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.
Are you saying vestige features are not evidence? They are. Are they proof of evolution? They are not. You are the one that refuses to deal with it.
Why don't you admit that you put your faith above anything. Including your own eyes.
lol dude.....vestiges are evidence of what?......because of your faith, which you put before your own eyes you believe them to be evidence of evolution......"oh, why should whales have bones in their flippers unless they used to be legs"......how about they have bones in their flippers because bones add support and allow them to swim better.......
Actually those old hip bones that prove they use to walk on land are now used to support the whales huge penis that can find the female whale's vagina from just about any angle. It is a very large and flexible penis. PBS is doing a whole show on animal sex.
So any questions you have, ask science. They have the answers. Maybe not all the answers but certainly a lot more and better answers than your church has.
Are you saying vestige features are not evidence? They are. Are they proof of evolution? They are not. You are the one that refuses to deal with it.
Why don't you admit that you put your faith above anything. Including your own eyes.
lol dude.....vestiges are evidence of what?......because of your faith, which you put before your own eyes you believe them to be evidence of evolution......"oh, why should whales have bones in their flippers unless they used to be legs"......how about they have bones in their flippers because bones add support and allow them to swim better.......
Actually those old hip bones that prove they use to walk on land are now used to support the whales huge penis that can find the female whale's vagina from just about any angle. It is a very large and flexible penis. PBS is doing a whole show on animal sex.
So any questions you have, ask science. They have the answers. Maybe not all the answers but certainly a lot more and better answers than your church has.
lol dude.....vestiges are evidence of what?......because of your faith, which you put before your own eyes you believe them to be evidence of evolution......"oh, why should whales have bones in their flippers unless they used to be legs"......how about they have bones in their flippers because bones add support and allow them to swim better.......
Actually those old hip bones that prove they use to walk on land are now used to support the whales huge penis that can find the female whale's vagina from just about any angle. It is a very large and flexible penis. PBS is doing a whole show on animal sex.
So any questions you have, ask science. They have the answers. Maybe not all the answers but certainly a lot more and better answers than your church has.
Why exactly did God design man with nipples? That one I've never figured out.
Why exactly did God design man with nipples? That one I've never figured out.
????....are your's dead?.....
Why exactly did God design man with nipples? That one I've never figured out.
????....are your's dead?.....
You obviously enjoy yours more than I do but what about man's other vestigial features? Do you enjoy your goose bumps as much?
The story has been told of a person who went back to his university professor many years after completing his degree in Economics. He asked to look at the test questions they were now using. He was surprised to see that they were virtually the same questions he was asked when he was a student. The lecturer then said that although the questions were the same the answers are were entirely different!
I once debated with a geology professor from an American University on a radio program. He said that evolution was real science because evolutionists were prepared to continually change their theories as they found new data. He said that creation was not science because a creationist's views were set by the Bible and, therefore, were not subject to change.
I answered, "The reason scientific theories change is because we don't know everything, isn't it? We don't have all the evidence."
"Yes, that's right," he said.
I replied, "But, we will never know everything."
"That's true," he answered.
I then stated, "We will always continue to find new evidence."
"Quite correct," he said. I replied, "That means we can't be sure about anything."
"Right," he said.
"That means we can't be sure about evolution."
"Oh, no! Evolution is a fact," he blurted out. He was caught by his own logic. He was demonstrating how his view was determined by his bias.
Models of science are subject to change for both creationists and evolutionists. But the beliefs that these models are built on are not.
The problem is that most scientists do not realize that it is the belief (or religion) of evolution that is the basis for the scientific models (the interpretations, or stories) used to attempt an explanation of the present. Evolutionists are not prepared to change their actual belief that all life can be explained by natural processes and that no God is involved (or even needed). Evolution is the religion to which they are committed. Christians need to wake up to this. Evolution is a religion; it is not a science!
Evolution is Religion
Non-sense! Adaptation has been proven in many species. It is illogical to assert that what is true for some species isn't true for others, in this context. The strongest and fastest and smartest, in nature, are the one's that get to mate, eat, hold territory, etc..., and the slowest and weakest and dumbest, do not. This is but one example of adaptation. The white moth that necessarily turned black due to all the soot during the Industrial Revolution in England, is but another.
Interesting to note....that humans, mostly western (modern) humans, are now largely living OUTSIDE of nature, in that the slowest, weakest and dumbest are not only allowed to survive and breed, but are rewarded for doing so by way of welfare and other forms of unnatural support.....in this way, our gene pool is NOT a function of adaptation, and is NOT improving, but instead stagnation, perversion and atrophy (so to speak). This explains a great deal about our current condition. Res Ipsa Loquitur.
interesting theory.....does that explain the recent rise in the number of atheists?.....
lol dude.....vestiges are evidence of what?......because of your faith, which you put before your own eyes you believe them to be evidence of evolution......"oh, why should whales have bones in their flippers unless they used to be legs"......how about they have bones in their flippers because bones add support and allow them to swim better.......
Actually those old hip bones that prove they use to walk on land are now used to support the whales huge penis that can find the female whale's vagina from just about any angle. It is a very large and flexible penis. PBS is doing a whole show on animal sex.
So any questions you have, ask science. They have the answers. Maybe not all the answers but certainly a lot more and better answers than your church has.
The flipper bones are not vestigial, they clearly serve a purpose. The vestigial structures are clearly a pelvis and femur that no longer serve their original function. I don't know about them supporting the penis, that may be why they still exist.
There are plenty of other examples, including a bunch in man himself:
Why exactly did God design man with nipples? That one I've never figured out.
????....are your's dead?.....
You obviously enjoy yours more than I do but what about man's other vestigial features? Do you enjoy your goose bumps as much?
lol.....and what do you think goose bumps are a vestige of......the goose feathers we used to have?.....
that is your profession of faith.....
You're confusing faith with deductive logic. I'm NOT just taking someone's word, I'm using my brain to examine the evidence. If that's not a way to truth, IMO, you're saying God lies to us and we cannot believe the evidence of our senses.
no, not at all....I'm saying you're lying to yourself about the evidence of your senses.....
but DNA and fossils are evidence of God's creation....unless you have some proof you haven't mentioned.....What evidence are you basing your observation on and what conclusions are you drawing from that evidence? Could you please list them out for me.
DNA and fossils, you know, the evidence you ignore and pretend doesn't exist. IMO, it's blasphemous that you would treat the brain God gave you that way. He may be the Creator, but evolution is the agency of His creation. Beyond "let there be light"(The Big Bang), Genesis is an allegory written down by men who didn't understand the intricacies of science that we do today.
So you guys agree that the bible is crap? Cool.but DNA and fossils are evidence of God's creation....unless you have some proof you haven't mentioned.....DNA and fossils, you know, the evidence you ignore and pretend doesn't exist. IMO, it's blasphemous that you would treat the brain God gave you that way. He may be the Creator, but evolution is the agency of His creation. Beyond "let there be light"(The Big Bang), Genesis is an allegory written down by men who didn't understand the intricacies of science that we do today.
True, they can be evidence of creation, but evolution is evidence for how He went about creation.
So you guys agree that the bible is crap? Cool.but DNA and fossils are evidence of God's creation....unless you have some proof you haven't mentioned.....
True, they can be evidence of creation, but evolution is evidence for how He went about creation.
So you guys agree that the bible is crap? Cool.True, they can be evidence of creation, but evolution is evidence for how He went about creation.
On science it is.
On the teachings of Jesus to love thy neighbor, do not judge and respect others it is what I follow.
atheists aren't reviled for not believing in God...they are reviled for being assholes who file law suits all the time.......
You call them irrational for not believing in God.
well no....and everyone reading this forum except you is already aware of that.....for some reason you aren't bright enough to understand that even though its been explained to you several times.....I suspect the reason you can't is that you're an atheist......they don't tend to be the brightest......
I'm not defining what an Atheist is. I am just saying that you don't meet your definition.
To use your analogy, just because you define a human being as an animal which can flap its arms and fly does not mean you can do it. If just means your definition is wrong.
There is a false premise at work all throughout this and that is that an atheist cannot acknowledge that there might be supernatural beings,
because if he does he automatically becomes an agnostic,
the implication being that 'atheist' and 'agnostic' are mutually exclusive.
No, the false premise is that an Atheist lacks beliefs. In the absence of evidence (and I have yet to see any evidence) any position is a belief. The only non-belief based position which one can have without evidence is neutrality. You have stated that you are not neutral. Therefore, you do not lack beliefs. So either the definition is wrong or you are not an Atheist.
You logic runs thus: An Atheist lacks beliefs. I am an Atheist. Therefore, I lack beliefs. But the same logic can state: A human can fly by flapping his arms. I am a human. Therefore, I can flap my arms and fly.
I don't dispute the logic, but I certainly dispute the initial premise.
Why atheists are so reviled for not believing in God
atheists aren't reviled for not believing in God...they are reviled for being assholes who file law suits all the time.......
There is a false premise at work all throughout this and that is that an atheist cannot acknowledge that there might be supernatural beings,
because if he does he automatically becomes an agnostic,
the implication being that 'atheist' and 'agnostic' are mutually exclusive.
No, the false premise is that an Atheist lacks beliefs. In the absence of evidence (and I have yet to see any evidence) any position is a belief. The only non-belief based position which one can have without evidence is neutrality. You have stated that you are not neutral. Therefore, you do not lack beliefs. So either the definition is wrong or you are not an Atheist.
You logic runs thus: An Atheist lacks beliefs. I am an Atheist. Therefore, I lack beliefs. But the same logic can state: A human can fly by flapping his arms. I am a human. Therefore, I can flap my arms and fly.
I don't dispute the logic, but I certainly dispute the initial premise.
I don't where you get 'lacks beliefs' from when we are talking about a single belief.
The atheist does not believe in God. If he becomes dogmatic about it, to the point of insisting with certainty that God cannot exist, then he becomes irrational.
The believer believes in God. If his belief is also dogmatic, to the point of insisting with certainty that God exists, he then is being irrational.
However, the belief in God, even with the concession that God might not exist, is irrational because there is no evidence of God. That is a harsh reality but it is true.
Faith is the alternative to rationality. It should not compete with rationality; it is not meant to.
Non-sense! Adaptation has been proven in many species. It is illogical to assert that what is true for some species isn't true for others, in this context. The strongest and fastest and smartest, in nature, are the one's that get to mate, eat, hold territory, etc..., and the slowest and weakest and dumbest, do not. This is but one example of adaptation. The white moth that necessarily turned black due to all the soot during the Industrial Revolution in England, is but another.
Interesting to note....that humans, mostly western (modern) humans, are now largely living OUTSIDE of nature, in that the slowest, weakest and dumbest are not only allowed to survive and breed, but are rewarded for doing so by way of welfare and other forms of unnatural support.....in this way, our gene pool is NOT a function of adaptation, and is NOT improving, but instead stagnation, perversion and atrophy (so to speak). This explains a great deal about our current condition. Res Ipsa Loquitur.
interesting theory.....does that explain the recent rise in the number of atheists?.....
It is not a theory.
As to your question, I would have to say, yes. The more humans live outside the norms of nature, the less likely they are to be attached to nature, and religion. I think the evidence bears this out, although causation is a tricky thing.
You're confusing faith with deductive logic. I'm NOT just taking someone's word, I'm using my brain to examine the evidence. If that's not a way to truth, IMO, you're saying God lies to us and we cannot believe the evidence of our senses.
no, not at all....I'm saying you're lying to yourself about the evidence of your senses.....
Am I? How can you prove that? I'm not the only one that should have to prove my statements.
