Just another bible lie

Originally posted by RJHinds
I am waiting for them to do all the tests and have them all peer reviewed by scientists that believe in creation.

You mean the 700 creationist scientists vs the 400,000 evil ones?

Originally posted by sonhouse
You mean the 700 creationist scientists vs the 400,000 evil ones?

Whatever.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Whatever.

Not whatever, that is a telling number.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Not whatever, that is a telling number.

Well, the 400,000 or so evil scientists will still have to do the tests by the scientific method to prove anything. Just stating their opinions on data does not prove anything. We can't take opinions to the bank, right?

Originally posted by RJHinds
Well, the 400,000 or so evil scientists will still have to do the tests by the scientific method to prove anything. Just stating their opinions on data does not prove anything. We can't take opinions to the bank, right?

You have a sick idea as to what is opinion and what is valid scientific method.

It is the EXACT same method used in evolution, age of the Earth, Geology, seismology, medical sciences, atmospheric sciences and all the others.

When 400,000 scientists agree on a theory and 700 or so hate it, too bad for the 700.

You just grouse about valid results, a voice bleating in the wilderness while the real world goes right on by you, leaving you a thousand years behind the real world.

You would really love to be put back in time where you really belong, around the year 1000, you could stump up the Crusades.

Originally posted by sonhouse
You have a sick idea as to what is opinion and what is valid scientific method.

It is the EXACT same method used in evolution, age of the Earth, Geology, seismology, medical sciences, atmospheric sciences and all the others.

When 400,000 scientists agree on a theory and 700 or so hate it, too bad for the 700.

You just grouse about valid results, a ...[text shortened]... put back in time where you really belong, around the year 1000, you could stump up the Crusades.

Evolution is a belief system, not a valid science.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Evolution is a belief system, not a valid science.

You don't know much about evolution. You don't know much about scientific methods. So when you say that evolution is not a valid science, you are wrong because of your ignorance.

If you do learn some evolution, if you do learn some scientific methods, you know that you will change your mind about this. You are scared to death to even try.

Originally posted by FabianFnas
You don't know much about evolution. You don't know much about scientific methods. So when you say that evolution is not a valid science, you are wrong because of your ignorance.

If you do learn some evolution, if you do learn some scientific methods, you know that you will change your mind about this. You are scared to death to even try.

When I was in college doing experiments by the scientific method, we were required to observe and repeat our result as part of the scientific method. Perhaps modern evolution scientists no longer want to follow that part of the scientific method because it does not work for evolution.

Scientists have done experiments with the fruit fly for years and no evolution was observed. They did everything they could think to them over large number of generations and were only able to reproduce a lot of deformed and damaged fruit flies.

Therefore, I believe anyone with normal intelligence should understand that evolution is not a proven science, but only a belief.

Originally posted by RJHinds
When I was in college doing experiments by the scientific method, we were required to observe and repeat our result as part of the scientific method. Perhaps modern evolution scientists no longer want to follow that part of the scientific method because it does not work for evolution.

Scientists have done experiments with the fruit fly for years and no e ...[text shortened]... normal intelligence should understand that evolution is not a proven science, but only a belief.

If you believe in evilution, then you assume that evolution brings tigers out of fruitflies. That has nothing to do with science, but is only creational desinformation.

Evolution is proven, time after time, and you evilutionists don’t notice it. Why? Because you evilutionists get your information through Youtube from creational sources.

Learn some real evolution instead, and scientific methods, and then you will know more. Now you're just making an ass out of yourself.

Originally posted by RJHinds
When I was in college doing experiments by the scientific method, we were required to observe and repeat our result as part of the scientific method. Perhaps modern evolution scientists no longer want to follow that part of the scientific method because it does not work for evolution.

Scientists have done experiments with the fruit fly for years and no e ...[text shortened]... normal intelligence should understand that evolution is not a proven science, but only a belief.

Here is one example of the scientific method:

http://phys.org/news/2014-04-scientific-evidence-antimicrobial-ingredients-consumer.html

Following the evidence trail.

Or this:

http://phys.org/news/2014-03-methane-producing-microbes-responsible-largest-mass.html

Follow the evidence.

Or this:

Evidence of evolution:

http://anthro.palomar.edu/evolve/evolve_3.htm

My guess is you will just again put your hands to your ears going "I can't hear you, I can't hear you" like a 5 year old. I dare you to read all three of MY links since you put up dozens of yours.

Originally posted by FabianFnas
If you believe in evilution, then you assume that evolution brings tigers out of fruitflies. That has nothing to do with science, but is only creational desinformation.

Evolution is proven, time after time, and you evilutionists don’t notice it. Why? Because you evilutionists get your information through Youtube from creational sources.

Learn some r ...[text shortened]... scientific methods, and then you will know more. Now you're just making an ass out of yourself.

I am referring to evolutionists like Richard Dawkins and Jerry Coyne. Jerry Coyne believes whales evolved from some type of land animal that is probably extinct. Richard Dawkins believes an extinct ape changed into a man. They believe one kind has evolved into another kind like the about examples. I believe those ideas are evil and that is why I call it evilution even though they call it evolution.

The theory of evolution means something different to everybody and I have already read about many of them. Some people think adaption and minor changes in inherited characteristics is evoution and give that definition because they are ignorant and don't understand evolution. It appears that you may be one of those people that don't know the difference.

Richard Dawkins has said that evolution happened in the distant past and does not happen today with modern animals. That means his type of evolution can not be proven because it does not happen today. Therefore, it can not be observed or reproduced in accordance with the scientific method. That makes evolution a belief and not science.

Originally posted by FabianFnas
If you believe in evilution, then you assume that evolution brings tigers out of fruitflies. That has nothing to do with science, but is only creational desinformation.

Evolution is proven, time after time, and you evilutionists don’t notice it. Why? Because you evilutionists get your information through Youtube from creational sources.

Learn some r ...[text shortened]... scientific methods, and then you will know more. Now you're just making an ass out of yourself.

He is against ideas and thinking because those that think for themselves and form their own ideas will surely think his religious beliefs are all wrong. Can't have that! Thinking is dangerously anti-creationist and therefore EVIL!

Originally posted by sonhouse
Here is one example of the scientific method:

http://phys.org/news/2014-04-scientific-evidence-antimicrobial-ingredients-consumer.html

Following the evidence trail.

Or this:

http://phys.org/news/2014-03-methane-producing-microbes-responsible-largest-mass.html

Follow the evidence.

Or this:

Evidence of evolution:

http://anthro.palomar. ...[text shortened]... u" like a 5 year old. I dare you to read all three of MY links since you put up dozens of yours.

Your are like FabianFnas, who is ignorant of the main theory of evolution. You give me evidence such as wolves, dogs, and foxes in the canine kind as proof of evolution. This is not real evolution, but, as I informed FabianFnas, it is proof that changes in characteristics, like appearance, can change through selective breeding.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Your are like FabianFnas, who is ignorant of the main theory of evolution.

Excuse me, you say that you know more about evolution than I do? From where have you got that impression? Is it you who wrote that, or was it Alzheimer? You really have to think first before you write.

You really are a near genius among the morons...

Originally posted by RJHinds
Your are like FabianFnas, who is ignorant of the main theory of evolution. You give me evidence such as wolves, dogs, and foxes in the canine kind as proof of evolution. This is not real evolution, but, as I informed FabianFnas, it is proof that changes in characteristics, like appearance, can change through selective breeding.

Exactly where in my posts did I say dogs were proof of evolution? Dogs are proof of selective breeding but they are still Canines. You don't take Wolves and turn them into turnips, we never suggested such a thing and you know that full well.

The Wolf to dog thing only took a few thousand years of selective breeding and you can have many different body types from the tiny to the gigantic Mastiff which all came about in something like 10 or 20 thousand years.

Real evolution, which dogs are not, takes a thousand times longer. BTW, Whales ARE former land animals whether or not you want to believe it.

For instance, Manatee's in Florida are related to Elephants, so millions of years ago the proto land animal that became elephants also had a side tree that went back to being aquatic and they became Manatee's.

And OF COURSE you will totally reject all I just wrote, totally expected from a self mutilated self lobotomized 100% brainwashed mind you have.