Reply to Shtal (Interesting facts, for believers) - Page 2

Baby Eagle,

Evolution/science hasn't ruled out ID with 100% certainty, however it has ruled out Shital's version of creation.

Ok that said ... lets just say the 8th day in male human infant is brought to us by evolution. What need did our ancestors (monkeys an the whole nine yards lol) benefit from the 8th day ? What does the elevated spike in prothrombin (Vit K) on the 8th day of a male infant mean from an evolution theory point of view ?

Tell me. Because there's only one possibility I can think of and it's not a nice one.  LMAO

I know very little about physics, but it seems you may be wrong on the whole matter being created/destroyed issue. It's energy that can't be destroyed, only transfered.

I can't answer your 8th day question, because I'm a sheep that leaves the nerds to their science stuff.

Science, Physics, Astronomy, Medicine, Archaeology and slowly but surely Biology (to name a few) CANNOT rule out "intelligent design" or creation Felloffher. The Creation Theory is "Intelligent design". Don't confuse people.

State you case for evolution, please.

This should be easy scroll back towards the top of the page and read what I wrote regarding ID. I went to a natural science musuem in grade 7, they had some very nifty exibits with physical evidence showing various forms of evolution and the process.  

I have no issue with people who believe in ID, but I do take issue with those who blatantly lie and destort the truth to suit their own need.  

The First Law of Thermodynamics states neither matter or energy can be created or destroyed. The second 1/2 of the First Law of Thermodynamics states matter and or energy can change form, but the total amount of energy stays the same. (para)

What am I not understanding Felloffher ? Explain.

I stand corrected after doing some science homework (it's been a while).  Yes matter is still considered intact when transformed to energy. I didn't go to university, so I concede that your knowledge regarding physics and many other subjects will out weigh mine. However, there are several subjects that I could lure you into to make you look stupid as well. None of this changes that Shital's arguments are retarded. 

Shtals argument highlighted and posted at the top of this thread by the OP is not retarded, alittle brass, but not retarded. You need to not kill the messenger here.

Evolution is a Theory not fact, "intelligent design" or creation is a Theory not fact. We are discussion "theories" not facts. The only facts we have are known "laws" and 2 testaments by God, so to conclude one (evolution) or two (intelligent design or creation) as non exist or as a fact over the other - is to say our "laws" of physics, of the cosmos, of dynamics, teleological, scientific, testaments, astronomy, archaeology and medicine etc ..  are all wrong as we know them.

Evolution is only a theory when used to explain the orgin of our existance, the evidence that evolution has and is occuring is irrefutable. That is fact.

I'm off to work now.

Depends who your talking to. lol  Some people prolly think it's fact. lol

Evolution can be by definition a chemical, a stellar or a biological "change" within a naturalistic state. But what your saying is basically a molecules to man state of evolution aka relative morality and that just isn't so with the word evolution. Call it what it is relative morality. Not evolution.

Anyone can call it what they want I suppose (lol), but chemical, stellar or biological are evolution by definition not social, recipe or legal system changes. lol

Or did I misunderstand you ? Because if you call all this fundamental clashing in society we see today vs what went on in society even 237 years ago as evolution (lol) you done been hoodwinked. lol