Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It's convenient to claim that "he who ...". It's more of that convenient "because I say so" admonition that you believe relieves you of any requirement to support your claims to supermagical gods.Explain how a designer got started without a designer.
The building blocks for life exist throughout the cosmos. We can test for that and confirm their existence.
How do we test for a suparnatural designer which itself requires a supernatural designer.
He who created all is eternal.
But thanks for admitting your side want to claim my side are fundies and nuts even though your side has no clue how it could of happened.
We see complexity created by man but there can't be someone more intelligent then man beyond our comprehension.
I do find it interesting that you identify your gods as "he". You attribute thoroughly human attributes to a thoroughly human invention. That's not surprising since as a human construct, humans will add their familial and social conventions to their gods. That has been the case with all the gods which have "existed" before your gods.
And yes, for those who believe the nonsense further by Ken Ham and his abomination called the " creation museum" , we are forced to come to conclusions about those who believe in a literal 6,000 year old earth and humans frolicking with dinosaurs.
mr ignorance speaks ....KILTS NOT SKIRTS!WHO SAID ANYTHING ABOUT THE IRISH..I'm not Irish, No offense to the Irish.
if I had to guess, you're a cross dresser ,when you wifes' out handing out the watch tower or trespassing for god!
besides didn't you say that you were busy?
Some Irish men wear skirts.
asked and answeredyes lies , the only so called viable explanation that i need is that your highly specious speculation is based on a false premise: God did it!lies ,how do you know if you can't respond with viable explanations to our questions nor refute our views ?
How many times does that have to be repeated ?
Your questions are not questions as you've chosen an answer based not on evidence but on faith.
explain how life got started without a designer ? Explain complexity ?
lok them up yourself.another world famous mis interpretation by ywcno way they had what they call legs that would support the weight of a whale.
Show me a picture that proves they had legs and we will cretique it together.
again your self inflicted ignorance shines
ancient whales were small compared to what they evolved into, so you comment is intentionally stupid .
Hey dick head: Using trees to make predictions about fossils: The whale's ankle
scientists used to think that whales' ancestors were now-extinct carnivores called mesonychids. However, based on recent findings, scientists have hypothesized that whales are actually more closely related to hoofed mammals like hippos and ruminants such as cows and giraffes.
This hypothesized phylogeny leads us to predict that ancient whales should share some characters with their close relatives. The close relatives of whales have a type of ankle called a double pulley ankle, so we would expect that ancestral whales would also have a double pulley ankle.
And in fact, recent fossil discoveries have borne out that prediction. Scientists found ancient whales with hind legs and pelvises: These whales had the same kind of double pulley ankle bone that modern pronghorns, camels, cows and hippos have.
Compare the ankle bones of the two ancient whales on the left and right (the specimen on the right is missing some bones) and those of a modern pronghorn (center). Notice the double pulley structure boxed on all three.
ankle bones photo courtesy of philip d. Gingerich, university of michigan, ann arbor
show me the complete skeleton and name the species.
He? you can't prove that "he" exists lol!Explain how life got started without a designer ? Explain complexity ?
Explain how a designer got started without a designer.
The building blocks for life exist throughout the cosmos. We can test for that and confirm their existence.
How do we test for a suparnatural designer which itself requires a supernatural designer.
He who created all is eternal.
But thanks for admitting your side want to claim my side are fundies and nuts even though your side has no clue how it could of happened.
We see complexity created by man but there can't be someone more intelligent then man beyond our comprehension.
No way they had what they call legs that would support the weight of a whale.
Show me a picture that proves they had legs and we will cretique it together.
Just do a google search to find what I'm talking about. You'll see that whales looked a lot different from what they do today and we owe that to evolving.
You are aware that many animals were similar to others but went extinct ? Then a lot of times they are not complete fossils and they were just someones opinion of what they could have looked like but no evidence to prove they look the way they are rendered.
I believe that they show a slow transition from what they looked like millions of years ago.
False. The are many cases (the progression of humans, for example), showing a clear progression and transition from early ancestor to current humans.I believe that they show a slow transition from what they looked like millions of years ago.
That is precisely what the fossil record doesn't show, a slow transition. More like punctuated equilibrium [The new term to ignore the evidence Darwin was smoking crack].
It's convenient to claim that "he who ...". It's more of that convenient "because I say so" admonition that you believe relieves you of any requirement to support your claims to supermagical gods.He who created all is eternal.
But thanks for admitting your side want to claim my side are fundies and nuts even though your side has no clue how it could of happened.
We see complexity created by man but there can't be someone more intelligent then man beyond our comprehension.
I do find it interesting that you identify your gods as "he". You attribute thoroughly human attributes to a thoroughly human invention. That's not surprising since as a human construct, humans will add their familial and social conventions to their gods. That has been the case with all the gods which have "existed" before your gods.
And yes, for those who believe the nonsense further by Ken Ham and his abomination called the " creation museum" , we are forced to come to conclusions about those who believe in a literal 6,000 year old earth and humans frolicking with dinosaurs.
I trust in the bible to me the evidence we have only supports Gods word. It gives you the proper chronology of the universe and life. The bible answered many questions before modern day science.
mr ignorance speaks ....KILTS NOT SKIRTS!WHO SAID ANYTHING ABOUT THE IRISH..
if I had to guess, you're a cross dresser ,when you wifes' out handing out the watch tower or trespassing for god!
besides didn't you say that you were busy?
Some Irish men wear skirts.
asked and answeredyes lies , the only so called viable explanation that i need is that your highly specious speculation is based on a false premise: God did it!
How many times does that have to be repeated ?
Your questions are not questions as you've chosen an answer based not on evidence but on faith.
explain how life got started without a designer ? Explain complexity ?
You would be very famous.lok them up yourself.another world famous mis interpretation by ywc
again your self inflicted ignorance shines
ancient whales were small compared to what they evolved into, so you comment is intentionally stupid .
Hey dick head: Using trees to make predictions about fossils: The whale's ankle
scientists used to think that whales' ancestors were now-extinct carnivores called mesonychids. However, based on recent findings, scientists have hypothesized that whales are actually more closely related to hoofed mammals like hippos and ruminants such as cows and giraffes.
This hypothesized phylogeny leads us to predict that ancient whales should share some characters with their close relatives. The close relatives of whales have a type of ankle called a double pulley ankle, so we would expect that ancestral whales would also have a double pulley ankle.
And in fact, recent fossil discoveries have borne out that prediction. Scientists found ancient whales with hind legs and pelvises: These whales had the same kind of double pulley ankle bone that modern pronghorns, camels, cows and hippos have.
Compare the ankle bones of the two ancient whales on the left and right (the specimen on the right is missing some bones) and those of a modern pronghorn (center). Notice the double pulley structure boxed on all three.
ankle bones photo courtesy of philip d. Gingerich, university of michigan, ann arbor
show me the complete skeleton and name the species.
He? you can't prove that "he" exists lol!Explain how a designer got started without a designer.
The building blocks for life exist throughout the cosmos. We can test for that and confirm their existence.
How do we test for a suparnatural designer which itself requires a supernatural designer.
He who created all is eternal.
But thanks for admitting your side want to claim my side are fundies and nuts even though your side has no clue how it could of happened.
We see complexity created by man but there can't be someone more intelligent then man beyond our comprehension.
again hollie's not admitting to anything please point where in that post he says anything about fundies and nuts.
"your side has no clue how it could of happened."ywc THIS MAY COME AS A BIG FUCKING SHOCK BUT "YOUR SIDE"has no clue either!
the difference is "our side" accepts that for now we may have "no clue" (a gap in discovered evidence )but that gap gets smaller every second.
whereas "YOUR SIDE" WILL NOT AND CANNOT ADMIT TO ANY SUCH GAP OR YOUR HOUSE OF CARDS FALLS...
BTW YOU ARE FUNDIES AND NUTS ,THE BEST PROOF OF THAT IS THE FACT THAT OTHER CHRISTIANS LAUGH AT YOU.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BS5vid4GkEY]Why do people laugh at creationists? (part 1)- YouTube[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=istxUVBZD2s]Why do people laugh at creationists? (part 2). - YouTube[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdEZTdOlGss]Why do people laugh at creationists? (part 3).- YouTube[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjFeVwuJB7I]Why do people laugh at creationists? (part 4). - YouTube[/ame]
That is certainly fine. If you choose to believe that the earth is 6,000 years old that of course is your delusion. If you choose to live in trembling fear of an angry desert deity, knock yourself out. Just be aware that such beliefs limit your ability to function in the rational world.He? you can't prove that "he" exists lol!He who created all is eternal.
But thanks for admitting your side want to claim my side are fundies and nuts even though your side has no clue how it could of happened.
We see complexity created by man but there can't be someone more intelligent then man beyond our comprehension.
again hollie's not admitting to anything please point where in that post he says anything about fundies and nuts.
"your side has no clue how it could of happened."ywc THIS MAY COME AS A BIG FUCKING SHOCK BUT "YOUR SIDE"has no clue either!
the difference is "our side" accepts that for now we may have "no clue" (a gap in discovered evidence )but that gap gets smaller every second.
whereas "YOUR SIDE" WILL NOT AND CANNOT ADMIT TO ANY SUCH GAP OR YOUR HOUSE OF CARDS FALLS...
BTW YOU ARE FUNDIES AND NUTS ,THE BEST PROOF OF THAT IS THE FACT THAT OTHER CHRISTIANS LAUGH AT YOU.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BS5vid4GkEY]Why do people laugh at creationists? (part 1)- YouTube[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=istxUVBZD2s]Why do people laugh at creationists? (part 2). - YouTube[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdEZTdOlGss]Why do people laugh at creationists? (part 3).- YouTube[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjFeVwuJB7I]Why do people laugh at creationists? (part 4). - YouTube[/ame]
I don't have to prove I believe the bible provides better answers concerning life,the universe, chronology then modern day scientist's.
Just do a google search to find what I'm talking about. You'll see that whales looked a lot different from what they do today and we owe that to evolving.
You are aware that many animals were similar to others but went extinct ? Then a lot of times they are not complete fossils and they were just someones opinion of what they could have looked like but no evidence to prove they look the way they are rendered.
Of course I realize that and you might be right that a lot of the fossils found are not complete. However, a number of them are and it is apparent that they evolve from the credible fossils found. I believe that they show a slow transition from what they looked like millions of years ago.
False. The are many cases (the progression of humans, for example), showing a clear progression and transition from early ancestor to current humans.I believe that they show a slow transition from what they looked like millions of years ago.
That is precisely what the fossil record doesn't show, a slow transition. More like punctuated equilibrium [The new term to ignore the evidence Darwin was smoking crack].
Don't let your lack of training in science and your religious affliction cause you to man's such nonsensical statements.
Obviously, you must reject the fossil record because it directly contradicts a literal rendering of genesis. Fundies are consistent in parotting the creation ministry mouthpieces in their scripted slogans denying the fosill record but that truly leaves them in a position of simply denying the science facts.False. The are many cases (the progression of humans, for example), showing a clear progression and transition from early ancestor to current humans.That is precisely what the fossil record doesn't show, a slow transition. More like punctuated equilibrium [The new term to ignore the evidence Darwin was smoking crack].
Don't let your lack of training in science and your religious affliction cause you to man's such nonsensical statements.
No they havn't.
Read the facts and see how this guy admits the fossil record is not even close to complete but we knew that right. So the fossil record is based on conjecture.
False. The are many cases (the progression of humans, for example), showing a clear progression and transition from early ancestor to current humans.That is precisely what the fossil record doesn't show, a slow transition. More like punctuated equilibrium [The new term to ignore the evidence Darwin was smoking crack].
Don't let your lack of training in science and your religious affliction cause you to man's such nonsensical statements.
No they havn't.
Read the facts and see how this guy admits the fossil record is not even close to complete but we knew that right. So the fossil record is based on conjecture.
The Fossil Record
