Spirituality
21 Oct 14
- Joined
- 31 Aug 06
- Moves
- 40565
02 Nov 14
Originally posted by josephwAn illusion that's proven practically useful in predicting events that deepens our understanding of the biological world such that we can produce ever more efficient and useful medicines, among many other things. Wait a minute. Does that even qualify as an illusion?
Evolution is an illusion.
02 Nov 14
Originally posted by C HessIt is learning of the truth of the creators design in biology and all science rather than the errors in the fairy tale illusion of evolution that has deepened our understanding, so we can produce more useful medicine and machinery.
An illusion that's proven practically useful in predicting events that deepens our understanding of the biological world such that we can produce ever more efficient and useful medicines, among many other things. Wait a minute. Does that even qualify as an illusion?
The evolution theory supposes that everything in nature came about by chance from the beginning and developed little by little to become more complex over millions and billions of years. Atheists, like Richard Dawkins and C Hess, believe that things in nature, such as DNA and radar in bats, only presents the illusion of design by an intelligent mind.
By chance some of us now appear to have been designed to have intelligent minds of our own, but of course the atheist evolutionists know that is just an illusion because they know nothing in biology is truly designed. But yet some crazy scientists believe they can use their undesigned minds to design useful medicines and machines.
02 Nov 14
Originally posted by RJHindsYou really need to check your meds again. You posted that months ago and the replies showed exactly why you WISH he was stumped.
I would not feel so honored if you can do no better than this in answering a creationists' question:
[b]Richard Dawkins stumped by creationists' question
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaKryi3605g[/b]
02 Nov 14
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsYou love to take things out of context AND you apparently didn't listen to the second half of that same video. He was not stumped. There was an agreement before hand not to bring up that subject but the interviewer did anyway. THAT is why you THINK he was stumped.
It is clear to any reasonably intelligent person that he was stumped.
That was covered months ago. Like I said, check your meds, you need to work on your memory.
- Joined
- 31 Aug 06
- Moves
- 40565
02 Nov 14
Originally posted by RJHindsGene duplication and mutation. Dawkins have written about this, and Susumu Ohno wrote about it back in the seventies, so it wasn't really that hard to answer. I believe I linked to an article a few months back where this process had been observed in bacteria.
I would not feel so honored if you can do no better than this in answering a creationists' question:
[b]Richard Dawkins stumped by creationists' question
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaKryi3605g[/b]
Dawkins has explained why he went silent. He got angry as it dawned on him that he'd been duped into an interview with a creationist. He's made a point out of never giving creationists his time, as it may give the false impression that he takes them seriously. So he's angry and really thinking about how to throw them out.
02 Nov 14
Originally posted by C HessThis has all been pointed out several times before since RJ has posted this at least 3 times in the past year but his deteriorating brain has let him down. He has deteriorated to the point of repetitiveness. It's kind of sad really.
Gene duplication and mutation. Dawkins have written about this, and Susumu Ohno wrote about it back in the seventies, so it wasn't really that hard to answer. I believe I linked to an article a few months back where this process had been observed in bacteria.
Dawkins has explained why he went silent. He got angry as it dawned on him that he'd been duped in ...[text shortened]... ion that he takes them seriously. So he's angry and really thinking about how to throw them out.
02 Nov 14
Originally posted by sonhouseHe was stumped plain and simple. There was no example he could give, because evolution never happened. He could only imagine that in his fairy tale world that millions or billions of years ago it might have magically happened.
You love to take things out of context AND you apparently didn't listen to the second half of that same video. He was not stumped. There was an agreement before hand not to bring up that subject but the interviewer did anyway. THAT is why you THINK he was stumped.
That was covered months ago. Like I said, check your meds, you need to work on your memory.
02 Nov 14
Originally posted by C HessOf course, he had to make up some lie rather than admit the truth and disappoint all his atheist evolutionist fans.
Gene duplication and mutation. Dawkins have written about this, and Susumu Ohno wrote about it back in the seventies, so it wasn't really that hard to answer. I believe I linked to an article a few months back where this process had been observed in bacteria.
Dawkins has explained why he went silent. He got angry as it dawned on him that he'd been duped in ...[text shortened]... ion that he takes them seriously. So he's angry and really thinking about how to throw them out.
02 Nov 14
Originally posted by sonhouseThe sad part is that you guys don't realize that you are following Satan and his demons to the Lake of Fire and Brimstone.
This has all been pointed out several times before since RJ has posted this at least 3 times in the past year but his deteriorating brain has let him down. He has deteriorated to the point of repetitiveness. It's kind of sad really.
