The Big Think Creationism debate
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-08-2013, 05:44 PM
RE: The Big Think Creationism debate
(25-08-2013 04:14 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(25-08-2013 04:03 PM)theword Wrote:  Shiruba, you wrote way too much for me to read. I really dont feel like wasting my time going through all of that.
Here is natural selection: mommy mouse gives birth to 5 brown mice and 5 white mice. The owls can see the white mice better, so they eat the white mice.... pretty soon, we only have (or at least the great majority) brown mice- in that area. White mice may survive perfectly other places.
We have many varieties of chickens, cows, dogs, ect.... But the fact is, they all give birth to other chickens, cows, and dogs. This variety is natural selection.
It's hard to give a definition for evolution- since evolution does not exist. A cow has never turned into a chicken and never will.

You've tipped you hand - you are unwilling to look at the evidence.

You are willfully ignorant and I pity you.
Chas, once again you prove how ignorant you are. Do you want to see some evidence? I will show you. I have a book written in 1995, entitled "Vertebrates." It is written by an atheist professor, Kenneth V. Kardong. On page 189 of this book, Kardong gives a table of "Haeckel's comparison of early embryonic stages." The only problem with this is that Haeckel admitted this to be a fraud in 1910.
Maybe you can educate me on the Brontosaurus? Or Nebraska man? Or Piltdown man? I think it is you who needs a little more studying!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-08-2013, 06:10 PM
RE: The Big Think Creationism debate
(25-08-2013 04:03 PM)theword Wrote:  Shiruba, you wrote way too much for me to read. I really dont feel like wasting my time going through all of that.
Here is natural selection: mommy mouse gives birth to 5 brown mice and 5 white mice. The owls can see the white mice better, so they eat the white mice.... pretty soon, we only have (or at least the great majority) brown mice- in that area. White mice may survive perfectly other places.
We have many varieties of chickens, cows, dogs, ect.... But the fact is, they all give birth to other chickens, cows, and dogs. This variety is natural selection.
It's hard to give a definition for evolution- since evolution does not exist. A cow has never turned into a chicken and never will.





^This is not evolution.

Thats one of the first times people have said my posts are too long but its filled with the information regardless. You already wasted your time believing in fallacies so it won't be that much learning about the evidence of evolution.

Yes that is an example of natural selection. Now we do have varieties of chickens, dogs, cats, cows and pigs and yes you are correct that they give birth to the same species. If a cow ever turned into a chicken that would actually disprove evolution so you should strongly look for one since you have such a deep hatred for it. Evolution does not change a chicken to a dog. What it does is it takes an species and those that can survive and adapt propagate and those that die simply don't carry their genes to the next generation.

I have asked you for what your substitute for this is and you have yet to tell me. You seem to have a delusional view of evolution so I at least first advise you to read about the Theory of Evolution by means of Natural Selection and come back with your new thoughts because you clearly do not understand what it is.

"Mankind must put an end to war, or war will put an end to mankind." -John F Kennedy

The way to see by Faith is to shut the eye of Reason.” -Benjamin Franklin

It has been a long time. How have you been?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-08-2013, 06:13 PM
RE: The Big Think Creationism debate
(25-08-2013 05:44 PM)theword Wrote:  
(25-08-2013 04:14 PM)Chas Wrote:  You've tipped you hand - you are unwilling to look at the evidence.

You are willfully ignorant and I pity you.
Chas, once again you prove how ignorant you are. Do you want to see some evidence? I will show you. I have a book written in 1995, entitled "Vertebrates." It is written by an atheist professor, Kenneth V. Kardong. On page 189 of this book, Kardong gives a table of "Haeckel's comparison of early embryonic stages." The only problem with this is that Haeckel admitted this to be a fraud in 1910.
Maybe you can educate me on the Brontosaurus? Or Nebraska man? Or Piltdown man? I think it is you who needs a little more studying!

No, Haeckel admitted to have used the wrong plate for some illustrations.

Piltdown man was a fraud - so?

Brontosaurus was a duplicate name for an already named species.

Nebraska man was a misclassification on slim evidence.

If you think any or all of that is counter-evidence or disproof, your reasoning abilities are sorely lacking.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-08-2013, 06:31 PM
RE: The Big Think Creationism debate
(25-08-2013 05:37 PM)theword Wrote:  
(25-08-2013 04:05 PM)Stevil Wrote:  What is the Creationist explanation as to why humans have the gene for creating Vitiman C but why is it broken in the same way within all humans?
Because humans are a unique species made by God. Did I rephrase this good enough for you.? Secondly, you are trying to prove evolution by giving examples of living things that are already here. You have no scientific explanation of how they got here.
What I am trying to do is to show some evidence and then compare the Evolution explaination of it with the Creation explaination.
We haven't thus far shown any explaination.
The evidence, DNA shows that all humans have a faulty gene which means we cannot create Vitamin C.

You said the creation explaination is that "humans are a unique species made by God"
That is not an explaination, it is an assertion, and it does not link to the evidence.
Why did god give humans this faulty gene? Why do all humans have it? We inherit genes from our ancestors, right? does this mean all humans have a common ancestor?
Is this consistent with Creationism?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-08-2013, 06:37 PM
RE: The Big Think Creationism debate
(25-08-2013 06:10 PM)ShirubaDangan Wrote:  
(25-08-2013 04:03 PM)theword Wrote:  Shiruba, you wrote way too much for me to read. I really dont feel like wasting my time going through all of that.
Here is natural selection: mommy mouse gives birth to 5 brown mice and 5 white mice. The owls can see the white mice better, so they eat the white mice.... pretty soon, we only have (or at least the great majority) brown mice- in that area. White mice may survive perfectly other places.
We have many varieties of chickens, cows, dogs, ect.... But the fact is, they all give birth to other chickens, cows, and dogs. This variety is natural selection.
It's hard to give a definition for evolution- since evolution does not exist. A cow has never turned into a chicken and never will.





^This is not evolution.

Thats one of the first times people have said my posts are too long but its filled with the information regardless. You already wasted your time believing in fallacies so it won't be that much learning about the evidence of evolution.

Yes that is an example of natural selection. Now we do have varieties of chickens, dogs, cats, cows and pigs and yes you are correct that they give birth to the same species. If a cow ever turned into a chicken that would actually disprove evolution so you should strongly look for one since you have such a deep hatred for it. Evolution does not change a chicken to a dog. What it does is it takes an species and those that can survive and adapt propagate and those that die simply don't carry their genes to the next generation.

I have asked you for what your substitute for this is and you have yet to tell me. You seem to have a delusional view of evolution so I at least first advise you to read about the Theory of Evolution by means of Natural Selection and come back with your new thoughts because you clearly do not understand what it is.
You are wrong. That is natural selection, something both creationists and evolutionists believe. Evolutionists believe whales came from deer, and birds came from dinosaurs. This is untrue, it didn't happen, hasn't happened, does not happen now, and will not happen.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-08-2013, 06:42 PM
RE: The Big Think Creationism debate
(25-08-2013 06:37 PM)theword Wrote:  
(25-08-2013 06:10 PM)ShirubaDangan Wrote:  



^This is not evolution.

Thats one of the first times people have said my posts are too long but its filled with the information regardless. You already wasted your time believing in fallacies so it won't be that much learning about the evidence of evolution.

Yes that is an example of natural selection. Now we do have varieties of chickens, dogs, cats, cows and pigs and yes you are correct that they give birth to the same species. If a cow ever turned into a chicken that would actually disprove evolution so you should strongly look for one since you have such a deep hatred for it. Evolution does not change a chicken to a dog. What it does is it takes an species and those that can survive and adapt propagate and those that die simply don't carry their genes to the next generation.

I have asked you for what your substitute for this is and you have yet to tell me. You seem to have a delusional view of evolution so I at least first advise you to read about the Theory of Evolution by means of Natural Selection and come back with your new thoughts because you clearly do not understand what it is.
You are wrong. That is natural selection, something both creationists and evolutionists believe. Evolutionists believe whales came from deer, and birds came from dinosaurs. This is untrue, it didn't happen, hasn't happened, does not happen now, and will not happen.

Don't be absurd. Where do you get such nonsense? What you describe is not even close to what evolution is.

Please read a science book. You apparently have never done so.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-08-2013, 06:43 PM
RE: The Big Think Creationism debate
(25-08-2013 06:13 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(25-08-2013 05:44 PM)theword Wrote:  Chas, once again you prove how ignorant you are. Do you want to see some evidence? I will show you. I have a book written in 1995, entitled "Vertebrates." It is written by an atheist professor, Kenneth V. Kardong. On page 189 of this book, Kardong gives a table of "Haeckel's comparison of early embryonic stages." The only problem with this is that Haeckel admitted this to be a fraud in 1910.
Maybe you can educate me on the Brontosaurus? Or Nebraska man? Or Piltdown man? I think it is you who needs a little more studying!

No, Haeckel admitted to have used the wrong plate for some illustrations.

Piltdown man was a fraud - so?

Brontosaurus was a duplicate name for an already named species.

Nebraska man was a misclassification on slim evidence.

If you think any or all of that is counter-evidence or disproof, your reasoning abilities are sorely lacking.
See how you ignore or discard the facts... typical atheist. They were all lies and fraud... why can't you be man enough to admit it?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-08-2013, 06:44 PM
RE: The Big Think Creationism debate
(25-08-2013 06:31 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(25-08-2013 05:37 PM)theword Wrote:  Because humans are a unique species made by God. Did I rephrase this good enough for you.? Secondly, you are trying to prove evolution by giving examples of living things that are already here. You have no scientific explanation of how they got here.
What I am trying to do is to show some evidence and then compare the Evolution explaination of it with the Creation explaination.
We haven't thus far shown any explaination.
The evidence, DNA shows that all humans have a faulty gene which means we cannot create Vitamin C.

You said the creation explaination is that "humans are a unique species made by God"
That is not an explaination, it is an assertion, and it does not link to the evidence.
Why did god give humans this faulty gene? Why do all humans have it? We inherit genes from our ancestors, right? does this mean all humans have a common ancestor?
Is this consistent with Creationism?
Stevil, you must sell used cars for a living. I am not falling for your little box and close game. I stated that there is no proof for evolution, if you care to show some, then please be my guest.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-08-2013, 06:47 PM
RE: The Big Think Creationism debate
(25-08-2013 06:43 PM)theword Wrote:  
(25-08-2013 06:13 PM)Chas Wrote:  No, Haeckel admitted to have used the wrong plate for some illustrations.

Piltdown man was a fraud - so?

Brontosaurus was a duplicate name for an already named species.

Nebraska man was a misclassification on slim evidence.

If you think any or all of that is counter-evidence or disproof, your reasoning abilities are sorely lacking.
See how you ignore or discard the facts... typical atheist. They were all lies and fraud... why can't you be man enough to admit it?

One was a fraud, three were errors. Your characterization is incorrect.

Please read and actual history book and an actual science book. You might actually learn something.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-08-2013, 07:35 PM
RE: The Big Think Creationism debate
(25-08-2013 06:44 PM)theword Wrote:  
(25-08-2013 06:31 PM)Stevil Wrote:  What I am trying to do is to show some evidence and then compare the Evolution explaination of it with the Creation explaination.
We haven't thus far shown any explaination.
The evidence, DNA shows that all humans have a faulty gene which means we cannot create Vitamin C.

You said the creation explaination is that "humans are a unique species made by God"
That is not an explaination, it is an assertion, and it does not link to the evidence.
Why did god give humans this faulty gene? Why do all humans have it? We inherit genes from our ancestors, right? does this mean all humans have a common ancestor?
Is this consistent with Creationism?
Stevil, you must sell used cars for a living. I am not falling for your little box and close game. I stated that there is no proof for evolution, if you care to show some, then please be my guest.
I am trying to present the evidence to you by comparing how alternative explanations deal with the facts.

If a fact leads to a more plausible explanation for one theory in comparison to the explanations offered by an alternative theory then that fact and explanation can be considered as evidence for said theory.

Evolution has a very plausible explanation of why all humans have a faulty gene in regards to Vitiman C. It's because genes mutate and these mutations have been inhereted via a common ancestor.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: