₦airaland Forum

CoolUsername:
Firstly, that foot print is most definitely a [url=paleo.cc/paluxy/meister.htm]hoax[/url].

Secondly, micro-evolution is the go-to term for creationists for any observed evolutionary change. Unfortunately, they have failed to define a boundary between what we call 'micro' and 'macro' evolution, therefore every single evolutionary change observed in the lab or in nature is shoe-horned into micro-evolution. This is not honest science. Micro-evolutin is just evolution. They put the successive additive mutation of E.coli to absorb citrates in certain conditions as micro-evolution, they put the 3-decade change of Podarcis sicula from insectivore to herbivore after a change of environment as micro-evolution. So what are the defined limits of micro-evolution sir?

1. The geologic column is gotten by dating different igneous rock material present in each sediment.
2. Traces of erosion are not found in deep rock after years of compaction. But on the other hand, if there was a global flood (that some peple believe in) there should be traces of erosion. So why aren't they there?
3. Trilobite eyes were pretty, compound eyes like arthropods. I don't know about 'most sophisticated ever known'. The closest living analog we have today is the horseshoe crab. Shows a trend to me.

Once again we have another atrocious assertion here. DNA sequencing is used for paternity tests, but for some reason it doesn't show ancestral ties when it comes to evolution, right?

Use the internet, and don't only read Christian apologetics sites.

ValentineMary:
Dude be sure of ur facts well. Hitler was a catholic who attended mass daily. He even once attempted to be a catholic monk. And he did not kill the jews because of evolution rather because of some bibilical prophecy that made a point of Jews being d choose people. But he would not accept that because he wanted to take over all of Europe. So he began to exterminate the jews.

Oluwaseytiano:
Hmmm. Am not an atheist bt I feel the thread is stupid

ElCount:
Hitler was an atheist, he was born and baptized in the catholic church though. Hitler never openly denounced his catholic faith because he needed their support in other for him to rise to power. His genocide against the jews was clearly on the grounds of racism backed by the evolution theory. I am very sure of my facts thank you very much

SirWere:


And you go and pick hitler, neglecting[b]Bill Gates,[/b] Paine, and so many other humanist who have enriched the human race for good.


@the bolded, listen to yourself. Have you read about the cause(s) of the World War II from any reputable historian who attributed hitler's aggressive action to jews towards evolution??





Reveive sense, receive wisdom, enlighten your mind.

ElCount:
please may I know why you feel that way?

Toluwarni:
Bill Gates in no longer an atheist/ agnostic.

Toluwarni:
Bill Gates in no longer an atheist/ agnostic.

ElCount:
Firstly, no one was expecting the scientists to accept it was a footprint off cause they accepted that the trilobite was true and debunked the footstep. Totally expected from them.

ElCount:
Secondly, you say micro-evolution is the go to term for creationist when its actually the foundation and the only evidence evolutionists have of cause by attaching the time factor "...Billions of years ago, a the lions ancestor was a mango tree..." That's insane

ElCount:
Thirdly, I don't know what boundary you are asking for. Over time cockroaches get immune to a pesticide, but do you think they will ever get immune to a sledge hammer?. The limit here is that animals will always produce offsprings of thesame kind, we are yet to observe a lizard give birth to a bird and that's because its not possible.

ElCount:
I don't subscribe to radiometric dating cos it doesn't work.

ElCount:
Collect a reasonable amount of sand sample, put it in a transparent jar, shake vigorously and allow to settle, it will definitely be in layers.
There are no erosion marks because it happened rapidly like in the little experiment above during the flood in the days of Noah.
The Horseshoe crab right, so what intermediary specie(s) whether living or fossil existed between a Trilobite and the Horseshoe crab, or did the Trilobite just sleep and wake up only to find out that its now a Horseshoe crab.

ElCount:
As for the DNA sequencing in a paternity test, Have there ever been a case where the test came out and the result said that the father of the child was a monkey or plant or bacteria etc? It always said that it was a HUMAN BEING
You seem to be pouring out what you were told in school learn to ask the right questions.
Read articles from scientist and christian apologetics and make comparison

CoolUsername:
Yeah, because scientists are known to be a dishonest bunch of people whose only agenda is to disprove God /s



The only insane thing is that you can't define the upper limit of micro-evolution. Sympatric speciation has been observed in the lab but creationists still term it under micro-evolution. Evolution is evolution is evolution.



This only shows how uninformed you are about this theory. Evolution never states that one specie would give birth to another.
That is a claim made by people who are either too ignorant about the theory of evolution or who, dishonestly misrepresent it in order to argue against his own botched definition.



Sure, you're only just implying that the entire atomic theory is off the mark, who knew? Maybe we just got lucky with the atomic bomb, and all that safe nuclear energy that advanced countries harness, and also all those delicate medical equipment based on radiation and electromagnetic waves. Who knew? /s



So how did the Kangaroos make it back to Australia, then?
I'm not sure if the Trilobite is an ancestor of the Horseshoe crab. I never implied that, I only said that the has a similar eye-structure. Once again, you're misinterpreting my words.



You're not really following my argument, are you? I simply stated that DNA sequencing is based upon similar principles and knowledge as paternity testing.

And once again, once species doesn't give birth to another. If you are that ignorant on the theory of evolution, then you should read it up, rather than argue for or against it on internet forums.

Oluwaseytiano:
its classifying millions of atheists based on the actions of a perverted mass murderer.

ElCount:
I don't know where you got that from, I never said Hitler did what he did because he was an atheist. I said he did it because of his strong belief in the evolution theory and the theory also appears to give some backing to his actions.
Everyone agrees that what hitler did was wrong including those who believe in the evolution theory, but there's one question that arises
If the evolution theory is true, how then do you tell if what Hitler did was right or wrong, (that is based on the evolution theory how do you tell right from wrong)

Because the way I see it the evolutionists and atheists are basking in the morality rules established by God, and yet they claim God is their greatest problem or there's no God

Oluwaseytiano:
the thing about evolution is no one really understands it.

ElCount:
The funny thing about it is that they call it science

Oluwaseytiano:
maybe it it. BT the theory of evolution seems less ridiculous than the creation story

SirWere:
Says who

Toluwarni:
Wikipedia:

In an interview with Rolling Stone, Gates stated in regard to his faith:

The moral systems of religion, I think, are super important. We've raised our kids in a religious way; they've gone to the Catholic church that Melinda goes to and I participate in. I've been very lucky, and therefore I owe it to try and reduce the inequity in the world. And that's kind of a religious belief. I mean, it's at least a moral belief.[77]

In the same interview, Gates said: "I agree with people like Richard Dawkins that mankind felt the need for creation myths. Before we really began to understand disease and the weather and things like that, we sought false explanations for them. Now science has filled in some of the realm – not all – that religion used to fill. But the mystery and the beauty of the world is overwhelmingly amazing, and there's no scientific explanation of how it came about. To say that it was generated by random numbers, that does seem, you know, sort of an uncharitable view [laughs]. I think it makes sense to believe in God

ElCount:
Well if you see it that way, but no one tried to pass the creation story as science and force it into the scheme of work of students