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.
actually, doesn't it show I have doubts about YOUR position?.......????....when have I ever been in a corner?......lol....this from someone who thinks man made green house gases caused global warming 150k years ago....
Haha, what are you even talking about. It's fun watching Hollie back you into a corner to the point where you just blurt out whatever random defense you can come up with.You really have a lot of problems with this don't you? It shows that you have enormous doubt in your position.okay....no single celled organism has ever evolved into a multicelled organism.....thus, the first creature to randomly develop DNA (if it even existed) never passed it on to anyone......Prove that it can't orActually, it's you, who should consider the ramifications of the religion you were indoctrinated with.????....are you another who has never considered the ramifications of what you claim to believe?....Ok, now I'm BEGGING YOU, read up on evolution, PUUULLLLEEEAAASSSEEEEE!if one truly believes in macro-evolution we have a common ancestor with pine trees.....Except that man also shares about90 percent of his dna with pigs and mice did we evolve from a mouse like creature too?So the theory of evolution does not claim that man evolved from an ape like creature?
Given the similarity of humans to apes, the idea of a common ancestor is pretty logical. Hard to deny.
Our sentience has allowed us to explore. As you move further away from humans, you find corollaries of human behavior that reside in us still, that have proven successful evolutionarily throughout time, and are maintained, and you also see hints of where our sentience comes from.
That's why we see a degree of self-awareness in chimpanzees but not at all in ants -- yet hierarchal structuring of both societies have similarities. Are there offshoots? Yes, nature is not perfect, and never has it been claimed it is, and what do we see? An imperfect nature, with a lot of starts and stops, successes and failures.
We have evolved a sense of survival, it is evident in almost every animal, and the methods to which we go to survive get more complex as -- surprise! -- the higher towards sentience you go. At the same time, we also see vestiges of self-sacrifice for the greater good, just like a lowly bee will sting an invader and die, for the greater good of the hive.
Also, why would gawds create mankind out of dust, give him sentience, a special place in the universe, and then give animals such similar abilities-just at a lower "wattage"?
Yet more confusion, making it seem as though we evolved our characteristics from animals similar to us, who share 99.9% of our DNA, instead of humans being qualitatively different. Why would a gawd do this, particularly when the bible says man will have dominion over all beasts?
What is more likely, that the gawds purposely made these similarities so to confuse and confound us, or the tales and fables were set down within the limited parameters of knowledge of the natural world that existed at the time?
why WOULDN'T an intelligent designer continue to use DNA in all his creation....DNA works.......a better question would be, how would something as efficient as DNA simply evolve randomly.....
actually, you gave me options.....you said prove it OROh, and btw, I said
And if you actually read up on all that shit, you could know as much about it as scientists currently do, then you could stop worrying so much that your bible is nonsense and you could then move on. Hint: start by looking up the word zygote.second.....trillions and trillions of single celled organisms reproduce every day.......yet in the last thousand years, not a single new multicelled creature has evolved.....
. Ok, so so what if the bible is wrong?
I'm sorry Billy.....I realize that discussion has been challenging to you but the human reproductive system is not an example of evolution.....you'll just have to deal with that fact.....the zygote is not a different species.....And if you actually read up on all that shit, you could know as much about it as scientists currently do, then you could stop worrying so much that your bible is nonsense and you could then move on. Hint: start by looking up the word zygote.second.....trillions and trillions of single celled organisms reproduce every day.......yet in the last thousand years, not a single new multicelled creature has evolved.....
I said "start" there, now keep going....I'm sorry Billy.....I realize that discussion has been challenging to you but the human reproductive system is not an example of evolution.....you'll just have to deal with that fact.....the zygote is not a different species.....And if you actually read up on all that shit, you could know as much about it as scientists currently do, then you could stop worrying so much that your bible is nonsense and you could then move on. Hint: start by looking up the word zygote.second.....trillions and trillions of single celled organisms reproduce every day.......yet in the last thousand years, not a single new multicelled creature has evolved.....
Of course you find it ridiculous, it's a direct challenge to your fundamentalist beliefs.the claim there is evidence for it is why I find it ridiculous......if one truly believes in macro-evolution we have a common ancestor with pine trees.....Except that man also shares about90 percent of his dna with pigs and mice did we evolve from a mouse like creature too?So the theory of evolution does not claim that man evolved from an ape like creature?
Given the similarity of humans to apes, the idea of a common ancestor is pretty logical. Hard to deny.
Um as a matter of fact, yes we do share at least some common ancestry with pine trees. As well as every other living thing on this planet. Personally I don't see why people like you find that notion ridiculous. I find it wondrous but it doesn't matter how I feel about it because there is evidence for it.
As usual, you announce your appalling lack of a science vocabulary.the claim there is evidence for it is why I find it ridiculous......if one truly believes in macro-evolution we have a common ancestor with pine trees.....Except that man also shares about90 percent of his dna with pigs and mice did we evolve from a mouse like creature too?So the theory of evolution does not claim that man evolved from an ape like creature?
Given the similarity of humans to apes, the idea of a common ancestor is pretty logical. Hard to deny.
Um as a matter of fact, yes we do share at least some common ancestry with pine trees. As well as every other living thing on this planet. Personally I don't see why people like you find that notion ridiculous. I find it wondrous but it doesn't matter how I feel about it because there is evidence for it.
It's a false claim that "no single celled organism has ever evolved into a multicelled organism".okay....no single celled organism has ever evolved into a multicelled organism.....thus, the first creature to randomly develop DNA (if it even existed) never passed it on to anyone......Prove that it can't orActually, it's you, who should consider the ramifications of the religion you were indoctrinated with.????....are you another who has never considered the ramifications of what you claim to believe?....Ok, now I'm BEGGING YOU, read up on evolution, PUUULLLLEEEAAASSSEEEEE!if one truly believes in macro-evolution we have a common ancestor with pine trees.....Except that man also shares about90 percent of his dna with pigs and mice did we evolve from a mouse like creature too?So the theory of evolution does not claim that man evolved from an ape like creature?
Given the similarity of humans to apes, the idea of a common ancestor is pretty logical. Hard to deny.
Our sentience has allowed us to explore. As you move further away from humans, you find corollaries of human behavior that reside in us still, that have proven successful evolutionarily throughout time, and are maintained, and you also see hints of where our sentience comes from.
That's why we see a degree of self-awareness in chimpanzees but not at all in ants -- yet hierarchal structuring of both societies have similarities. Are there offshoots? Yes, nature is not perfect, and never has it been claimed it is, and what do we see? An imperfect nature, with a lot of starts and stops, successes and failures.
We have evolved a sense of survival, it is evident in almost every animal, and the methods to which we go to survive get more complex as -- surprise! -- the higher towards sentience you go. At the same time, we also see vestiges of self-sacrifice for the greater good, just like a lowly bee will sting an invader and die, for the greater good of the hive.
Also, why would gawds create mankind out of dust, give him sentience, a special place in the universe, and then give animals such similar abilities-just at a lower "wattage"?
Yet more confusion, making it seem as though we evolved our characteristics from animals similar to us, who share 99.9% of our DNA, instead of humans being qualitatively different. Why would a gawd do this, particularly when the bible says man will have dominion over all beasts?
What is more likely, that the gawds purposely made these similarities so to confuse and confound us, or the tales and fables were set down within the limited parameters of knowledge of the natural world that existed at the time?
why WOULDN'T an intelligent designer continue to use DNA in all his creation....DNA works.......a better question would be, how would something as efficient as DNA simply evolve randomly.....
Of course, the issue you cannot reconcile is that evolutionary processes act on biological organisms over periods of billions of years, not less than 6,000 years.second.....trillions and trillions of single celled organisms reproduce every day.......yet in the last thousand years, not a single new multicelled creature has evolved.....
no where to go....I said "start" there, now keep going....I'm sorry Billy.....I realize that discussion has been challenging to you but the human reproductive system is not an example of evolution.....you'll just have to deal with that fact.....the zygote is not a different species.....And if you actually read up on all that shit, you could know as much about it as scientists currently do, then you could stop worrying so much that your bible is nonsense and you could then move on. Hint: start by looking up the word zygote.second.....trillions and trillions of single celled organisms reproduce every day.......yet in the last thousand years, not a single new multicelled creature has evolved.....
So how does it go in your world again? A magical invisible being poofed everything into existence fully formed? Brah, you need to get a grip on things.no where to go....I said "start" there, now keep going....I'm sorry Billy.....I realize that discussion has been challenging to you but the human reproductive system is not an example of evolution.....you'll just have to deal with that fact.....the zygote is not a different species.....And if you actually read up on all that shit, you could know as much about it as scientists currently do, then you could stop worrying so much that your bible is nonsense and you could then move on. Hint: start by looking up the word zygote.second.....trillions and trillions of single celled organisms reproduce every day.......yet in the last thousand years, not a single new multicelled creature has evolved.....
. Ok, so so what if the bible is wrong?
/shrugs......prove that it is or
/shrugs......prove that it is orIt's a false claim that "no single celled organism has ever evolved into a multicelled organism".okay....no single celled organism has ever evolved into a multicelled organism.....thus, the first creature to randomly develop DNA (if it even existed) never passed it on to anyone......Prove that it can't orActually, it's you, who should consider the ramifications of the religion you were indoctrinated with.????....are you another who has never considered the ramifications of what you claim to believe?....Ok, now I'm BEGGING YOU, read up on evolution, PUUULLLLEEEAAASSSEEEEE!if one truly believes in macro-evolution we have a common ancestor with pine trees.....Except that man also shares about90 percent of his dna with pigs and mice did we evolve from a mouse like creature too?So the theory of evolution does not claim that man evolved from an ape like creature?
Given the similarity of humans to apes, the idea of a common ancestor is pretty logical. Hard to deny.
Our sentience has allowed us to explore. As you move further away from humans, you find corollaries of human behavior that reside in us still, that have proven successful evolutionarily throughout time, and are maintained, and you also see hints of where our sentience comes from.
That's why we see a degree of self-awareness in chimpanzees but not at all in ants -- yet hierarchal structuring of both societies have similarities. Are there offshoots? Yes, nature is not perfect, and never has it been claimed it is, and what do we see? An imperfect nature, with a lot of starts and stops, successes and failures.
We have evolved a sense of survival, it is evident in almost every animal, and the methods to which we go to survive get more complex as -- surprise! -- the higher towards sentience you go. At the same time, we also see vestiges of self-sacrifice for the greater good, just like a lowly bee will sting an invader and die, for the greater good of the hive.
Also, why would gawds create mankind out of dust, give him sentience, a special place in the universe, and then give animals such similar abilities-just at a lower "wattage"?
Yet more confusion, making it seem as though we evolved our characteristics from animals similar to us, who share 99.9% of our DNA, instead of humans being qualitatively different. Why would a gawd do this, particularly when the bible says man will have dominion over all beasts?
What is more likely, that the gawds purposely made these similarities so to confuse and confound us, or the tales and fables were set down within the limited parameters of knowledge of the natural world that existed at the time?
why WOULDN'T an intelligent designer continue to use DNA in all his creation....DNA works.......a better question would be, how would something as efficient as DNA simply evolve randomly.....
Lies and falsehoods intended to protect your extremist beliefs are not going to protect your bankrupt arguments.
150,000 year old AGW you say?....Of course, the issue you cannot reconcile is that evolutionary processes act on biological organisms over periods of billions of years, not less than 6,000 years.second.....trillions and trillions of single celled organisms reproduce every day.......yet in the last thousand years, not a single new multicelled creature has evolved.....
does it have DNA or something new?.....Every so often science discovers a previously unknown organism. What they don't answer is whether the organism was always there and just discovered, or whether it evolved. A thousand years isn't nearly enough time for the evolution of anything. However it's not a thousand years, but the millions of years before that too.
get a grip on life spontaneously crawling out of a mud puddle?.......So how does it go in your world again? A magical invisible being poofed everything into existence fully formed? Brah, you need to get a grip on things.no where to go....I said "start" there, now keep going....I'm sorry Billy.....I realize that discussion has been challenging to you but the human reproductive system is not an example of evolution.....you'll just have to deal with that fact.....the zygote is not a different species.....And if you actually read up on all that shit, you could know as much about it as scientists currently do, then you could stop worrying so much that your bible is nonsense and you could then move on. Hint: start by looking up the word zygote.second.....trillions and trillions of single celled organisms reproduce every day.......yet in the last thousand years, not a single new multicelled creature has evolved.....
Religious extremism is a dead end.no where to go....I said "start" there, now keep going....I'm sorry Billy.....I realize that discussion has been challenging to you but the human reproductive system is not an example of evolution.....you'll just have to deal with that fact.....the zygote is not a different species.....And if you actually read up on all that shit, you could know as much about it as scientists currently do, then you could stop worrying so much that your bible is nonsense and you could then move on. Hint: start by looking up the word zygote.second.....trillions and trillions of single celled organisms reproduce every day.......yet in the last thousand years, not a single new multicelled creature has evolved.....
And once again, you embarrass yourself with a complete lack of understanding regarding biological evolution.get a grip on life spontaneously crawling out of a mud puddle?.......So how does it go in your world again? A magical invisible being poofed everything into existence fully formed? Brah, you need to get a grip on things.no where to go....I said "start" there, now keep going....I'm sorry Billy.....I realize that discussion has been challenging to you but the human reproductive system is not an example of evolution.....you'll just have to deal with that fact.....the zygote is not a different species.....And if you actually read up on all that shit, you could know as much about it as scientists currently do, then you could stop worrying so much that your bible is nonsense and you could then move on. Hint: start by looking up the word zygote.second.....trillions and trillions of single celled organisms reproduce every day.......yet in the last thousand years, not a single new multicelled creature has evolved.....
Babbling?150,000 year old AGW you say?....Of course, the issue you cannot reconcile is that evolutionary processes act on biological organisms over periods of billions of years, not less than 6,000 years.second.....trillions and trillions of single celled organisms reproduce every day.......yet in the last thousand years, not a single new multicelled creature has evolved.....
