Simple questions for op.

1.Is the op a result of your own personal summeries based on the total sum of your knowledge, or, is the op a cut and paste where you are simply regurgitating opinions of other creationists?

2. If they are your original thoughts, then are you coming from a purely scientific perspective, or from a non - scientific perspective?

The reason I ask these questions is because theists much more enlightened than you are on this forum are not shy to make the clear distinction between faith, reason and empirical science.
It is silly to use faith to make scientific arguments.

EvilBrain1:

Again, the theory of evolution doesnt address where life came from, just how and why already existing life changes. In fact, the theory is not just about living things but all self-replicating systems with imperfect copying. Thats why it has been applied to certain types of computer programs as well as cultural phenomena like languages, religions and memes.


Yes, just like the Germ THEORY of disease, and Newtons THEORY of gravitation, and Einsteins THEORY of relativity. Because clearly antibiotics, space rockets snd the GPS on your phone dont really work because the principles they are based on are just theories. Hint: some words have different meanings when used in science than in regular english. For example, retárded means something is slowed down, and an ídiot is a person with an IQ <70% of the general population.


You need to stop laughing and start thinking. For one,where did this assumption thst your specific deity created life come from? Even if you could prove that it was a supernatural agent (and you cant), why just one,? Why not two, or a crack team of 15000 powerful deities? The first time you saw an iPhone, did you just assume that it was made by one single person? Yet the simplest bacteria is far more complex than an iPhone and you just assume one single guy made it?


This is the only remotely accurate thing youve said so far. Congrats.


Obviously youre not addressing the theory of evolution because you clearly lack even a basic, child-like understsnding of it. And what the hell is an "evolutionist"? That is a word that Ive only ever heard anti-science crackpots use. Maybe its crackpotese for "biologist". Please confirm or deny.


No sir, I do not.


It seems like you want me to show you a picture of a half-duck, half-crocodile. Well I have something even better: Google Archeopteryx and look at the pictures of the fossils. Note the row of sharp teeth, the claws on its forelimbs, the long tail, the wings and clearly visible feathers. Now tell me if it is a bird or a dinosaur, give reasons. Do birds have teeth in your village? Do reptiles have wings and feathers? Do the chickens in your fathers house have lizard-like tails? So how do you explain the fossil? Hint: All living things are transitional. Life is constantly evolving. There are no final forms.
NB: I would have posted the picture myself, but Im on my phone and the internet where I am sucks donkey balls.

Wow...so many words! Did you forget that you're addressing a creationist?

No matter what you say, you're wrong because God.

DProDG:


Wow...so many words! Did you forget that you're addressing a creationist?

Sorry, I get carried away sometimes.

No matter what you say, you're wrong because God.

Don't be so quick to give up on these guys. If Frosbel can be cured, so can anybody. All they need is a little knowledge.

This "frosbel" must be very popular on this site... I see his/her/its name more than "Jesus Christ"

[quote author=LucemFerre post=31820248]And again... Just because someone failed to give evidence for life not involving a creator, doesn't prove that there was or is a creator. It simply just proves that the available creator theory is more probable than the available "*natural process" thing. "The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence." They're all theories... I'd suggest we treat them as simply that, until God comes down and mold me a model or something would just spring out from nothing.

And for the record... I think life has always existed.[/quote

("I think life has always existed"
Life as in human form,energy or what?

If it's human form then why is the earth still in tact(relatively speaking),considering how even the past few years have impacted it.

If it's energy then at what point did it start to manifest in human form and what probably influenced it's transformation.

I want to know what influenced your trail of thought.

hernia:

("I think life has always existed"
Life as in human form,energy or what?

I want to know what influenced your trail of thought

Lol... Human form?

I really do not know what form... But I think life has always evolved through many stages in different forms.

And emm... Ur user name's kinda funny

Actually, this thread have been created since 2013 when I'm still used to debate with Atheist but unlike now that I don't do such anymore. So I only want to say this to clarify the reason why I respond to you people's post.

EvilBrain1:
Again, the theory of evolution doesnt address where life came from,

Whereas the OP isn't about evolution which means you're just shouting upon your own reason not to address the OP.

Obviously youre not addressing the theory of evolution because you clearly lack even a basic, child-like understsnding of it.

The OP is addressing EARLY LIFE and not evolution, so I don't see the reason why you would make this statement.

And what the hell is an "evolutionist"? That is a word that Ive only ever heard anti-science crackpots use. Maybe its crackpotese for "biologist". Please confirm or deny.

Please sir check your dictionary unless you want to tell me that this word doesn't exist.

LucemFerre:


Mmm... "False dilemma..." Actually there are 3...
3. Life has always existed...
And now that you have introduced an "intelligent source (God)" to the first possibility even make the possibilities 4.

I just want to get it right, life has always existed ON EARTH or where?

Emusan:


I just want to get it right, life has always existed ON EARTH or where?

If you didn't see "earth", then there's no "earth"