Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I will give you the curtisey of anwsering your question
I do not beleive that there are any gods of goddess so that makes me an atheist. I have no proof that there is no God, nor do I think there could be such a proof, but an athesit only means a lack of belief in a god not a beleif that there is no god. If evidence or something else came my way I would of course review my belief. It would be dishonest to not do so.
I will go even further and state that I do not accept evolution or geology on faith. I have been trained in science and have trust in the scientific method. This method has demostrated strongly both traditional geology and evolution. I expect there will be vast improvements in our understanding of the natural world in the next few centuries but not as vast a difference as what was brought forward by Hutton and Darwin.
I also know that global flood geology nor creationism have any scientific basis to them, and that is not a belief or a faith but simply from knowing what the scientific method is and in reading their writings that the scientific method has not been used at all. Believing in Noah's flood or creationism (which is different than believing that there is a creator) is a religious belief not a scientific theory. Those who propose those two as science are not honest or truthfull.
I believe that I am an honest person with an open mind, I have read Creationists books and websites, I have read wide specualtions on archeaology and antroplolgy. None of them have yet pasted the muster of being based on actually matching the evidence to their beleifs.
You are constantly claiming that your side is factually correct however they do not have science behind them at all and are actually full of distortions of what evoltuion is or how science works.
This honest answer is more than you deserve considering your posting history.
Oh, okay. Thank you. Now I know why you answer the way you do.
But of course I did tell the truth about evolution.
Truth 1: Evolution has not proven mankind evolved from single celled amoebas.
Truth 2: Evolution has not proven single celled amoebas started all plant and animal life on earth.
How is Truth 1 and Truth 2 lies?
There are several problems with your deceptive claim, Eusebius. It is telling that your namesake . . . the original Eusebius . . . was famous for lying for God and was frank about it. First of all . . . proofs are not part of science. . . they belong to mathematics. Science provides evidence that become facts by replication. The facts then provide evidence in support of the theories that explain them. So . . . since science does not "prove" anything . . . both statements would be true in that limited sense. But they are deceptive because evolution has massive evidence in support of the gradual growth of diversity of lifeforms . . . including our own . . . from more primal beginnings. Also . . . evolution says NOTHING at all about the ORIGIN of life . . . something you seem woefully ignorant about . . . or simply choose to deceptively misrepresent.
Thanks old mate. That IS a lie. To refuse to look at the evidence, to deny and evade and misrepresent is merely dishonest, but to say there is not one shred of evidence is a lie. There is no two ways about it.
Please provide your EVIDENCE that all life on earth evolved from single celled amoebas. I have asked for this over and over and over and over and over but all I get from you is fist pounding and foot stomping.
Quote:
Evolution theory does not even claim that God did not create all life on earth. evolution theory neither claims it nor denies it. It is Creationism and creationism alone that is making the claim - that evolution did not and cannot happen.
It is dishonesty again to reverse the burden of proof and demand that evolution prove that God did not do it. Where is the scientific evidence that God did do so?
Bible won't do. It is full of metaphor and symbolism and it is not a science book. Where is the scientific evidence that God created anything let alone everything? Let's have you produce some evidence for a change.
Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Col_1:16 for in Him is all created, that in the heavens and that on the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones, or lordships, or sovereignties, or authorities, all is created through Him and for Him,
Rev_4:11 Worthy art Thou, O Lord, our Lord and God, To get glory and honor and power; For Thou dost create all, And because of Thy will they were, and are created."
Quote:
No, we do not want appeals to complexity or references to water -grading of mud deposits. That does not even disprove evolution, let alone prove anything. Trying to pick holes in evolution is not evidence for Creation.
Let's see what you have. If anything. So far nothing whatever has been presented. You can forget Behe and I/D. That is not science and doesn't even work. It is not in the least shred evidence for God helping evolution along, let alone creating all life.
There is no evidence for evolution. You can pound your fists and stomp your feet all day but that is not proof of evolution. It is just proof you have no proof.
Quote:
Oh, and let's see your working and case posted here on the boards, not just a couple of addies and a video. I know how you operate, produce a couple of sources we have to read, write up the arguments, refute and post, you then deny everything and post some more sites and sources. A nice little scam for making us do all your work for you. Don't you dare try to cheat like that, old son. You make your own case here where everyone can see it - if you have anything at all.
Let's see what you have other than hot air and BS.
I notice you have not answered my two truths yet. I wonder why that is?
Oh, okay. Thank you. Now I know why you answer the way you do.
Peace.
Of course, you appeal to bias, as though that made all his arguments invalid. What gross dishonesty. Does your arguments, based utterly and entirely in total faith on Bible literalism invalidate your arguments? Of course not! It may be the way you argue and way Badlander argues (you did ask ) but what is comes down to is the evodence. You falsely declared that we had none. That was a lie.
I'm asking you to produce yours, because if you can't produce anything betteer than appeals to the Bible, then it becomes clear that faith -based bias is all you have.
Off you go - and I repeat, none of that crafty demanding that we go and 'Educate ourselves' (is there no limits to your craftiness and dishonesty? ) rather than you providing any sort of case.
There are several problems with your deceptive claim, Eusebius. It is telling that your namesake . . . the original Eusebius . . . was famous for lying for God and was frank about it.
The original Mystic was famous for not believing God.
Quote:
First of all . . . proofs are not part of science. . . they belong to mathematics. Science provides evidence that become facts by replication. The facts then provide evidence in support of the theories that explain them. So . . . since science does not "prove" anything . . . both statements would be true in that limited sense. But they are deceptive because evolution has massive evidence in support of the gradual growth of diversity of lifeforms . . . including our own . . . from more primal beginnings. Also . . . evolution says NOTHING at all about the ORIGIN of life . . . something you seem woefully ignorant about . . . or simply choose to deceptively misrepresent.
I think you failed to answer my question. Since so-called "scientists" have told us over and over again that all life on earth, the plants, trees, animals, all come from the single celled amoeba. They say it, but I want proof.
Here is the question again:
Originally Posted by Eusebius But of course I did tell the truth about evolution.
Truth 1: Evolution has not proven mankind evolved from single celled amoebas.
Truth 2: Evolution has not proven single celled amoebas started all plant and animal life on earth. How are Truth 1 and Truth 2 lies?
Of course, you appeal to bias, as though that made all his arguments invalid. What gross dishonesty. Does your arguments, based utterly and entirely in total faith on Bible literalism invalidate your arguments? Of course not! It may be the way you argue and way Badlander argues (you did ask ) but what is comes down to is the evodence. You falsely declared that we had none. That was a lie.
I'm asking you to produce yours, because if you can't produce anything betteer than appeals to the Bible, then it becomes clear that faith -based bias is all you have.
Off you go - and I repeat, none of that crafty demanding that we go and 'Educate ourselves' (is there no limits to your craftiness and dishonesty? ) rather than you providing any sort of case.
Just answer my question concerning the two truths.
Originally Posted by Eusebius But of course I did tell the truth about evolution.
Truth 1: Evolution has not proven mankind evolved from single celled amoebas.
Truth 2: Evolution has not proven single celled amoebas started all plant and animal life on earth. How are Truth 1 and Truth 2 lies?
You said I was telling lies. How are truth 1 and 2 lies?
Please provide your EVIDENCE that all life on earth evolved from single celled amoebas. I have asked for this over and over and over and over and over but all I get from you is fist pounding and foot stomping.
Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Col_1:16 for in Him is all created, that in the heavens and that on the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones, or lordships, or sovereignties, or authorities, all is created through Him and for Him,
Rev_4:11 Worthy art Thou, O Lord, our Lord and God, To get glory and honor and power; For Thou dost create all, And because of Thy will they were, and are created."
There is no evidence for evolution. You can pound your fists and stomp your feet all day but that is not proof of evolution. It is just proof you have no proof.
I notice you have not answered my two truths yet. I wonder why that is?
I have tried to present the evidence. You refused even to look. Why do you keep pretending that I will not or cannot present the evidence?
You dismiss the fossil evidence as a 'few bones', you cover your eyes at the Cetan sequence. You didn't even mention a single word about Tiktaalik. Can dishonest denial be more obvious?
You predictably can do no more by way of evidence than quote the Bible. That is not science. Your denial of evidence as 'pounding and stomping is' is just your latest method of denial.
Just answer my question concerning the two truths.
Originally Posted by Eusebius But of course I did tell the truth about evolution.
Truth 1: Evolution has not proven mankind evolved from single celled amoebas.
Truth 2: Evolution has not proven single celled amoebas started all plant and animal life on earth. How are Truth 1 and Truth 2 lies?
You said I was telling lies. How are truth 1 and 2 lies?
Your dishonesty gets worse and worse. You lied about there being not a shred of evidence. I quote you. You then pretend that I am calling your other points 'lies' when I was very careful to say that they were reasonable questions (your refusal to even begin to look at the evidence is not ) you have been caught cheating, red handed old mate. How can you have the gall to pretend that you are the one in the right?
Your dishonesty is not now even about the subject but just the usual attempts to scrape cheap debating points with 'You said this - no I didn't' stuff, like a five year old. I just don't understand how you can continue to brazen it out. is there something about genesis -lieralist creationism that provided somebody with a eight - inch thick skin?
I'm not just putting you down or trying to score points - the case has been made as much as it can be - but I'm genuinely curious about why such Faith makes someone behave so badly.
There are several problems with your deceptive claim, Eusebius. It is telling that your namesake . . . the original Eusebius . . . was famous for lying for God and was frank about it. First of all . . . proofs are NOT part of science. . . they belong to mathematics. Science provides evidence that become facts by replication. The facts then provide evidence in support of the theories that explain them. So . . . since science does not "prove" anything . . . both statements would be true in that limited sense. But they are deceptive because evolution has massive evidence in support of the gradual growth of diversity of lifeforms . . . including our own . . . from more primal beginnings. Also . . . evolution says NOTHING at all about the ORIGIN of life . . . something you seem woefully ignorant about . . . or simply choose to deceptively misrepresent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
The original Mystic was famous for not believing God.
Wrong. Jesus was a Mystic, Eusebius.
Quote:
I think you failed to answer my question. Since so-called "scientists" have told us over and over again that all life on earth, the plants, trees, animals, all come from the single celled amoeba. They say it, but I want proof.
I think you failed to read my post! Proofs do not exist in science. Your desire for PROOF is fatuous and irrelevant because you do not know what constitutes evidence in science. Proof most certainly has nothing to do with the Bible. The Bible is useful, tells us about Christ and is there to give us hope . . . NOT science or history.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.