Evolution Debunked - Life from dead chemicals??? - Page 5

Hundmutter wrote:  'Right back at you',

Shtal.  It seems to me that christians have an EVEN

BIGGER burden of proof on them if/when they attempt

to justify creationism.  After all, scientists and atheists

have the fossil record AND LOGIC on OUR side;  what

have you got ?  Oh yes, "You must have faith in a book."

 

 

Hi Hundmutter :)

I decided to reply even I made conclusion already lol...

What would we expect to observe if everything was Created by God less than 10,000 years ago, and there was a literal worldwide flood? We would expect to find thousands of feet of sedimentary rock all over the earth. Check, that is what we find. We would expect to find billions of dead things, fossilized, in the layers of sedimentary rock. Check, that is what we find. We would expect to find a vast array of animals each created for their own niche, who cannot change outside of their kind. Check, that is what we find.

We should be able to find large coal deposits, made up of huge rafts of floating plants torn loose in a flood, all over the earth. Check, that is what we find. We should be able to carbon date, which is only good to about 60,000 years, coal, oil and diamonds. Check, that is what we find. We should be able to date the earth using observable, testable and repeatable tests, at an age much less than the 4.5 billion years claimed by evolutionists. That is exactly what we observe. We should be able to find evidence that supposedly very old, extinct animals, like dinosaurs, are not very old at all. Check, that is what we find. We shouldn't be surprised to find soft tissue in supposed 65 million year old fossils. Check, we are not surprised. We should be able to see evidence in the heavens that the universe is not billions of years old, like comets and the lack of super nova remnants. Check, that is what we find.

We should find complex biological molecules that could not possibly happen by chance, like DNA. Check, that is what we find. We should see evidence of an intelligent designer, like the massive amounts of coded information, and micro molecular machines, in the cell. Check, that is what we find. We would not expect to see a gradual change from one kind of animal to another kind in the fossil record. Check, that is what we observe. And yet, with all the observable, testable and repeatable evidence we have showing a Creator God and a literal worldwide flood, there are still students being taught that the universe came about when nothing exploded and that life arose from non-life by time and chance. If evolution was true there should be some observable, testable and repeatable evidence showing it to be true. Where is it?

I'm sure Carlin and ggturner would agree with me :)

Shtal perhaps you should address the issues of your personal fraud and dishonesty before you repeat the same bullshit.

You have been shown to be a lier and fraud by several members.

Do you think rev moon is god incarnate like Jonathan Wells does?

The bible is just a fairy tale, none of that bullshit ever happened so shtal's conclusions are irrelevant.

1 Creationists have changed their tune, much, on a lot of things from your list Shtal; not so long ago they would have been absolutely denying the evidence of eg "dead things, fossilized, in layers of sedimentary rock."

Claiming that anything that had not already been dug up did not exist anywhere. Denying that any fossils that WERE found meant anything at all.

Expecting to find "a vast array of animals each created for their own niche, who cannot change outside of their kind" is simply inaccurate.

"Observable, testable and repeatable evidence showing a Creator God" is so untrue it is laughable.

2 JMO, VK is correct, you should concentrate on answering his demand that you admit your own falsehoods, before you move on to other issues.

Hundmutter wrote: who cannot change outside of their kind" is simply inaccurate.

 

example like Lucy???


Here is my old post.

The full proper name is Australopithecus Africanus Lucy… Donald Hudson found Lucy in 1974. (Ethiopia) He had gone there with a grant to look for missing links, somebody gave him some money - said here, go find missing link if you don’t find one – no more money. Two weeks before his grant money expired he discovered Lucy. (Highly motivated I suspect) that would be suspect by the way in the court of law. Lucy was three feet tall; it is obviously chimpanzee of some kind, the bones of the scull was crushed thoroughly, could not tell anything about the scull, but when they put it together for your kids text book, they make it half human and half ape, they name it Lucy because they were listening to a song, Lucy in the sky with Diamonds, great popular back then, which by the way have initials LSD which must be on when they found this thing.

The knee joint that was labeled Lucy knee in national geographic was actually found mile in half away (1.5m) and 200 hundred feet deeper. The national geographic labeled Lucy’s knee, it’s not Lucy knee, its mile and half away (1.5m) for heaven sake okay. There is quite quarterversary about that knee joint still, but the knee joint is the best evidence they have Lucy was becoming a human; because an ape has a lower and upper leg in the straight line with each other, the human leg goes up to your knee and angles off to the side because your hips are wider than your knees. Lucy knee is angle off to the side (the Femur angled) and Donald said see that proves she is becoming a human. No, any monkey climbs trees has an angled femur, what he found is tree climbing monkey, its not proof its becoming a human. He said well the bones are slightly bigger than a regular ape, well that is true, but that doesn’t proof it becoming a human.
The bones of a Clydesdale are slightly bigger than a regular horse; it doesn’t proof it becoming a truck for heaven sake okay. What he found was a heavy duty chimpanzee and probably pre-flood chimpanzee and everything was probably more heavy duty, if they are living longer and much healthier, that’s all they found. We have big horses and little horses today by the way. St. Louis Zoo put human feet on their Lucy display, not one feet bone or hand bone was found, not one... Every other Australopithecus has been found has curl toes. Professor David Menton in Washington University said the statue is a complete misrepresentation, it’s a big fancy word for lie, I prefer smaller words – it’s a lie. The Zoo director said; Zoo officials have no plans to knuckle under. We cannot be updating every exhibit based on every new piece of evidence. We look at the overall exhibit and the impression it creates. We think the overall impression this exhibit creates is correct. So you would lie to kids coming to your zoo just to get an impression across to them that the evolution is true, you mean your theory is more important than the facts; that is exactly correct, they will lie to the kids going through science and zoo just to make them believe this evolution theory.

We would like you to address your dishonesty, you are sinning against your god.

Nobody cares about your repeated bullshit.

Do you think rev moon is god like Jonathan Wells does?

Vk4, you are unintelligent ape and you say you have scientific evidence that proves you are unintelligent ape. Well I am not going to argue with your science.

You are an ape as well, not so much intelligent tho.

So do you believe rev moon is god like the creationist Jonathan Wells believes?

You are an ape as well, not so much intelligent tho.

So do you believe rev moon is god like the creationist Jonathan Wells believes?

I got this from internet image...

 

"Interpretation"

 

vk4 asked his father, "How were people born?" So his father said, "Adam and Eve made babies, then their babies became adults and made babies, and so on." The vk4 then went to his mother, asked her the same question and she told him, "We were monkeys then we evolved to become like we are now." The vk4 ran back to his father and said, "You lied to me!" His father replied, "No, your mom was talking about her side of the family."