[Kite]

Quote by: loser Sorry for the hiatus all. This is a debate in which I am very interested but I have hardly been outside the Philosophy and Religion Forum and I totally forgot about this thread.

Well you are forgiven, and let me be the first to thank you for forcing me to wade through another rant in which you provide zero evidence to support your claims, and choose to simply ignore any information that might throw your predrawn conclusion out of whack.

That's a fallacy. There are no random mutations. ALL are cause and effect.

Where is your evidence to support this be all end all claim?

Then you agree that we haven't evolved after all. Wow, didn't expect that.

I certainly didn't expect you to turn a scientific debate and discussion into a 'lets see who can twist the other guys own words against them best' contest.

Oh, and zippers...I'll pretend I didn't hear that.

Just like you pretend to not hear all the evidence and sources and facts presented in this thread. You even pretend not to see incredibly stupid statements made by yourself.

If there was any fossil record "evidence" supporting evolution's outrageous claims, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Perhaps you should go back and read 'Paleontology: Chapter 1' this time, that way you would know that fossils aren't exactly plentiful or easy to find.

That statement in itself is very misleading. The ToE is almost bereft of any support and Darwin's theory that evolution is fueled by natural selection is all but defunct.

Once again, you make a very bold statement and then back it up with absolutely nothing. Where is your evidence, where are your sources, where are your FACTS?

Once again, the false assumption of random mutations is coloring judgment. Mutations are never random, they happen for a reason.

What is the reason behind the genetic mutation that would make a child autistic? Retarded? Deaf?

Genetic change is reasonable...so much less pretentious than evolution.

Perhaps you could be troubled to explain to us the difference between the two.

I've got an idea...dismiss it completely, a much better solution.

Yes, if I cant see the bus barreling toward me thats about to turn me into a messy red spot on the pavement, its not there. Thats not irrational or childlike at all.

The human genome and DNA in general has put nails in the coffin of the ToE. Evolution cannot explain the genetic code found in every living cell.

You aren't even making sense. How does the presence of DNA completely disprove evolution?

This code is a complex language set with precise instructions on how to fabricate basic needed parts such as proteins. It is information and it is information and instructions and a complex language that could only have its origins in intelligent life.

Every living thing has DNA. It is certainly not confined to 'intelligent life', although what you may consider intelligence may differ greatly from another person.

If you say something enough times, can you actually begin to believe it?

You are living proof of that.

Jubloz, I wish I could comfort you by agreeing with your statement but I can't. There is absolutely no evidence to support evolution and there never will be. The reason is obvious: it's not happening now, it won't happen in the future, and it didn't happen in the past. Humans are humans, they were human in the past, and they will be human in the future. Monkeys were monkeys, are monkeys, and will be monkeys as long as they exist. Things change, things adapt, but they don't evolve (as evolution is taught). We don't have a common ancestor except the commonality of our organic chemical makeup. Inherent diversity is by design. Maybe that's not a comfortable thought for many but it is a reality, nontheless. All humans have a common ancestor: a human!

Your statement speaks for itself. Evidence, facts, sources, figures, anything besides you beating your chest and screaming "IM RIGHT IM RIGHT".

An example of cause and effect...purpose.

You are right, even though it is a self defeating purpose, dying from anemia instead of malaria.

We have different (very distant) ancestors. What we share is a Creator.

Oh boy, here comes the God train.

Both of which are distinctly not human.

Monkeys and apes are capable of preforming math and communicating with humans, in addition to sharing a large chunk of our DNA. Not a human certainly, but even you cant be blind to the fact that they are similar.

Yes, indeed, cause and effect...purposeful and designed.

A cause of gamma radiation, an effect of an eyeless three armed child. Hardly purposeful or designed by any parent.

Yet things are rarely as they seem.

Actually, you are exactly the pseudo-scientist I thought you to be.

Convenient, perhaps, but not accurate.

How is it not accurate? Can you please back up your denouncements with something like, oh I don't know, evidence?

I'm back!!!

We noticed.

This is so true. Yet, the reverse is true, also...it does not PRECLUDE a theistic answer or the existence of God. It is a wise man who does not jump to hasty conclusions.

I agree, but when given the choice between an answer that has evidence and facts to back it up and an answer made of baseless claims and assertions, I'll choose the former.

Well, after all, man was created in the image of God. Why should it surprise anyone that they are approaching the ability of God...ever learning, and, yet, never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

And the ugly, fundie truth surfaces.

It's a lot easier when you already have the code in existence to copy. Let's see them come up with a new kind of code that will create a new kind of cell or life (though it would still be based on prior existent knowledge).

So just because they would have to use the only known code that there is to create life, that means that their feat is meaningless?

Well, of course there is...that's what I'm trying to tell you. We can have tremendous amounts of change, even 'speciation', without having to resort to pseudo-science fantasy such as that proposed by Darwin.

Would you be so kind as to explain how tremendous amounts of change and 'speciation' would preclude the ToE?

Now, it's obvious (using logic) that you are referring to God. You make two false claims/assumptions: 1) a complete lack of evidence; 2) a heap of evidence to the contrary.

A complete lack of evidence and a heap of evidence to the contrary would seem to be problems more yours than his.

If one looks at this objectively, one must concede that the evidence for the existence of God far exceeds the evidence to the contrary. I declare your evidence is more invisible than God Himself!

Interesting choice of words, your evidence is more invisible than God himself. The only reason all the evidence is invisible is because you wont let yourself see it. To look at something objectively is to go in without bias and with an open mind, actions you have refused to take.

What really gets me is that you created this thread under the guise of wanting to be educated, and then you proceeded to upend the table that we had all placed our evidence on and scream "I reject your reality and substitute my own!" Science is supposed to be the pursuit of knowledge, not the exclusion of knowledge that does not suit your fancy or purposes.