The Evolution Fraud

[Questioner]

A familiar tactic of the religious extremists is to announce their feelings are hurt when their arguments for magic and supernaturalism are met with glaring light of scrutiny.

That's more archaic 19th century nonsense, since it doesn't define what the ambigious term "magic" is to begin with, neither does it "supernatural" - in the sense that thoughts, ideas or mental concepts, such as the very mathematical axioms upon which dated theories, such as those of Bacon's natural sciences are based on to begin with, one could easily assert that thoughts are "supernatural"

I should advise that links to fundamentalist creation ministries masquerading as “science” are useless for a meaningful discussion of the natural world.

Thoughts aren't part of the "natural world", the faith-based axioms which those theories or approximations are based on to begin with, are not only fundamentally contradictory, but themselves are not a part of the "natural world".

I'm honestly thankful that the archaic 19th century natural sciences and their theories and the dated mathematical approximations which they're based on to begin with, not held to by simple people and propagandists in the media because they're "true" in any inherent sense, but simply because they've been around for quite a while and stood the test of time, or simply "make sense" to some people in a very limited and anti-intellectual way which is "convenient" rather than true in any ultimate sense to begin with, akin to archaic forms of conservatism or Toryism.

It's highly probable that new sciences such as computer science and those spawned from the Information age will render those archaic sciences and their hilariously dated and naïve axioms and propositions obsolete except to the serially and severely archaic, holding to them in the same way a traditionalist Catholic incapable of deeper or non-ridged thinking, or having any worldview of approximation of reality which exists within the confines of his favorite propaganda media network, marketed to the level of a 6th grade reading level and indoctrination thereof - would to his dying and archaic faith - much as social media is the archaic, dinosaur media on TV or radio, soon to go the way of Blockbuster video rentals.

The internet is, thankfully, where "irreligion", in the archaic 19th century sense as described above, and the misinformation, lack of education, and 6th grade reading and literacy levels naturally associated with it, has come to die, perhaps likely and possibly for good, much as the very nations and cultural aspects thereof which depend on such archaism and the ignorance of its collective masses, no more educated, literate, or capable of rational though devoid of indoctrination than the average sports or Nascar fan, will come to die as well, having no where left to go in the real world, or the new information economy and its emerging sciences, but to hide in their sheltered little bubbles and echochamber, unable to grasp truth and it's emerging complexities, as opposed to clining to the archaic myths and fables with the legitimacy of the dying natural sciences and Bacon's method as a whole are predicated on for their false and superstitious legimacy to begin with, at least in Britian and America primarily, as opposed to the rest of the world, its economies, and its institutions; meaning that being totally blind and obvious to perhaps 90% of the real world as it is more or less a perquisite for having childish faith in the naïve fables and superstitions associated with such a decepit and utterly nonsensical worldview to begin with.

Most being so stupid or poorly educated, that explaining the basic principles and precepts of reductionism, and the fallacies thereof, such as equating two things as identical merely on the basis of a shared or miniscule similarity or trait, which could be done with any two things made from matter and energy, all other similarities or differences be damned.

Nor even understanding the meaning of contexts and the arbitrations required for the meaning of the various taxonomies or approximations, such as zoology, in which every species and be identified, compared, conflated, or contrasted on the basis of shared taxonomies, much as every member of the animal kingdom itself could be conflated or contrasted with other beings or constructs of matter and energy to begin with, such as rocks.

Simplistic statements and folk wisdom such as "people are apes", are no more 'true or false' than "people are primates", "people are animals", "people are molecules, atoms, matter and energy" - yet even such miniscule facts and logic such as this are lost on the simpler and more-anti-intellectual and anti-aesthetic variety of people, to whom they merely provide some mythical assurance or sense of identity, devoid of higher reason, logic, creativity, and so forth.

Just simple little slogans and mantras for simple, 19th century people and relics of a dead or dying day and age altogether, good riddance, says the rest of the world and the thinking men and women contained within it, and comprising of it.

 

[Hollie]

A familiar tactic of the religious extremists is to announce their feelings are hurt when their arguments for magic and supernaturalism are met with glaring light of scrutiny.

That's more archaic 19th century nonsense, since it doesn't define what the ambigious term "magic" is to begin with, neither does it "supernatural" - in the sense that thoughts, ideas or mental concepts, such as the very mathematical axioms upon which dated theories, such as those of Bacon's natural sciences are based on to begin with, one could easily assert that thoughts are "supernatural"

I should advise that links to fundamentalist creation ministries masquerading as “science” are useless for a meaningful discussion of the natural world.

Thoughts aren't part of the "natural world", the faith-based axioms which those theories or approximations are based on to begin with, are not only fundamentally contradictory, but themselves are not a part of the "natural world".

I'm honestly thankful that the archaic 19th century natural sciences and their theories and the dated mathematical approximations which they're based on to begin with, not held to by simple people and propagandists in the media because they're "true" in any inherent sense, but simply because they've been around for quite a while and stood the test of time, or simply "make sense" to some people in a very limited and anti-intellectual way which is "convenient" rather than true in any ultimate sense to begin with, akin to archaic forms of conservatism or Toryism.

It's highly probable that new sciences such as computer science and those spawned from the Information age will render those archaic sciences and their hilariously dated and naïve axioms and propositions obsolete except to the serially and severely archaic, holding to them in the same way a traditionalist Catholic incapable of deeper or non-ridged thinking, or having any worldview of approximation of reality which exists within the confines of his favorite propaganda media network, marketed to the level of a 6th grade reading level and indoctrination thereof - would to his dying and archaic faith - much as social media is the archaic, dinosaur media on TV or radio, soon to go the way of Blockbuster video rentals.

The internet is, thankfully, where "irreligion", in the archaic 19th century sense as described above, and the misinformation, lack of education, and 6th grade reading and literacy levels naturally associated with it, has come to die, perhaps likely and possibly for good, much as the very nations and cultural aspects thereof which depend on such archaism and the ignorance of its collective masses, no more educated, literate, or capable of rational though devoid of indoctrination than the average sports or Nascar fan, will come to die as well, having no where left to go in the real world, or the new information economy and its emerging sciences, but to hide in their sheltered little bubbles and echochamber, unable to grasp truth and it's emerging complexities, as opposed to clining to the archaic myths and fables with the legitimacy of the dying natural sciences and Bacon's method as a whole are predicated on for their false and superstitious legimacy to begin with, at least in Britian and America primarily, as opposed to the rest of the world, its economies, and its institutions; meaning that being totally blind and obvious to perhaps 90% of the real world as it is more or less a perquisite for having childish faith in the naïve fables and superstitions associated with such a decepit and utterly nonsensical worldview to begin with.

Most being so stupid or poorly educated, that explaining the basic principles and precepts of reductionism, and the fallacies thereof, such as equating two things as identical merely on the basis of a shared or miniscule similarity or trait, which could be done with any two things made from matter and energy, all other similarities or differences be damned.

Nor even understanding the meaning of contexts and the arbitrations required for the meaning of the various taxonomies or approximations, such as zoology, in which every species and be identified, compared, conflated, or contrasted on the basis of shared taxonomies, much as every member of the animal kingdom itself could be conflated or contrasted with other beings or constructs of matter and energy to begin with, such as rocks.

Simplistic statements and folk wisdom such as "people are apes", are no more 'true or false' than "people are primates", "people are animals", "people are molecules, atoms, matter and energy" - yet even such miniscule facts and logic such as this are lost on the simpler and more-anti-intellectual and anti-aesthetic variety of people, to whom they merely provide some mythical assurance or sense of identity, devoid of higher reason, logic, creativity, and so forth.

Just simple little slogans and mantras for simple, 19th century people and relics of a dead or dying day and age altogether, good riddance, says the rest of the world and the thinking men and women contained within it, and comprising of it.

Please pay attention. The term “magic” in the context of discussions with religious extremists (yes, Ringtone, that means you), is straightforward.

Similarly, the term “supernatural” is unambiguous; outside the bounds of the natural world.

The rest of your rambling, disjointed screed is vintage Ringtone and the other accounts you have posted under.

 

[Questioner]

A familiar tactic of the religious extremists is to announce their feelings are hurt when their arguments for magic and supernaturalism are met with glaring light of scrutiny.

That's more archaic 19th century nonsense, since it doesn't define what the ambigious term "magic" is to begin with, neither does it "supernatural" - in the sense that thoughts, ideas or mental concepts, such as the very mathematical axioms upon which dated theories, such as those of Bacon's natural sciences are based on to begin with, one could easily assert that thoughts are "supernatural"

I should advise that links to fundamentalist creation ministries masquerading as “science” are useless for a meaningful discussion of the natural world.

Thoughts aren't part of the "natural world", the faith-based axioms which those theories or approximations are based on to begin with, are not only fundamentally contradictory, but themselves are not a part of the "natural world".

I'm honestly thankful that the archaic 19th century natural sciences and their theories and the dated mathematical approximations which they're based on to begin with, not held to by simple people and propagandists in the media because they're "true" in any inherent sense, but simply because they've been around for quite a while and stood the test of time, or simply "make sense" to some people in a very limited and anti-intellectual way which is "convenient" rather than true in any ultimate sense to begin with, akin to archaic forms of conservatism or Toryism.

It's highly probable that new sciences such as computer science and those spawned from the Information age will render those archaic sciences and their hilariously dated and naïve axioms and propositions obsolete except to the serially and severely archaic, holding to them in the same way a traditionalist Catholic incapable of deeper or non-ridged thinking, or having any worldview of approximation of reality which exists within the confines of his favorite propaganda media network, marketed to the level of a 6th grade reading level and indoctrination thereof - would to his dying and archaic faith - much as social media is the archaic, dinosaur media on TV or radio, soon to go the way of Blockbuster video rentals.

The internet is, thankfully, where "irreligion", in the archaic 19th century sense as described above, and the misinformation, lack of education, and 6th grade reading and literacy levels naturally associated with it, has come to die, perhaps likely and possibly for good, much as the very nations and cultural aspects thereof which depend on such archaism and the ignorance of its collective masses, no more educated, literate, or capable of rational though devoid of indoctrination than the average sports or Nascar fan, will come to die as well, having no where left to go in the real world, or the new information economy and its emerging sciences, but to hide in their sheltered little bubbles and echochamber, unable to grasp truth and it's emerging complexities, as opposed to clining to the archaic myths and fables with the legitimacy of the dying natural sciences and Bacon's method as a whole are predicated on for their false and superstitious legimacy to begin with, at least in Britian and America primarily, as opposed to the rest of the world, its economies, and its institutions; meaning that being totally blind and obvious to perhaps 90% of the real world as it is more or less a perquisite for having childish faith in the naïve fables and superstitions associated with such a decepit and utterly nonsensical worldview to begin with.

Most being so stupid or poorly educated, that explaining the basic principles and precepts of reductionism, and the fallacies thereof, such as equating two things as identical merely on the basis of a shared or miniscule similarity or trait, which could be done with any two things made from matter and energy, all other similarities or differences be damned.

Nor even understanding the meaning of contexts and the arbitrations required for the meaning of the various taxonomies or approximations, such as zoology, in which every species and be identified, compared, conflated, or contrasted on the basis of shared taxonomies, much as every member of the animal kingdom itself could be conflated or contrasted with other beings or constructs of matter and energy to begin with, such as rocks.

Simplistic statements and folk wisdom such as "people are apes", are no more 'true or false' than "people are primates", "people are animals", "people are molecules, atoms, matter and energy" - yet even such miniscule facts and logic such as this are lost on the simpler and more-anti-intellectual and anti-aesthetic variety of people, to whom they merely provide some mythical assurance or sense of identity, devoid of higher reason, logic, creativity, and so forth.

Just simple little slogans and mantras for simple, 19th century people and relics of a dead or dying day and age altogether, good riddance, says the rest of the world and the thinking men and women contained within it, and comprising of it.

Please pay attention. The term “magic” in the context of discussions with religious extremists (yes, Ringtone, that means you), is straightforward.

No it isn't.

What do you mean by "magic"? David Blaine? Chris Angel?

Similarly, the term “supernatural” is unambiguous; outside the bounds of the natural world.

That's what thoughts, mathematics, and theories about the natural world built from mathematical approximations and thought are, yes.

 

[OldBiologist]

"You don't have a soul. You are a soul. You have a body." C.S. Lewis

We are not physical bodies with a spirit, we are spiritual beings inside physical bodies. - Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (From memory. If you wish, look it up and make any corrections.)

It’s funny when religious extremists blather on with abstract ideas such as “spirits” and supernaturalism while not submitting any case to support them.

Nothing extreme. It's observable. I think OldBiologist kicked the bucket after I told him as he still didn't believe it like you. He probably couldn't take it that he was wrong all his life while you're still in denial.

No, I’ve been busy. I spend most of my time on a couple other forums. Evolution is as much a fact as molecular biology, radiology, or any other scientific field. Researchers deal with the raw stuff of evolution in labs everyday at the molecular level. Thousands of experiments have been conducted clearly showing evolution of bacteria, viruses, protozoa, fruit flies, etc. or making use of evolution to produce certain results.

You can ignore the science going on all around you, makes no difference, but you should focus your argument where you have the strongest objection, the evolution of higher animals including Homo sapiens as postulated by anthropologists and paleontologists. The huge majority of evolutionary molecular biologists are busy doing actual experiments, manipulating the raw material of evolution, to be concerned about theories on the origin of man.

 

[ChemEngineer]

No, I’ve been busy. I spend most of my time on a couple other forums. Evolution is as much a fact as molecular biology, radiology, or any other scientific field. Researchers deal with the raw stuff of evolution in labs everyday at the molecular level. Thousands of experiments have been conducted clearly showing evolution of bacteria, viruses, protozoa, fruit flies, etc. or making use of evolution to produce certain results.

You can ignore the science going on all around you, makes no difference, but you should focus your argument where you have the strongest objection, the evolution of higher animals including Homo sapiens as postulated by anthropologists and paleontologists. The huge majority of evolutionary molecular biologists are busy doing actual experiments, manipulating the raw material of evolution, to be concerned about theories on the origin of man.

It is you Darwinists who ignore all the science going on all around you. No, fruit flies have NOT "evolved." All that thousands of generations of fruit fly trials have produced are monsters, unable to survive outside their little safe harbors. If you honestly understood protein synthesis and its statistical insuperability,you would not swear allegiance to Darwin, who knew NOTHING about it in 1859.

Titin, the largest protein in your body, is a chain of 33,450 amino acid residues in precise order.

What is 20 to the 33,450th power, the number of possible sequences of a polypeptide that long?

Keep in mind that only 1 in 10 the 77th power sequences is functional, in a protein of 150 amino acid residues long. And there are only 10 to the 80th fundamental particles in the universe.

A>B>C>D, Richard Dawkins childish representation of Magic Selection, doesn't cut it in contemporary science.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

No, I’ve been busy. I spend most of my time on a couple other forums. Evolution is as much a fact as molecular biology, radiology, or any other scientific field. Researchers deal with the raw stuff of evolution in labs everyday at the molecular level. Thousands of experiments have been conducted clearly showing evolution of bacteria, viruses, protozoa, fruit flies, etc. or making use of evolution to produce certain results.

You can ignore the science going on all around you, makes no difference, but you should focus your argument where you have the strongest objection, the evolution of higher animals including Homo sapiens as postulated by anthropologists and paleontologists. The huge majority of evolutionary molecular biologists are busy doing actual experiments, manipulating the raw material of evolution, to be concerned about theories on the origin of man.

It is you Darwinists who ignore all the science going on all around you. No, fruit flies have NOT "evolved." All that thousands of generations of fruit fly trials have produced are monsters, unable to survive outside their little safe harbors. If you honestly understood protein synthesis and its statistical insuperability,you would not swear allegiance to Darwin, who knew NOTHING about it in 1859.

Titin, the largest protein in your body, is a chain of 33,450 amino acid residues in precise order.

What is 20 to the 33,450th power, the number of possible sequences of a polypeptide that long?

Keep in mind that only 1 in 10 the 77th power sequences is functional, in a protein of 150 amino acid residues long. And there are only 10 to the 80th fundamental particles in the universe.

A>B>C>D, Richard Dawkins childish representation of Magic Selection, doesn't cut it in contemporary science.

You would get laughed out of a 7th grade science class.

 

[james bond]

"You don't have a soul. You are a soul. You have a body." C.S. Lewis

We are not physical bodies with a spirit, we are spiritual beings inside physical bodies. - Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (From memory. If you wish, look it up and make any corrections.)

It’s funny when religious extremists blather on with abstract ideas such as “spirits” and supernaturalism while not submitting any case to support them.

Nothing extreme. It's observable. I think OldBiologist kicked the bucket after I told him as he still didn't believe it like you. He probably couldn't take it that he was wrong all his life while you're still in denial.

No, I’ve been busy. I spend most of my time on a couple other forums. Evolution is as much a fact as molecular biology, radiology, or any other scientific field. Researchers deal with the raw stuff of evolution in labs everyday at the molecular level. Thousands of experiments have been conducted clearly showing evolution of bacteria, viruses, protozoa, fruit flies, etc. or making use of evolution to produce certain results.

You can ignore the science going on all around you, makes no difference, but you should focus your argument where you have the strongest objection, the evolution of higher animals including Homo sapiens as postulated by anthropologists and paleontologists. The huge majority of evolutionary molecular biologists are busy doing actual experiments, manipulating the raw material of evolution, to be concerned about theories on the origin of man.

Sorry, I missed your post. I had to do a search just to see if you were posting anymore.

It's understandable that you miss out on the main points such as the supernatural and natural co-existing right in front of you. I just destroyed two of your fellow atheists in another S&T forum. At least, I know you're going to try and stream roll me with biology and ToE. Oh, it's not EIF, but still ToE so you're wrong there. We both know that if evolution was a fact, then both sides would be able to use it, i.e. everyone. We can only use natural selection which creation scientist Alfred Russel Wallace gave us.

As you've discovered, it's only at the molecular level that God has allowed humans to create. Only God can create at the atomic level or below the molecular level. This is more evidence for God just like the big one I demonstrated for you in life spirit or God's breath. It also means no abiogenesis -- which is just modern wording for spontaneous generation that Dr. Louis Pasteur debunked. Only life begats life. All of the examples you give is natural selection. Did Darwin call his theory microevolution?

What new science am I ignoring? Can you provide a few links so I know what you are referring to? BTW, I trust the anthropologists more than the paleontologists. The paleos are too much into evolution, so they are much too fake for me.

Anyway, have you realized that ToE, evolutionary thinking and history contradicts everything that God stated in the Bible regarding science. This cannot be a coincidence. As you may be aware different people from all walks of life wrote the Bible as it was inspired by the Holy Spirit. It took about 1500 years to write and compile to what we have today. OTOH, we have had various secular or atheist scientists write what I call Satan's Antibible in Evolution. Satan is of rebellious nature, so he contradicted everything that God said about science. I can understand a few discrepancies, but not everything. Usually, it means something is terribly bad when you have coincidences such as this. This is more evidence for God and Satan.

Anyway, I'll list some of the differences between fake science (evolution) vs real science (creation):
Abiogenesis vs God creating mature animals
Aliens vs no aliens
Macroevolution (humans from monkeys and birds from dinosaurs) vs only microevolution
Billions of year old universe and Earth vs young universe and Earth (same age)
Earth is not special vs God focused on creating Earth
Multiverses vs universe
Singularity and Cosmic Expansion vs first day
Quantum particles pop in and out of existence vs creation of spacetime
Things happen in the universe through dark energy and dark matter vs God and gravity (?)
Universe is boundless and does not have a center vs universe bounded and galactocentric (Milky Way)
There is no hell nor heaven vs there is
There is nothing after we die vs there is

Anyway, Happy 2020!

 

[bripat9643]

Most of what people believe and postulate about evolution is a fraud, yes, the merits of it, or the other theories of evolution which have existed independently and proceeded Darwin's own take on the subject, or of the other theories or mathematical approximations under the scope of Francis Bacon's scientific methodologies, being a different subject entirely....

Evolution, more often than not, sadly, is just what ugly people use as a surrogate for an imaginary friend or heathen deity, much as is the case in most superstitious and supercilious views and homages to "science", popular science to be more specific... were Francis Bacon still here, he may very well be rolling in his grave, cliché as that one often is... or perhaps he would've just chalked it up to human nature and stupidity in general, of which we are all potentially prone to.

I've never seen such ignorance displayed in print before.

 

[ChemEngineer]

Anyway, I'll list some of the differences between fake science (evolution) vs real science (creation):
Abiogenesis vs God creating mature animals
Aliens vs no aliens
Macroevolution (humans from monkeys and birds from dinosaurs) vs only microevolution
Billions of year old universe and Earth vs young universe and Earth (same age)
Earth is not special vs God focused on creating Earth
Multiverses vs universe
Singularity and Cosmic Expansion vs first day
Quantum particles pop in and out of existence vs creation of spacetime
Things happen in the universe through dark energy and dark matter vs God and gravity (?)
Universe is boundless and does not have a center vs universe bounded and galactocentric (Milky Way)
There is no hell nor heaven vs there is
There is nothing after we die vs there is

Anyway, Happy 2020!

Deep and wide. Rather like God's Brilliant Creations. To imagine and pretend that the wonders surrounding us simply happened is the height of anti-science and it is unintelligent - a word I first read in the Potsdam Declaration rather recently.

 

[james bond]

Anyway, I'll list some of the differences between fake science (evolution) vs real science (creation):
Abiogenesis vs God creating mature animals
Aliens vs no aliens
Macroevolution (humans from monkeys and birds from dinosaurs) vs only microevolution
Billions of year old universe and Earth vs young universe and Earth (same age)
Earth is not special vs God focused on creating Earth
Multiverses vs universe
Singularity and Cosmic Expansion vs first day
Quantum particles pop in and out of existence vs creation of spacetime
Things happen in the universe through dark energy and dark matter vs God and gravity (?)
Universe is boundless and does not have a center vs universe bounded and galactocentric (Milky Way)
There is no hell nor heaven vs there is
There is nothing after we die vs there is

Anyway, Happy 2020!

Deep and wide. Rather like God's Brilliant Creations. To imagine and pretend that the wonders surrounding us simply happened is the height of anti-science and it is unintelligent - a word I first read in the Potsdam Declaration rather recently.

This all started when cnm claimed birds are dinosaurs now. Only one of two so called macroevolution occurrences where one species becomes another. I looked it up under days of creation and it said birds and flying animals were created on day five and land animals on day six. Thus, birds came before dinosaurs and they lived at the same time. It was only after going back and forth with him that everything that the atheists and evolutionists say contradicts the Bible and God's word. Some of these are so far out such as birds from dinosaurs to birds are dinosaurs is positively uncanny. It could not be a coincidence. Usually, bad things that happen together such as a robbery and killing happening around the same time and place are not due to coincidence.

 

[bripat9643]

Anyway, I'll list some of the differences between fake science (evolution) vs real science (creation):
Abiogenesis vs God creating mature animals
Aliens vs no aliens
Macroevolution (humans from monkeys and birds from dinosaurs) vs only microevolution
Billions of year old universe and Earth vs young universe and Earth (same age)
Earth is not special vs God focused on creating Earth
Multiverses vs universe
Singularity and Cosmic Expansion vs first day
Quantum particles pop in and out of existence vs creation of spacetime
Things happen in the universe through dark energy and dark matter vs God and gravity (?)
Universe is boundless and does not have a center vs universe bounded and galactocentric (Milky Way)
There is no hell nor heaven vs there is
There is nothing after we die vs there is

Anyway, Happy 2020!

Deep and wide. Rather like God's Brilliant Creations. To imagine and pretend that the wonders surrounding us simply happened is the height of anti-science and it is unintelligent - a word I first read in the Potsdam Declaration rather recently.

No one ever said they "simply happened." How they happened doesn't mean you get to claim God did it. That's what you believers in the great gaseous vertebrate with a penis are always doing.

 

[bripat9643]

Anyway, I'll list some of the differences between fake science (evolution) vs real science (creation):
Abiogenesis vs God creating mature animals
Aliens vs no aliens
Macroevolution (humans from monkeys and birds from dinosaurs) vs only microevolution
Billions of year old universe and Earth vs young universe and Earth (same age)
Earth is not special vs God focused on creating Earth
Multiverses vs universe
Singularity and Cosmic Expansion vs first day
Quantum particles pop in and out of existence vs creation of spacetime
Things happen in the universe through dark energy and dark matter vs God and gravity (?)
Universe is boundless and does not have a center vs universe bounded and galactocentric (Milky Way)
There is no hell nor heaven vs there is
There is nothing after we die vs there is

Anyway, Happy 2020!

Deep and wide. Rather like God's Brilliant Creations. To imagine and pretend that the wonders surrounding us simply happened is the height of anti-science and it is unintelligent - a word I first read in the Potsdam Declaration rather recently.

This all started when cnm claimed birds are dinosaurs now. Only one of two so called macroevolution occurrences where one species becomes another. I looked it up under days of creation and it said birds and flying animals were created on day five and land animals on day six. Thus, birds came before dinosaurs and they lived at the same time. It was only after going back and forth with him that everything that the atheists and evolutionists say contradicts the Bible and God's word. Some of these are so far out such as birds from dinosaurs to birds are dinosaurs is positively uncanny. It could not be a coincidence. Usually, bad things that happen together such as a robbery and killing happening around the same time and place are not due to coincidence.

The depth of your deliberate ignorance is astounding.

 

[bripat9643]

A familiar tactic of the religious extremists is to announce their feelings are hurt when their arguments for magic and supernaturalism are met with glaring light of scrutiny.

That's more archaic 19th century nonsense, since it doesn't define what the ambigious term "magic" is to begin with, neither does it "supernatural" - in the sense that thoughts, ideas or mental concepts, such as the very mathematical axioms upon which dated theories, such as those of Bacon's natural sciences are based on to begin with, one could easily assert that thoughts are "supernatural"

I should advise that links to fundamentalist creation ministries masquerading as “science” are useless for a meaningful discussion of the natural world.

Thoughts aren't part of the "natural world", the faith-based axioms which those theories or approximations are based on to begin with, are not only fundamentally contradictory, but themselves are not a part of the "natural world".

I'm honestly thankful that the archaic 19th century natural sciences and their theories and the dated mathematical approximations which they're based on to begin with, not held to by simple people and propagandists in the media because they're "true" in any inherent sense, but simply because they've been around for quite a while and stood the test of time, or simply "make sense" to some people in a very limited and anti-intellectual way which is "convenient" rather than true in any ultimate sense to begin with, akin to archaic forms of conservatism or Toryism.

It's highly probable that new sciences such as computer science and those spawned from the Information age will render those archaic sciences and their hilariously dated and naïve axioms and propositions obsolete except to the serially and severely archaic, holding to them in the same way a traditionalist Catholic incapable of deeper or non-ridged thinking, or having any worldview of approximation of reality which exists within the confines of his favorite propaganda media network, marketed to the level of a 6th grade reading level and indoctrination thereof - would to his dying and archaic faith - much as social media is the archaic, dinosaur media on TV or radio, soon to go the way of Blockbuster video rentals.

The internet is, thankfully, where "irreligion", in the archaic 19th century sense as described above, and the misinformation, lack of education, and 6th grade reading and literacy levels naturally associated with it, has come to die, perhaps likely and possibly for good, much as the very nations and cultural aspects thereof which depend on such archaism and the ignorance of its collective masses, no more educated, literate, or capable of rational though devoid of indoctrination than the average sports or Nascar fan, will come to die as well, having no where left to go in the real world, or the new information economy and its emerging sciences, but to hide in their sheltered little bubbles and echochamber, unable to grasp truth and it's emerging complexities, as opposed to clining to the archaic myths and fables with the legitimacy of the dying natural sciences and Bacon's method as a whole are predicated on for their false and superstitious legimacy to begin with, at least in Britian and America primarily, as opposed to the rest of the world, its economies, and its institutions; meaning that being totally blind and obvious to perhaps 90% of the real world as it is more or less a perquisite for having childish faith in the naïve fables and superstitions associated with such a decepit and utterly nonsensical worldview to begin with.

Most being so stupid or poorly educated, that explaining the basic principles and precepts of reductionism, and the fallacies thereof, such as equating two things as identical merely on the basis of a shared or miniscule similarity or trait, which could be done with any two things made from matter and energy, all other similarities or differences be damned.

Nor even understanding the meaning of contexts and the arbitrations required for the meaning of the various taxonomies or approximations, such as zoology, in which every species and be identified, compared, conflated, or contrasted on the basis of shared taxonomies, much as every member of the animal kingdom itself could be conflated or contrasted with other beings or constructs of matter and energy to begin with, such as rocks.

Simplistic statements and folk wisdom such as "people are apes", are no more 'true or false' than "people are primates", "people are animals", "people are molecules, atoms, matter and energy" - yet even such miniscule facts and logic such as this are lost on the simpler and more-anti-intellectual and anti-aesthetic variety of people, to whom they merely provide some mythical assurance or sense of identity, devoid of higher reason, logic, creativity, and so forth.

Just simple little slogans and mantras for simple, 19th century people and relics of a dead or dying day and age altogether, good riddance, says the rest of the world and the thinking men and women contained within it, and comprising of it.

The idea that your superstitious nonsense is some superior brand of intellectualism doesn't pass the laugh test.

 

[bripat9643]

Anyway, I'll list some of the differences between fake science (evolution) vs real science (creation):
Abiogenesis vs God creating mature animals
Aliens vs no aliens
Macroevolution (humans from monkeys and birds from dinosaurs) vs only microevolution
Billions of year old universe and Earth vs young universe and Earth (same age)
Earth is not special vs God focused on creating Earth
Multiverses vs universe
Singularity and Cosmic Expansion vs first day
Quantum particles pop in and out of existence vs creation of spacetime
Things happen in the universe through dark energy and dark matter vs God and gravity (?)
Universe is boundless and does not have a center vs universe bounded and galactocentric (Milky Way)
There is no hell nor heaven vs there is
There is nothing after we die vs there is

Anyway, Happy 2020!

Deep and wide. Rather like God's Brilliant Creations. To imagine and pretend that the wonders surrounding us simply happened is the height of anti-science and it is unintelligent - a word I first read in the Potsdam Declaration rather recently.

This all started when cnm claimed birds are dinosaurs now. Only one of two so called macroevolution occurrences where one species becomes another. I looked it up under days of creation and it said birds and flying animals were created on day five and land animals on day six. Thus, birds came before dinosaurs and they lived at the same time. It was only after going back and forth with him that everything that the atheists and evolutionists say contradicts the Bible and God's word. Some of these are so far out such as birds from dinosaurs to birds are dinosaurs is positively uncanny. It could not be a coincidence. Usually, bad things that happen together such as a robbery and killing happening around the same time and place are not due to coincidence.

There's too much idiocy in that paragraph to bother disentangling all the falsehoods.

 

[james bond]

bripat9643, you are just coming unglued here. It's why nobody should take you seriously in the S&T forum. What kind of degree do you have? HS diploma? GED?

 

[bripat9643]

bripat9643, you are just coming unglued here. It's why nobody should take you seriously in the S&T forum. What kind of degree do you have? HS diploma? GED?

As always, you fail to provide a shred of evidence to support your imbecile claims.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

To imagine and pretend that the wonders surrounding us simply happened

Stupid comment. We are talking about HOW it happened. You nutsacks can still point at all of it and say, "God did that!". Knock yourselves out.

 

[ChemEngineer]

There's too much idiocy in that paragraph to bother disentangling all the falsehoods.

You win the name-calling contest. It's a pathetic claim but it's all yours.

A>B>C>D is not science, it is unintelligent

 

[bripat9643]

There's too much idiocy in that paragraph to bother disentangling all the falsehoods.

You win the name-calling contest. It's a pathetic claim but it's all yours.

A>B>C>D is not science, it is unintelligent

Facts and logic are wasted on true believers like you. That's what it means to have faith. That's why ridicule is the only thing that has any chance of success.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

No one really knows where we came from, or how we got here.

Anyone who thinks they have The Answer is delusional and egotistical.

You can know. You choose not to.