davidylan:

another bumbling fool comes tumbling forward.

Moses wasnt interested in an alternative to creationism . . . He simply wrote down what happened.

You claim that Gen 1 and 2 is wrong and hang your belief on evolution . . . why dont you go ahead and prove it? why are you only interested in gen 1?

I can not help but laugh with scorn at this ridiculous and deluded FOOL. The mythical moses simply wrote down what happened eh? Was he there when it happened? Did he tell you that he was the one that wrote it or did somebody else tell you he wrote it? Idiot. You claimed it happened where is your scientific evidence to show that it happened? Deluded imbeciles.

Tudór:

Are you drunk? You call me ignorant and offer to educate me yet all you do is want me to answer your questions. . .questions i put to you in the first place. Jesus will be so ashamed of you!

what should I call u? u asked for empirical evidence without knowing the meaning of the word "empirical". are u alright?

This is a blatant lie!
Those are not evidences rather they are claims. The story is just told to fit the reality on ground, just like old folklore- why does the tortoise have lines on the shell? "Oh the tortoise went to heaven with the vulture riding on it's wings. At the feast he ate all the food, the vulture left in annoyance and the tortoise had to jump down breaking it's shell, it pieces had to be glued by mrs tortoise hence the lines"- this story is difficult to contend coz indeed lines do exist on the tortoise shell. But we all know this story is ridiculous and a farce just like your bible story.

u never disappoint ur fans.

what are the results of the story in genesis? which of the objects and substances created in genesis do not exist as was stated in genesis?

Which of the accounts in genesis are true?

All of them. which of them is false.

And any evidence to prove this?

The evidence that it rained today is the heavy water on the roof top and the massive ones on the floor not caused by dews, flooding or irrigation.

The evidence for the creation story is the simple fact that all that was created there . . . .was created and exists for all to see till this day.
And guess what. . . . .there is still no alternative.

horse703:

imagine an emerging organism, a human beign with half formed organs, some organs actually missing, anatomy and physiology utterly incomplete, appearing for the first time on planet earth for the first time, he now has to start mutating particular portions of his DNA to be able to even fom a nose to breath, he has to mutate specifcic portions of his DNA to be able to live in this new environment because before, he was just a fish but now he is a man, he nust mutate and fast. after mutation he must pass on traits to progeny so race can go on.
questions:
1) if mutation is random, which has been proven, and cannot be controlled by organism, how does a fish suddenly begin to mutate to form legs to walk
2) how is the newly formed organism able to survive in such a new environment and even reproduce, his physiology is in a shambles, anatomy the same, how is he able to survive then.
3) did the fish suddenly decide to mutate a hand?

These questions stem from a poor understanding of the theory of evolution.
Lets take the fish for example, in a species of fish there exist some members who are stronger than the others, probably by being able to survive much longer outside water or maybe have longer and stronger fins therefore able to swim faster to acquire food and have a higher chance of surving drought or whatever. Due to their survival they are able to reproduce producing the next generation which have even better their parents survival characteristics although some of the offspring may be just normal [ due to dominant and reccessive combination] . In this next generation the stronger ones are much more likely to survive hence reproduce offspring much more adapted in addition to some normal ones. This cycle keeps going on and the structures keep getting stronger and more specialized. Note that it takes tens to hundreds of millions of years for these mutations to occur, hence it's a gradual process.
That my friend is just a simple breakdown for you.

4)mutations that occur have been proven to be harmful, at least 99%, so how did the organism know how to mutate harmlessly, maybe it had magic powers? or im wrong.
Please atheist answer these questions

You are wrong. Genetic mutations have been done in the lab to produce crops that water resistant, drought resistant, bigger, more colourful e.t.c they are not all harmful, beneficial ones exist.

noetic2:

what should I call u? u asked for empirical evidence without knowing the meaning of the word "empirical". are u alright?  

u never disappoint ur fans.

what are the results of the story in genesis? which of the objects and substances created in genesis do not exist as was stated in genesis?

 
All of them. which of them is false.

The evidence that it rained today is the heavy water on the roof top and the massive ones on the floor not caused by dews, flooding or irrigation.

The evidence for the creation story is the simple fact that all that was created there . . . .was created and exists for all to see till this day.
And guess what. . . . .there is still no alternative.

When will these pathetic apologist learn to provide evidence for their claims? When does claim equal evidence? Ok lets assume that creationsim is true where are the scientific evidence to back it up?

bindex:

When will these pathetic apologist learn to provide evidence for their claims? When does claim equal evidence? Ok lets assume that creationsim is true where are the scientific evidence to back it up?

what do u understand by scientific?

Tudór:

These questions stem from a poor understanding of the theory of evolution.
Lets take the fish for example, in a species of fish there exist some members who are stronger than the others, probably by being able to survive much longer outside water or maybe have longer and stronger fins therefore able to swim faster to acquire food and have a higher chance of surving drought or whatever. Due to their survival they are able to reproduce producing the next generation which have even better their parents survival characteristics although some of the offspring may be just normal [ due to dominant and reccessive combination] . In this next generation the stronger ones are much more likely to survive hence reproduce offspring much more adapted in addition to some normal ones. This cycle keeps going on and the structures keep getting stronger and more specialized. Note that it takes tens to hundreds of millions of years for these mutations to occur, hence it's a gradual process.
That my friend is just a simple breakdown for you.You are wrong. Genetic mutations have been done in the lab to produce crops that water resistant, drought resistant, bigger, more colourful e.t.c they are not all harmful, beneficial ones exist.

Tudor please don't waste your time addressing the questions of these fools. They claim they have "evidence" and "questions" that disprove evolution yet they are very afraid of asking or challenging scientist and evolutionist, They can only come to nairaland and cry all day that they are "biologist" and "scientist", Yet they only want to debate non biologist on evolution. If they have questions about evolution and evidence that shows it is "baseless" why don't they write their peer reviewed articles to the NAS and other scientific bodies challenging what the scientist have written about evolution and all the evidence they have provided to support it. The FOOL davidylan keeps crying everyday that he is a "scientist" but he is so afraid of writing to the NAS to challenge any of their claims. What a discredited and pathetic foolish fool.

noetic2:

what should I call u? u asked for empirical evidence without knowing the meaning of the word "empirical". are u alright? 

Since you're the wise teacher why didn't you define it??
Stop masking your ignorance with irreleavant questions.

u never disappoint ur fans.

what are the results of the story in genesis? which of the objects and substances created in genesis do not exist as was stated in genesis?

   
All of them. which of them is false

.

Hey the story was made up to mask the ignorance of those primitive men i.e tailored to fit the reality just like the folklore example i gave. When a fable is constructed from ground up it's bound to resemble reality coz thats where it was built from in the first place!

The evidence that it rained today is the heavy water on the roof top and the massive ones on the floor not caused by dews, flooding or irrigation.

can you establish to a non-witness that the ones on the floor where not caused by dew, flood or irrigation?
Are you certain water was not poured/sprinkled deliberately on the roof to make it look like rain?

The evidence for the creation story is the simple fact that all that was created there . . . .was created and exists for all to see till this day.

like i said the story was made up using all we see now as raw materials no wonder there are no mentions of dinosaurs or mammoths in the bible.

And guess what. . . . .there is still no alternative.

That we don't have viable alternatives doesn't mean we have to swallow the crap of creation as truth.

Fellas, fellas why so much fighting?  
The bottomline is simple. Neither Evolution nor Creation can be scientifically proven beyond all reasonable doubt.

The problem is when one side is bold enough as to demand for evidence, the opposing view equally demands for evidence from the other - when in reality neither can prove their belief.

For those who support evolution the fact majority of scientists believe Evolution to be true, that does not validate it by any stretch of the imagination. At the end of the day evolution is still just an unprovable belief - just like Creationism.

Tudór:

Since you're the wise teacher why didn't you define it??
Stop masking your ignorance with irreleavant questions.

u asked for empirical evidence. . . . .yet u dont know the meaning of empirical. . . . .are u ok?  
.

Hey the story was made up to mask the ignorance of those primitive men i.e tailored to fit the reality just like the folklore example i gave. When a fable is constructed from ground up it's bound to resemble reality coz thats where it was built from in the first place!

where is ur PROOF?

can you establish to a non-witness that the ones on the floor where not caused by dew, flood or irrigation?
Are you certain water was not poured/sprinkled  deliberately on the roof to make it look like rain?

the non-witness is not intellectually blind and bankrupt to deduce that

a. dews dont fall in the afternoon
b. the water on the floor is minimal and not flood-like or resultant effect of a flood.
c. there are no crops to be irrigated neither is there a need for irrigation.

are u this dumb?   stop disappointing ur fans.

like i said the story was made up using all we see now as raw materials no wonder there are no mentions of dinosaurs or mammoths in the bible.That we don't have viable alternatives doesn't mean we have to swallow the crap of creation as truth.

u still have not said how and what makes creation a crap.

JeSoul:

Fellas, fellas why so much fighting?  
The bottomline is simple. Neither Evolution nor Creation can be scientifically proven beyond all reasonable doubt.

The problem is when one side is bold enough as to demand for evidence, the opposing view equally demands for evidence from the other - when in reality neither can prove their belief.

For those who support evolution the fact majority of scientists believe Evolution to be true, that does not validate it by any stretch of the imagination. At the end of the day evolution is still just an unprovable belief - just like Creationism.

This is borne from the deeply flawed preconception that you're either a creationist or an evolutionist. People who are neither exist you know. If you gonna preach crap to them the least you could do is have some proof.

Tudór:

This is borne from the deeply flawed preconception that you're either a creationist or an evolutionist. People who are neither exist you know. If you gonna preach crap to them the least you could do is have some proof.

Calm down. The post was directed at the discussants of this thread, not the lovely person I will converse with at some point in life who has no opinion on the matter. If I will preach crap to such a person it is of no concern of yours is it?

noetic2:

u asked for empirical evidence. . . . .yet u dont know the meaning of empirical. . . . .are u ok?  

so after all your bragging and pompousity you still couldn't correct me. . . What a shame!
.

where is ur PROOF?

my PROOF is that since no proof exists for your fable then it's a farce. Simple

the non-witness is not intellectually blind and bankrupt to deduce that

a. dews dont fall in the afternoon
b. the water on the floor is minimal and not flood-like or resultant effect of a flood.
c. there are no crops to be irrigated neither is there a need for irrigation.

are u this dumb?   stop disappointing ur fans.

See how you're easily deceived a simple lawn sprinkler could cause the rain effect. What do you think they use to simulate rain in movies. . . .jesus? No, its SPRINKLERS!

u still have not said how and what makes evolution a crap.

What the hell is this?
Like i said any theory without evidence is CRAP. If evolution, karma sutra or creation has no evidence then it's CRAP.

JeSoul:

Calm down. The post was directed at the discussants of this thread, not the lovely person I will converse with at some point in life who has no opinion on the matter. If I will preach crap to such a person it is of no concern of yours is it?

Well you never can tell that lovely person might just be me. . . .can't be too careful these days can you?

Tudór:

so after all your bragging and pompousity you still couldn't correct me. . . What a shame!

I believe I corrected u. . . . .check back.  
.

my PROOF is that since no proof exists for your fable then it's a farce. Simple

are the objects/subjects created in genesis nihilant? . . . . .stop disgracing urself. what other evidence do u need?

See how you're easily deceived a simple lawn sprinkler could cause the rain effect. What do you think they use to simulate rain in movies. . . .jesus? No, its SPRINKLERS!

I believe I answered ur question. whats next?

What the hell is this?
Like i said any theory without evidence is CRAP. If evolution, karma sutra or creation has no evidence then it's CRAP.

what are u saying?  

Tudór:

Well you never can tell that lovely person might just be me. . . .can't be too careful these days can you?

but you already have a formed opinion on the matter now unless say you lead me into thinking otherwise, which I suspect you are very capable of

JeSoul:

Fellas, fellas why so much fighting?  
The bottomline is simple. Neither Evolution nor Creation can be scientifically proven beyond all reasonable doubt.

The problem is when one side is bold enough as to demand for evidence, the opposing view equally demands for evidence from the other - when in reality neither can prove their belief.

For those who support evolution the fact majority of scientists believe Evolution to be true, that does not validate it by any stretch of the imagination. At the end of the day evolution is still just an unprovable belief - just like Creationism.

Evolution is backed by science because it makes predictions and is falsifiable, it can also be tested. The whole position rests upon a grand dismissal of evidence by creationist and pseudo scientist. Evolution can be seen, but then they label it "microevolution not macroevolution" to magically dismiss the evidence and the positively tested hypotheses (the backbone of the scientific process).  

What evidence do they have, that would support biblical creationism? I am not a scientist but I have studied evolution for the past 8 months intensely and and I now accept the theory. Do I have some questions about it ? of course and I always ask evolutionary biologist to help me out. Our resident "biologists" and "scientist" keep crying for us non biologist to provide evidence to support evolution. Scientist(evolutionary biologist) have done that and if they have misgivings they should write their own scientific paper and challenge the evidence provided by other scientist instead of crying all day on nairaland to us to help them. By the way discounting evidence is different than actually refuting evidence, If they want to refute it then they should write to the NAS. Evolution has been useful in medical research, can creationism be useful in medical research?

Do you seriously believe that scientist will come up with the theory of evolution without actually having evidence that are nicely explained by that theory?

noetic2:

I believe I corrected u. . . . .check back.  
.are the objects/subjects created in genesis nihilant? . . . . .stop disgracing urself. what other evidence do u need?

I believe I answered ur question. whats next?
what are u saying?  

What the hell is all these??

Tudór:

What the hell is all these??

the hell u have u have been ranting about.

JeSoul:

  but you already have a formed opinion on the matter now unless say you lead me into thinking otherwise, which I suspect you are very capable of 

Everybody has a preconcieved idea even an slowpoke. . . . Well, till we meet on that lovely day. . .

toneyb bindex and Tudor keep up the good work i enjoy reading your posts

manmustwac:

toneyb bindex and Tudor keep up the good work i enjoy reading your posts

toneyb:

Evolution is backed by science because it makes predictions and is falsifiable, it can also be tested. The whole position rests upon a grand dismissal of evidence by creationist and pseudo scientist. Evolution can be seen, but then they label it "microevolution not macroevolution" to magically dismiss the evidence and the positively tested hypotheses (the backbone of the scientific process).

 My brother as nice as all that sounds, having some evidence to suggest the probablity of something is not enough to solidify it as the absolute truth. And I'll go beyond my fellow christians in here and say that I don't think it unreasonable to go with the prevailing belief - but does the belief become any truer because it has the most followers? of course not.

What evidence do they have, that would support biblical creationism? I am not a scientist but I have studied evolution for the past 8 months intensely and and I now accept the theory. Do I have some questions about it ? of course and I always ask evolutionary biologist to help me out. Our resident "biologists" and "scientist" keep crying for us non biologist to provide evidence to support evolution. Scientist(evolutionary biologist) have done that and if they have misgivings they should write their own scientific paper and challenge the evidence provided by other scientist instead of crying all day on nairaland to us to help them. By the way discounting evidence is different than actually refuting evidence, If they want to refute it then they should write to the NAS. Evolution has been useful in medical research, can creationism be useful in medical research?

Do you seriously believe that scientist will come up with the theory of evolution without actually having evidence that are nicely explained by that theory?  

 If this is a battle of who has more 'scientific evidence' then I will give that battle to evolution. But the same science will also quickly acquiesce that a lack of 'evidence' does not necessarily constitute & indicate falsehood or fictional. All I'm saying is whether one side has more disputable evidence or not, neither view can be proven beyond all reasonable scientific doubt.

At the end of the day evolution and creationism are both accepted on faith & believed without total proof.

Tudór:

Everybody has a preconcieved idea even an slowpoke

yeah true that. I love this famous quote "The problem with an opinion is that everybody has one"

Well, till we meet on that lovely day. . .

Me self I am waiting and also hoping by then you will feel differently on the issue

JeSoul:

 My brother as nice as all that sounds, having some evidence to suggest the probablity of something is not enough to solidify it as the absolute truth. And I'll go beyond my fellow christians in here and say that I don't think it unreasonable to go with the prevailing belief - but does the belief become any truer because it has the most followers? of course not.

 If this is a battle of who has more 'scientific evidence' then I will give that battle to evolution. But the same science will also quickly acquiesce that a lack of 'evidence' does not necessarily constitute & indicate falsehood or fictional. All I'm saying is whether one side has more disputable evidence or not, neither view can be proven beyond all reasonable scientific doubt.

At the end of the day evolution and creationism are both accepted on faith & believed without total proof.

Jesoul the loveliest of them all.  . So cool and collected. How you dey? When I get my CPL we will cruise round the Caribbean.

@poster
"just wondering if there is anyone who considers himself a deist around here?"

Try reading 'The age of reason' by Thomas Paine. He was a deist and this is a very enlightening book by him.

If you are interested in reading peer reviewed scientific articles in support of evolution you will find them in abundance in this thread.

Re: Creationism Or Evolution - Post Your Peer-review Articles Here And Lets Discuss
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-252741.64.html

Respects to m nwankwo for providing them.

He has a belief in a god and also accepts the fact that there is so much evidence in support of evolution now that  to ignore it would be intellectually dishonest and regressive in our understanding of how we all got here.

I am not a scientist, but he is so if you wanted to learn more about evolution i suggest you ask him. I'm sure he would be only too willing to share his knowledge with you.

Each one Teach one.

Respects

mantraa:

@poster
"just wondering if there is anyone who considers himself a deist around here?"

Try reading 'The age of reason' by Thomas Paine. He was a deist and this is a very enlightening book by him.

If you are interested in reading peer reviewed scientific articles in support of evolution you will find them in abundance in this thread.

Re: Creationism Or Evolution - Post Your Peer-review Articles Here And Lets Discuss
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-252741.64.html

Respects to m nwankwo for providing them.

He has a belief in a god and also accepts the fact that there is so much evidence in support of evolution now that  to ignore it would be intellectually dishonest and regressive in our understanding of how we all got here.

I am not a scientist, but he is so if you wanted to learn more about evolution i suggest you ask him. I'm sure he would be only too willing to share his knowledge with you.

Each one Teach one.

Respects

The FOOL davidylan keeps crying all over the thread( Re: Creationism Or Evolution - Post Your Peer-review Articles Here And Lets Discuss) and exposing himself as a know nothing deluded slowpoke. He refused to provide his scientific peer reviewed paper that supports creationism he still refuses to provide scientific peer reviewed papers that disproves evolution, all he does is cry all the time like the rejected retard that he is. the same FOOL will then come and open his dirty mouth crying that he is a scientist. Encounters with such foolish charlatans only leaves you wondering if such deluded foolish know nothing retards can ever do anything more than shout and cry all the time.

Interesting thread. . .Evolution vs creationism. ,  . . Biological evolution explains with some evidence at least. . . how living forms developed from ancient single-celled organisms,  . . while creationism is about how bronze-age man explained how he thought the world came to be, so no proponent of creationism can provide any scientific evidence to support his claim because non exist.

[size=18pt]its ridiculously funny how all these loud but empty barrels deliberately pretended not to see horse 703's post.[/size] 

could it be because it asked salient questions they couldnt provide an answer to?

davidylan:

[size=18pt]its ridiculously funny how all these loud but empty barrels deliberately pretended not to see horse 703's post.[/size] 

could it be because it asked salient questions they couldnt provide an answer to?

This know nothing blow hard keeps crying all the time. Where are your own answers to the questions we have been asking since? Where are your scientific evidence that supports creationism?

Can you write the "salient" points you talk about and send to to the NAS? Thou senseless fool do that or forever shut up.

bindex:

This know nothing blow hard keeps crying all the time. Where are your own answers to the questions we have been asking since? Where are your scientific evidence that supports creationism?

Can you write the "salient" points you talk about and send to to the NAS? Thou senseless fool do that or forever shut up.

we've been talking way too much about creationism . . . we are tired. We'd like the fools who hanker after the bible (even though they claim not to believe it) to try education us on their different belief system (evolution) this time around.

You seem to know so much about the NAS, all we ask is a brief 3 lines on WHAT EXACTLY is the concrete stand of the NAS on evolution.

I wonder why that's so hard for these fools. Virtually all the threads here are about us giving "answers to the questions you have been asking" . . . when are you going to answer just one of ours? Start with that by horse703, he made very salient points . . . its no surprise ALL OF YOU avoided like he didnt even exist.

Hypocrites.

bindex:

This know nothing blow hard keeps crying all the time. Where are your own answers to the questions we have been asking since? Where are your scientific evidence that supports creationism?

Can you write the "salient" points you talk about and send to to the NAS? Thou senseless fool do that or forever shut up.

where is yours on evolution? Start there and see if i wont promptly answer you.

Hopeless fool.

@bindex, you are so stupid that the only thing you know is insult and insult, no doubt, an empty barrel makes the loudest noise.

Do you think if not for creationism you would have been a perfect being, having nose to breath, teeth to grind, ear to hear, anus for waste matter, hand for equipping, leg for walking etc, you and your brothers i.e atheist or whatever are the greatest fool, if you think it is a struggle for the survival like your theory says why is it that every man is born complete, or have you seen one born with one eye or one leg or no head ?




You think you and your family came from evolution right ? I have a question for you, has any animal in a zoo for once changed into a man ?


Think, think and think