Evolution Vs. God

reply to post by edmc^2

On topic - people interviewed did not provide an ounce of evidence to prove that evolution is an observable fact - it's based on imagination as one of the scientist admitted.

Only a fool can be fooled twice by a "bananaman".

That's just it, you have no idea what evidence was or wasn't provided in those interviews. You are only seeing what Ray Comfort wants you to see. Some people have the good sense to ask for all of the evidence so they can draw their own conclusions. Others decide to take Ray Comfort at his word. Who is the fool in that situation?

reply to post by Vasa Croe


Two great video examples of why Ray Comfort should not be trusted.

He even admits that he intends to bait and switch questions for videos like these because his ignorant brothers in Christ will swallow it whole without doubt.

So much for any credibility the OP's video had.

reply to post by edmc^2

On topic - people interviewed did not provide an ounce of evidence to prove that evolution is an observable fact - it's based on imagination as one of the scientist admitted.

Only a fool can be fooled twice by a "bananaman".

And what's your brilliant theory? Don't just trash the goose and not bring a turkey to slap on the table in its place.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by edmc^2

 

On topic - people interviewed did not provide an ounce of evidence to prove that evolution is an observable fact - it's based on imagination as one of the scientist admitted.

Only a fool can be fooled twice by a "bananaman".

And what's your brilliant theory? Don't just trash the goose and not bring a turkey to slap on the table in its place.

edit on 28-8-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

Infinity!

Originally posted by iterationzero
reply to post by edmc^2

 

On topic - people interviewed did not provide an ounce of evidence to prove that evolution is an observable fact - it's based on imagination as one of the scientist admitted.

Only a fool can be fooled twice by a "bananaman".

That's just it, you have no idea what evidence was or wasn't provided in those interviews. You are only seeing what Ray Comfort wants you to see. Some people have the good sense to ask for all of the evidence so they can draw their own conclusions. Others decide to take Ray Comfort at his word. Who is the fool in that situation?

I think Mr. Comfort is telling the truth when he said there's nothing really there to add.
What we saw in the interview is the main course.

It'll be interesting though to see the entire interview to see if the complaints have merit.
Of course if there's none - the complaint will continue.

reply to post by edmc^2


So you're going to ridicule the evolutionary theory, then give us an even more ridiculous and unhelpful answer to replace it? This thread is obviously going places. Not any history book, but places.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by edmc^2

 

So you're going to ridicule the evolutionary theory, then give us an even more ridiculous and unhelpful answer to replace it? This thread is obviously going places. Not any history book, but places.

Surprised you didn't get it Afterinfinity.

You do believe that Infinity exist and will always exist - with no end and beginning, don't you?

So do I.

reply to post by edmc^2

Surprised you didn't get it Afterinfinity.

You do believe that Infinity exist and will always exist - with no end and beginning, don't you?

So do I.

I would suggest that infinity exists in only three forms - the universe, the imagination, and human stupidity. I'm not entirely sure about the universe and imagination.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by edmc^2

 

Surprised you didn't get it Afterinfinity.

You do believe that Infinity exist and will always exist - with no end and beginning, don't you?

So do I.

I would suggest that infinity exists in only three forms - the universe, the imagination, and human stupidity. I'm not entirely sure about the universe and imagination.

Seriously, mathematically speaking, the physical universe has limits. its within the confines of space. But Space is infinite having no beginning and end. Yet it exist!

So how can something with no beginning and end exist?

Originally posted by rigel4
reply to post by UnifiedSerenity

 

Evolution V's God

Evo wins............by default

No, God wins every time.

Instead of a theory for how things are, evolution is a theory of how God is not. The perfect example of man's sin.

The premise of the video is correct, show the change in "Kinds" or it didn't happen.

Love the pesky fossilized trees standing through all of those millions of years of sediment found all over the earth. They are like beacons of truth exposing a web of deceit.

reply to post by TinfoilTP


You must have a depressingly low opinion of the human species if you believe it would deny a factual deity just because we are "inherently evil". Yes, we are clearly so contrary and rebellious that we absolutely must deny religion at every turn, even if we know for a fact that we're wrong!

We're not so pointlessly obstinate as that. Trust me, there's a a lot of pieces to reality that we would much rather ignore and pretend don't exist. Do we? No, we do not. Because we know perfectly well those problems will still be there tomorrow.

As such, as of now, there's no reason to reject the factual or theoretical existence of any deity except for one, simple, cover-all answer: the god theory is just plain rubbish, and it would be disgraceful to all honest men and women of science to pretend otherwise at this point in time.

reply to post by edmc^2

I think Mr. Comfort is telling the truth when he said there's nothing really there to add. What we saw in the interview is the main course.

You've been provided with evidence in this thread that Ray Comfort engages in exactly the kind of behavior he's being accused of by the people he interviewed. He has admitted, in his own words, to engaging in other dishonest tactics like quote mining. Yet you "think Mr. Comfort is telling the truth" without having all of the evidence in hand to support or refute that. And somehow you call the people being interviewed by Ray Comfort "fools".

My opinions on this thread

1. The bible will never be and never was written to be the whole truth from god. In fact it is a test book to see if you are a sheep or a goat. Many say god in words and pray but are anti-christs in behaviour because they do not understand the test or the hidden messages.

2. The bible is a symbolic book that uses the number 7 for specific reasons that the most readers have no understanding of why. 7 days should probably not take literally. Maybe if you do not know why 7 is such a important number in the bible, you better seek and find why it is repeated so much.

3. Darwinian symbiosis and evolution works perfectly with the ideas that god started the cocktail and let it evolve as it was meant to with the guidance of synchronicity (the mysterious ways).

There might be a duality between Evolution and God in peoples mind. But to me that is only a illusion that you are creating. God uses evolution also in souls and changes them just like species evolve. Fractal reality. As above below.

reply to post by TinfoilTP


Really another person on this site thinks "polystrate trees" (a term invented by Creationists) disproves evolution? As is pointed out in this link from TalkOrigins we have been able to explain these fossils since the 19th century. That's how out of date the "Creationist science" is.

"Polystrate" Tree Fossils

Let me pose to you two questions I posed to US in another thread which he was never able to adequately answer. I at least hope you admit adaptation occurs and that adaptation is the product of genetic mutations. So, if mutations can lead to visible changes over just a few generations what is the mechanism that prevents mutations from accruing over many generations and as a result leading to wide scale changes that results in speciation?

The other question focuses on the logical outcome of what would happen if evolution did not occur. Science says that the number of species existing now equal about 0.1% of all species that have ever existed. So do you believe that there were billions of species living concurrently at the beginning of the planet?

reply to post by Xcalibur254


Your accusations are completely dishonest. I have responded to every one of them multiple times and just because you ask them again and again, does not mean I am going to continue to play your little game of "why don't you answer me".

I disagree with your supposed answer about polystrate tree fossils as do many scientists. I never said adaptation does not occur, but please show 1 just one example of animals changing kind. Do you really think you are related to a banana? Really? And you all call me crazy!

Again, Darwin's finches are still finches, fruit flies are still fruit flies, etc.. You know you can't show one thing to prove change from one kind to another, and yet you want to claim changes WITHIN a species proves Darwin's theory of common ancestry. Science is about observing things and being able to prove a hypothesis, and yet the whole gist of Darwin's theory rests on something that CANNOT and HAS NOT been observed, so it is a belief system and NOT science. Take out micro-evolution which is about natural selection within a species and you don't have any other stuff to back up Darwin's theory. You all hate that I know, but it is the truth.

Maybe since I have answered you again, you can stop it with this silly game of "US did not answer me" blah blah blah.

No. 1: Darwin did not claim humans are descended from apes, but that apes and humans are descended from a common ancestor; and
No. 2: Evolution is a "theory". At no time has proof ever been submitted that one species evolved into another species. There are changes within a species, but probably not the changes claimed by evolutionists/Darwinists.
No. 3: Why did apes quit evolving? As far back as fossil records of the apes go, they have been essentially the same as now.
This question gets asked so often that some people in Religion & Science have made a drinking game of it; every time someone asks, they take a drink. You may get some answers that say "Swig" or "Gulp" or "Thanks for the excuse to drink". That's what they mean. If you do a search on "still monkies", "still monkeys" and "still apes" you'll get roughly 2 - 3 per day since YA started.
It is a theory not proven but just theorized. You may have heard of the peppered moth I will post a link and just ask you to read it, have a good night.
www.dailymail.co.uk...
(There are also several other readings of the peppered moth)

Something no one here is considering. Evolution does not make a statement as to if there is God or not. In fact, evolution is simply the idea by which scientists assume life must have progressed through time. Not that it has any proof, but merely that it has a lot of followers.

I am a Christian and I believe in God and that God created all the life we see around us and everything else in the universe. But, let us say for the sake of argument that evolution was in fact true (which it isn't really), but let say that it was. There could still be God.

Genesis, chapter 1:

And God said, "Let the waters bring forth the moving creature that has life and fowl that may fly above the earth.."

And God said, "Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind:" and it was so.


Did you notice here that God "let" the waters do it, and He "let" the earth do it? Is is evident from the Bible itself that life originated out of the waters of the oceans and the land, and that God let it happen. So even if you argue evolution without God, I could argue it with God.

Atheism tries to ride the train of evolution because other than that they really don't have much of an argument to stand on except their disbelief. What kind of argument is "I don't believe in God" Someone asks why and they answer, "Just because."

Evolution is not atheism, it's a scientific belief system. Atheists hijacked it to try to prove to themselves there is no God.

reply to post by Fromabove


I see where you are going with this, but pulling one word out to prove a point does disservice to understanding the text as a whole. I won't post all of Genesis 1, but these few verses sum it up:

Gen 1:20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
Gen 1:21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.

Gen 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.