Mutations are merely aberrations that cause damage to existing cells. Otherwise, again, scientists would simply leave cancer cells alone to mutate into helathy ones, but they don't. Therefore, again, evolution is a figment of the imaginations of men which many, many scientists are now claiming. You can find them all over the web.
Evolutionists are also asking us to believe the an ape and a "common ancestor" mated to produce a mutant who then found another mutant with the exact same mutation and they bred an offspring who found another mutant who then bred offspring with another mutant whose genes had added another superior trait by accident, and they found another mutant to breed with who also had another superior gene added to his DNA and on and on. This is not only astronomical, but completely bizarre as well. And all of this to deny that God exists!
[Re: use of the terms "Xian" & "Xmas"]
Would nihilists have any problem being called Xhilists or the Buddhists Xhidists, the agnostics, Xnostics, et al? Is this a way of demeaning and insulting over 50% of Americans whose religion is Christianity? Do any other Christians besides me here find it offensive to be called Xians or am I being hypersensitive?
And what constitutes who is in which kingdom? If I have a degree in science and i say that humans and animals are in the same kingdom because they have certain characteristics in common, then poepl would simply accept whatever I say. Humans and plants have certain characteristics in common; we both need food, water, mate, and grow. But does that make us plants? Sorry but calling a human an animal doesn't make him one nor does it make himcapable of being the descendant of an animal or breeding one.
'[The Theory of Evolution stems from science.']
Only Darwinists believe this. The evidence says the Emperor has no clothes. The textual evidence of the Bible says Darwinian macroevolution beliefs are a penalty from God for denying Him Creator status. The penalty is corroborated by the fact that the ***reason for being*** evidence/intermediacy is entirely missing; IC is a scientific fact; fossil record shows zero signs of species transitioning. These are death blows in the eyes of any non-prejudicial observer. The fact that Darwinism thrives despite its nudity is explained by the penalty.
As a gift, I'll give you something you can use as evolution evidence from the Bible (though it wasn't random) that gives the link between snakes, lizards and birds. You may already know this but the snake that was possesed by the devil used to have feathers and lost them as well as its legs, leaving the vestigial legs on boas and anacondas as remains. Strange that those 3 animals are related by science as well. That actually works to sway the most stubborn Christian to believe in a small part of what you believe.
IF "it doesn't matter how it came about," then WHY do "EVOLUTIONISTS" (it seems that some of your friends can't countenance being called "Darwinists" for some strange reason, though many of them have no problem hatefully attacking others with pejoratives far worse, e.g. "fundies," and bible thumpers," and "flat earthers" to name but a few) almost universally argue pure naturalistim, devoid of "religious myths"? Are they wrong, or are you? While it is a simple matter for "EVOLUTIONISTS" to mock and ridicule the abject stupidity of "fundies," whether or not they even have a religion, it is inexcusable for practitioners of what is supposed to be PURE and OBJECTIVE "SCIENCE" to be so inconsistent.
Also, on the issue of giants, there is quite a lot of evidence giants did exist. Perhaps you are just unaware of the evidence?
Evos call them more primitive hominids, but they have been found with tools fitted to their size so they seem to just be a giant form of "people" in layman's terms.
Think rationally and I'll teach you why Creation is our origin rather then evolution!
The facts of history confirms the Biblical scenario and falsifies the Evolutionary scenario based on the massive amount of worldwide physical evidence proving ancient men possessed ultra-intelligence and capabilities surpassing our own today. They knew the shape and EXACT dimensions of the Earth, how to locate and align any position with true polar north, were advanced mathematicians who employed pi in their geometrical and trigonometrical abilities, and could extract out of quarry, transport, cut with optical precision, dress, and lift blocks weighing up to 70 to 400 tons apiece without cranes or any modern equipment.
Evolution can only occur so often though. It must occur in multiple organisms at once and its chances for succeeding become smaller everytime.1 cell to copy 1:1 probability of success. 2 celled organism to copy 1:2 chance of success,so on and so forth. You yourself just said this is just a bunch of chemicals and only self-replicates. Eventually it will reach where it needs to breathe and eat. When it does, it will have no prior info about these things. It needs to learn how to eat, what to eat, how to breathe, etc. Seeing as how single-celled organisms crawled out of the sea we do not yet have to worry about dehydration.
Evolution is a framework in which all evidence is interpreted (as is creationism) and if there is evidence that does not fit into the model, then the model must be modified or rejected. In relation to evolution, there has to be an explanation of how the magnetic fields of the planets have lasted for billins of years. This where the dynamo (and Mercury) come in. Mercury is an odd planet, in that it has a magnetic field where the dynamo theory says it shouldn't. What I'am asking is if I've done my homework right, and if not, explain how evolution does account for the magnetic field of Mercury.
Contrary to popular belief, evolutionists don't have a corner on scientific objectivity. I've found through personal experience that when an evolutionist gets backed into the wall he relies on arrogant condescending rhetoric. From my observations, creationists are more prone to stick to the objective facts.
It's no use. Evolutionists conveniently divorce themselves from explanations of abiogenesis because they have absolutely no explanation of how it is possible. To simply state that it's not part of evolutionary theory is a cop-out.
The simplest concievable form of life as we know it would require at least one strand of DNA or RNA. Simply put, the probability of such a complex molecule randomly coming together is nill. Even if by some freakish event such a spontaneous arrangement were accomplished, it would require the intricate protein/lipid structure of a cell to survive and reproduce.
To base an entire theory on such an enormously improbable event is ludicrous. Science follows laws of probability.
Science is the discovery and unpacking of creation via various learned and academic methodologies. The IDer doesn't give a fuck about what anyone theorizes or says as long as ultimate credit is assigned to Him as the source.
Have you ever been plargiarized, or stolen from, or had a patent or copyright infringement ?
ToE has plagiarized the source of creation and assigned it to an incorporeal entity (chance) as explained by them its Prophets and Priests. IOW, you guys have set up yourselves as God and are paying the traditional price of plagiarism: expulsion. The IDer has expelled you - thats the reason why you deny His reality.
MORALS:
April 1999- Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold walk into a high school in Jefferson County, Colorado. One of them happened to be wearing a t-shirt with the words written "survival of the fittest"..
EXPLANATION: Not only were these boys strong believers in evolution but they also were also strong believers in Nazism(see Hitler}Now you probably are saying that evolution was not to completely blame for the incident at Columbine. And you’re right. But that still does not deny the fact that over the years these 2 kids were influenced by the doctrine of evolution to the point where they took it VERY SERIOUSLY. Some people called them extremists. But were they? If you don't kill off the weaker kind as you believe in the foundations of evolution. aren’t you a hypocrite?
And I also cannot believe that the link posted showing the reptile-to-bird transitions actually included Archaeopterix (sp?). That was proven false years ago!!! Some Chinese farmer dug up a fossil and glued a piece onto it and sold it to National Geographic for thousands of dollars!!! National Geographic was so excited about the possibility of finding a rare transitional form (which should not be rare if evolution is true) that they bought into a fake. They had to report it was a fake in a later article stating that they had been duped. How do we know that if Archaeopterix is the only one that people have lied to the public about?
Because The Big Bang Theory cannot be tested it must be classified as a theory.
Because it is a theory based on the origin of the universe is must be a religion.
Because it is a religion, if you believe it, you have faith in it.
but the arrogance is on the side of those who refuse to acknowledge God's own communication and prefer their own interpretation of His universe over what He actually said in actual words. This is what science is doing. It comes up with views of the universe that contradict God's written word, and then some dare to claim that that view IS God's word, which cannot be the case if it contradicts what He actually said through His prophets. I DO have the right to say what God Himself has said, because He said it, it's written, it is unambiguous, and I can point to it and quote it. It is my YEC premise, [...] that God's WRITTEN WORD trumps science if science contradicts it.
No, I haven't been to the Southwest though I really want to see it, so you can disqualify my answer on that basis. It is, however, pictures of the formations of the Southwest that convince me the most of the Flood apart from the Bible. The stacked strata, so obviously rapidly formed by water, the fact that all the formations are shapes of stacked strata exposed by what looks like massive water erosion, and of course the incredibly copious fossil contents.
scientists tested the Grand canyon floor and found out it was 3.5 billion years old. but then they tested the top of the grandcanyon and they found out it was 45 Billion years old. Also, three layers of the canyon floor had been on the top. A rockslide threw it down. And you talk about us christians not checking our sources.
Tom Brokaw, anchorman for NBC News, showed a film of the shoreline of the ocean etched into the Himalayas about 10,000 feet above sea level, in about 1995.
The news media is pro-Atheism, and so, this has been suppressed, and never repeated or enlarged upon.
Modern science uses the phoney idea of neutrality of science as a shield against the assertion that they are pushing an essenially religious notion of creation in the big bang theories. Thus we are now spending billions of dollars in the religious quest for life "out there" in space, which, I am sure produces howls of laughter from the Throne of HEaven.I hope and pray that scientists get enough integrity and honeesty going to admit the truth - that which they are fond of searching for, is that they, too are on a religious quest for origins.
For most of the history of the United States, it has been universally agreed that the three basic sciences are:
Reading, Riting, and Rithmatic.
This has been taught in grade school, high school, and universities.
On the other hand, Evolution is the most speculative theory every devised.
Every new book on the subject increases the age of the earth by one, or more, million years. Very instable subject, indeed.
I didn't become a believer in YEC until I'd been a Christian for some years and read some of the creationists.
The childish things *I* put away were atheism and the ToE.
It is ALL interpretation. Don't you see that? Creationists are just as good at coming up with contrary interpretations of any of it given enough experience with the material. There is no PROOF, don't you see? No evidence, no testability, no falsifiability, it's all INTERPRETATION, all PLAUSIBILITIES against PLAUSIBILITIES. Find all the similarities you want they are JUST AS WELL explained in terms of design factors, or, in the case of apparent shared genetic anomalities or mistakes, by the effects of the Fall on all life. Our genes are broken because of the Fall. There is NO COMPELLING REASON to explain any of it in terms of descent.
The bottom line is, the theory of evolution will remain a theory until empircal data is obtained that proves that dogs can produce non-dogs and/or dogs came from rocks 4.6 billion years ago.
Um...we live in 2005 AD. 2005 years ago Jesus was born. Our whole calander is based on him?
Also, Jesus had a lot of enemies that were still alive when the gospels were written. As likely as it is that those who were actively trying to eradicate Christianity could have simply written a rebuttal to the writings of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, no such rebuttal writings exist. This seems to suggest that the gospel accounts were considered to be factual. The onus seems to be not on me to produce more documentation of his existance, but on you to prove he didn't.
all presidents and powerful people are occultists, but they fulfil different roles, as christians or muslims etc. They need the world to believe that diversity of religions make conflicts, to establish a one world religion under the rule of the biblical antichrist and prosecute the loyal christians saying they are "closed minded" and have "old patterns of thought" and are "keeping the earth to evolve". This is the kingdom of the beast prophesied in matthew 24 and revelation 13, that the churches don´t want you to know.
You evolutionists need to realize if you haven't already(you probably have) that we are dealing with the most fundamental of all subjects to be discussed and debated, because who is right changes everything. And for us creationists, well, we don't have to worry about where we will go when we die, evolutionists on the other hand are making a huge gamble on their lives, cause the odds are stacked up against their theory. If we were created, then we were created, there is no probability involved there, it is far more likely that we were created then if we evolved from the Big-Bang. We can all agree that the chances of us evolving without God are very slim, it's like trying to pull out the numbers 1 through 1,000 randomly from a jar without skipping a number or getting one out of order. Those are the odds that you are basing your eternal existence on. The fossil record does not show evolution, math does not show evolution, all of creation in it's designed appearance points toward a Designer! You should at least consider the possibility of God being behind everything, rather than risk eternity in punishment for your willful choice of evolution. I'm not saying to believe in God, but to just set your heart to searching for Him.
I've come to understand that many things happened to the earth at the Fall, having to do with God's cursing it for our sake, and that includes the bombardment by meteors that is evident on the moon but not evident on earth -- probably because the Flood erased the craters (I had thought that bombardment must have occurred during the Flood but I believe now it was part of the cursing of the creation with the Fall), and this cursing also includes the "ice age" which explains the development of the wooly mammoth too, as well as that beast's huge tusks and the sabre-toothed tiger and the like for the purpose of defense or killing prey.
......evolution cannot be used to explain bodily symmetry for one simple reason...In the evolution theory, all things in nature are supposed to be in balance...equal spacing of matter...so it really isn't a fair question that evolution can answer because we know all matter in the universe is not in balance and or equally spaced...trying to use evolution theory as a unit of measure to weigh an argument against or for, is like trying to measure in centimeters with an imperial ruler.
And it was some 3.68 years earlier, was on May 16th 1983, that I had my first and only open-eye Biblical like apparition, when at 2:30am I was woken up whilst sleeping next to my sleeping wife and looked towards the windows, when the curtains ‘disappeared’ and in their place was a large white screen. Then, the metaphysical ‘movie’ first showed me a wilderness location, and temporary accommodation units of a rather different type, in that each unit consisted of four interlocking circular and tents standing on a 10 x 10 metre square base. I knew it was exactly 10 metres because a ‘voice’ spoke into my mind. The second part of the apparition was seeing the Adversary himself face to face and eyeball to eye ball. The appartion showed me clearly that the Devil also resides in Satan for they are as One. So to the metaphysical, the Adversary, seems to like the two common denominators 155 and 508. And Satan at 155 x the Devil 508 and /2,000 is 39.37 and 39.37 inches is one metre, (unless one likes the square root of 1550 at 39.37003937 inches). And the reciprocal of 508 x 20,000 is 39.370078 inches. And there are 508 days from September 11, 2001 to the destruction of Shuttle Columbia on February 1, 2003. Thus the New World Order Elite re-established during the French Revolution a former cubit they termed a metre at 39.37 inches.
It is no fairy tale that the bible tells us these things. He planted a garden, and in days, it was grown. It is not possible in this physical world now. Any non atheist scientist out there must know this. To deny the world of spiritual experience, and the bible, only because we believe that only this physical existed, because we can see nothing else, is to confine oneself to the 'box' of physical only. Most people on earth have always known there is more.
Since it may be ignored, but not disproved, you may believe what you want. But don't try to lay some trip on me, where anything else but the puny physical only never existed, or ever will. No one argues that it now is all man has. It is real and great. But it is a small part of the big picture, and the spiritual is not subject to mere physical only tests, restrictions, principles, or laws.
The flood involved more than the physical, the garden did as well, and heaven will too. Trying to stick it all in the box is like trying to get the ocean in a spoon.
And yes I consider bacteria and trees to be intelligent agents. You may not understand their intelligence but that does not mean it doesn't exist.
Yes, it would be humanly possible to try and replicate the Ark, but not even slighly feasible.
I disagree however that we were tree dwelling apes, or had a common descendant.
On the other hand, small revivals occur in some 3rd world countries like the notoriously apostate country of Haiti: the poor Voodoo-ists (Devil worshippers) command their children to go to Christian schools (100%) and get saved. Every state-run and private school in Haiti performs daily evangelical praying and singing as per Christ's teachings and the gospel. The T[heory]o[f]E[volution] is fully discarded from all K1-12th grade curriculums. Thus, these poor wretches have not entirely discarded Christ's teachings nor gospel.
Themes of Genesis... It actually affirms gender equality, believe it or not.
The truth is, I do not entirely understand that [killing an innocent man for our crimes] either (but I never claimed that my beliefs were philosophicly justifiable) I am just gratefull that it is true.
And if we share this same common genetic make up as other creatures, isn't at all possible that this 'genetic material' is the 'dust' referenced to in the bible? Now I know you will automatically disregard this because I used that five letter word ' bible' but you have to consider all the evidence not just some.
If the species in Australia evolved separately from the rest of the world's species, why do they ALL still fit into the general categories describing animals? In other words, if kangaroos are the result of a completely different evolutionary pathway, then why do they still fall under the classification of 'mammals'?
Evolutionists, particularly the ones in this forum, are among the most close-minded, biased people I've ever heard of... Also, Kent Hovind IS a doctor. All the bogus riff-raff about Kent Hovind's degree is just a back-and-forth rumor between the evolutionists.
Even if Dr. Hovind WASN'T a doctor that wouldnt mean he doesn't have the righ to run C[reation]S[science]E[vangelism]... Also, any TRULY open-minded, educated person who is not arrogant or ignorant will admit that Dr. Hovind's degrees are legitimate.
I KNOW you will disagree, but I have seen Patriot's policies, I have SEEN WITH MY OWN EYES Dr. Hovind's PhD diploma, I have talked with Dr. Hovind personally, and I have even read the 'crap' that says Patriot University is a 'degree mill.' Whether it is a degree mill or not, (you'd have to be more specific) is not your business...
Studies have been done at the moment of death and they have shown that the soul IS present in a body and at death the body is a few ounces lighter. Logic would dictate that the soul was what weighed those few ounces.
Actually if a human next to a dinosaur enveloped in ice was ever found, it probably would disapear and never reach the public eye. Do you how much evidence has been destroyed and taken by the government and evolutionists.
You always seem to have anti-creationist crap posted on the web, but I've never seen any evolutionists stand up to a publicised book by a true creation scientist--read through those three books, check their sources, AND ONLY THEN tell me that you can stand up to so-called 'dumb' creation scientists!!!
Would you please stop trying to use my age [14] against me... I have read testimonies by creationists (not Hovind) that say they found evidence that would null evolution, but that evidence was either stolen, taken away by government or the owners of the property where the evidence was found or the owners were forced to dispose of the evidence.
You see, the Smithsonian is responsible for hiding a lot of evidence that goes against evolution, so I've heard.