27 Jun 05
Originally posted by LangtreeThere's no point to giving a rational response to a bunch of irrational tripe. If other people want to deal with the ridiculous assertion that ALL scientific dating methods are wrong because a perverse reading of Genesis demands it, that's their dime. I've given up on fools like you; try to make sure someone ties your shoelaces for ya.
Why no rational reply? A typical evolutionist response to a challenge.
- Joined
- 10 Jun 03
- Moves
- 19229
27 Jun 05
Originally posted by no1marauderThere you go agaim, just insults. I have noticed that because you jave no answers to my rebuttals. Therefore, you turn to insults. That only makes a poor reflection on you. I challenge you, if you think you can, prove me wrong. I would wager that you won't because Evolution is in crisis.
There's no point to giving a rational response to a bunch of irrational tripe. If other people want to deal with the ridiculous assertion that ALL scientific dating methods are wrong because a perverse reading of Genesis demands it, that's their dime. I've given up on fools like you; try to make sure someone ties your shoelaces for ya.
27 Jun 05
Originally posted by Langtree🙄🙄 The only thing that is in "crisis" is your sanity.I won't be able to "prove" you wrong, because like dj2becker you have decided on an irreversible conclusion regardless of the evidence. What you wrote originally is absolute gibberish; Lead "leaching" into water and thus changing its atomic structure??????? "Iodized" rock?? Read a book on the natural sciences first, even a junior high school textbook, would improve your pathetic "knowledge".
There you go agaim, just insults. I have noticed that because you jave no answers to my rebuttals. Therefore, you turn to insults. That only makes a poor reflection on you. I challenge you, if you think you can, prove me wrong. I would wager that you won't because Evolution is in crisis.
- Joined
- 10 Jun 03
- Moves
- 19229
27 Jun 05
Here's a quote from an evolutionist, Steven Stanley, Macro-evolution😛atterns and Process. San Francisco W.M Freeman and Co. 1979 , p 79, "The known fossil record fails to document a single example of plyetic evolution accomplishing a major morphologic transition . . ." "The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design . . . has been a persistent and nagging problem, for gradualistic accounts of evolution."
Here's one from David Raup, a geologist, "So the geological time scale and the basic facts of biological change over time are totally independent of evolutionary theory." "In the years after Darwin, his advocates hoped to find predictable progressions. In general, these have not been found-yet the optimism has died hard, and some pure fantasy has crept into the textbbooks." Taken from Evolution and the Fossil Record, Science (vol 213: July 17, 1981 p. 289.
- Joined
- 10 Jun 03
- Moves
- 19229
27 Jun 05
Originally posted by no1marauderInteresting, again no evidence. Just hurling insults and lots of emotions. Evolution is an unproven theory and sheer speculation, that is of a philosophical nature. So keep evolution out of science and in philosophy.
🙄🙄 The only thing that is in "crisis" is your sanity.I won't be able to "prove" you wrong, because like dj2becker you have decided on an irreversible conclusion regardless of the evidence. What you wrote originally is absolute gibberish; Lead "leaching" into water and thus changing its atomic structure??????? "Iodized" rock?? Read a book on ...[text shortened]... l sciences first, even a junior high school textbook, would improve your pathetic "knowledge".
- Joined
- 10 Jun 03
- Moves
- 19229
27 Jun 05
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderWell, the matter is settled, you cannot defend your position at all, but, that doesn't come as a surprise to me. You believe in evolution, probably because of a moral issue rather than a scientific issue. You don't want to acknowledge the fact of the existence of God. If evolution was true, it would be replete with tangible evidence, but alas it is not, so you resort to insults and other irrational behavior. Evolutionists are climbing the mountain of knowledge, only to find the creationists already there.
🙄🙄
27 Jun 05
1 edit
Originally posted by Langtreeyour overconfidence stems from the fact that you feel that no one has proven you wrong beyond a shadow of a doubt. if i made the claim that there is a 900 year old monkey on the 32nd moon in the far-off galaxy of Goobledy-Gook who will fart out pink bananas if you pull his finger, i'm also quite confident no one here will be able to prove me wrong. however, it doesn't make my claim rational.
Well, the matter is settled, you cannot defend your position at all, but, that doesn't come as surprise to me. You believe in evolution, probably because of a moral issue rather than a scientific issue. You don't want to acknowledge th ...[text shortened]... ountain of knowledge, only to find the creationists already there.
i still maintain that evolution makes sense. to suggest that a creator created everything out of thin air is no more rational than any answer i could give you concerning how the TOE is (purportedly) supposed to account for the inception of matter and life. moreover, the idea that satan planted fossils and other evidence for the TOE is not too convincing either.
- Joined
- 10 Jun 03
- Moves
- 19229
27 Jun 05
Originally posted by LemonJelloWell, Lemonjello, No, creationism has been proven to be the logical conclusion. Do you intend on defending your position while refraining from insults and emotions?
your overconfidence stems from the fact that you feel that no one has proven you wrong beyond a shadow of a doubt. if i made the claim that there is a 900 year old monkey on the 32nd moon in the far-off galaxy of Goobledy-Gook who will fart out pink bananas if you pull his finger, i'm also quite confident no one here will be able to prove me wrong. how ...[text shortened]... the idea that satan planted fossils and other evidence for the TOE is not too convincing either.
- Joined
- 10 Jun 03
- Moves
- 19229
27 Jun 05
Originally posted by LemonJelloReading your reply disappoints me; your not demonstrating any rational thought, supported by empirical evidence, remember science is an empirical discipline. Hard cold facts, not speculation, that is philosophy.
your overconfidence stems from the fact that you feel that no one has proven you wrong beyond a shadow of a doubt. if i made the claim that there is a 900 year old monkey on the 32nd moon in the far-off galaxy of Goobledy-Gook who will fart out pink bananas if you pull his finger, i'm also quite confident no one here will be able to prove me wrong. how ...[text shortened]... the idea that satan planted fossils and other evidence for the TOE is not too convincing either.
27 Jun 05
Originally posted by LangtreeNot every creature becomes a fossil. In fact the odds are so much against it that there wouldn't even be a full human skeleton left in all of America in a million years. Yet you expect there to be fossils representing every single stage of evolution?
Here's a quote from an evolutionist, Steven Stanley, Macro-evolution😛atterns and Process. San Francisco W.M Freeman and Co. 1979 , p 79, "The known fossil record fails to document a single example of plyetic evolution accomplishing a major morphologic transition . . ." "The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions ...[text shortened]... xtbbooks." Taken from Evolution and the Fossil Record, Science (vol 213: July 17, 1981 p. 289.
27 Jun 05
Originally posted by Langtreecreationism has not been proven to be anything of the sort. i am a creature of logic and through my rational functions i maintain that creationism makes extremely little sense. in fact, creationism entails faith. faith and reason are like oil and water -- matters of faith have no proof by definition. your beliefs are at best unfounded. at worst, they are just plain wrong.
Well, Lemonjello, No, creationism has been proven to be the logical conclusion. Do you intend on defending your position while refraining from insults and emotions?
when did i insult you or demonstrate emotional outburst? your skin is thin.
27 Jun 05
Originally posted by Langtree🙄🙄😴😴
Well, the matter is settled, you cannot defend your position at all, but, that doesn't come as a surprise to me. You believe in evolution, probably because of a moral issue rather than a scientific issue. You don't want to acknowledge the fact of the existence of God. If evolution was true, it would be replete with tangible evidence, but alas it is not ...[text shortened]... olutionists are climbing the mountain of knowledge, only to find the creationists already there.
- Joined
- 10 Jun 03
- Moves
- 19229
27 Jun 05
2 edits
Originally posted by XanthosNZNo, it's the evolutionists who expect to find fossil record replete with evidence for every stage. I believe that there are systematic gaps. Creatures appearing suddenly fully formed and functional with no intermediary forms. Come on, don't you know your position.
Not every creature becomes a fossil. In fact the odds are so much against it that there wouldn't even be a full human skeleton left in all of America in a million years. Yet you expect there to be fossils representing every single stage of evolution?