Creationists

[daws101]

Every YWC thread is simply him forcing you to repeat yourself, and re-debunk assessments he made earlier in the thread over and over again until you're bored with it.


Then once you're bored with proving him wrong, he repeats himself again, and declares himself victor.

I think you're right. The question is, why does he bother? He's not going to convince anyone who knows anything about the subject. Is he really foolish enough to think there are no answers to the arguments he's raising? What does he get out of this? It's quite mysterious.

Anyway, I think I will take your implied advice and be done with this thread. There is really no point in arguing with committed creationists; no evidence will be seriously and honestly considered.

hazzaa!
it's no mystery, ywc for the attention, he may say that's not so..but that would be a lie.

 

[Youwerecreated]

first you have to prove what intelligence is did it come about due to naturally occurring conditions and billions of years of evolution? inventions are man made and after the fact, they are a byproduct of human existence.
science has shown that everything is caused by chemical reactions.
can you prove that intelligence is anything more than that?
don't forget: Probability is ordinarily used to describe an attitude of mind towards some proposition of whose truth we are not certain.[1] The proposition of interest is usually of the form "Will a specific event occur?" The attitude of mind is of the form "How certain are we that the event will occur?" The certainty we adopt can be described in terms of a numerical measure and this number, between 0 and 1, we call probability.[2] The higher the probability of an event, the more certain we are that the event will occur. Thus, probability in an applied sense is a measure of the likeliness that a (random) event will occur.

The concept has been given an axiomatic mathematical derivation in probability theory, which is used widely in such areas of study as mathematics, statistics, finance, gambling, science, artificial intelligence/machine learning and philosophy to, for example, draw inferences about the likeliness of events. Probability is used to describe the underlying mechanics and regularities of complex systems.

your insistence that an intelligent force is behind existence is based on faith, nothing more.
IMO that faith is a way of filling in the unknown.

shut u up!

Dream on,nothing complex can be denomstrated to have come into existence on it's own.

 

[koshergrl]

All right Cupcake; same deal, bring your best game--only you don't get dozens of concessions like Youwerecreated, and this is your only chance to refuse gracefully and respectfully--otherwise, same consequences.

What the hell are you yammering about? My contention is that you have different standards for yourself v. the faithful, and lie about what the evidence shows.

That's proven every time you open your stupid mouth. There's really nothing else to bring.

Someone needs to give you reputation points I tried but it wouldn't let me and that was after i added reputation to BB.

Oh noooo! Lol..reputation is highly overrated, don't worry about it.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Every YWC thread is simply him forcing you to repeat yourself, and re-debunk assessments he made earlier in the thread over and over again until you're bored with it.


Then once you're bored with proving him wrong, he repeats himself again, and declares himself victor.

This isn't my thread

You follow me aronud it's almost like a fatal attraction.

Loki does the same thing.

 

[daws101]

shut u up!

Dream on,nothing complex can be denomstrated to have come into existence on it's own.

odd, the same can be said of complex creation.
thanks for playing

 

[Youwerecreated]

What the hell are you yammering about? My contention is that you have different standards for yourself v. the faithful, and lie about what the evidence shows.

That's proven every time you open your stupid mouth. There's really nothing else to bring.

Someone needs to give you reputation points I tried but it wouldn't let me and that was after i added reputation to BB.

Oh noooo! Lol..reputation is highly overrated, don't worry about it.

Well you deserve it fighting off these ignorant trolls.

They are always trying to change the subject matter when I produce evidence for Intelligent design.

They don't want to admit it takes intelligence to accomplish any project.

 

[Youwerecreated]

shut u up!

Dream on,nothing complex can be denomstrated to have come into existence on it's own.

odd, the same can be said of complex creation.
thanks for playing

Did i just become dumber from reading your post ?

 

[koshergrl]

Hey, it's okay when they do it...when they do it, it's "proof". When we do it, we're stupid bible thumpers.

 

[FurthurBB]

I'm snipping your wall of text again. Please express ideas in your own words concisely.

The truith is there are very few full bodied fossils,most creatures they have less the 25% of the fossil of an organism they used their imagination to create many creatures that exist in the fossil record.

This is not a significant fact. No product of the imagination is ever used as evidence of facts not know.

What does being fossilized have to do with not showing gradualism ?

Ah, I misunderstood you. I thought you were asking why the fossil ITSELF didn't change, not why it didn't SHOW change.

That's different. The answer is that it does show change.

Again, I'm not going to read through a wall of text. Please explain in your own words, concisely. Give me a few examples of things showing up with dates "much different" from the known date.

Please understand that I'm not denying this can happen. I am simply denying that it presents any significant problem with radioactive dating methods. Reasons why it would happen are known and understood, and the likelihood of them happening is known to be small.

Then you are saying eldredge and gould who came up with the theory of punctuated equilibrium didn't understand the fossil record ?

And many other well educated professors say there are no transitional fossils they don't understand the fossil record either ?

That quote!—about the missing transitional fossils

Punctuated equilibrium is a well known aspect of the modern evolutionary theory. It has since been shown that evolution can happen many different ways. This was not a problem with the fossil record or anything to do with the theory of evolution not being correct. When new evidence was presented, it was incorporated. That is how science works. As far as the last thing, I think they are just seeing what they want to see because everything is transitional.

 

[FurthurBB]

You once again show you have no idea what you're talking about.

If beneficial mutations are not supposedly the engine of evolution where do you get the new information for macro-evolution ?

Here let me help you,according to your theory.

1. Mutations create new & beneficial genetic data.

2. then natural selection helps the mutant spread through the population.

3. then the magic ingredient is added to make it possible,long ages for it to happen to long to be observed. That's not science.

What neo teaches is mutations+natural selection=Neo darwinian macro-evolution.

No. You have just demonstrated that despite having it explained, to you over and over again, that you are wrong ... you insist upon spreading you dishonest misrepresentations.

Correct. The strawman version of "evolution" you have created does not work. That's not in dispute. It never has been.

Absolutely false. NATURAL SELECTION IS THE ENGINE OF EVOLUTION, YOU RETARD!

Here is what I believe the DNA code barrier+Gene depletion+natural selection prevents zero macro-evolution.

Here's what you believe: Changes in genotype do not result in changes in phenotype.

Which proves that you have no idea what you're talking about.

And, now that your questions have been answered again, it's worth noting (again) that your dishonesty is magnified by your hypocrisy, manifested in your own continued refusal to answer the question directed at you.

Wrong never denied this,listen dummy what do you think happens with mutations ? when mutations cause change they cause more harm then benefit. It's documented.

You have been brainwashed to believe that traits change through mutations thats not true ,traits change through sexual reproduction or asexual reproduction. This is where we go back to the genes of each parent decide what the offspring will look like and be.

Your ignorance is a beautiful thing to watch.

Reproduction changes traits the same way mutations change traits. If you have a change in the genetic information you might have a change in a gene, if you have a change in a gene you might have a change in a protein, if you have a change in a protein you might have a change in phenotype, that is how it all works. Like I have a hereditary mutation that causes me to have fructose malabsorption disorder, a bad thing, but I also have a hereditary mutation that causes me to process fats better than 90% of the population, a good thing. They are both single point mutations, one is in a promoter region of a gene and the other is in a regulatory binding site.

 

[koshergrl]

"It's not a problem because I say so".

See, it's always the same.

 

[FurthurBB]

Also Youwerecreated, even if I and every proponent of actual evolution, or even the strawman versions you invent, are all entirely wrong and we have no idea what we're talking about, .... it's worth noting (again) that your dishonesty is magnified by your hypocrisy, manifested in your own continued refusal to answer the question directed at you.

Look how parents genes have an effect on the offspring the genetics not mutations.

Beefalo image by snowyridgeranch on Photobucket

Redirect Notice

Redirect Notice

How does heredity change phenotypes?

 

[FurthurBB]

Wrong never denied this, ...

You deny it every single time you say mutation cannot lead to speciation.

... listen dummy what do you think happens with mutations ?

I think there's a change in genetic information. Don't you?

It's also documented that beneficial mutations cause more benefit that harm. Don't you agree?

Well, you have yet to demonstrate how genotype is unrelated to phenotype.

Not where there's no change in the genotype that codes for the trait in question. Or are you about to level up and admit you believe magic causes the change in traits expressed?

This is where we go back to the genes of each parent decide what the offspring will look like and be.

Not if, as you assert, a difference in the genetic information can not express as a difference in the trait.

Your ignorance is a beautiful thing to watch.

I seem to rather well informed compared to you.

And, now that your questions have been answered again, it's worth noting (again) that your dishonesty is magnified by your hypocrisy, manifested in your own continued refusal to answer the question directed at you.

[/QUOTE]

I definitely think you are pretty well informed on these topics.

 

[Dr Grump]

Dream on,nothing complex can be denomstrated to have come into existence on it's own.

Yet you believe a god did, right?

 

[koshergrl]

You still don't get it.

We don't claim that our faith is based upon proof.

You do.

But you have no proof.

 

[FurthurBB]

You are really just ignorant.

It's always cute watching you, of all people, call others that.

You're on here denying evolution all the while being totally clueless on it. Having no clue what a mutation is, no clue that no scientist says humans evolved from chimps, you choose ignorance because the facts hurt the fundamentalist mindset you've based your life on.

I have made it clear I know what a mutation is

No, you have actually made the exact opposite clear.

 

[FurthurBB]

that is the evidence ASSCLOWN!

NO IT'S NOT.

I suggest you look up the term "evidence" and "proof". Because that is not any kind of evidence. You might like the opinion, but just because it sounds good to you DOESN'T MAGICALLY TURN IT INTO PROOF.

What IS the average grade level of you guys? 5th??????

Well right after 5th grade is normally when they start teaching about evolution, so I would use that excuse yourself as to why you're so ignorant of the subject.

Thank you! I have seen grade school students with a better grasp of biology.

 

[FurthurBB]

Who's the lying piece of shit?

It's clearly you. Click the link in the post, you retard. Not the link to the top of the page.

Do you think your retarded clicking skills can manage now, Cupcake?

Same garbage.

Since you are unable to restate your alleged question, I will assume you are lying that there is one.

Holy fuck! You're the dumbest retard ever!

The links are good; clear your cache, or just OPEN YOUR FUCKING EYES!!!!!!

Yes, those links are good. I checked.

 

[FurthurBB]

There is all kinds of evidence for intelligent design.

I can provide evdence for my belief but you on the other hand cannot.

BULLSHIT there is not. the only evidence is for your belief is belief. you have no empirical quantifiable evidence to prove that the thing or action (intelligent design) believed in exists or happened .
belief only proves belief nothing more.

Everything created or invented came into existence by intelligence.

Can you think of any language that came in to existence absent of a mind ? The DNA code is a language did that come into existence by intelligence ?

Can non-intelligence create intelligence ?

Would a natural process be able to think of everything that is needed for life then think of mechanisms to preserve that life ?

How bout this planet that is setup to sustain life is that just a coincedence ?

This is all anecdotal, semantics, and non-intelligence thinking is just out there.

 

[Dr Grump]

You still don't get it.

We don't claim that our faith is based upon proof.

You do.

But you have no proof.

Proof of what? Evolution? There is plenty of evidence.

Maybe you don't base your claim on proof, Avatar disagrees....

....Oh, by the way, I've figured out who you are, but why you bothered to change your name is beyond me...