Evolutionists, how do you explain this?

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: Tinystarlight

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: firefromabove

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: firefromabove
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I'm not sure how people drawing extinct animals disproves evolution

That's not what I said

How can a single jawbone be the basis for an understanding of what the creature may have looked like

Evolutionists just magically know everything, don't they.

So you don't understand evolution or scientific methods....therefore it's all lies and rubbish?

I fully understand evolution. The problem is that its theoretical and doesn't have much going for it in the "solid evidence" department

Its guesswork resting on assumptions resting on conjecture

Darwin's finches are a pretty good example of evolution in action. It can be argued as adaptation, but physical/physiological changes occurred and were observed.

Also, basically ALL science is theoretical. Science has no problem changing mindset when new evidence arises though.

Darwin's finches are still finches. They made variations in their kind, just like cats or dogs. But if you see those finches in action, they mate with each other and still breed other finches.

???

This is your answer? This is very dishonest.

Well that wasn't a reply to you (or was it?) but it was an example of actual physical changes of a species. Adaptation? Maybe. Then again, ALL evolution could be lumped into that sum, as evolution is basically survival of the fittest, and the best of the best win and continue.

You guys ask for PROOF, then when it is shown brush it off as non-relevant and false. I mean, how serious should we take you when the bar keeps changing?

Then you answer a question with nanananana I know it but I'm not telling.

Tell me, why is a single cell complicated?

You see, this is taught in biology class as proof of "macro-evolution". It just shows that DNA is able to respond to a great degree because of changes in environment. It doesn't show a change in species or "kind" All finches are still finches. And will always be finches. Just like all dogs who change according to their climate and breeding will always be dogs and will be able to breed with other dogs.

That this is proof of evolution is a farce. And very deceptive. And it is shameful schools teach it as proof of evolution. Makes you all look like fools.

originally posted by: firefromabove

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: firefromabove

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: firefromabove
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I'm not sure how people drawing extinct animals disproves evolution

That's not what I said

How can a single jawbone be the basis for an understanding of what the creature may have looked like

Evolutionists just magically know everything, don't they.

So you don't understand evolution or scientific methods....therefore it's all lies and rubbish?

I fully understand evolution. The problem is that its theoretical and doesn't have much going for it in the "solid evidence" department

Its guesswork resting on assumptions resting on conjecture

Darwin's finches are a pretty good example of evolution in action. It can be argued as adaptation, but physical/physiological changes occurred and were observed.

Also, basically ALL science is theoretical. Science has no problem changing mindset when new evidence arises though.

Darwin's finches is evidence that variations of an existing can emerge

Its NOT evidence for the other claims of evolution, that reptiles became birds or that land mammals became whales etc

Not too familiar with his finches I take it?

originally posted by: Jefferton

originally posted by: firefromabove
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I'm not sure how people drawing extinct animals disproves evolution

That's not what I said

How can a single jawbone be the basis for an understanding of what the creature may have looked like

Evolutionists just magically know everything, don't they.

Yes, "God did it" is less magical answer, right?
*eye roll*

Chanting "evolution did it" without proof isn't exactly scientific

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: firefromabove

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: firefromabove

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: firefromabove
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I'm not sure how people drawing extinct animals disproves evolution

That's not what I said

How can a single jawbone be the basis for an understanding of what the creature may have looked like

Evolutionists just magically know everything, don't they.

So you don't understand evolution or scientific methods....therefore it's all lies and rubbish?

I fully understand evolution. The problem is that its theoretical and doesn't have much going for it in the "solid evidence" department

Its guesswork resting on assumptions resting on conjecture

Darwin's finches are a pretty good example of evolution in action. It can be argued as adaptation, but physical/physiological changes occurred and were observed.

Also, basically ALL science is theoretical. Science has no problem changing mindset when new evidence arises though.

Darwin's finches is evidence that variations of an existing can emerge

Its NOT evidence for the other claims of evolution, that reptiles became birds or that land mammals became whales etc

Not too familiar with his finches I take it?

The finches do not serve as evidence for evolution

You've been told it does, but it doesn't

a reply to: Tinystarlight

It just shows that DNA is able to respond to a great degree because of changes in environment.

DNA only changes through mutations. Are you thinking of genes?

Can you explain why you believe this?

originally posted by: firefromabove

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: firefromabove

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: firefromabove

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: firefromabove
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I'm not sure how people drawing extinct animals disproves evolution

That's not what I said

How can a single jawbone be the basis for an understanding of what the creature may have looked like

Evolutionists just magically know everything, don't they.

So you don't understand evolution or scientific methods....therefore it's all lies and rubbish?

I fully understand evolution. The problem is that its theoretical and doesn't have much going for it in the "solid evidence" department

Its guesswork resting on assumptions resting on conjecture

Darwin's finches are a pretty good example of evolution in action. It can be argued as adaptation, but physical/physiological changes occurred and were observed.

Also, basically ALL science is theoretical. Science has no problem changing mindset when new evidence arises though.

Darwin's finches is evidence that variations of an existing can emerge

Its NOT evidence for the other claims of evolution, that reptiles became birds or that land mammals became whales etc

Not too familiar with his finches I take it?

The finches do not serve as evidence for evolution

You've been told it does, but it doesn't

The bible does not serve as evidence of god

You've been told it does, but it doesn't.

See how that works? Except my example actually does show evidence to my theory.

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: Tinystarlight

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: Tinystarlight

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: Tinystarlight

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: MonkeyFishFrog

To the average person a bone is just a bone. How much can one learn from a thigh bone? An immense amount. Right off the bat the shape and angle of the femur head along with the length of the femur neck will tell you how an animal walked or stood.

I liked this part so I figured I'd help with a visual reference.

Now as we see we have 2 similar objects we can recognize, keys. Most people can discern the top key goes to a car and the bottom key goes to a door, but they are both keys. We can tell what goes to what because we have interacted with those objects regularly and are familiar with them.

That's how an archaeologist sees bones.

Kinda proving the point that the bones were created, just like a key was.

Correct!

Bones were created from cellular division.

What created cellular division. A mind. Just like a mind created digital software like the one we are using.

No, a mind didn't create cellular division. Cells aren't very complicated, but once they divide they can become pretty complex.

Even the most basic cell is very complicated. Either you are uneducated or are lying to yourself. Either way that is a false answer.

Oh really?

What makes a single cell so complicated?

Can you explain this image in detail for me please. label each part and tell us all how it eats and reproduces. Do this without googling it. Then you tell me how a single celled organism isn't complicated.

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: firefromabove

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: firefromabove

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: firefromabove

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: firefromabove
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I'm not sure how people drawing extinct animals disproves evolution

That's not what I said

How can a single jawbone be the basis for an understanding of what the creature may have looked like

Evolutionists just magically know everything, don't they.

So you don't understand evolution or scientific methods....therefore it's all lies and rubbish?

I fully understand evolution. The problem is that its theoretical and doesn't have much going for it in the "solid evidence" department

Its guesswork resting on assumptions resting on conjecture

Darwin's finches are a pretty good example of evolution in action. It can be argued as adaptation, but physical/physiological changes occurred and were observed.

Also, basically ALL science is theoretical. Science has no problem changing mindset when new evidence arises though.

Darwin's finches is evidence that variations of an existing can emerge

Its NOT evidence for the other claims of evolution, that reptiles became birds or that land mammals became whales etc

Not too familiar with his finches I take it?

The finches do not serve as evidence for evolution

You've been told it does, but it doesn't

The bible does not serve as evidence of god

You've been told it does, but it doesn't.

See how that works? Except my example actually does show evidence to my theory.

It is actually the opposite. You have been shown what you have been taught is faulty. And you cannot refute it. And will not, because it is impossible. The greatest minds alive know this.

As far as the Bible. It has many things showing it is from God. It has accurate reliable history, archaeology proves what it says, it is harmonious, although it was written by many people over thousands of years, and it has been hated more than any other work ever, and still endured. And is available on earth in more than 2,000 languages, the most printed, and available book, and by applying its principles it helps you, no matter what or who you are. Poor, rich, girl, man, woman, child. And all of its prophecies have come true.

Someone has blinded you something good.

That last statement was a loving slap on your face.

a reply to: scraedtosleep

Well you have a cell splitting creating 2 nucleus', the membrane, and the cytoplasm.

What it feeds on? Honestly I'm not sure but I assume it would depend on the cell type, and its location.

I believe (heard this long time ago, could very well be some bs, but made sense) that cell division is the byproduct/excrement a cell experiences to create another cell.

What's so complicated?

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: scraedtosleep

Well you have a cell splitting creating 2 nucleus', the membrane, and the cytoplasm.

What it feeds on? Honestly I'm not sure but I assume it would depend on the cell type, and its location.

I believe (heard this long time ago, could very well be some bs, but made sense) that cell division is the byproduct/excrement a cell experiences to create another cell.

What's so complicated?

Here is the answer to your question about the cell:
Cell

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: firefromabove

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: firefromabove

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: firefromabove

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: firefromabove
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I'm not sure how people drawing extinct animals disproves evolution

That's not what I said

How can a single jawbone be the basis for an understanding of what the creature may have looked like

Evolutionists just magically know everything, don't they.

So you don't understand evolution or scientific methods....therefore it's all lies and rubbish?

I fully understand evolution. The problem is that its theoretical and doesn't have much going for it in the "solid evidence" department

Its guesswork resting on assumptions resting on conjecture

Darwin's finches are a pretty good example of evolution in action. It can be argued as adaptation, but physical/physiological changes occurred and were observed.

Also, basically ALL science is theoretical. Science has no problem changing mindset when new evidence arises though.

Darwin's finches is evidence that variations of an existing can emerge

Its NOT evidence for the other claims of evolution, that reptiles became birds or that land mammals became whales etc

Not too familiar with his finches I take it?

The finches do not serve as evidence for evolution

You've been told it does, but it doesn't

The bible does not serve as evidence of god

You've been told it does, but it doesn't.

See how that works? Except my example actually does show evidence to my theory.

You don't understand scripture so you are not qualified to speak on the subject.

See how that works?

Again Darwin's finches remained finches. It's not evidence for evolution happening on the scale we are told occurred in the past

a reply to: Tinystarlight

As far as the Bible. It has many things showing it is from God. It has accurate reliable history

Yea, so does Wikipedia.

although it was written by many people over thousands of years, and it has been hated more than any other work ever, and still endured

Which version do you subscribe to? There are several, and most contradict each other.

And is available on earth in more than 2,000 languages, the most printed, and available book

Well that's what I would do if I wanted to appeal to the masses. Make sure everyone knows of it in some way, shape, or form. In modern times we call that advertising.

and by applying its principles it helps you, no matter what or who you are

Mentally maybe. How many people "find jesus" in prison?

And all of its prophecies have come true.

Really? Name three.

Someone has blinded you something good.

Must be the devil

a reply to: Vector99

Search for it. If you really want truth. Not are not just a skeptic like the rest are, it is there. I can easily name three for you though.

One is the fact that the Bible foretld that Babylon would be destroyed and become a heap of ruins never to be inhabited again. Hundreds of years before it happened.

The Dead Sea Scrolls contained the entire book of Isaiah and dated to the 3rd century B. C. E. And yet Babylon was not laid desolate without an inhabitant for another 600 years. According to history.

Open your eyes to other truth. Not just skeptics that just hate everything told them and disbelieve everything, and will not tell you these important facts.

Jesus foretold a falling away from the truth. And before him in Isaiah God foretold that at the end of the days Jehovah's witnesses would be raised for his name in all the nations. And that they would "learn war no more" and would come out of all nations and tribe and languages and peoples.

And in Matthew 24:14 Jesus said that at the end of the days: This good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.

These are three very simple and basic prophesier. There are soo so many more skeptics are blinding you from seeing. You just have to investigate. It is amazing what you will find.

The issue is that the OP posted this not as a question or a lead up to a healthy debate, it was a "you cant prove it thus my god must exist and you are wrong" which was then followed by the same old people spouting their "it cant be real, cos god!".

They demand evidence, it is shown, they dismiss it and claim their god is the only true proof of which there is 0, none, zip.

You are allowed your religious belief, that is your right, no one should be able to tell you differently, but never close your mind to other ideas. That makes you small minded, bigoted and pathetic.

If one day we meet an Alien race whom are friendly, they had mapped their evolution from the first proteins etc becoming fused in some freak incident and laid it out for us. Would you say that god made us and they were just lucky? Or did the same god make them?

originally posted by: Tinystarlight

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: firefromabove

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: firefromabove

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: firefromabove

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: firefromabove
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I'm not sure how people drawing extinct animals disproves evolution

That's not what I said

How can a single jawbone be the basis for an understanding of what the creature may have looked like

Evolutionists just magically know everything, don't they.

So you don't understand evolution or scientific methods....therefore it's all lies and rubbish?

I fully understand evolution. The problem is that its theoretical and doesn't have much going for it in the "solid evidence" department

Its guesswork resting on assumptions resting on conjecture

Darwin's finches are a pretty good example of evolution in action. It can be argued as adaptation, but physical/physiological changes occurred and were observed.

Also, basically ALL science is theoretical. Science has no problem changing mindset when new evidence arises though.

Darwin's finches is evidence that variations of an existing can emerge

Its NOT evidence for the other claims of evolution, that reptiles became birds or that land mammals became whales etc

Not too familiar with his finches I take it?

The finches do not serve as evidence for evolution

You've been told it does, but it doesn't

The bible does not serve as evidence of god

You've been told it does, but it doesn't.

See how that works? Except my example actually does show evidence to my theory.

It is actually the opposite. You have been shown what you have been taught is faulty. And you cannot refute it. And will not, because it is impossible. The greatest minds alive know this.

As far as the Bible. It has many things showing it is from God. It has accurate reliable history, archaeology proves what it says, it is harmonious, although it was written by many people over thousands of years, and it has been hated more than any other work ever, and still endured. And is available on earth in more than 2,000 languages, the most printed, and available book, and by applying its principles it helps you, no matter what or who you are. Poor, rich, girl, man, woman, child. And all of its prophecies have come true.

Someone has blinded you something good.

I'm sorry, but do you seriously believe that the Bible has been confirmed by archaeology? Because that would come as quite a surprise to most historians.

originally posted by: Tinystarlight
In my, and billion of others' experience mutations

You can't speak for others' experiences.

...are almost elusively bad. Meaning things like DNA defects and cancer, which almost always lead to death. Sorry 100% lead to death, I mean many lead to premature death. No genetic mutant has gotten around that yet has he?

Yes, many have.

You're right that many types of mutation are bad and lead to genetic disorders and death. Absolutely. Radiation, toxins, DNA division issues, etc.

But many have not. You, standing there in your living room are 100% evidence that genetic mutation is NOT always bad and has lead to the advancement of life on Earth.

Look at the variations of species -- why do some have different coloured skins, fur, claws?

Remember that almost 99% of all animal life that existed on earth went extinct millions of years ago. Yet here we are.

Again I ask you -- what is your explanation for all this? What do you attribute life on Earth to?

a reply to: thekaboose

It just exposes the lies you are all believing. And you all are. That's all. And while you are a skeptic you will hate God, and will not listen to anything that shows you he exists, while you will love falsehood, and eat up anything saying he doesn't even if it is a lie.

You aren't really a skeptic. Just a liar.

a reply to: Tinystarlight

Ahh. You're a Bible believer. You believe in fairy tales and mythology, not logic, science and reason.

Sorry, I'm not going to debate to someone with a child's view of the world. I'm out.