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.
Look, many of you have tried to put me on the spot and told me to prove creation. You rejected my proof without even examining it so now it is your turn to prove evolution. If there is so much evidence for the theory of evolution then lets hear some, give just one example of imperical evidence for evolution, just one, I would really like to see what you have that I havent seen before.
Look, many of you have tried to put me on the spot and told me to prove creation. You rejected my proof without even examining it so now it is your turn to prove evolution. If there is so much evidence for the theory of evolution then lets hear some, give just one example of imperical evidence for evolution, just one, I would really like to see what you have that I havent seen before.
BTW, I really do not think you will change your mind at all. I have heard some people repeatedly challenge evolution demanding all kinds of proof but when it comes to a religion they are born into, the beauty of a flower is proof enough of a divine being - no proof needed. There is a double standard regarding the burden of proof.
BTW, I really do not think you will change your mind at all. I have heard some people repeatedly challenge evolution demanding all kinds of proof but when it comes to a religion they are born into, the beauty of a flower is proof enough of a divine being - no proof needed. There is a double standard regarding the burden of proof.
Which is how I started in this thread explaining no one would accept what I offered for creation, but I will look at your link.
BTW, I really do not think you will change your mind at all. I have heard some people repeatedly challenge evolution demanding all kinds of proof but when it comes to a religion they are born into, the beauty of a flower is proof enough of a divine being - no proof needed. There is a double standard regarding the burden of proof.
I appreciate what you offered here but I see no imperical proof for evolution. What I do see is theory based on theory and so on. I mean no disrespect and I appreciate the effort but what has been repeatedly tested and proven? I dont see anything. Look at the claim of millions of years, it is based on an untestable theory. Look at the claim of common ancestory the other common ancestory is with neanderthal and no other. They have not observed or created life from sludge, there are no intermediate fossils. Like I said I appreciate your effort and have no wish to make fun of your effort, I know it is sincere and I can appreciate that.
What I would honestly like to see is something proven and not theories based on theories. Now something I just found interesting was Darwins decent with modification, now that is something the Bible promotes if you are willing to look at the flood. Elluding to something and then calling it fact is bothersome, like the link you offered declared something being duplicated so much it is declared fact while still declaring science leaves room for more information. Now what if that information someday gives the irrefutable evidence for creation? The creation claims and stories have never changed but science wants them declared nonscence.
Like I said I just want to see one single example of evolution proven to be fact.
Look, many of you have tried to put me on the spot and told me to prove creation. You rejected my proof without even examining it so now it is your turn to prove evolution. If there is so much evidence for the theory of evolution then lets hear some, give just one example of imperical evidence for evolution, just one, I would really like to see what you have that I havent seen before.
Do you never leave the Christianity forum? Check out the evolution threads on the R/P forum....Lots of proof there.
Edit....On second though, don't bother, as I just read your post 130, and what ever evidence you see on evolution you will not be able to accept...You obviously have your mind locked to keep out anything that disputes your bible.
Do you never leave the Christianity forum? Check out the evolution threads on the R/P forum....Lots of proof there.
Edit....On second though, don't bother, as I just read your post 130, and what ever evidence you see on evolution you will not be able to accept...You obviously have your mind locked to keep out anything that disputes your bible.
We are always accused of this and it is usually by those who are unwilling to show what we ask for. Try this, do you realize that an aboriginal skull is very similar to a neanderthal skull, and no I did not get this from some book on creation but by observing different skull types among living races. I just ask for one example.
Do you never leave the Christianity forum? Check out the evolution threads on the R/P forum....Lots of proof there.
Edit....On second though, don't bother, as I just read your post 130, and what ever evidence you see on evolution you will not be able to accept...You obviously have your mind locked to keep out anything that disputes your bible.
But you don't have your mind locked to keep out anything that disputes Darwin?
I'm not sure you understand what a theory is in science. It's an agreed upon conclusion drawn from ample and diverse peer-reviewed research.
There is absolutely no debate about the process of evolution happening. There is ample factual evidence to support the claim that the evolutionary process happens. We have witnessed increments of it happening in many species.
Where there are lingering questions is in origins, but not in the process.
Your other point - that things are just too perfect and beautiful to not be intelligently designed - has no scientific merit. It's conjecture.
But wouldn't it be even more impressive if the evolutionary process could create all of this? Now that would be a pretty impressive God. Obviously (to me at least), there are many forces beyond evolution at work in our world (forces we would call spiritual), but they do not supplant the OBSERVABLE evidence of evolution just as the observable evidence of evolution does not supplant the possibility that some sentient force acts as a "designer" of sorts.
They are not mutually exclusive.
Bluefly: What is observed is not, in fact, evolution. What is observed is like begetting like. What is observed is completeness and complexity and not gradual changes from simple to complex.
There is not ample evidence that the evolutionary process happens and it is not true that there is no debate about the process of evolution happening! The debate by reputable scientists who debunk the "fact" of the evolutionary process is ignored or stifled by the powers that be. The ample evidence actually supports design and not the evolutionary process.
Evolutionists like to point to small changes within a species as proof of the evolutionary process. The fact remains that the changes do not lead to a change of one species to another species.
Creation by God or a Big Bang? Neither was observed; neither can be proven. All we have is what we see, and what we see, supports the teachings of Genesis 1--everything producing after its own kind! The discovery of DNA which causes everything to produce after its own kind further supports the teachings of Genesis 1.
From our studies of the complexities of DNA, we can scientifically and rightfully assume that such blueprints for life always existed. We OBSERVE all around us that like begets like. Cows do not mate with horses and produce offspring! Humans cannot procreate with apes no matter how close of an evolutionary connection we supposedly have with them!
What we OBSERVE is that all life forms are distinct and continue to be distinct. From this OBSERVATION we can justifiably and with strong certainty affirm that it has always been that way! Small, random, rare and usually harmful mutations within a species give little if any support to the false notion that everything has a common ancestor and that "given enough time" one species can evolve into another species.
The evolutionist showers and feeds his intelligently designed, complex, and awesomely formed body, jumps into his intelligently designed, complex, and awesomely manufactured car, drives to his laboratory by using every one of his intelligently designed senses, and there hunts for the obscure and the unusual in a futile attempt to disprove the validity of the intelligent design of all of the things he just observed and experienced on his way to work!
Furthermore, ALL facts are always open to further evaluation and testing. It matters not to me that a group of evolution scientists agrees among themselves that something constitutes a fact. It was once a recognized "fact" among scientists that the earth is flat. OBSERVATION relegated that "fact" to the scrap heap of failed "theories." The evolution model should be tossed there as well, but for many die-hard scientists, such an act is impossible because the thought of accepting the alternative makes their intelligently designed blood coagulate!
Preterist
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.
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.
