Originally posted by Blue nocturne
That's not evolution that's varation.EDIT: Varation does not compliment evolution because varations are combinations of already exsisting genes.
I disagree. You are looking evolution right in the face, and refusing to see it. The problem is not evolution; the problem is your refusal to see it.
So what is the mechanism behind evolution? I believe that it is God.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I disagree. You are looking evolution right in the face, and refusing to see it. The problem is not evolution; the problem is your refusal to see it.So what is the mechanism behind evolution? I believe that it is God.
Well I'm not saying evolution never happened i'm simply stating a fact does who believe in creationism aren't to different from does that believe in Darwinism, So why should they be ridiculed because it isn't scientific?
Despite the fact that Darwinism has holes in it's theories and is generally accepted so why creationism also I admire you faith shakyamunison and I damn well know I don't have all the answers so people like cap.Falcon should stop criticizing creationist.
Originally posted by Blue nocturne
Well I'm not saying evolution never happened i'm simply stating a fact does who believe in creationism aren't to different from does that believe in Darwinism, So why should they be ridiculed because it isn't scientific?Despite the fact that Darwinism has holes in it's theories and is generally accepted so why creationism also I admire you faith shakyamunison and I damn well know I don't have all the answers so people like cap.Falcon should stop criticizing creationist.
In my mind, the problem is those few people with a hidden agenda. These people are using ID as a political tool to gain power.
Originally posted by Blue nocturne
Well I'm not saying evolution never happened i'm simply stating a fact does who believe in creationism aren't to different from does that believe in Darwinism, So why should they be ridiculed because it isn't scientific?Despite the fact that Darwinism has holes in it's theories and is generally accepted so why creationism also I admire you faith shakyamunison and I damn well know I don't have all the answers so people like cap.Falcon should stop criticizing creationist.
You have alot of just purely scientifically ignorant quotes on here, which are too numerous to quote. So put all of your questions against Evolution into one neat post, seperated into paragraphs, complete with punctuation, and I promise to answer every single one, with correct scientific data.
That sounds fair enough, methinks.
Considering there is already 133 pages of scientific evidence for you to sort through.
http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=27866&highlight=evolution
Originally posted by Wesker
Oh yes... another ignoramus trying to overturn over a hundred years of scientific thought with... "OMg, their r teh problums!".
I wish they could prove it. After all, that is what science is all about. If evolution is not correct, then I will through it out the window. I want to know what really happened. But they’re lies the difference. Supporters of ID would never question their beliefs, and would ignore evidence to the contrary. But with science, theories will change as we get closer to the truth, and what dose not hold up to scrutiny will fall to the wayside.
Why has no one submit a scientific paper on ID and published it in the scientific world? If they have good hard evidence and it is truly a science, then it would stand it’s ground, and all opposed would be silenced. However, religion does not work that way, you believe it, or you don’t.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Why has no one submit a scientific paper on ID and published it in the scientific world? If they have good hard evidence and it is truly a science, then it would stand it’s ground, and all opposed would be silenced. However, religion does not work that way, you believe it, or you don’t.
They've tried. Several times, with several books.
The "science" of Intelligent Design has been proven wrong many times, either because a claim itself was proven wrong, or a "fact" on which a claim was based was proven wrong or outdated.
Michael Behe tried with a book titled "Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution" and Phillip Johnson tried with "Darwin on Trial", both of which were widely criticized and tossed aside by the scientific community, for using just plain wrong facts and incorrect methodology.
Originally posted by Arachnoidfreak
They've tried. Several times, with several books.The "science" of Intelligent Design has been proven wrong many times, either because a claim itself was proven wrong, or a "fact" on which a claim was based was proven wrong or outdated.
Michael Behe tried with a book titled "Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution" and Phillip Johnson tried with "Darwin on Trial", both of which were widely criticized and tossed aside by the scientific community, for using just plain wrong facts and incorrect methodology.
Well, back to the drawing board. 😆
Originally posted by Blue nocturneyes actually. 95% of Earth's life has become extinct because of strugle to survive.
Right so slow that certian creatures never evolve and just die off 🙄
Originally posted by Blue nocturne1. cambrian age?
falcon answer these questions1. If all creatures have a common ancestry why did so many organisms appear during the cambrian age
2. Why do certian creatures remain unchanged from there appearence to there extiction they should have changed to survive right.
2. Ermm, I don't think you understand evolution. (Not suprised really) which are these creatures that didn't evolve? Apes? They changed.
Originally posted by Blue nocturneOkay Nocturne, what's the SCIENTTIFIC evidence for creationism.
Well I'm not saying evolution never happened i'm simply stating a fact does who believe in creationism aren't to different from does that believe in Darwinism, So why should they be ridiculed because it isn't scientific?Despite the fact that Darwinism has holes in it's theories and is generally accepted so why creationism also I admire you faith shakyamunison and I damn well know I don't have all the answers so people like cap.Falcon should stop criticizing creationist.
Originally posted by Arachnoidfreak✅ lets compare evolution, with intelligent design. It's a great way to teach kids the difference between good science, and non-science.
They've tried. Several times, with several books.The "science" of Intelligent Design has been proven wrong many times, either because a claim itself was proven wrong, or a "fact" on which a claim was based was proven wrong or outdated.
Michael Behe tried with a book titled "Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution" and Phillip Johnson tried with "Darwin on Trial", both of which were widely criticized and tossed aside by the scientific community, for using just plain wrong facts and incorrect methodology.
Evolution
good science CHANGES as we learn more. It begins with OBSERVATION, then moves on to HYPOTHESIS, TESTING, and DEBATE.
Creationism
whereas non-science is RIGID. It begins with FICTION, then moves to ASSERTING, INSISTING, TWISTING THE FACTS, and even TORTURING.
Originally posted by Captain Falcon
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2762997832693663864&q=evolution&pl=true
Originally posted by Adam_PoERemember when I tried to prove Creationism? 🤨
If you wish to discuss the merits of Modern Evolutionary Theory, there are several threads devoted to the subject already. This thread is for the discussion of Creation Science. In other words, evolution is not on trial here, so stick to proving or disproving Creationism.