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.
No one deserves to be insulted for voicing their views, but that is all you fundy evos can do because you certainly can't provide any scientific evidence to support you opinions. You think insulting the views of others will strengthen you view, but it does just the opposite. It exposes your rudeness.
I have backed up my claims, you just don't understand what I say. you have offered no evidence that a leg can become a fin or a nose become a blowhole. You can' even offer a reasonable explanation as to why a land animal would become as sea creature even if it was genetically possible, which it isn't.
You accept what your so called whale experts say, because you want it to be true, not on any scientific evidence.
Written by someone that clearly has no idea how evolution (and science in general) works. I can tell it is pointless to debate with you. No matter what evidence is presented, you'll either not comprehend it and/or completely dismiss it. It could literally happen right before your eyes, and I still doubt you would believe it due to it not fitting your predetermined views.
Omega says we need to see the outer edge of the universe to know that it is expanding. Explain why that is, Omega.
Quote:
Originally Posted by omega2xx
Until you have pictures of the outer edge of the universe, you are just whistling Dixie.
Why do we need to see the outer edge to know the universe is expanding?
Quote:
Originally Posted by omega2xx
How do you explain that most of the matter we can see has come to rest? That alone would indicate there was never a BB.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 303Guy
By the way, if the universe were NOT expanding we WOULD be able to see the outer edge.
Now that you've added matter coming to rest - how do you know that matter has come to rest?
As you said, matter coming to rest would indeed prove there was no big bing and as I said, if the universe were NOT expanding .....
You know Omega, when you ask us for evidence or proof that God does not exist we show you that there is zero evidence that he does exist. Now would you reciprocate and show us that there is no evidence that the universe is expanding?
Too bad we cannot see the outer edge because if we could you would have proof positive that the universe is not expanding and you would win the argument.
10-07-2017, 10:27 AM
2K5Gx2km
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by omega2xx
No one deserves to be insulted for voicing their views, but that is all you fundy evos can do because you certainly can't provide any scientific evidence to support you opinions. You think insulting the views of others will strengthen you view, but it does just the opposite. It exposes your rudeness.
I have backed up my claims, you just don't understand what I say. you have offered no evidence that a leg can become a fin or a nose become a blowhole. You can' even offer a reasonable explanation as to why a land animal would become as sea creature even if it was genetically possible, which it isn't.
You accept what your so called whale experts say, because you want it to be true, not on any scientific evidence.
Why do you keep running. This is not about my views but yours. You made a claim I asked a question and you were insulted not for your claim but for how you keep responding in the face of a simple question. Stop the diversion and excuses and demonstrate that claim. Of course I already know you can't and won't and will only make excuses because you are a troll and intellectually dishonest and have no evidence PERIOD!
This critique on the Creationist book "Explore Evolution" exposes the creationist “evidence against evolution” and “teach the controversy” strategies to misrepresent scientific consensus and distort the conclusions of legitimate scientific research. Explore Evolution offers anonymous “critics” in place of substantive analysis.
Four of the book’s five co-authors are closely tied to the “intelligent design” creationism movement. Lead author Stephen C. Meyer is a Discovery Institute (DI) vice president and program director of the DI’s Center for Science and Culture. Paul A. Nelson is a fellow of the DI. In 2005 in the Kitzmiller trial, Scott Minnich testified in favor of teaching “intelligent design” in public schools.
Beneath all its distortions, all its misrepresentations of modern evolutionary science, Explore Evolution uses familiar and long-refuted creationist anti-evolution arguments. Students who are required to read this book in a science classroom will be confused by its flagrant inaccuracies, and will be put at a disadvantage in standardized tests which require an understanding of modern biology.
As you said, matter coming to rest would indeed prove there was no big bing and as I said, if the universe were NOT expanding .....
Technically, that's not quite right. I'm not sure what "matter coming to rest" means, but if we interpret it as the universe ceasing to expand, it would just mean that the energy of expansion precisely matched the pull of universal gravitation. Verb phrases like "coming to rest" or "ceasing to expand" imply previous motion/expansion, so something like the BB is still implied. But, of course, if we happened to be in that "resting" phase, we would have probably never even thought of the BB hypothesis in the first place (prior to the discovery of expansion, the general assumption was a steady state).
In any case, I don't think that anyone - including anyone publishing any articles at the ICR, or other creationists sites - is actually suggesting that "matter is coming to rest" (whatever that is even supposed to mean). I think omega is just spouting gibberish to see what he can get away with. I'm inviting him to prove me wrong by referencing a creationist who makes the same assertions that he is making (e.g., we can't detect expansion because we can't see the edge of the universe; matter is coming to rest; there is no evidence that birds ever had teeth). I don't think he can come up with any references but, if he does, I will be very interested in checking them out.
Notice I'm not even asking for mainstream science references. I'm asking for references from virtually any scientific or quasi-scientific source at all (such as ICR). I would even accept a reference to a philosopher of science or, for that matter, even some quotes from a science fiction character or some scientist's grandmother.
BTW: I'm going to add a prediction: If omega, or anyone, does manage to provide references for the 3 assertions I'm questioning, I predict that they will be from someone more than 30 years ago. I would not be quite so shocked if someone in, say, the 1950s made some remarks of the sort I am questioning. One favorite trick of creationists is to reference decades-old scientific quotes that have long since been refuted.
Last edited by Gaylenwoof; 10-07-2017 at 12:31 PM..
No one deserves to be insulted for voicing their views, but that is all you fundy evos can do because you certainly can't provide any scientific evidence to support you opinions. You think insulting the views of others will strengthen you view, but it does just the opposite. It exposes your rudeness.
I have backed up my claims, you just don't understand what I say. you have offered no evidence that a leg can become a fin or a nose become a blowhole. You can' even offer a reasonable explanation as to why a land animal would become as sea creature even if it was genetically possible, which it isn't.
You accept what your so called whale experts say, because you want it to be true, not on any scientific evidence.
Look at this. It has to be a Poe's Law troll. Really? Calling expert biologists "so-called whale experts"? A so-called genetics-non-expert dictates what is genetically possible, I think not... LMAO.
Is this guy asking for pity and leniency as a response to his ridiculous self-absorbed hubris now? Did he forget that he was one of the very people insulting the views of others (without any backup) thinking they would strengthen his non-empirical (due to, among other things, mutants that are born unable to reproduce "after the kind" of their parents) and irrational (due, among other things, to evidence from dog-breeding) views?
Everyone else, the forum explicitly bans personal insults, please report these "insults" as you see them and the moderators will redact or ban them at their discretion.
Everyone, else, I have already explained my advance credentials in Genetics, and I can assure you, the vast consensus among Genetics experts is that evolution is true and parts changing through mutation through successive populations is true.
That is the usual, ignorant response, When you have evidence a mastiff and a chihuahua are not both canines , get back to me.
A simple question that he can't answer self-supportedly is now "an ignorant response" guys. LOL
Everyone else,
Canines are a type of tooth. Colloquially, feline and canine now mean the taxonomic families of Felidae and Canidae (often further restricted to only the Canis) .
K9 is the police code for dogs. Canis lupus familiaris is a genetic family that includes mastiffs, shepherds, bichons, chihuahuas, etc. Canis is a genetic family that includes Dogs, Wolfs, Coyotes, Dingoes, Etc.
Canidae is a genetic family that includes Dogs, Foxes, Wolfs, Dingoes, Raccoon-dogs, Etc.
Caniformia is a genetic family that includes Dogs, Otters, Foxes, Raccoons, Skunks, Etc.
Carnivora is a genetic family that includes Dogs, Cats, Dingos, Otters, Tigers, Bears, Hyenas, Etc.
Last edited by LuminousTruth; 10-07-2017 at 01:01 PM..
10-07-2017, 12:40 PM
2K5Gx2km
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuminousTruth
A simple question that he can't answer self-supportedly is now "an ignorant response" guys. LOL
Everyone else,
Canines are a type of tooth. Colloquially, feline and canine mean the taxonomic families of Felidae and Canidae.
K9 is the police code for dogs. Canis lupus familiaris is a genetic family that includes mastiffs, shepherds, bichons, chihuahuas, etc. Canis is a genetic family that includes Dogs, Wolfs, Coyotes, Dingoes, Etc.
Canidae is a genetic family that includes Dogs, Foxes, Wolfs, Dingoes, Raccoon-dogs, Etc.
Caniformia is a genetic family that includes Dogs, Otters, Foxes, Raccoons, Skunks, Etc.
Carnivora is a genetic family that includes Dogs, Cats, Dingos, Otters, Tigers, Bears, Hyenas, Etc.
Don't confuse him with nested hierarchies. Reminds me of the ole bacteria are still bacteria line. As if he expects us to prove that a bacteria must change into Archaea or Eukarya.
Until you have pictures of the outer edge of the universe, you are just whistling Dixie. How do you explain that most of the matter we can see has come to rest? That alone would indicate there was never a BB.
Everyone else,
1. No matter is "at rest" due to gravity
2. The Christian Catholic that published his theory of a Big Bang based his now-widely accepted findings on the fact that the red-shift movement of galaxies away from each other (even including the blue-shift of the fact that the Andromeda galaxy is on a collision course with our Milky Way galaxy) can be mathematically traced to one point at one time (13.7 billion years ago) if gravity was always constant.
3. Christians and Atheists who used to believe in a "Static" Universe both used that assumed fact to say it was that way because of God or nature, respectively. Now, because of the finding of the Big Bag, many Christians say the BB contradicts "those foolish Atheists" and proves (somehow) the Genesis book account. The Atheists say the Big Bang proves that the time-frame for creation (by years of life of the characters and even giving that some Bible canons say that one day to the Jewish god is like 1000 years for us) given in Genesis is false.
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.
