theoretical process.

"That is, you have to predict what could possibly happen genetically in the case of a micro/macro evolution, say, you should be able to predict under what random selections that a heart or a brain or an eye can possibly be formed through the theoretical process."

I'm not sure i understand what this means, but I can tell you that we have confirmed , via empirical observations, every single mechanism of evolution, including natural selection, mutation, and genetic drift. Also, while mutations may be random, selection most certainly is not.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

No evidence?

Where did land animals come from? Explain the fossil record.

The fossil record shows species suddenly coming into existence and suddenly disappearing. There are very few examples of transitional fossils and no examples of cross-genus speciation. There should be trillions of these examples. Here is where people like you will usually say... Well, we haven't looked everywhere! ...Well... your fossils don't prove your case then!

Look man... I would LOVE to believe that, when God created Life, it was something SO incredible it was able to evolve from a single-cell organism into the billions of assorted life forms we know today. If ANYTHING would be capable of creating such a thing, it would indeed be God. But I don't believe that's how we came about having all the life we see today. I believe whatever created life was intelligent and created numerous forms of interdependent life... some of it evolved, some of it went extinct. I don't need to define the Creator and it doesn't need to be the Biblical God.

"The fossil record shows species suddenly coming into existence and suddenly disappearing. There are very few examples of transitional fossils "

Nobody who knows anything about this topic at all would ever say something so ridiculous. I think it is now fair to question your motives, after having said something so misguided.

Not seeing any evidence here. I'm just seeing you refute what I said based on nothing but your opinion.

"Not seeing any evidence here."


Of what... transitional fossils? Then you are blind. I'm not going to retread old ground. I have not a doubt in my mind that you have been shown why you are wrong before. Unless have this all wrong, and you are a very young person in a remote area of the world who is new to this topic. In which case, I would simply point you to some resources to get you started o this topic.