Whew, that was a close one.

EVOLUTION IS A THEORY. ITS IN BLACK AND WHITE.

EDIT: Why would I lie about all that I said?  Bossieman can confirm all I said.

I know and have known pretty much there is to know about evolution,  what everyone has posted here is old news

CREATIONISM IS A HOAX. IT\'S IN BLACK AND WHITE.



:rolleyes:

Originally posted by Samwise
CREATIONISM IS A HOAX. IT\'S IN BLACK AND WHITE.



:rolleyes:

OK, prove it by scientific fact right now

Originally posted by Clowd
OK, prove it by scientific fact right now

Dude, you just don\'t get it. I\'m just mimicing the hopeless replies by you. Why don\'t YOU prove evolution isn\'t a fact.

EDIT: I\'m not saying I know how life originated on earth. For all I know it could be God, aliens or just nature itself (amino acids and whatnot). But evolution is happening and I don\'t know why you would falsely claim it\'s not. There\'s no doubt that evolution is a fact. If you\'re such an expert on the subject you should know.

Originally posted by Samwise
Dude, you just don\'t get it. I\'m just mimicing the hopeless replies by you. Why don\'t YOU prove evolution isn\'t a fact.

I already did, Samwise.  The left hand right hand fact proves creatin and disaproves evolution.  Amino acids cant form in the primitive atmostphere.  water in the primitive ocean favors depolymerization.  as much as you want to believe the eye evolved,  darwin said its absurd to think it did.

I\'ll have to look into that left hand right hand fact you\'re talking about. I didn\'t catch it the first time, and it sounds quite amazing. If it\'s not too much to ask, could you explain it again? Otherwise I\'ll just find it.

darwin said its absurd to think it did.

The only thing that`s absurd are your posts, I´m sorry. You should change your name to Clown...[

Hmm.. ya know. You complain that people do not read your posts carefully Clowd. Perhaps you should watch what you say before someone uses it against you. Case in point, your responce to my very first post in which you answered that "You cannot take every little word of the bible litterally, as it is subjective". (Forgive the non-verbatum quotes, as I\'m too lazy to search a 14 page thread for your -exact- words, but I will hand them to you on a silver plater should you decide to try and weasle your way out) Yet, in a later post you claim that you believe every single word of the bible? How can you believe a scripture as an absolute truth when it\'s very meaning differs between readers?

And to further compound this, you claim that -most- of the passages in the dead sea scrolls match the bible (King James version you claimed, as I recall.. one that was written after a religeous reform which occured well after the time of Christ). Yet, you must conceed that the Dead Sea Scrolls are closer to the true message of Christ being that they are the closes thing we have to an original text. How can you believe your bible word for word when it\'s not verbatium to the dead sea scrolls? Do you simply omit the differences between the versions and believe what the scrolls tell you or do you just ignore the incosistancies and claim it to be "close enough".

Also, while many of the events described in the bible and in the Dead Sea Scrolls coincide, their details, symbolism, and messages are radically different. You may as well be compairing the Bible to the Quran for as close as these two texts are to being similar.  I suppose this is another case of "It\'s close enough" eh?

Oh, and I thought I should also point out that you are wrong Shadwhawk. The theory of eveloution, as stated by Darwin, is utter nonsence.. and none but the most ameture of armchair scientists actually believe in it. I realize that you\'re probably trying to keep from getting too techinical with Clowd as he won\'t understand a word you\'re saying, but there are other theories which branch off of Darwin\'s original which explain eveloution far better. Lavan and I already had this discussion long ago, and although he won by simply being able to throw out more facts than I could, I think we did a good job of picking apart Darwins theory.

Evolutionary discussion Clowd can\'t possibly hope to understand.

Also Clowd, re-reading that old thread reminded me of something. There have been 5 major extictions in the fossil record. Two of which (I believe) were caused by asteroid impacts. You callously dismiss one, but what of the other 4 mass extictions?

And Clowd, on the "an eye can\'t evolve thing":

Generations of creationists have tried to counter Darwin by citing the example of the eye as a structure that could not have evolved. The eye\'s ability to provide vision depends on the perfect arrangement of its parts, these critics say. Natural selection could thus never favor the transitional forms needed during the eye\'s evolution--what good is half an eye? Anticipating this criticism, Darwin suggested that even "incomplete" eyes might confer benefits (such as helping creatures orient toward light) and thereby survive for further evolutionary refinement. Biology has vindicated Darwin: researchers have identified primitive eyes and light-sensing organs throughout the animal kingdom and have even tracked the evolutionary history of eyes through comparative genetics. (It now appears that in various families of organisms, eyes have evolved independently.)


And as for the other \'proof\' you used earlier about the giraffes and whatnot, that was nicely explained by someone else - I think it was Shockwaves, but I might have to check up on that again.


Oh, and in case you missed it, my last post on the other page was edited a little:

"EDIT: I\'m not saying I know how life originated on earth. For all I know it could be God, aliens or just nature itself (amino acids and whatnot). But evolution is happening and I don\'t know why you would falsely claim it\'s not. There\'s no doubt that evolution is a fact. If you\'re such an expert on the subject you should know."

Originally posted by macabre


The only thing that`s absurd are your posts, I´m sorry. You should change your name to Clown...[

your absurd for thining darwin didnt say that, proves how much you know about the father of evolution

why does views of the bible differ between readers?  because the bible was written to where only people with true divine wisdom can understand it.  (i got my info from those people)

5 mass extinctions?  fill me in on these 5 mass extinctions...

shockwaves nicely explained what i said about giraffes?  he just said they evolved it.  nicely said

of course animals have different eyes...

as for your fossil record, if it proves evolution why isnt there any incomplete skeletons?  Im sure there would be more then one skeptical fish

saying you cant take the bible literally:  if the bible says a huge tree will grow somewhere, like in a certain part of the world,  or your off spring will become a mountain  its most likley talking about a new government, or your offspring will become a mighty nation,  that is what i mean by dont take SOME of the bible literal

close enough, as long as its the same things, and the wording stays basically the same,  you cant complain,  anyways im yet to here which scriptures where changed from the original dead sea scrolls

as for shadwhawk,  he seems to copy and paste from atheist.alt,  so his credibility is pretty low to me,  and should be to everyone

Originally posted by Clowd
as for shadwhawk,  he seems to copy and paste from atheist.alt,  so his credibility is pretty low to me,  and should be to everyone

Yeah, he should use alt.creationism instead, that\'d be much better. :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Clowd
shockwaves nicely explained what i said about giraffes? he just said they evolved it. nicely said

Yeah, wouldn\'t you say that explained why their heart is the way it is?

But why don\'t you read everything Lavan wrote on this page?

Then you can spew out more garbage later.

[videoholic]

Originally posted by ##RaCeR##


Your a friggen racist, thats what you are.

And there are 21 million other people who would agree with me. Don\'t mess with us.

This post has hundreds of quality posts to reply to and you pick my one joke.  Gotta love that.


Shadwhawk: I have to say welcome to the forum.  Finally someone with the knowledge and the sheer will to reply to Clowd\'s absolutely useless drivel.  Welcome and I hope you stay after this thread dies.  Give that man an avatar!!!

This is the left hand right hand: amino acids come in two shapes, left handed and right handed, should they be formed at random, half be left handed and half would be right handed, there is no reason why either shape would be prefereed by living beings, but of the 20 amino acids used to make life, ALL are left handed

The odds of evolution are compare to the odds of a printing shop blowing up and resulting in an unabridged dictionary.

which pretty much equals 1 to 100000000000 or some big number like that

its more sensible to believe in God then evolution,  but some dont because they dont understand God

Sam wise all my information has come from scientists,  not a creation website


Sonyfan what do you mean by evolution?  Yes different types of birds are getting made all the time,  just like humans.  But they stay a bird.  You dont see any half bird,  half fish do you?

And why would evolution suddenly stop?  Wouldnt some animals be in the middle of transforming?

 How do you think we got the big variety of humans we have today? Evolution states that beings can become radically differnt and change into totaly different things,  like a fish to a reptile.

Also i got a question for you guys.  If life is survival of the fittest,  why did the fish want to go on the land?  what was wrong with the water?  what would make a fish grow legs?  answer this please

Originally posted by Samwise
I\'ll have to look into that left hand right hand fact you\'re talking about. I didn\'t catch it the first time, and it sounds quite amazing. If it\'s not too much to ask, could you explain it again? Otherwise I\'ll just find it.

Lefthanded/righthanded.

When we create aminoacid in laboratory we get 50% left and 50 % right handed. The thing is that nature almost all the time uses lefthanded aminoacid instead of righthanded. This is a bit of a mystery why nature choose left before righthanded.
There is several theories about why it is like this. The one I belive is the most correct one is that life  (aminoacid) came to earth from space. when we have study meteors that have hit Earth we find on them that there is more lefthanded Aminoacid than righthanded. this "could prove" that life came to earth from space.
If life came to earth from a meteor there is even more interesting theories, like pulsars "killing" righthanded aminoacides. Well Samwise you have to study it more closelly to understand it but it is damn interesting.
i hope I have help you out.

Yeah, thanks for the info both of you.