Originally posted by andre18
Next, it claims that evolution has no scientific backing... this is blatantly dishonest. Even creationists now admit to a version of evolution that
they call "micro evolution".
Words like "erroneous", "misleading", etc. are untrue. They do not give any examples or explanations why those words would be appropriate, so it
looks like this video is blatant propaganda.
Yup... by 3:15, it is without a doubt just a propaganda film.
3:57... no scientific basis for evolution? Yeah, blatant lie. Wow. I thought Christians had some rules against false witness/lying?
Then after 4:18, it talks about all the scientific branches that offer proofs against evolution. I bet they're referring to cherry picked data,
ignoring the explanations scientists have for why those discrepancies occurred. They're also ignoring all the evidence those branches of science have
for evolution. To overlook those shows how biased this program is.
The fossils they are showing around 5:33, I don't see the significance. It sounds like the creationist argument, "if men evolved from monkeys, then
why are there still monkeys around?" Basically, scorpions could have existed millions of years ago and still be alive today because they were in an
environment where they had a secure and comfortable ecological niche and didn't need to evolve much.
Look, The ENTIRE evolution Saga can be seen for what it really is and what most creationist / ID advocates have been saying for years. THAT it is a
RELIGION and is NOT science.
If creationism should be taught in philosophy then evolution should be taught as the same thing for it is the same thing as religious philosophy via
blind faith passed off as scientific evidentiary fact.
Modern science was originally developed by godly men. They started with the philosophical foundation of biblical theism and divine creation.
During the 18th century the gradual takeover of science by secular humanists began. They rejected the notion that man needs to learn anything from
God. For them scientific research motivated by the pride of human intellect became the only source of true enlightenment and knowledge of nature.
Man himself, without God, would attempt to understand all reality and use his knowledge to change society and the world. The Bible prophesy supports
this eventuality and is why I pay attention to it.
Charles Darwin put this movement into place. Today, the entire scientific educational intellectual establishment has been given over to the Godless
vision of an evolving cosmos where God has no place, given no credit nor is anyone to even suggest such a being is even possible. To them evolution is
the creative force and the total explanation of all of the complexity and apparent design and purposefulness of the universe. And the goal of their
scientific research is to complete the evolutionary explanation of everything that is.
EXCEPT ONE THING
One thing they will not touch, one area of science they will argue they want no part of, one place in time they will REFUSE to admit it but fear its
Abiogenesis, violates some of the most basic principles of chemistry and biochemistry universally held as axiomatic.
Science cannot study the supernatural?
Yeah that would be the reason why religion is not science according to the scientific method so often refered to as a tool to weed out fallacious
experiments which has been taken to the extreme as reason to discriminate religious believing scientists who question Darwin. Since life had to come
from somewhere, this leads to the question of how life could have come into being by purely naturalistic means.
That of course is how science works.
Some even admit that many marvels in the discovery and complexity of what were once thought to be simple cells and are now described as having the
"Illusion of being designed" yet are discarded for that same reason as junk evidence as if the role of science is to not only cherry pick the judge
and jury of the science community but its evidence as well and is why we don't often see such evidence that supports the so called myth of jesus and
the creation model of our origin.
While Atheists advertising Darwinism in the same voice they denegrate theist's, they completely ignore their own monumental hypocrisy for Bias and
judgementalsim. They give themselves a licsence to use vulgar and graphically descriptive expletives in their explanations to refute creationist's
while constantly reminding us of some alleged goody goody gomer pyle christian reputation to live up to, keeping us nice and polite while they can be
as rude and obnoxious as any web hosts rules will allow. Exhibit A- Penn and Tellers video using hick down home country bumpkin religious folk in
contrast to the sharp science minded fake religious folk portraying himself as a concerned science teacher of guess which science?
BIOLOGY Of course!
Isn't always this way and so many biologists making so many patently false announcements heading off any anticipated refutations given by
creationists such as the theory of evolution is so convincingly proven why it ranks above the law of gravity! Then they follow that (as if true) with
a question to bring the quality of humility and gentle grace of the christian and push it over thge cliff into humorous humiliation asking: "you DO
believe in gravity don't you? Or can we expect you to deny that as well jumping off a building praying the invisible man upstairs will reach out of
the clouds and save you.
As ridiculous as that would be for anyone to think the average christian is dumb enough to take that test of faith, it is very similar to what many
evolutionist would describe as the process reptiles went through to evolve wings giving many theists the same impression of being just plane dumb as
they have of us,.
Evolution is NOT science anymore than it is NOT a religion. For the love of man and the hatred of God, they have constructed a series of fabricated
lies, manufactured evidence each having a peer review process where its members have a carefully guarded monopoly, a clique of its own Darwinian
Dimwits that police themselves, making excuses for eachother from fudged data to fit the theory to making sure NO ONE having any other theory but the
one that suits Evolution. From the very Start, this idea was not only NOT original andrew but seems to stay alive merely by having the blind faith to
believe in the BS fairy tales written about it.
If one were to take a timeline of Darwinist discoveries end to end, we would see the numerous token titles of desperate men starting with the phoney
dime store degreed scientist himself Chuck Darwin. A legend NOT in his own mind but the minds of every dogmatic religious atheist making desperate
claims requiring desperate acts of fraud to prove. The legend of Charles Darwins fanciful foibles and fables where a self Governed self Organized
militant atheist agenda has pumped up their over inflated ego's to believe themselves to be members of the "Science Community" and have elevated
their God Darwin by rewriting the history of his jaunts he paid to go on to the galopagos islands as the HMS Beagles onboard scientist on duty. Many
areas of history they have fraudulently given as great discovery's of our time, were in fact NOT removed from todays history for the same reasons
those they re-write as never having existed or at least are now insisting they be called myths.
Not only in Science is this constantly being done but our history as well as these same evolutionists are also atheist and want no mention of the
words god made anywhere and have quite a mountain of law suits to prove this intention is more than merely the disengenuous act of a person just being
a jerk, no this is a movement an agenda and it is worth bringing it to everyones attention
The fact is: Evolution is a long list of lies piled on top of more lies and what we end up with is, a mountain of lies they call a mountain of
evidence. Most of it is still being taught as Science, even today the convicted of fraud, self admitted fakery of haekels own tweaked drawings are
currently passed around all through schools where science is taught and excuses made to continue to do so as lame as saying the entire science
community is just too damn lazy to xerox something new.
Darwin was neither a Scientist nor was he paid to be in any capacity as a member of the crew to do any such thing. He, like most anti-theist's or
"A-THEIST'S" had a vivid imagination and a dogged determination to explain away God by "any means necessary". As we have witnessed, proven time
and time again, they will stop at nothing going as far above the law in breaking any law to preserve their monopoly hold on a Science Atheist's have
hijacked held as a ransomless hostage. Today, science has been crippled with religion but it isn't the kind you might think would bring science
back to the stone age. It is the religion of atheism whose pre-rehearsed comebacks are so often said in semantically laced anecdotal analogies to
refute assertions as allegations and their interlocutors opposing them as adversaries of science. They respond to us using cutesy decree's
announcing pardoxically incorrect assertions as "atheism is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby" but I can say with certainty that if
collecting stamps were a religion and stamps were its many gods, atheists would have a new hobby of actively disbelieving in stamp collecting and
spending millions from tireless anti stamp collectors or "a-hobbyists" disparaging anyone or anything about the hobby of stamp collecting denying
any responsibility as accomplaces whose complicity they assume is invisible merely because of its antithetical definition they assume has an equally
antithetical interest in an antithetical agenda.
They even have one for that saying, organizing atheists would be like hearding cats into a corale but one only needs look at any challenge to
evolution and see hoardes of Atheist's and their token religious phony's like Ken Miller coming in not like cats but like Bulls in a china shop with
the tongues of a scorpion and the swagger of jimmy swagger himself they are everything they hate about religion are more pious, more right never wrong
and every bit a religious zealot. They are exactly the mirror image of any fundamentalist hell fire and brimstone baptist preacher anyone would ever
meet and they are oblivious, totally unaware of how much they remind me of religious people shoving their belief down my throat that if you allow it,
it is so much Bullcrap you end up vomiting from it their science is THAT hard to digest anymore.
They have minced mashed mingled and mangled the language of science using the language of semantics and linguistic programming composed by the author
of all lies and existing in all of them he is the legendary liar the many authors are of the same name for they are legion.
Using this bio-babbling dis-information they have taken the once clear and distinct accuracy of the greek and latin languages used in medicine and
science that were once used and understood because of their contextual accuracy and specificity , they have bastardized the very science vernacular
using beligerant and bombastic verbiage with in your face angst aggression, bullying anyone opposing them with historically altered revisions of that
same scientific history and passing it off as facts supported by a science community now at the mercy of a "to get along you got to go along"
Anyone who doesn't agree is labled a nutcase and any science that even suggests any other theory is labled religion and is castigated, censored,
censured and summarily ridiculed into oblivion ruining entire careers while those who have been busted for fraud are posthumously awarded sciences
highest honors as Haekel was this past year. They have conspired to keep anyone out that isn't already in and those that do get in have to be
invited at special request of a high ranking zealot of this insanity to promote and advance their religion of atheism behind the guise of science's
self aggrandizing self puffery and pompous personalities. The Pope is one such personality and The Prof. is another and it is undeniably proven by our
very own United States Government in Congressional hearings investigating everyone from the top down in this particular area of Science.
They have excused their crimes of fraud as an excuse to trust them using such tortureously construed alibi's as auto correcting science they suggest
is no reason to throw out all science just because of one injustice. The problem is, it isn't all science it is THIS one area of science which has
the dubious distinction of having the most egregiously perpetrated acts of fraud and the most numerous counts against it without a single act
prosecuted but instead is arduoulsy protected then covered up as the lies coninue to be published in text books as if nothing ever happened the same
way Catholic leaders handled their own dirty laundry protecting pedophile preists.
They handle it not like adults or professionals but like mouthy little children while embellishing any justified criticism as crimes of intellectual
terrorism employing the ACLU and many Atheist volunteers to attack their interlocutors opposing them with extreme prejudice ruining the careers of
many, in acts that would make the civil rights movement look like a hassle being caught in a traffic jam.
Charles Darwin’s hypothesis that life first originated on earth in a little pond on a primitive planet called earth and used by most nontheists for
over a century to explain the origin of life is a failure from the very start yet this is never taught. No what seems to get taught in our public
schools is how to lie for science while they have the audacity to accuse anyone that doesn't agree to be lieing for jesus.
The method used in constructing these hypothetical replicators is not stated, nor has it ever been demonstrated to exist either in the laboratory or
on paper and some of them are even aware of this like Grand Poobah of the Atheist church movement, "Dick Dawkins" who wants his followers of this
zaney religion to wear tee shirts with it emblazoned on their chest.
Darwin recognized and even conceded that all existing terrestrial life must have descended from some primitive life form that was called into life by
the Creator pages 1900, p. 316.
But to admit, as Darwin did, the possibility of creation is to open the door to the possibility that life as explained by the ancients and accurately
described but not detailed in the historical writings of the Bible, is true afterall.
If God made one animal type, He also could have made thousands of different types. No contemporary hypothesis today has provided a plausible
explanation as to the origin of life that could occur by naturalistic means.
The problems are so serious that the majority of evolutionists today won't even discuss it, in fact they give cookie cutter copy pasted posts to
explain evolution as a seprate science and that it only address what happened AFTER life began as if they know of a specific wall of separation, a
line of demarcation that they won't go over in an area of science they fear to tread while using yet another wall of separation to keep out any
science that suggests an answer as the separation of church and state. You might think they got their teflon coated thick but but this too is not
only an illusion like the transitional forms they always suggest is proven by looking in the mirror but if this were true, but at no time in our
history has a historical book purported to be facts as given by a supernatural being, decribing the events of our origin, becoming more scientifically
proven then the Bible is today. In fact I would say that anything left in the Bible givien as a future prediction still seeming supernatural, is only
because the Science and technology to inerpret it has not been discovered or invented yet. What were once called mytical places and fundamentalist
fables are now being proven as factual data corroborated by other areas of science that will soon join creationists as an adversary of evolutionist
"With the help of reputable archeologists, historians, DNA experts, robot-camera technicians, epigraphers and a CSI expert from New York's
Long Island, Jacobovici assembles a case in which he says proves that the bones of these famous biblical figures were once entombed in this cave.
James Charlesworth of the Princeton Theological Seminary consulted with Jacobovici and expressed: "A very good claim could be made that this was
Jesus' clan." Not afraid of being unpopular, Jacobovici with Cameron's help secured Discovery Channel's backing and a $3.5 million budget. If it
can proven, the discovery would discredit the message of Christendom and require a radically revised theology.
Joe Zias, who was the curator for anthropology and archeology at the Rockefeller Museum in Jerusalem from 1972 to 1997, who numbered the Talpiot
ossuaries, said "Simcha has no credibility whatsoever." "He's pimping off the Bible … He got this guy Cameron, who made 'Titanic' or something
like that—what does this guy know about archeology? I am an archeologist, but if I were to write a book about brain surgery, you would say, 'Who is
this guy?' People want signs and wonders. Projects like these make a mockery of the archeological profession." Cameron's reply: "I don't profess
to be an archeologist or a Biblical scholar. I'm a film producer. I found it compelling. I think we're on firm ground to say that much."
Some have tried and give computer models running mutation equations they can tweak to substantiate their Godless philosophy their agenda of a-theism
and admit it on public television shows where I have already posted and proven statements made to that effect by none other than Neil Degrasse Tyson
of PBS Nova Science. Running equations through a computer does not constitute an experiments but many in science have used them to prove natural
selection and mutation as the force behind darwinian evolution with disastrous embarrassment Prof. Dick Dawkins has not used his "me thinks it's a
weasel" program and the reasons are obvious when one considers the fact if a mindless, aimless, brainless deaf dumb and totally stupid natural
selection were to create a sentence that is not only coherant but given a target by something or someone who would have the intelligence to know what
it says when it is finally correct. In other words, Mr Dawkins was pulling a fast one as usual. Who is Natural selections sentence or phrase writer?
Who give it the final output and the period ending the sentence if it is so aimless? Nope computer models don't work.
Not if it has to have an intelligent hand guiding it and this cannot be used then if evolution is ever to pass its own scientific method.
Scientists may never know precisely where and when life emerged but speculating on a historical event, which is very different from the usual kind of
science, and so criteria and methods are very different and MUST allow for great lattitude for imagination, conjecture and speculation and it is for
this reason, that such a science NEVER be held up as the defacto theory or that it is more solid more convincing than the "what goes up, must come
down" evidence that not only support, gravity, but,,
PROVES IT EVERY TIME !..
Yeah Gravity is THAT reliable and can be given the title FACT, LAW, Theory etc,.
Evolution however,, doesn't make this first cut so quit using such weak comparisons to suggest anything so outrageuous as evolution being more
acceptable more obvious and more proven than gravity. Evolution has the same credibility as a science as astrology.
"Amino acids have been found in meteorites and even in outer space. But bricks alone don’t make a house, we now realize however, that the
Urey/Miller experiments did not produce evidence for abiogenesis because, although amino acids are the building blocks of life, they like must be
planned by a builder that knows why things are to be put in the places they belong for a purpose they serve in an environment where selection
pressures are already accounted for as adaptation but no fittest surviving member of any species has ever been observed to change in small steps over
time. It is NO coincedence that when evolutionists give examples of transmutation they show things like virus and bacteria which can mutate very fast
but at no one time do they mutate turning into a new form of bacteria and only express adaptations already inherant in their DNA. I would challenge
ANY so called member of the science community to prove such macro evolution actually happens and spare me the equivocations and the BS speculation or
excuses for the lack of fossil proof because THAT ain't our fault you can't show many dead things like dead humans belonging to a society of other
dead humans all having 6 fingers on there third right arm. No all of us have looked the same as far back as the dinosaur and we have the fossils of
bipedal man walking along side of them and why wouldn't they, why wouldn't man with the intelligence God gave us, train a brontosaurus the same way
we have elephants.
The millipede, Apheloria corrugata, when the millipede is attacked by ants or other enemies, it mixes mandelonitrile with a catalyst, causing it to
decompose forming benzaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide gas
C6H5 - C - CN --> C6H5CHO + HCN: in Chemistry we know this to mean:
mandelonitrile --> benzaldehyde + hydrogen cyanide
The problems for evolutionists attempting to explain this creatures appearance on this earth are too many to mention here but this is just one of
trillions of many trillions of many more billions of many millions of lucky accidents all concluding in a symetry of animal forms having millions of
the same shapes and number of legs eyes ears etc for as many millions of years as they would have us believe they existed. The default answer to
every excuse they give whenever a living fossil is discovered is that it was perfectly suitable for it's environment so it didn't have to evolve
anymore. My question is and continues to be, then why was it so damn near rare we thought so very few it was thought to be EXTINCT!
Why is this ALWAYS the answer for EVERY living fossil? Are they ALL suitable in this way? You show me a living thing today that has a million year
history and a fossil that proves it and ill show you a fossil that has changed ZERO in its basic shape and form with the exception to it's size,
Dragon flys haven't changed an IOTA nor has any other creature and NOT one of the men of evolution has come up with anything convincing me otherwise.
In FACT I challenge ANYONE to give me a use for something removed from a complex organism's parts where the function of that organism's survival is
severely threatened and again, Ill show you a function that took an intelligent hand guiding it to this new function by speculation and THAT my
friends is NOT scientific. As Ken Miller the phony Christian actor and role player or token Christian of the evolutionary left demonstrated in the
dover vs kitzmiller trial. Mr Miller used Michael behe's mouse trap missing a pin which would allow the spring loaded clip to come crashing down on
an unfortunate mouse. Miller took the mouse trap applied it to his neck tie saying "it may not catch mice but it makes an attractive tie clip"
Unfortunatley, that isn't what gave mouse trap the advantage over the other kinds of mouse catchers and if that is what the mouse trap did so well to
make it the fittest of traps, then I suppose the mouse tie clip would die unless it could find a way to having an advantage in the bad taste in tie
clips niche but I doubt it would find much luck after Ken Miller. Weed thinks, as a lot of people do, that evolution is science but it isn't science
and as many times as they have been busted for manufacturing evidence, or making a complete species out of a tooth where not even the tooth belonged
to the creature they said it did.
All that they seem to forgive while they hold ID and creationism to a standard they can't begin to satisfy themselves.
The rebuttals we get from evolutionists are usually cookie cutter comebacks boasting of mountains of evidence never showing an ounce of it.
Originally posted by dave420
Seriously, Con - get a basic understanding of evolution, and you won't wind up spilling your confused mind on this forum.
Originally posted by dave420
You have such venom towards evolution, yet you clearly don't understand it.
Originally posted by dave420
I'm not being rude when I say this, but clearly you don't understand the scientific method.
Originally posted by dave420
Clearly you don't understand how evolution works, so you lay the credit on your ol' buddy, God.
Originally posted by dave420
A layperson, clearly without knowledge of evolution, has managed to point out in a post, a 3-paragraph post at that, how evolution is all
Originally posted by dave420
Clearly if you feel the need to write your second paragraph, you don't understand the scientific method.
"Clearly" we see why we should consider the "science community" of anti-theists as having an advantage just look those comebacks and Ill grant you
weed has many about me that suggest my own close minded anvil on a brain stem. When they do offer proof, it isn't anything more than suggesting micro
evolution can do more than we have ever seen observed without someone "interpreting" what MAY have been a transmutation to this or that .
and always the proof is of a species that is already intact.
Just the way it was
[edit on 8-4-2009 by Aermacchi]