Creationists

[Youwerecreated]

Let me show you the nonsense and circular reasoning used by evolutionist.

Chimps,cats,dogs,cows,mice,flies,chickens. They all share DNA similarity with humans does that mean we are all related ? What's being ignored is the huge difference in DNA information. This points to a designer using the same or similar substances to create with a huge difference in DNA transcription. Yes folks the DNA information.

Evolution say's because of similarity this shows we are all related through a natural process. That is if you can read between the lines. It is pure nonsense and circular reasoning at best that supports these opinions.

So... what you're suggesting is that the gawds spent time "designing" every terrestrial animal and human which has ever walked or crawled on the planet but for some reason "designed" DNA as a comment component of life just to fool us?

Your self-inflicted ignorance Is your own.

Each family was designed yes. Recombination of genes that was already present in the genome is how we got the diversity in each family group.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Fitness is very easily defined as reproductive success. Differential reproductive success is ultimately what drives evolution.

Whats more, the phylogenetic study of rRNA sequences has revolutionized evolutionary biology such that a "tree of life" can be resolved from comparative studies of ribosomal sequences that is largely unbiased by HGT artifacts. Your supposition that modern genetics has convoluted the 'tree of life' could not be further from the truth. To help clarify your understanding of how modern phylogenetic analysis has only empowered evolutionary biology I have linked a review from the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that was published in 2011.

Phylogeny and beyond: Scientific, historical, and conceptual significance of the first tree of life

While the detractors of the TOE will allude to flaws, gaps and evidence that contradicts the TOE they have failed to produce any credible scientific discourse that supports their position.

I challenge the opponents of the TOE to link one publication from the Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences that explicitly refutes the modern synthesis of the TOE. Its time to crap or get off the pot folks.

What you are saying is built on circular reasoning,just because we have the same genetic code and DNA similarity. DNA similarity proves nothing.

First of all, my post references RNA not DNA.... there is a difference. Additionally, your OPINION that the comparative phylogenetics based on small subunit ribosomal sequences proves nothing is well outside of the scientific mainstream- see the PNAS I provided in my previous post. I'm not exactly sure how you arrived at the conclusion that comaparative phylogentics is circular reasoning but your conclusion that the conservation of the genetic code and translation mechanisms among all known life is not due to common descent but is instead due to a 'designer' has no basis in science.

Ultimately the quantitative phylogenetic analysis of SSU rRNA is in agreement with numerous other lines of evidence i.e. the fossil record that support the modern synthesis of the TOE.

Again, I posit my challenge to those who oppose the TOE:

I challenge the opponents of the TOE to link one publication from the Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences that explicitly refutes the modern synthesis of the TOE

I challenge you to provide the same thing you are asking of us .Provide the viable explanation to how nonliving matter produced life knowing that biogenesis is a fact.

 

[Hollie]

Let me show you the nonsense and circular reasoning used by evolutionist.

Chimps,cats,dogs,cows,mice,flies,chickens. They all share DNA similarity with humans does that mean we are all related ? What's being ignored is the huge difference in DNA information. This points to a designer using the same or similar substances to create with a huge difference in DNA transcription. Yes folks the DNA information.

Evolution say's because of similarity this shows we are all related through a natural process. That is if you can read between the lines. It is pure nonsense and circular reasoning at best that supports these opinions.

So... what you're suggesting is that the gawds spent time "designing" every terrestrial animal and human which has ever walked or crawled on the planet but for some reason "designed" DNA as a comment component of life just to fool us?

Your self-inflicted ignorance Is your own.

Each family was designed yes. Recombination of genes that was already present in the genome is how we got the diversity in each family group.

So to clarify, the gawds made two (male and female) of every creature? If that is the case, why produce a "design" with inherent flaws? Why "design" a gene pool the will recombine with flaws thus producing errors.

How do you account for worms, as one example, which can reproduce asexaully? Were the gawds just having a bit of fun with that?

How do you account for dinosaurs being "designed" hundreds of millions of years ago and the literal account of a 6,000 year old earth?

Have the gawds played a cruel joke on you?

 

[Hollie]

What you are saying is built on circular reasoning,just because we have the same genetic code and DNA similarity. DNA similarity proves nothing.

First of all, my post references RNA not DNA.... there is a difference. Additionally, your OPINION that the comparative phylogenetics based on small subunit ribosomal sequences proves nothing is well outside of the scientific mainstream- see the PNAS I provided in my previous post. I'm not exactly sure how you arrived at the conclusion that comaparative phylogentics is circular reasoning but your conclusion that the conservation of the genetic code and translation mechanisms among all known life is not due to common descent but is instead due to a 'designer' has no basis in science.

Ultimately the quantitative phylogenetic analysis of SSU rRNA is in agreement with numerous other lines of evidence i.e. the fossil record that support the modern synthesis of the TOE.

Again, I posit my challenge to those who oppose the TOE:

I challenge the opponents of the TOE to link one publication from the Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences that explicitly refutes the modern synthesis of the TOE

Dna is converted to Rna so the information does not get tainted,so what is your point ? Naturally you are looking for such an article because you and everyone who knows anything about science,know that the heads of the curriculum in the field of science will not allow anything supporting design.That's a fact. Secularists are in control and have been for a while.

They don't allow anything in that refutes the lie being taught. I may have jumped the gun about where I thought you were headed.

It's definitely a conspiracy formed and maintained by multiple conspirators to keep ancient fears and superstitions out of the public school classroom.

Oh you poor, poor dispossessed fundie.

I would tend to agree that the lack of teaching about the means and methods for burning people at the stake for practicing witchcraft has irreperablly damaged this nations impressionable yutes.

But why on earth would we teach Christian creationism as opposed to older, more established tales of creation which are actually true as opposed to the false doctrines of the Christian fundies.

 

[Youwerecreated]

First of all, my post references RNA not DNA.... there is a difference. Additionally, your OPINION that the comparative phylogenetics based on small subunit ribosomal sequences proves nothing is well outside of the scientific mainstream- see the PNAS I provided in my previous post. I'm not exactly sure how you arrived at the conclusion that comaparative phylogentics is circular reasoning but your conclusion that the conservation of the genetic code and translation mechanisms among all known life is not due to common descent but is instead due to a 'designer' has no basis in science.

Ultimately the quantitative phylogenetic analysis of SSU rRNA is in agreement with numerous other lines of evidence i.e. the fossil record that support the modern synthesis of the TOE.

Again, I posit my challenge to those who oppose the TOE:

I challenge the opponents of the TOE to link one publication from the Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences that explicitly refutes the modern synthesis of the TOE

Dna is converted to Rna so the information does not get tainted,so what is your point ? Naturally you are looking for such an article because you and everyone who knows anything about science,know that the heads of the curriculum in the field of science will not allow anything supporting design.That's a fact. Secularists are in control and have been for a while.

They don't allow anything in that refutes the lie being taught. I may have jumped the gun about where I thought you were headed.

It's definitely a conspiracy formed and maintained by multiple conspirators to keep ancient fears and superstitions out of the public school classroom.

Oh you poor, poor dispossessed fundie.

I would tend to agree that the lack of teaching about the means and methods for burning people at the stake for practicing witchcraft has irreperablly damaged this nations impressionable yutes.

But why on earth would we teach Christian creationism as opposed to older, more established tales of creation which are actually true as opposed to the false doctrines of the Christian fundies.

You are a nutcase,we are through. Time to ignore your hateful uneducated rhetoric.

 

[daws101]

wow, aren't you the clueless one. The relevance of it is hollie goes around calling everyone liars and saying they twist the truth, yet she has represented herself on this forum as a woman and on another one as a man. Bascially, by her continual lying, he/she has robbed herself of all credibility. When you come to his/her defense, you just wind up looking stupid when you don't have all the facts.

that's funny because it's a spot on discription of you!

Yeah, because I've been posing as Ultimeana Reality on another forum.

would that be christians cross dressers .com?

 

[daws101]

you did notice it's mostly me I and me again.
maybe UR is a teenage girl, sure posts like one!

Her fascination with me leads me to believe that she has mistaken this site for her "alternate lifestyle" dating service.

I actually found a video of Rugged Hollie Touch online. I think this is going to explain a lot. His/Her realy name is Pat...

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwT1kp0C3Ss[/URL]

I'm sure you'd like it to be that way..
you do realize that you're contradicting yourself..

 

[daws101]

What we have proof of is since the fall of adam lifespans of humans greatly decreased. Through research and medicine we increased lifespans but not near what it once was.

bullshit! since you have no proof that Adam lived any conclusion drawn from that false premise by defintion is false.
so my answer stands :there is no credible proof that genetic disorders are on the rise

Researchers have identified more than 4,000 diseases that are caused by genetic variants.



The Basics on Genes and Genetic Disorders




There are over 6,000 genetic disorders that can be passed down through the generations, many of which are fatal or severely debilitating. Since 1997, the GDF has worked with Mount Sinai to help provide funding for research to improve early detection and treatment options for many of these disorders.

Genetic Disease Foundation: Hope Through Knowledge

It looks like the number of genetic disorders are on the rise.

again you dodge the statement :you have no proof that Adam lived any conclusion drawn from that false premise by defintion is false.
so my answer stands :there is no credible proof that genetic disorders are on the rise.
maybe I should have dumbed it down for you
since Adam never existed the so called rise in gentic disorder has to have another cause.

I followed your links neither one says anything about a rise in genetic diorders.
neither did the 10 more that I checked..
as always you're talking out your ass!

 

[daws101]

What do you think scientific explanations are Daws ?

a report based on evidence objective testing and observation.
THEY ARE NOT based on belief in the supernatural as a causation.

Here i will help you out since you can't be honest,they are opinions.

based on evidence objective testing and observation.
that's the scientific method you can't get any more honest then that.
you don't seem to know the difference between your based on belief in the supernatural as a causation opinion.
from a real scientific opinion based on evidence objective testing and observation.
you ignorant fuck!

 

[daws101]

Researchers have identified more than 4,000 diseases that are caused by genetic variants.



The Basics on Genes and Genetic Disorders


There are over 6,000 genetic disorders that can be passed down through the generations, many of which are fatal or severely debilitating. Since 1997, the GDF has worked with Mount Sinai to help provide funding for research to improve early detection and treatment options for many of these disorders.

Genetic Disease Foundation: Hope Through Knowledge

It looks like the number of genetic disorders are on the rise.

Praise Jay-zus.

You must find it galling that the science you hate is exposing your gawds as incompetent "designers".

As the alleged author of all, your gawds are thus responsible for all.

How is it possible that your incompetent designer gawds got so much so wrong?

Actually, as science becomes more exacting, the diagnosis of disease becomes more exacting. The diagnosis of genetic disease is becoming more of a science.

It is my opinions mutations were used by God to put an end to eternal life after adam and eve sinned.

These mutations have been passed on for 6,000 years.

lolololol!
your opinion is a huge steaming pile of of unprovable shit.

you have no proof of god
" adam"
" eve "
" eternal life"
" god starting or ending anything"
" passing of mutations for 6,000 years"
funny how your irrefutable facts become opinions when you are getting your ass handed to you.

 

[daws101]

Here i will help you out since you can't be honest,they are opinions.

So.... the occurrance of genetic disease is not fact but just opinion?

Your goofy fundie agenda manages to dismantle your own arguments.

Can I get a hallelujah brothas' and sistas'.

Is Ken Ham out of jail yet?

No,how do you think genetic problems some are being headed off in the womb. Some there is nothing we can do about. Why do you think moms and dads are having gene screening before and during pregnancy ? Genetic disorders are a fact.

Life coming from nonliving matter is an opiion. Organisms evolving into destinctly new organisms ,not of the same family, is built on opinions. So what it comes down to does the evidence better support a designer or naturalism?

why do you keep going on about evidence you do not have!

 

[daws101]

, hope you got the letter, and...
I pray you can make it better down here.
I don't mean a big reduction in the price of beer
But all the people that you made in your image, see
Them starving on their feet 'cause they don't get
Enough to eat from God, I can't believe in you

Dear God, sorry to disturb you, but... I feel that I should be heard
Loud and clear. We all need a big reduction in amount of tears
And all the people that you made in your image, see them fighting
In the street 'cause they can't make opinions meet about God,
I can't believe in you

Did you make disease, and the diamond blue? Did you make
Mankind after we made you? And the devil too!

, don't know if you noticed, but... your name is on
A lot of quotes in this book, and us crazy humans wrote it, you
Should take a look, and all the people that you made in your
Image still believing that junk is true. Well I know it ain't, and
So do you, dear God, I can't believe in I don't believe in

I won't believe in heaven and hell. No saints, no sinners, no
Devil as well. No pearly gates, no thorny crown. You're always
Letting us humans down. The wars you bring, the babes you
Drown. Those lost at sea and never found, and it's the same the
Whole world 'round. The hurt I see helps to compound that
Father, Son and Holy Ghost is just somebody's unholy hoax,
And if you're up there you'd perceive that my heart's here upon
My sleeve. If there's one thing I don't believe in

It's you....

 

[Hollie]

Dna is converted to Rna so the information does not get tainted,so what is your point ? Naturally you are looking for such an article because you and everyone who knows anything about science,know that the heads of the curriculum in the field of science will not allow anything supporting design.That's a fact. Secularists are in control and have been for a while.

They don't allow anything in that refutes the lie being taught. I may have jumped the gun about where I thought you were headed.

It's definitely a conspiracy formed and maintained by multiple conspirators to keep ancient fears and superstitions out of the public school classroom.

Oh you poor, poor dispossessed fundie.

I would tend to agree that the lack of teaching about the means and methods for burning people at the stake for practicing witchcraft has irreperablly damaged this nations impressionable yutes.

But why on earth would we teach Christian creationism as opposed to older, more established tales of creation which are actually true as opposed to the false doctrines of the Christian fundies.

You are a nutcase,we are through. Time to ignore your hateful uneducated rhetoric.

I wasn’t surprised you went slithering for the exits.
It’s just a fact that Christian creationism is a more recent creationist tale of gawds, supernatural / metaphysical beings who fundies demand we bend and scrape to.

While the sacred cows of Christianity are being heaped upon the altar of religious indoctrination, there are many more religions that would require representation if we're not to be accused of being biased or capricious toward lesser followed – but just as likely – religions and gods. There is absolutely nothing that better defines the Abrahamic god vs. the various polytheistic gods of Hinduism, for example. Unless someone can speak with authority regarding Vishnu as one of the true gods extant as opposed to Zeus or Isis, we shouldn't allow head count as the only basis for determining which religions are represented within a public school syllabus. Why not study the worship of Osiris?, or Isis, worshipped for 5,000 years. Using timeline as the criteria for a "real" religion, the worship of Isis far exceeds the more recent constructs and configurations of god and gods.

What fundie christian creationists need to account for is that as soon as they begin dismissing the claims of others' gods, they have inadvertently condemned the arguments for their own gods. The sectarian fundie Christian (supernatural), contention is dependent on claims of a particular god(s). As soon as one begins to approach any discussion of a specific sectarian version of gawd(s), you must hold that gawd(s) to the same standards of proof that all gawds must meet. To dismiss the Greek gods as an absurd claim while holding different gods to be extant supplies the Greek god did it'ists with all the necessary ammunition to shoot down in flames your version as absurd.

If you have evidence for the existence of a creator Gawd, then provide it. But please, stop pretending that there is logical parity between believing something for which there is no evidence and not believing it.

 

[Hollie]

It is my opinions mutations were used by God to put an end to eternal life after adam and eve sinned.

These mutations have been passed on for 6,000 years.

I see. So humanity is a lot like a 1970's vintage Chevy vega - cheaply built with planned obsolescence.

Otherwise, your gawds have done to humanity what they have done throughout their tenure. Their hate for humanity has caused them to "design" an environment where people will die in horrific ways with horrific pain and suffering.

To worship such an entity is a prescription for a maladjusted personality.

 

[cooky]

What you are saying is built on circular reasoning,just because we have the same genetic code and DNA similarity. DNA similarity proves nothing.

First of all, my post references RNA not DNA.... there is a difference. Additionally, your OPINION that the comparative phylogenetics based on small subunit ribosomal sequences proves nothing is well outside of the scientific mainstream- see the PNAS I provided in my previous post. I'm not exactly sure how you arrived at the conclusion that comaparative phylogentics is circular reasoning but your conclusion that the conservation of the genetic code and translation mechanisms among all known life is not due to common descent but is instead due to a 'designer' has no basis in science.

Ultimately the quantitative phylogenetic analysis of SSU rRNA is in agreement with numerous other lines of evidence i.e. the fossil record that support the modern synthesis of the TOE.

Again, I posit my challenge to those who oppose the TOE:

I challenge the opponents of the TOE to link one publication from the Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences that explicitly refutes the modern synthesis of the TOE

I challenge you to provide the same thing you are asking of us .Provide the viable explanation to how nonliving matter produced life knowing that biogenesis is a fact.

The manner in which life first came to inhabit the earth is not a phenomena described by the modern synthesis of the TOE. The scietific community has been quite candid and open about how at present an insufficiency of data precludes a compelling explanation for the origins of life on earth.

The notion that an intrinsic secular bias among the leaders of thought in modern science is the primary reason tenets of creationism and design have been excluded and/or rebuffed by the mainstream scientific community is a total farse. The real reason that the tenets of creation and ID 'science' ( I use that term loosely in conjunction with ID and creationism) have failed to find mainstream acceptance is because the explanations espoused by ID and creationism lack empirical support and/or were developed outside of accepted scientific norms.

 

[Youwerecreated]

bullshit! since you have no proof that Adam lived any conclusion drawn from that false premise by defintion is false.
so my answer stands :there is no credible proof that genetic disorders are on the rise

Researchers have identified more than 4,000 diseases that are caused by genetic variants.



The Basics on Genes and Genetic Disorders




There are over 6,000 genetic disorders that can be passed down through the generations, many of which are fatal or severely debilitating. Since 1997, the GDF has worked with Mount Sinai to help provide funding for research to improve early detection and treatment options for many of these disorders.

Genetic Disease Foundation: Hope Through Knowledge

It looks like the number of genetic disorders are on the rise.

again you dodge the statement :you have no proof that Adam lived any conclusion drawn from that false premise by defintion is false.
so my answer stands :there is no credible proof that genetic disorders are on the rise.
maybe I should have dumbed it down for you
since Adam never existed the so called rise in gentic disorder has to have another cause.

I followed your links neither one says anything about a rise in genetic diorders.
neither did the 10 more that I checked..
as always you're talking out your ass!

Let me dumb it down for you.

A genetic disorder is a disease caused in whole or in part by a change in the DNA sequence away from the normal sequence. Genetic disorders can be caused by a mutation in one gene (monogenic disorder), by mutations in multiple genes (multifactorial inheritance disorder), by a combination of gene mutations and environmental factors, or by damage to chromosomes (changes in the number or structure of entire chromosomes, the structures that carry genes).

As we unlock the secrets of the human genome (the complete set of human genes), we are learning that nearly all diseases have a genetic component. Some diseases are caused by mutations that are inherited from the parents and are present in an individual at birth, like sickle cell disease. Other diseases are caused by acquired mutations in a gene or group of genes that occur during a person's life. Such mutations are not inherited from a parent, but occur either randomly or due to some environmental exposure (such as cigarette smoke). These include many cancers, as well as some forms of neurofibromatosis.

FAQ About Genetic Disorders


You do know who Mendel is and what he is famous for right ? if not google him.


Their revolutionary concepts and findings point to the need for new principles and experimental approaches to understanding polygenic diseases. Mendel and his genetic gospel still hold true. It is now a matter of adapting these principles to explain phenomena of the modern world. The work of Alper and his group directs us to focus on the new approaches for intervention and prevention being developed that are genetically based, rather than diverting energy and resources to speculative environmental or other external causes that are, in some cases contributory, but not determining.

News - Polygenic Diseases on the Rise - News & Events | Immune Disease Institute

You once again are bloviating.

 

[Youwerecreated]

So.... the occurrance of genetic disease is not fact but just opinion?

Your goofy fundie agenda manages to dismantle your own arguments.

Can I get a hallelujah brothas' and sistas'.

Is Ken Ham out of jail yet?

No,how do you think genetic problems some are being headed off in the womb. Some there is nothing we can do about. Why do you think moms and dads are having gene screening before and during pregnancy ? Genetic disorders are a fact.

Life coming from nonliving matter is an opiion. Organisms evolving into destinctly new organisms ,not of the same family, is built on opinions. So what it comes down to does the evidence better support a designer or naturalism?

why do you keep going on about evidence you do not have!

So you have an answer for my questions or are you once again talking from ignorance ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

First of all, my post references RNA not DNA.... there is a difference. Additionally, your OPINION that the comparative phylogenetics based on small subunit ribosomal sequences proves nothing is well outside of the scientific mainstream- see the PNAS I provided in my previous post. I'm not exactly sure how you arrived at the conclusion that comaparative phylogentics is circular reasoning but your conclusion that the conservation of the genetic code and translation mechanisms among all known life is not due to common descent but is instead due to a 'designer' has no basis in science.

Ultimately the quantitative phylogenetic analysis of SSU rRNA is in agreement with numerous other lines of evidence i.e. the fossil record that support the modern synthesis of the TOE.

Again, I posit my challenge to those who oppose the TOE:

I challenge the opponents of the TOE to link one publication from the Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences that explicitly refutes the modern synthesis of the TOE

I challenge you to provide the same thing you are asking of us .Provide the viable explanation to how nonliving matter produced life knowing that biogenesis is a fact.

The manner in which life first came to inhabit the earth is not a phenomena described by the modern synthesis of the TOE. The scietific community has been quite candid and open about how at present an insufficiency of data precludes a compelling explanation for the origins of life on earth.

The notion that an intrinsic secular bias among the leaders of thought in modern science is the primary reason tenets of creationism and design have been excluded and/or rebuffed by the mainstream scientific community is a total farse. The real reason that the tenets of creation and ID 'science' ( I use that term loosely in conjunction with ID and creationism) have failed to find mainstream acceptance is because the explanations espoused by ID and creationism lack empirical support and/or were developed outside of accepted scientific norms.

I will hold you to the same standards you do creationists.

The real problem is you have no clue but are willing to ignore evidence for design.

 

[cooky]

I challenge you to provide the same thing you are asking of us .Provide the viable explanation to how nonliving matter produced life knowing that biogenesis is a fact.

The manner in which life first came to inhabit the earth is not a phenomena described by the modern synthesis of the TOE. The scietific community has been quite candid and open about how at present an insufficiency of data precludes a compelling explanation for the origins of life on earth.

The notion that an intrinsic secular bias among the leaders of thought in modern science is the primary reason tenets of creationism and design have been excluded and/or rebuffed by the mainstream scientific community is a total farse. The real reason that the tenets of creation and ID 'science' ( I use that term loosely in conjunction with ID and creationism) have failed to find mainstream acceptance is because the explanations espoused by ID and creationism lack empirical support and/or were developed outside of accepted scientific norms.

I will hold you to the same standards you do creationists.

The real problem is you have no clue but are willing to ignore evidence for design.

I provided a scientific source on the phylogenetics.

Please elaborate how i have "no clue" and how I am ignoring evidence for design.

 

[UltimateReality]

a report based on evidence objective testing and observation.
THEY ARE NOT based on belief in the supernatural as a causation.

Here i will help you out since you can't be honest,they are opinions.

So.... the occurrance of genetic disease is not fact but just opinion?

Your goofy fundie agenda manages to dismantle your own arguments.

Can I get a hallelujah brothas' and sistas'.

Is Ken Ham out of jail yet?

Why do you hate Christians so much? Why do you insist on mocking Christians with lies and stereotypes?

How would you like it if I started making fun of your white, long-sleeve button down oxford shirt? Or your short, spikey hair cut?