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.
false premiseYWC, when Hollie gets owned she just ignores it and hopes no one will notice. I owned her with the supernatural cause for the big bang!!!
You confuse cutting and pasting from xtian creationist websites with making an actual argument.
I'm afraid that the best YWC has to offer is cutting and pasting from Harun Yahya.
I'm afraid you have been "owned" by your own ineptitude and incompetence.
Hollie youand are a liar.
false premiseI'm afraid you're unable to be honest with yourself or others regarding so many things.Hollie you
That is not a problem for me I have asked repeatedly for your side to make that convincing argument on how life began through a total natural process and heck you guys are not even using the Miller and Urey experiment to make your argument but you're convinced there is no intelligent designer.
typical ignorant hubris, all you owned was your underwhelming non originality,YWC, when Hollie gets owned she just ignores it and hopes no one will notice. I owned her with the supernatural cause for the big bang!!!
I’ve never maintained that Miller and Urey either was, or is, the determining factor for how life began on the planet. I understand you tend to focus on this because you feel it appeals to the loathing you have for science. How sad for you.So you have backed off from the miller and Urey experiment as proof life happened naturally ? If not then supposedly Miller and Urey has provided mechanisms that produced life.
Now explain how through these mechanisms life was formed ? Also show life being observed spontaneous being generated now and if you can't why do you believe in naturalism ?
I’ve never maintained that Miller and Urey either was, or is, the determining factor for how life began on the planet. I understand you tend to focus on this because you feel it appeals to the loathing you have for science. How sad for you.So you have backed off from the miller and Urey experiment as proof life happened naturally ? If not then supposedly Miller and Urey has provided mechanisms that produced life.
Here's why fundies such as yourself devote so much energy toward your science loathing agenda: Creationists are almost exclusively Christian Fundamentalists; that is to say, literalists, taking every word of the bible to be the true and infallable word of God. Many echo the sentiments of Henry Morris, previous chief snake-oil salesman in charge fronting for fundie Christian charlatans who you have frequently cut and pasted from:
"But the main reason for insisting on the universal Flood as a fact of history and as the primary vehicle for geological interpretation is that God's Word plainly teaches it! No geologic difficulties, real or imagined, can be allowed to take precedence over the clear statements and necessary inferences of Scripture."
Dr. Henry Morris, Biblical Cosmology and Modern Science (1970) p.32-33
The fundie charlatans are nearly universal in that they view evolutionary science, which flatly contradicts the book of Genesis, as a direct threat to their theology, the foundation of society and a threat to the basis of morality itself.
I’ve noticed also, with near universality, that fundies attempt to sidestep the problem by stating, without any evidence to back it up (as usual), that their gawds made the stars, galaxies and intervening space and light from said stars and galaxies, in their present configurations. All this was done, presumably, to give the appearance of a very old, vast universe, and therefore to mislead scientists (and the rest of the rational world) to the spurious conclusion of a big bang that happened about 15 billion years ago.
Kind of a strange thing to do for a God who is "a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he." (Deut. 32:4) Also, Numbers 23:19- "God is not a man, that he should lie..." Also it is said that "Every word of God is flawless." Proverbs 30:5. Are His actions not like His words? Something to think about...
Now explain how through these mechanisms life was formed ? Also show life being observed spontaneous being generated now and if you can't why do you believe in naturalism ?
In spite of your inability to form coherent sentences….. I’ve already explained to you (on many occasions), that the precise biological mechanisms that sparked the first existence of life are unknown.
However, because you are forever burdened by a yolk of ignorance you choose to be constrained with (a function of your religious affliction), are you looking for the fact that species are observed to evolve into new species?:
Observed Instances of Speciation
How about some more observed Speciation Events:
Some More Observed Speciation Events
Or are you looking for the fact that there are tons of transitional fossils, showing the transformation of species?
Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ
Here is a one good example out of hundreds you can find within the pages above:
"Three species of wildflowers called goatsbeards were introduced to the United States from Europe shortly after the turn of the century. Within a few decades their populations expanded and began to encounter one another in the American West. Whenever mixed populations occurred, the specied interbred (hybridizing) producing sterile hybrid offspring. Suddenly, in the late forties two new species of goatsbeard appeared near Pullman, Washington. Although the new species were similar in appearance to the hybrids, they produced fertile offspring. The evolutionary process had created a separate species that could reproduce but not mate with the goatsbeard plants from which it had evolved."
This is an example witnessed in nature, not a laboratory (not that it makes much of a difference). Yes, we're talking about plants in this one instance. But it doesn't matter if we are talking about plants, flies, bacterium, dogs or humans-- the biological process is the same-- it makes no distinction. Remember that the shorter the lifespan of the organisms, the easier it is to witness evolution in action.
There are hundreds of clear examples to choose from. You can look at Evidence for Evolution for more examples.
Evidence for Evolution: An Eclectic Survey
So…. I’m still waiting for your comprehensive description of the hierarchy of gawds who designed your designer gawds.
And why do your gawds lie?
The bibles state that there are winged creatures that go about on 4 legs (Lev 11:20-21).
There aren't. Ooops.
The bibles also state specifically that rabbits chew their cud (Deu 14:7). They don't. Jesus states that there were some standing and listening to him speak who would still be alive to see his second coming (Mat 16:28)... obviously untrue.
He also stated that the world would come to an end during his generation:
Jesus is talking of signs that will happen before the end of the world to his disciples. (Notice: Jesus probably thought the stars were little lights attached to a solid rotating sky dome like everyone else at that time. Imagine just one star "falling to earth"!)
(Mat 24:29 NRSV) "Immediately after the suffering of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; *the stars will fall from heaven*, and the powers of heaven will be shaken. Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see 'the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven' with power and great glory.
(Jesus now says to his disciples that their generation will not pass away before the end of the world)
(Mat 24:34 NRSV) Truly I tell you, *this generation will not pass away* until all these things have taken place.
(Their generation did pass away, but the world didn't end) The evidence is the current existence of the world.
Need more?
Ezekiel predicted Babylon would conquer Egypt and was wrong. It never happened, and can now never be fulfilled.
In Luke 1:26, the angel who appears to Mary to foretell the birth of Jesus says that Jesus will be given the "throne of David", that he will reign over Israel. It never happened, did it?
Here is another factual error. "The love of money is the root of all evil." (1 Timothy 6:10) This is obviously untrue, and a blatantly ridiculous statement. There are sources of evil other than the love of money. Racism, sexism, jealousy, pride, shame, hate-- all these things are evil and can drive someone to murder. I am sure you can think of more, if you try.
Sorry, but hey - if you want to play Lumberjack, try holding up your end of the log.
false premiseI'm afraid you're unable to be honest with yourself or others regarding so many things.
That is not a problem for me I have asked repeatedly for your side to make that convincing argument on how life began through a total natural process and heck you guys are not even using the Miller and Urey experiment to make your argument but you're convinced there is no intelligent designer.
Ive never maintained that Miller and Urey either was, or is, the determining factor for how life began on the planet. I understand you tend to focus on this because you feel it appeals to the loathing you have for science. How sad for you.So you have backed off from the miller and Urey experiment as proof life happened naturally ? If not then supposedly Miller and Urey has provided mechanisms that produced life.
Here's why fundies such as yourself devote so much energy toward your science loathing agenda: Creationists are almost exclusively Christian Fundamentalists; that is to say, literalists, taking every word of the bible to be the true and infallable word of God. Many echo the sentiments of Henry Morris, previous chief snake-oil salesman in charge fronting for fundie Christian charlatans who you have frequently cut and pasted from:
"But the main reason for insisting on the universal Flood as a fact of history and as the primary vehicle for geological interpretation is that God's Word plainly teaches it! No geologic difficulties, real or imagined, can be allowed to take precedence over the clear statements and necessary inferences of Scripture."
Dr. Henry Morris, Biblical Cosmology and Modern Science (1970) p.32-33
The fundie charlatans are nearly universal in that they view evolutionary science, which flatly contradicts the book of Genesis, as a direct threat to their theology, the foundation of society and a threat to the basis of morality itself.
Ive noticed also, with near universality, that fundies attempt to sidestep the problem by stating, without any evidence to back it up (as usual), that their gawds made the stars, galaxies and intervening space and light from said stars and galaxies, in their present configurations. All this was done, presumably, to give the appearance of a very old, vast universe, and therefore to mislead scientists (and the rest of the rational world) to the spurious conclusion of a big bang that happened about 15 billion years ago.
Kind of a strange thing to do for a God who is "a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he." (Deut. 32:4) Also, Numbers 23:19- "God is not a man, that he should lie..." Also it is said that "Every word of God is flawless." Proverbs 30:5. Are His actions not like His words? Something to think about...
Now explain how through these mechanisms life was formed ? Also show life being observed spontaneous being generated now and if you can't why do you believe in naturalism ?
In spite of your inability to form coherent sentences .. Ive already explained to you (on many occasions), that the precise biological mechanisms that sparked the first existence of life are unknown.
However, because you are forever burdened by a yolk of ignorance you choose to be constrained with (a function of your religious affliction), are you looking for the fact that species are observed to evolve into new species?:
Observed Instances of Speciation
How about some more observed Speciation Events:
Some More Observed Speciation Events
Or are you looking for the fact that there are tons of transitional fossils, showing the transformation of species?
Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ
Here is a one good example out of hundreds you can find within the pages above:
"Three species of wildflowers called goatsbeards were introduced to the United States from Europe shortly after the turn of the century. Within a few decades their populations expanded and began to encounter one another in the American West. Whenever mixed populations occurred, the specied interbred (hybridizing) producing sterile hybrid offspring. Suddenly, in the late forties two new species of goatsbeard appeared near Pullman, Washington. Although the new species were similar in appearance to the hybrids, they produced fertile offspring. The evolutionary process had created a separate species that could reproduce but not mate with the goatsbeard plants from which it had evolved."
This is an example witnessed in nature, not a laboratory (not that it makes much of a difference). Yes, we're talking about plants in this one instance. But it doesn't matter if we are talking about plants, flies, bacterium, dogs or humans-- the biological process is the same-- it makes no distinction. Remember that the shorter the lifespan of the organisms, the easier it is to witness evolution in action.
There are hundreds of clear examples to choose from. You can look at Evidence for Evolution for more examples.
Evidence for Evolution: An Eclectic Survey
So . Im still waiting for your comprehensive description of the hierarchy of gawds who designed your designer gawds.
And why do your gawds lie?
The bibles state that there are winged creatures that go about on 4 legs (Lev 11:20-21).
There aren't. Ooops.
The bibles also state specifically that rabbits chew their cud (Deu 14:7). They don't. Jesus states that there were some standing and listening to him speak who would still be alive to see his second coming (Mat 16:28)... obviously untrue.
He also stated that the world would come to an end during his generation:
Jesus is talking of signs that will happen before the end of the world to his disciples. (Notice: Jesus probably thought the stars were little lights attached to a solid rotating sky dome like everyone else at that time. Imagine just one star "falling to earth"!)
(Mat 24:29 NRSV) "Immediately after the suffering of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; *the stars will fall from heaven*, and the powers of heaven will be shaken. Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see 'the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven' with power and great glory.
(Jesus now says to his disciples that their generation will not pass away before the end of the world)
(Mat 24:34 NRSV) Truly I tell you, *this generation will not pass away* until all these things have taken place.
(Their generation did pass away, but the world didn't end) The evidence is the current existence of the world.
Need more?
Ezekiel predicted Babylon would conquer Egypt and was wrong. It never happened, and can now never be fulfilled.
In Luke 1:26, the angel who appears to Mary to foretell the birth of Jesus says that Jesus will be given the "throne of David", that he will reign over Israel. It never happened, did it?
Here is another factual error. "The love of money is the root of all evil." (1 Timothy 6:10) This is obviously untrue, and a blatantly ridiculous statement. There are sources of evil other than the love of money. Racism, sexism, jealousy, pride, shame, hate-- all these things are evil and can drive someone to murder. I am sure you can think of more, if you try.
Sorry, but hey - if you want to play Lumberjack, try holding up your end of the log.
You, Daws and a few others in this thread most certainly turned to the miller and urey experiment as an answer for origins until You were owned on the issue.
Ive never maintained that Miller and Urey either was, or is, the determining factor for how life began on the planet. I understand you tend to focus on this because you feel it appeals to the loathing you have for science. How sad for you.
Here's why fundies such as yourself devote so much energy toward your science loathing agenda: Creationists are almost exclusively Christian Fundamentalists; that is to say, literalists, taking every word of the bible to be the true and infallable word of God. Many echo the sentiments of Henry Morris, previous chief snake-oil salesman in charge fronting for fundie Christian charlatans who you have frequently cut and pasted from:
"But the main reason for insisting on the universal Flood as a fact of history and as the primary vehicle for geological interpretation is that God's Word plainly teaches it! No geologic difficulties, real or imagined, can be allowed to take precedence over the clear statements and necessary inferences of Scripture."
Dr. Henry Morris, Biblical Cosmology and Modern Science (1970) p.32-33
The fundie charlatans are nearly universal in that they view evolutionary science, which flatly contradicts the book of Genesis, as a direct threat to their theology, the foundation of society and a threat to the basis of morality itself.
Ive noticed also, with near universality, that fundies attempt to sidestep the problem by stating, without any evidence to back it up (as usual), that their gawds made the stars, galaxies and intervening space and light from said stars and galaxies, in their present configurations. All this was done, presumably, to give the appearance of a very old, vast universe, and therefore to mislead scientists (and the rest of the rational world) to the spurious conclusion of a big bang that happened about 15 billion years ago.
Kind of a strange thing to do for a God who is "a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he." (Deut. 32:4) Also, Numbers 23:19- "God is not a man, that he should lie..." Also it is said that "Every word of God is flawless." Proverbs 30:5. Are His actions not like His words? Something to think about...
In spite of your inability to form coherent sentences .. Ive already explained to you (on many occasions), that the precise biological mechanisms that sparked the first existence of life are unknown.
However, because you are forever burdened by a yolk of ignorance you choose to be constrained with (a function of your religious affliction), are you looking for the fact that species are observed to evolve into new species?:
Observed Instances of Speciation
How about some more observed Speciation Events:
Some More Observed Speciation Events
Or are you looking for the fact that there are tons of transitional fossils, showing the transformation of species?
Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ
Here is a one good example out of hundreds you can find within the pages above:
"Three species of wildflowers called goatsbeards were introduced to the United States from Europe shortly after the turn of the century. Within a few decades their populations expanded and began to encounter one another in the American West. Whenever mixed populations occurred, the specied interbred (hybridizing) producing sterile hybrid offspring. Suddenly, in the late forties two new species of goatsbeard appeared near Pullman, Washington. Although the new species were similar in appearance to the hybrids, they produced fertile offspring. The evolutionary process had created a separate species that could reproduce but not mate with the goatsbeard plants from which it had evolved."
This is an example witnessed in nature, not a laboratory (not that it makes much of a difference). Yes, we're talking about plants in this one instance. But it doesn't matter if we are talking about plants, flies, bacterium, dogs or humans-- the biological process is the same-- it makes no distinction. Remember that the shorter the lifespan of the organisms, the easier it is to witness evolution in action.
There are hundreds of clear examples to choose from. You can look at Evidence for Evolution for more examples.
Evidence for Evolution: An Eclectic Survey
So . Im still waiting for your comprehensive description of the hierarchy of gawds who designed your designer gawds.
And why do your gawds lie?
The bibles state that there are winged creatures that go about on 4 legs (Lev 11:20-21).
There aren't. Ooops.
The bibles also state specifically that rabbits chew their cud (Deu 14:7). They don't. Jesus states that there were some standing and listening to him speak who would still be alive to see his second coming (Mat 16:28)... obviously untrue.
He also stated that the world would come to an end during his generation:
Jesus is talking of signs that will happen before the end of the world to his disciples. (Notice: Jesus probably thought the stars were little lights attached to a solid rotating sky dome like everyone else at that time. Imagine just one star "falling to earth"!)
(Mat 24:29 NRSV) "Immediately after the suffering of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; *the stars will fall from heaven*, and the powers of heaven will be shaken. Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see 'the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven' with power and great glory.
(Jesus now says to his disciples that their generation will not pass away before the end of the world)
(Mat 24:34 NRSV) Truly I tell you, *this generation will not pass away* until all these things have taken place.
(Their generation did pass away, but the world didn't end) The evidence is the current existence of the world.
Need more?
Ezekiel predicted Babylon would conquer Egypt and was wrong. It never happened, and can now never be fulfilled.
In Luke 1:26, the angel who appears to Mary to foretell the birth of Jesus says that Jesus will be given the "throne of David", that he will reign over Israel. It never happened, did it?
Here is another factual error. "The love of money is the root of all evil." (1 Timothy 6:10) This is obviously untrue, and a blatantly ridiculous statement. There are sources of evil other than the love of money. Racism, sexism, jealousy, pride, shame, hate-- all these things are evil and can drive someone to murder. I am sure you can think of more, if you try.
Sorry, but hey - if you want to play Lumberjack, try holding up your end of the log.
You, Daws and a few others in this thread most certainly turned to the miller and urey experiment as an answer for origins until You were owned on the issue.
You certainly made every effort to sidestep, dodge and avoid addressing the issues presented to you.
Hollie, how did your copy and paste job address my question ?You, Daws and a few others in this thread most certainly turned to the miller and urey experiment as an answer for origins until You were owned on the issue.
You certainly made every effort to sidestep, dodge and avoid addressing the issues presented to you.
You certainly made every effort to sidestep, dodge and avoid addressing the issues presented to you.
Why are you unable to make any attempt at addressing the origins of your gawds.
Doesn't Harun Yahya have something you can cut and paste?
Why are you unable to make any attempt at addressing the origins of your gawds.
Doesn't Harun Yahya have something you can cut and paste?
Who is side stepping
Why are you unable to make any attempt at addressing the origins of your gawds.
Doesn't Harun Yahya have something you can cut and paste?
Who is side stepping
Your lack of any identifiable ability to offer facts supporting your specious opinions would demonstrate you are the one sidestepping.
Who is side stepping
Your lack of any identifiable ability to offer facts supporting your specious opinions would demonstrate you are the one sidestepping.
Your lack of any identifiable ability to offer facts supporting your specious opinions would demonstrate you are the one sidestepping.
So, what was it I just wrote about "... lack of any identifiable..."
I hadn't realized I was getting "owned". That's often a lot of bluster coming from the party who is unable to address the topic.
So, what was it I just wrote about "... lack of any identifiable..."
Still side stepping ?
You're getting owned in the other thread.
Oh and this one to you might want to rejoin that other forum you were a member of.
Hollie you're a joke.
Have a wonderful day.
...false premise
An argument from false premises is a line of reasoning which can lead to wrong results.[1] A false premise is an untrue proposition that forms the basis of a logical syllogism. Since the premise (proposition, or assumption) is not correct, the conclusion drawn may be in error. However, the logical validity of an argument is a function of its internal consistency, not the truth value of its premises.
For example, consider this syllogism, which involves an obvious false premise:
If the streets are wet, it has rained recently. (premise)
The streets are wet. (premise)
Therefore it has rained recently. (conclusion)
This argument is logically valid, but quite demonstrably unsound, because its first premise is false one could hose down the streets, a street cleaner could have passed, or the local river could have flooded, etc. A simple logical analysis will not reveal the error in this argument, since that analysis must accept the truth of the argument's premises. For this reason, an argument based on false premises can be much more difficult to refute, or even discuss, than one featuring a normal logical error, as the truth of its premises must be established to the satisfaction of all parties.
Another feature of an argument based on false premises that can bedevil critics, is that its conclusion can in fact be true. Consider the above example again. It may well be that it has recently rained, and that the streets are wet. This of course does nothing to prove the first premise, but can make its claims more difficult to refute. This underlies the basic epistemological problem of establishing causal relationships. The adage warns, "Correlated does not necessarily mean causally related".
A false premise can also be a premise that is poorly, or incompletely, defined so as to make the conclusion questionable. The following joke from Plato and a Platypus Walk Into a Bar illustrates the point:
"An old cowboy goes into a bar and orders a drink. As he sits there sipping his whiskey, a young lady sits down next to him. ... She says, 'I'm a lesbian. I spend my whole day thinking about women. ...' A little while later, a couple sits down next to the old cowboy and asks him, 'Are you a real cowboy?' He replies, 'I always thought I was, but I just found out I'm a lesbian'." [2]
The mistake the cowboy makes is that he assumes that the definition of a lesbian is somebody who spends the "whole day thinking about women." The reason the joke works is because in a certain way that definition could apply to lesbians, but it fails to address the point that a lesbian is a homosexual female. The cowboy is neither homosexual nor female; therefore, he is not a lesbian.
Argument from false premises - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
can't make it any clearer than that .
also it's a chicken shit dodge..
OWNED by whom? are you inferring yourself or UR?Ive never maintained that Miller and Urey either was, or is, the determining factor for how life began on the planet. I understand you tend to focus on this because you feel it appeals to the loathing you have for science. How sad for you.So you have backed off from the miller and Urey experiment as proof life happened naturally ? If not then supposedly Miller and Urey has provided mechanisms that produced life.
Here's why fundies such as yourself devote so much energy toward your science loathing agenda: Creationists are almost exclusively Christian Fundamentalists; that is to say, literalists, taking every word of the bible to be the true and infallable word of God. Many echo the sentiments of Henry Morris, previous chief snake-oil salesman in charge fronting for fundie Christian charlatans who you have frequently cut and pasted from:
"But the main reason for insisting on the universal Flood as a fact of history and as the primary vehicle for geological interpretation is that God's Word plainly teaches it! No geologic difficulties, real or imagined, can be allowed to take precedence over the clear statements and necessary inferences of Scripture."
Dr. Henry Morris, Biblical Cosmology and Modern Science (1970) p.32-33
The fundie charlatans are nearly universal in that they view evolutionary science, which flatly contradicts the book of Genesis, as a direct threat to their theology, the foundation of society and a threat to the basis of morality itself.
Ive noticed also, with near universality, that fundies attempt to sidestep the problem by stating, without any evidence to back it up (as usual), that their gawds made the stars, galaxies and intervening space and light from said stars and galaxies, in their present configurations. All this was done, presumably, to give the appearance of a very old, vast universe, and therefore to mislead scientists (and the rest of the rational world) to the spurious conclusion of a big bang that happened about 15 billion years ago.
Kind of a strange thing to do for a God who is "a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he." (Deut. 32:4) Also, Numbers 23:19- "God is not a man, that he should lie..." Also it is said that "Every word of God is flawless." Proverbs 30:5. Are His actions not like His words? Something to think about...
Now explain how through these mechanisms life was formed ? Also show life being observed spontaneous being generated now and if you can't why do you believe in naturalism ?
In spite of your inability to form coherent sentences .. Ive already explained to you (on many occasions), that the precise biological mechanisms that sparked the first existence of life are unknown.
However, because you are forever burdened by a yolk of ignorance you choose to be constrained with (a function of your religious affliction), are you looking for the fact that species are observed to evolve into new species?:
Observed Instances of Speciation
How about some more observed Speciation Events:
Some More Observed Speciation Events
Or are you looking for the fact that there are tons of transitional fossils, showing the transformation of species?
Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ
Here is a one good example out of hundreds you can find within the pages above:
"Three species of wildflowers called goatsbeards were introduced to the United States from Europe shortly after the turn of the century. Within a few decades their populations expanded and began to encounter one another in the American West. Whenever mixed populations occurred, the specied interbred (hybridizing) producing sterile hybrid offspring. Suddenly, in the late forties two new species of goatsbeard appeared near Pullman, Washington. Although the new species were similar in appearance to the hybrids, they produced fertile offspring. The evolutionary process had created a separate species that could reproduce but not mate with the goatsbeard plants from which it had evolved."
This is an example witnessed in nature, not a laboratory (not that it makes much of a difference). Yes, we're talking about plants in this one instance. But it doesn't matter if we are talking about plants, flies, bacterium, dogs or humans-- the biological process is the same-- it makes no distinction. Remember that the shorter the lifespan of the organisms, the easier it is to witness evolution in action.
There are hundreds of clear examples to choose from. You can look at Evidence for Evolution for more examples.
Evidence for Evolution: An Eclectic Survey
So . Im still waiting for your comprehensive description of the hierarchy of gawds who designed your designer gawds.
And why do your gawds lie?
The bibles state that there are winged creatures that go about on 4 legs (Lev 11:20-21).
There aren't. Ooops.
The bibles also state specifically that rabbits chew their cud (Deu 14:7). They don't. Jesus states that there were some standing and listening to him speak who would still be alive to see his second coming (Mat 16:28)... obviously untrue.
He also stated that the world would come to an end during his generation:
Jesus is talking of signs that will happen before the end of the world to his disciples. (Notice: Jesus probably thought the stars were little lights attached to a solid rotating sky dome like everyone else at that time. Imagine just one star "falling to earth"!)
(Mat 24:29 NRSV) "Immediately after the suffering of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; *the stars will fall from heaven*, and the powers of heaven will be shaken. Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see 'the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven' with power and great glory.
(Jesus now says to his disciples that their generation will not pass away before the end of the world)
(Mat 24:34 NRSV) Truly I tell you, *this generation will not pass away* until all these things have taken place.
(Their generation did pass away, but the world didn't end) The evidence is the current existence of the world.
Need more?
Ezekiel predicted Babylon would conquer Egypt and was wrong. It never happened, and can now never be fulfilled.
In Luke 1:26, the angel who appears to Mary to foretell the birth of Jesus says that Jesus will be given the "throne of David", that he will reign over Israel. It never happened, did it?
Here is another factual error. "The love of money is the root of all evil." (1 Timothy 6:10) This is obviously untrue, and a blatantly ridiculous statement. There are sources of evil other than the love of money. Racism, sexism, jealousy, pride, shame, hate-- all these things are evil and can drive someone to murder. I am sure you can think of more, if you try.
Sorry, but hey - if you want to play Lumberjack, try holding up your end of the log.
You, Daws and a few others in this thread most certainly turned to the miller and urey experiment as an answer for origins until You were owned on the issue.
I’ve never maintained that Miller and Urey either was, or is, the determining factor for how life began on the planet. I understand you tend to focus on this because you feel it appeals to the loathing you have for science. How sad for you.So you have backed off from the miller and Urey experiment as proof life happened naturally ? If not then supposedly Miller and Urey has provided mechanisms that produced life.
Here's why fundies such as yourself devote so much energy toward your science loathing agenda: Creationists are almost exclusively Christian Fundamentalists; that is to say, literalists, taking every word of the bible to be the true and infallable word of God. Many echo the sentiments of Henry Morris, previous chief snake-oil salesman in charge fronting for fundie Christian charlatans who you have frequently cut and pasted from:
"But the main reason for insisting on the universal Flood as a fact of history and as the primary vehicle for geological interpretation is that God's Word plainly teaches it! No geologic difficulties, real or imagined, can be allowed to take precedence over the clear statements and necessary inferences of Scripture."
Dr. Henry Morris, Biblical Cosmology and Modern Science (1970) p.32-33
The fundie charlatans are nearly universal in that they view evolutionary science, which flatly contradicts the book of Genesis, as a direct threat to their theology, the foundation of society and a threat to the basis of morality itself.
I’ve noticed also, with near universality, that fundies attempt to sidestep the problem by stating, without any evidence to back it up (as usual), that their gawds made the stars, galaxies and intervening space and light from said stars and galaxies, in their present configurations. All this was done, presumably, to give the appearance of a very old, vast universe, and therefore to mislead scientists (and the rest of the rational world) to the spurious conclusion of a big bang that happened about 15 billion years ago.
Kind of a strange thing to do for a God who is "a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he." (Deut. 32:4) Also, Numbers 23:19- "God is not a man, that he should lie..." Also it is said that "Every word of God is flawless." Proverbs 30:5. Are His actions not like His words? Something to think about...
Now explain how through these mechanisms life was formed ? Also show life being observed spontaneous being generated now and if you can't why do you believe in naturalism ?
In spite of your inability to form coherent sentences….. I’ve already explained to you (on many occasions), that the precise biological mechanisms that sparked the first existence of life are unknown.
However, because you are forever burdened by a yolk of ignorance you choose to be constrained with (a function of your religious affliction), are you looking for the fact that species are observed to evolve into new species?:
Observed Instances of Speciation
How about some more observed Speciation Events:
Some More Observed Speciation Events
Or are you looking for the fact that there are tons of transitional fossils, showing the transformation of species?
Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ
Here is a one good example out of hundreds you can find within the pages above:
"Three species of wildflowers called goatsbeards were introduced to the United States from Europe shortly after the turn of the century. Within a few decades their populations expanded and began to encounter one another in the American West. Whenever mixed populations occurred, the specied interbred (hybridizing) producing sterile hybrid offspring. Suddenly, in the late forties two new species of goatsbeard appeared near Pullman, Washington. Although the new species were similar in appearance to the hybrids, they produced fertile offspring. The evolutionary process had created a separate species that could reproduce but not mate with the goatsbeard plants from which it had evolved."
This is an example witnessed in nature, not a laboratory (not that it makes much of a difference). Yes, we're talking about plants in this one instance. But it doesn't matter if we are talking about plants, flies, bacterium, dogs or humans-- the biological process is the same-- it makes no distinction. Remember that the shorter the lifespan of the organisms, the easier it is to witness evolution in action.
There are hundreds of clear examples to choose from. You can look at Evidence for Evolution for more examples.
Evidence for Evolution: An Eclectic Survey
So…. I’m still waiting for your comprehensive description of the hierarchy of gawds who designed your designer gawds.
And why do your gawds lie?
The bibles state that there are winged creatures that go about on 4 legs (Lev 11:20-21).
There aren't. Ooops.
The bibles also state specifically that rabbits chew their cud (Deu 14:7). They don't. Jesus states that there were some standing and listening to him speak who would still be alive to see his second coming (Mat 16:28)... obviously untrue.
He also stated that the world would come to an end during his generation:
Jesus is talking of signs that will happen before the end of the world to his disciples. (Notice: Jesus probably thought the stars were little lights attached to a solid rotating sky dome like everyone else at that time. Imagine just one star "falling to earth"!)
(Mat 24:29 NRSV) "Immediately after the suffering of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; *the stars will fall from heaven*, and the powers of heaven will be shaken. Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see 'the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven' with power and great glory.
(Jesus now says to his disciples that their generation will not pass away before the end of the world)
(Mat 24:34 NRSV) Truly I tell you, *this generation will not pass away* until all these things have taken place.
(Their generation did pass away, but the world didn't end) The evidence is the current existence of the world.
Need more?
Ezekiel predicted Babylon would conquer Egypt and was wrong. It never happened, and can now never be fulfilled.
In Luke 1:26, the angel who appears to Mary to foretell the birth of Jesus says that Jesus will be given the "throne of David", that he will reign over Israel. It never happened, did it?
Here is another factual error. "The love of money is the root of all evil." (1 Timothy 6:10) This is obviously untrue, and a blatantly ridiculous statement. There are sources of evil other than the love of money. Racism, sexism, jealousy, pride, shame, hate-- all these things are evil and can drive someone to murder. I am sure you can think of more, if you try.
Sorry, but hey - if you want to play Lumberjack, try holding up your end of the log.
