Creationists

[UltimateReality]

You're always a disappointment so don't feel bad.
...

You always resort to put downs instead of addressing the topic. Why?

You never fail to be confused about the issues you rattle on about. Has it ever crossed your mind to make an effort to understand the issues that confuse you?

I'm not confused. I am just curious as to why you always resort to putdowns??

 

[UltimateReality]

running and ducking from what?
I post when i want to, your dumbfuckery has zero to do with it.

Well it took you 13 hours to respond. I was actually being sarcastic to make a point about the silliness of you inferring I was using a work as an excuse to not engage in an argument with you. Obviously you were asleep so you couldn't respond, but I used your silly trick back on you to make it look like you were avoiding responding because you didn't have an answer. Basically, you aren't fooling anyone.

I post when i want to, your Tom Foolery has zero to do with it.

HAD NO ANSWER TO WHAT?
The rest is typical detective douche bag nonsense!


especialy this: "Basically, you aren't fooling anyone."- ur aka detective douche bag .
brilliant statement of the obvious...I have never attempted to fool anyone, so whatever you're trying and failing to insinuate is you committing character suicide

I think you missed the post about how you were manipulated to prove a point. The power of suggestion obviously works on you because I used the word "douche bag" one time and you have repeated it since then over and over. Why not try to dispense with the nonsense and have an adult conversation about science and religion?

 

[UltimateReality]

And now to reveal what has really been transpiring the last few pages of my posts: I was the first person to use the term "douche bag" here and with a somewhat devious intent which with your post has just now come to fruition. Just like clockwork, first Daws, then NP picked it up like a football and ran like crazy, using it back on me. I had to wait a bit for you Hawly, and I almost thought you were in the clear when you wouldn't spell it out, but even you fell in lockstep and copied the term. So what is my point? My point is you all are easily manipulated. If you can be that easily manipulated on an internet forum, maybe you should question what else you have been manipulated by, mainly, the materialist darwinist agenda.

Secondly, I also decided to mirror Hawlys, Daws and NP's behavior. NP called me shit for brains and I countered with excrement for neurons. Daws played the gay slur game and I came back with my own insinuations. Hawly gets mad and calls me turning her posts back on her plagurism. YWC is embarrassed that a fellow Christian is behaving in such a manner and trys to get Daws to stop responding. Finally, NP calls it out and basically says I have been a big jerk. But what has really happened here. I will tell you. NP is holding me to a higher standard than he holds himself because of my claimed belief. Neither he nor Hawly have ever called Daws out for his profanity and overall rancidness. Which brings me to the point number 2 I just proved, and that is, materialism fosters less moral behavior. Without some source of ethics, materialists hold themselves to a lower standard. It was perfectly acceptable for Daws and NP to use profanity and Hawly bigotry, but it is not for me and YWC. NP calls me out for behaving in the same manner he and Daws do.

If you really want to act like adults and have a mature discussion about science and religion, then profanity and bigoted attacks have no place here.

ANOTHER FALSE MIA CULPA BY UR.....THE SHIT IN IT IS SO DEEP i'LL HAVE TO STRAP ON MY WINGS TO GET ABOVE IT ...

Well you aren't above it. You fell for it hook, line and sinker, proving you can be easily manipulated. Time to re-evaluate how you have been manipulated by materialism and naturalism posing as science.

 

[UltimateReality]

And now to reveal what has really been transpiring the last few pages of my posts: I was the first person to use the term "douche bag" here and with a somewhat devious intent which with your post has just now come to fruition. Just like clockwork, first Daws, then NP picked it up like a football and ran like crazy, using it back on me. I had to wait a bit for you Hawly, and I almost thought you were in the clear when you wouldn't spell it out, but even you fell in lockstep and copied the term. So what is my point? My point is you all are easily manipulated. If you can be that easily manipulated on an internet forum, maybe you should question what else you have been manipulated by, mainly, the materialist darwinist agenda.

Secondly, I also decided to mirror Hawlys, Daws and NP's behavior. NP called me shit for brains and I countered with excrement for neurons. Daws played the gay slur game and I came back with my own insinuations. Hawly gets mad and calls me turning her posts back on her plagurism. YWC is embarrassed that a fellow Christian is behaving in such a manner and trys to get Daws to stop responding. Finally, NP calls it out and basically says I have been a big jerk. But what has really happened here. I will tell you. NP is holding me to a higher standard than he holds himself because of my claimed belief. Neither he nor Hawly have ever called Daws out for his profanity and overall rancidness. Which brings me to the point number 2 I just proved, and that is, materialism fosters less moral behavior. Without some source of ethics, materialists hold themselves to a lower standard. It was perfectly acceptable for Daws and NP to use profanity and Hawly bigotry, but it is not for me and YWC. NP calls me out for behaving in the same manner he and Daws do.

If you really want to act like adults and have a mature discussion about science and religion, then profanity and bigoted attacks have no place here.

is it just me or is this post an all about how much more moral UR falsely claims to be...
or is it he just can't get enough of himself?

It's just you.

Your filter is skewed and it is throwing off your interpretation. No where in my post did I say I am more moral than anyone here. What I did say is that NP holds me to a higher standard than he does you or himself, even though he would deny any naturalistic source for ethics.

 

[UltimateReality]

And now to reveal what has really been transpiring the last few pages of my posts: I was the first person to use the term "douche bag" here and with a somewhat devious intent which with your post has just now come to fruition. Just like clockwork, first Daws, then NP picked it up like a football and ran like crazy, using it back on me. I had to wait a bit for you Hawly, and I almost thought you were in the clear when you wouldn't spell it out, but even you fell in lockstep and copied the term. So what is my point? My point is you all are easily manipulated. If you can be that easily manipulated on an internet forum, maybe you should question what else you have been manipulated by, mainly, the materialist darwinist agenda.

Secondly, I also decided to mirror Hawlys, Daws and NP's behavior. NP called me shit for brains and I countered with excrement for neurons. Daws played the gay slur game and I came back with my own insinuations. Hawly gets mad and calls me turning her posts back on her plagurism. YWC is embarrassed that a fellow Christian is behaving in such a manner and trys to get Daws to stop responding. Finally, NP calls it out and basically says I have been a big jerk. But what has really happened here. I will tell you. NP is holding me to a higher standard than he holds himself because of my claimed belief. Neither he nor Hawly have ever called Daws out for his profanity and overall rancidness. Which brings me to the point number 2 I just proved, and that is, materialism fosters less moral behavior. Without some source of ethics, materialists hold themselves to a lower standard. It was perfectly acceptable for Daws and NP to use profanity and Hawly bigotry, but it is not for me and YWC. NP calls me out for behaving in the same manner he and Daws do.

If you really want to act like adults and have a mature discussion about science and religion, then profanity and bigoted attacks have no place here.

Who said "it is not okay"? Do whatever you want, but you will reap the consequences. Likewise, for us, or anybody. In case you haven't noticed, we are split into two teams. Usually the way it works when you are on teams, is you stick up for your teammates, while trying to beat the other team. I haven't seen you reprimand your teammates YWC and Lonestar for their behavior, which at times is sub-par. You try to make this a lovefest, where we all just "love" each other, but then you try to argue with us. You can't have your cake and eat it too. If you want to end this discussion and make up and be friends, cool. Let's do it. But you can't want both. We are in a debate, a fight, so stop expecting niceties like a little child, and then attributing foul play to a lower moral constitution. It's such a fucking copout and excuse for you to feel superior to atheists. It is, in other words, a display of pure ego. This is the problem with christianity, it leads to the most unenlightened individuals.

You attacked Daws for his sexuality? Did I see that right?That's disgusting behavior on your part, UR, so don't sit here and try and talk about how 'materialists" are morally inferior. It is so vapid. I find it funny that you mimic our behavior, and then judge us for our behavior, but not your own. That's called being a hypocrite.

...I'm just the same on line as in real life. to say anything else would be disingenuous...

You have proven yourself to be disingenuous repeatedly. All you have is internet bravado. I seriously doubt you've ever been in a real confrontation that didn't involve hiding behind a keyboard.

 

[UltimateReality]

Do any of you evolutionist idiots believe that humans have a soul?

Do all crceatures have souls?

Where did the soul originate?

What happenes to it when you die?


Four easy simple questions. But I bet I don't get any intelligent responses. I wonder how many cut and paste jobs will respond. Hmmmm......

Gee whiz. Another angry fundie rattling on about metaphysics absent any understanding of what he's rattling in about.

Your explanation of the concept of a "soul" is insufficient. It's only sufficient for those who have already decided there must be a "soul". You believe it's okay to assume as decided, the issue of some sort of continuation of the consciousness after death.

I have no explanation for "spirits" or the "soul" because the soul remains undemonstrated. I have no properties and characteristics for that which does not exist. I do have a comment about personality, and where that comes from. The sense of self is a higher brain function and it's seen in comparably lesser degrees in lesser animals (i.e., humans are not the only creatures with a sense of "self"). This in and of itself is enough to prove that "selfhood" is a natural phenomenon of higher brain functions. Either that, or your gawds have made monkeys and men with a soul each, and that means humans are the 'e'special creation of the gawds. Language, nurturing, survival, industry, and even environmental control all can be attributed to animals lesser on the sentience strat than man, which is a great case for man being of and a part of the natural world-- no gawds needed.

Personality is a phenomenon of the brain. Remove sections of the brain and the "self" changes as well. Apparently your eternal soul is at the mercy of a few pounds of grey jelly, because the soul cannot override the impact to the brain and the change in personality that attends that impact. The soul must be fairly weak.

This is a perfectly valid explanation for emotions, and it doesn't require the mumbo-jumbo of gods to explain it.

Non-material concepts are not fully non-material. You need a brain to substantiate them. Damage or impact to the brain directly affects the development and delivery of the concepts. You are simply assuming a spiritual nature for these things, and not submitting any case to support it. I am submitting they are the effects of the brain along with neurons and chemicals within the brain, and I can demonstrate how they can be manipulated by physical impact.

By way of example, I can

1. End all thought by killing that brain

2. create an emotion by chemical inducement of that brain

3. limit the thought and emotion of the brain by removing sections of it.

All the poetry about feelings and spirit and so on -- reside only in the brain. Remove it, and away it all goes. All of it. Even belief in gods.

Now you demonstrate the spiritual source, which you assert is the actual reason emotions exist and disassemble my case, please.

Please produce some cut and pastes showing a naturalistic source for conscious thought.

 

[UltimateReality]

And now to reveal what has really been transpiring the last few pages of my posts: I was the first person to use the term "douche bag" here and with a somewhat devious intent which with your post has just now come to fruition. Just like clockwork, first Daws, then NP picked it up like a football and ran like crazy, using it back on me. I had to wait a bit for you Hawly, and I almost thought you were in the clear when you wouldn't spell it out, but even you fell in lockstep and copied the term. So what is my point? My point is you all are easily manipulated. If you can be that easily manipulated on an internet forum, maybe you should question what else you have been manipulated by, mainly, the materialist darwinist agenda.

Secondly, I also decided to mirror Hawlys, Daws and NP's behavior. NP called me shit for brains and I countered with excrement for neurons. Daws played the gay slur game and I came back with my own insinuations. Hawly gets mad and calls me turning her posts back on her plagurism. YWC is embarrassed that a fellow Christian is behaving in such a manner and trys to get Daws to stop responding. Finally, NP calls it out and basically says I have been a big jerk. But what has really happened here. I will tell you. NP is holding me to a higher standard than he holds himself because of my claimed belief. Neither he nor Hawly have ever called Daws out for his profanity and overall rancidness. Which brings me to the point number 2 I just proved, and that is, materialism fosters less moral behavior. Without some source of ethics, materialists hold themselves to a lower standard. It was perfectly acceptable for Daws and NP to use profanity and Hawly bigotry, but it is not for me and YWC. NP calls me out for behaving in the same manner he and Daws do.

If you really want to act like adults and have a mature discussion about science and religion, then profanity and bigoted attacks have no place here.

is it just me or is this post an all about how much more moral UR falsely claims to be...
or is it he just can't get enough of himself?

It's not just you, daws. In my experience, 'alternate" reality is typical of fundie Christians. There is the unmistakable self-righteous and self-promoting attitude that grips fundies. Their claim to holding some moral and ethical high ground is so often contradicted by their behavior that depicts a groundswell of hate, self-doubt and insecurity.

My expectation is that if religion is so beneficial that it must be forced on all (as is the belief of many fundies), then it might follow that adherents to it should be better people. If religious beliefs make you less tolerant, more hateful then of what good is it?

Funny how you, Daws, and NP all allowed your prejudicial worldview to read things into my post that weren't there. By all means, please quote where I judged anyone or said I was better than anyone here. I'm waiting.

 

[Hollie]

Do any of you evolutionist idiots believe that humans have a soul?

Do all crceatures have souls?

Where did the soul originate?

What happenes to it when you die?


Four easy simple questions. But I bet I don't get any intelligent responses. I wonder how many cut and paste jobs will respond. Hmmmm......

Gee whiz. Another angry fundie rattling on about metaphysics absent any understanding of what he's rattling in about.

Your explanation of the concept of a "soul" is insufficient. It's only sufficient for those who have already decided there must be a "soul". You believe it's okay to assume as decided, the issue of some sort of continuation of the consciousness after death.

I have no explanation for "spirits" or the "soul" because the soul remains undemonstrated. I have no properties and characteristics for that which does not exist. I do have a comment about personality, and where that comes from. The sense of self is a higher brain function and it's seen in comparably lesser degrees in lesser animals (i.e., humans are not the only creatures with a sense of "self"). This in and of itself is enough to prove that "selfhood" is a natural phenomenon of higher brain functions. Either that, or your gawds have made monkeys and men with a soul each, and that means humans are the 'e'special creation of the gawds. Language, nurturing, survival, industry, and even environmental control all can be attributed to animals lesser on the sentience strat than man, which is a great case for man being of and a part of the natural world-- no gawds needed.

Personality is a phenomenon of the brain. Remove sections of the brain and the "self" changes as well. Apparently your eternal soul is at the mercy of a few pounds of grey jelly, because the soul cannot override the impact to the brain and the change in personality that attends that impact. The soul must be fairly weak.

This is a perfectly valid explanation for emotions, and it doesn't require the mumbo-jumbo of gods to explain it.

Non-material concepts are not fully non-material. You need a brain to substantiate them. Damage or impact to the brain directly affects the development and delivery of the concepts. You are simply assuming a spiritual nature for these things, and not submitting any case to support it. I am submitting they are the effects of the brain along with neurons and chemicals within the brain, and I can demonstrate how they can be manipulated by physical impact.

By way of example, I can

1. End all thought by killing that brain

2. create an emotion by chemical inducement of that brain

3. limit the thought and emotion of the brain by removing sections of it.

All the poetry about feelings and spirit and so on -- reside only in the brain. Remove it, and away it all goes. All of it. Even belief in gods.

Now you demonstrate the spiritual source, which you assert is the actual reason emotions exist and disassemble my case, please.

Please produce some cut and pastes showing a naturalistic source for conscious thought.

I just did.

Please provide another excuse for your incompetence and ignorance.

 

[Hollie]

is it just me or is this post an all about how much more moral UR falsely claims to be...
or is it he just can't get enough of himself?

It's not just you, daws. In my experience, 'alternate" reality is typical of fundie Christians. There is the unmistakable self-righteous and self-promoting attitude that grips fundies. Their claim to holding some moral and ethical high ground is so often contradicted by their behavior that depicts a groundswell of hate, self-doubt and insecurity.

My expectation is that if religion is so beneficial that it must be forced on all (as is the belief of many fundies), then it might follow that adherents to it should be better people. If religious beliefs make you less tolerant, more hateful then of what good is it?

Funny how you, Daws, and NP all allowed your prejudicial worldview to read things into my post that weren't there. By all means, please quote where I judged anyone or said I was better than anyone here. I'm waiting.

Funny how you are now side- stepping and backtracking on your cut and paste.

 

[Hollie]

You always resort to put downs instead of addressing the topic. Why?

You never fail to be confused about the issues you rattle on about. Has it ever crossed your mind to make an effort to understand the issues that confuse you?

I'm not confused. I am just curious as to why you always resort to putdowns??

You're confused about being confused.

I'm not at all surprised that it is a result of Christian fundie indoctrination.

 

[Hollie]

You need new dancing shoes.

Evolution does not provide for purposeful "design". Evolution is not directional or steered toward a result.

As noted, your atrocious lack of understanding regarding evolutionary theory causes you to make comments remarkable only for their ignorance.

Sorry I don't dance when my opponents are clearly inferior.

Your self assessed superiority is contradicted by your inability to further any meaningful dialogue. I see nothing in the Christian creationist argument that is not rife with fallacious analogies, bad examples and appeals to ignorance, fear and superstition. It's remarkable how you consider cutting and pasting from Harun Yahya as making you superior but I suppose that delusions of supermagical, angry gawds is just one more symptom of the pathology of Christian creationism.

Therein lies the danger. The point being, Christian creationism does not allow for the growth of knowledge. The fundies in this thread have made it clear that from a fundamentalist Christian point of view, humans are inherently evil, base, greedy, etc. That is a self-fulfilling speculation, and given the fact that we continue to survive, to show compassion and to further the benefits of cooperation, the fundie Christian worldview is not empirically true. And because it's not true -- what purpose does the fundie Christian promotion of hate and derision serve? Is it retrograde and superfluous? Yes, of course it is.

Assuming that evil acts are bourne out of the corruption of religion, (or more likely, the influence of religion), is religion worth the price is extracts on human development?

 

[ima]

So why can't evolution be part of god's plan?

 

[Youwerecreated]

You need new dancing shoes.

Evolution does not provide for purposeful "design". Evolution is not directional or steered toward a result.

As noted, your atrocious lack of understanding regarding evolutionary theory causes you to make comments remarkable only for their ignorance.

Sorry I don't dance when my opponents are clearly inferior.

Your self assessed superiority is contradicted by your inability to further any meaningful dialogue. I see nothing in the Christian creationist argument that is not rife with fallacious analogies, bad examples and appeals to ignorance, fear and superstition. It's remarkable how you consider cutting and pasting from Harun Yahya as making you superior but I suppose that delusions of supermagical, angry gawds is just one more symptom of the pathology of Christian creationism.

Therein lies the danger. The point being, Christian creationism does not allow for the growth of knowledge. The fundies in this thread have made it clear that from a fundamentalist Christian point of view, humans are inherently evil, base, greedy, etc. That is a self-fulfilling speculation, and given the fact that we continue to survive, to show compassion and to further the benefits of cooperation, the fundie Christian worldview is not empirically true. And because it's not true -- what purpose does the fundie Christian promotion of hate and derision serve? Is it retrograde and superfluous? Yes, of course it is.

Assuming that evil acts are bourne out of the corruption of religion, (or more likely, the influence of religion), is religion worth the price is extracts on human development?

My scientific arguments are not faith based they are fact based.

 

[Youwerecreated]

So why can't evolution be part of god's plan?

It is true we have seen variations within a family that is it and there is simple answer for this to which I have answered. Many creatures have gone extinct does not mean they were organisms that evolved it just shows they once existed. By your own theory these so call tranitional fossils why did they go extinct if by your theory they were better adapted ?

This question has gone with no explanation from your side.

Because the theory goes against what the bible teaches. If this process of evolution was used by God I think he would provided some type of explanation of the process in the bible. Why do you guys throw this question out there when you're totally against the thought of design ? That has been what has been demonstrated throughout this thread.

 

[Hollie]

Sorry I don't dance when my opponents are clearly inferior.

Your self assessed superiority is contradicted by your inability to further any meaningful dialogue. I see nothing in the Christian creationist argument that is not rife with fallacious analogies, bad examples and appeals to ignorance, fear and superstition. It's remarkable how you consider cutting and pasting from Harun Yahya as making you superior but I suppose that delusions of supermagical, angry gawds is just one more symptom of the pathology of Christian creationism.

Therein lies the danger. The point being, Christian creationism does not allow for the growth of knowledge. The fundies in this thread have made it clear that from a fundamentalist Christian point of view, humans are inherently evil, base, greedy, etc. That is a self-fulfilling speculation, and given the fact that we continue to survive, to show compassion and to further the benefits of cooperation, the fundie Christian worldview is not empirically true. And because it's not true -- what purpose does the fundie Christian promotion of hate and derision serve? Is it retrograde and superfluous? Yes, of course it is.

Assuming that evil acts are bourne out of the corruption of religion, (or more likely, the influence of religion), is religion worth the price is extracts on human development?

My scientific arguments are not faith based they are fact based.

Lordy man, but you are confused. Metaphysics, magic and superstition are not science. Have you noticed that these terms are even spelled differently? That's because they're different... which is why they're spelled differently. Do you been additional tutoring on this?

You're spending too much time at Harun Yahya.

 

[Youwerecreated]

You need new dancing shoes.

Evolution does not provide for purposeful "design". Evolution is not directional or steered toward a result.

As noted, your atrocious lack of understanding regarding evolutionary theory causes you to make comments remarkable only for their ignorance.

Sorry I don't dance when my opponents are clearly inferior.

Your self assessed superiority is contradicted by your inability to further any meaningful dialogue. I see nothing in the Christian creationist argument that is not rife with fallacious analogies, bad examples and appeals to ignorance, fear and superstition. It's remarkable how you consider cutting and pasting from Harun Yahya as making you superior but I suppose that delusions of supermagical, angry gawds is just one more symptom of the pathology of Christian creationism.

Therein lies the danger. The point being, Christian creationism does not allow for the growth of knowledge. The fundies in this thread have made it clear that from a fundamentalist Christian point of view, humans are inherently evil, base, greedy, etc. That is a self-fulfilling speculation, and given the fact that we continue to survive, to show compassion and to further the benefits of cooperation, the fundie Christian worldview is not empirically true. And because it's not true -- what purpose does the fundie Christian promotion of hate and derision serve? Is it retrograde and superfluous? Yes, of course it is.

Assuming that evil acts are bourne out of the corruption of religion, (or more likely, the influence of religion), is religion worth the price is extracts on human development?

It is clearly seen by my ability to take your questions on and you guys ducking my questions. It don't make me a better person my education makes me more qualified to provide an answer to your questions and ask you questions. NP keeps saying my questions are out of ignorance then I have to show him they are not that screams ignorance on this subject. I asked a question that any person trained in biology would have known why I asked the question and he thought I was speaking of Abiogenesis that exposed his ignorance.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Your self assessed superiority is contradicted by your inability to further any meaningful dialogue. I see nothing in the Christian creationist argument that is not rife with fallacious analogies, bad examples and appeals to ignorance, fear and superstition. It's remarkable how you consider cutting and pasting from Harun Yahya as making you superior but I suppose that delusions of supermagical, angry gawds is just one more symptom of the pathology of Christian creationism.

Therein lies the danger. The point being, Christian creationism does not allow for the growth of knowledge. The fundies in this thread have made it clear that from a fundamentalist Christian point of view, humans are inherently evil, base, greedy, etc. That is a self-fulfilling speculation, and given the fact that we continue to survive, to show compassion and to further the benefits of cooperation, the fundie Christian worldview is not empirically true. And because it's not true -- what purpose does the fundie Christian promotion of hate and derision serve? Is it retrograde and superfluous? Yes, of course it is.

Assuming that evil acts are bourne out of the corruption of religion, (or more likely, the influence of religion), is religion worth the price is extracts on human development?

My scientific arguments are not faith based they are fact based.

Lordy man, but you are confused. Metaphysics, magic and superstition are not science. Have you noticed that these terms are even spelled differently? That's because they're different... which is why they're spelled differently. Do you been additional tutoring on this?

You're spending too much time at Harun Yahya.

I am no Lord. You're completely ignorant on the subject of science please stop pretending you're not. You keep throwing this term around Metaphysics,please show where I am doing this ?

 

[Hollie]

So why can't evolution be part of god's plan?

It is true we have seen variations within a family that is it and there is simple asnwer for this to which I have answered. Many creatures have gone extinct does not mean they were organisms that evolved it just shows they once existed. By your own theory these so call tranitional fossils why did they go extinct if by your theory they were better adapted ?

This question has gone with no explanation from your side.

Because the theory goes against what the bible teaches. If this process of evolution was used by God I think he would provided some type of explanation of the process in the bible. Why do you guys throw this question out there when you're totally against the thought of design ? That has been what has been demonstrated throughout this thread.

Your comments depict a typical lack of knowledge regarding the science of evolution or more likely, a willful misrepresentation of what you choose to misrepresent.

Your comments are in concert with what is barfed out of creationist ministries. Such allegiance to lies and falsehoods calls into question your personal credibility.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Hollie it is time for your side to put up or shut up.

 

[Youwerecreated]

So why can't evolution be part of god's plan?

It is true we have seen variations within a family that is it and there is simple asnwer for this to which I have answered. Many creatures have gone extinct does not mean they were organisms that evolved it just shows they once existed. By your own theory these so call tranitional fossils why did they go extinct if by your theory they were better adapted ?

This question has gone with no explanation from your side.

Because the theory goes against what the bible teaches. If this process of evolution was used by God I think he would provided some type of explanation of the process in the bible. Why do you guys throw this question out there when you're totally against the thought of design ? That has been what has been demonstrated throughout this thread.

Your comments depict a typical lack of knowledge regarding the science of evolution or more likely, a willful misrepresentation of what you choose to misrepresent.

Your comments are in concert with what is barfed out of creationist ministries. Such allegiance to lies and falsehoods calls into question your personal credibility.

Wrong again, if you understood survival of the fittest or in other words natural selection this would need no explanation.