Maximus69:

18th century atheists!

Do you think this is one of your fruitless arguments?

Well that's the LATEST discoveries from world's class scientists so go and update your info!

LMFAO! Show me the text book you got your own information from.

kkins25:
Light rays from the sun are scattered by air particles. Visible light from the sun as you may already know contains several spectra -waves with different wavelength, coincidentally the air particles scatters light that is closer to the blue spectrum. so the sky appears blue because light scatters blue light in the sunlight more rapidly than other wavelengths such as red, orange,etc.

In other words God did it. Halleluyah

LordReed:


LMFAO! Show me the text book you got your own information from.

Information that's just less than two months?

You don't know that we're trailing them incessantly to know the results of all their latest discoveries.

My friend, we're not like churchgoers who only feed on what their pastors present before them. We examine all that's happening far and near, all what you know about the universe we know because all the discoveries of scientists are based on what is visible.

It's what we know that you can never know because while we rely on what God {the invisible being} tells us you only rely on what everyone can see! 1Corinthians 2:14-16

Maximus69:

Information that's just less than two months?

You don't know that we're trailing them incessantly to know the results of all their latest discoveries.

My friend, we're not like churchgoers who only feed on what their pastors present before them. We examine all that's happening far and near, all what you know about the universe we know because all the discoveries of scientists are based on what is visible.

It's what we know that you can never know because while we rely on what God {the invisible being} tells us you only rely on what everyone can see! 1Corinthians 2:14-16

Oga tell me the textbook you got your information, you too like long story.

LordReed:


Oga tell me the textbook you got your information, you too like long story.

TEXTBOOK!
Information just reaching us in LESS THAN TWO MONTH!
Is that the how low your level of intelligence?

OK wait for your own Gods until they update you with the textbooks they're using to shape your power of reasoning!

Maximus69:

TEXTBOOK!
Information just reaching us in LESS THAN TWO MONTH!
Is that the how low your level of intelligence?

OK wait for your own Gods until they update you with the textbooks they're using to shape your power of reasoning!

Where did you get your updated information from?

LordReed:


Where did you get your updated information from?

Latest info just 46 days old Sir!

Maximus69:


Latest info just 46 days old Sir!

So it's a picture of a video that provided you this information?

LordReed:


So it's a picture of a video that provided you this information?

The latest info along with supporting video, confirming the discovery!

So expect all your textbooks to be updated soon!

Maximus69:


The latest info along with supporting video, confirming the discovery!

So expect all your textbooks to be updated soon!

You posted a picture not a video Mr Updated Intelligence.

hahn:


In other words God did it. Halleluyah

God didn't do shit

LordReed:


You posted a picture not a video Mr Updated Intelligence.

unfortunately i fell for the trick. I was eager to see what "discovery was made"..
Nonetheless how can he claim its new research when it was previously taught that the sea reflects light making sky blue. The guy is nuts

kkins25:
unfortunately i fell for the trick. I was eager to see what "discovery was made"..
Nonetheless how can he claim its new research when it was previously taught that the sea reflects light making sky blue. The guy is nuts

Sometimes you egg them on so that they can expose their folly. It is hard to imagine some types of foolishness, you just have to witness it first hand.

When your God's complete their research, they'll update you all!
Is it not your so called ancient wise men {astrologers} who thought the earth was flat?
Is it not these same people who thought the earth is supported by something?
That's because they refused to agree with what humble ancient inspired writers penned down in our book. They assume they're wiser than them. But you who keeps following their updates have come to agree now that the earth is both spherical {Isaiah 40:22} and hangs upon nothing! Job 26:7

So we're not surprised whenever you argue only to come back and say 'regarding the issue we previously argued,your book has been right all along'

Maximus69:
When your God's complete their research, they'll update you all!
Is it not your so called ancient wise men {astrologers} who thought the earth was flat?
Is it not these same people who thought the earth is supported by something?
That's because they refused to agree with what humble ancient inspired writers penned down in our book. They assume they're wiser than them. But you who keeps following their updates have come to agree now that the earth is both spherical {Isaiah 40:22} and hangs upon nothing! Job 26:7

So we're not surprised whenever you argue only to come back and say 'regarding the issue we previously argued,your book has been right all along'

LMAO! That book of fables that can be used to prove anything you like.

Psalm 104:5 New International Version (NIV)
5 He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved.

The same bible says the earth does not move and has foundations. LoL

Even today there are Christians that still believe the earth is flat, TV01 for example does not believe the earth moves around the sun or that it is round. And has the bible verses to prove it. So please your book of ancient fables is more useful as a doorstop than as a text to know what the universe is like.

LordReed:

LMAO! That book of fables that can be used to prove anything you like.
Psalm 104:5 New International Version (NIV)
5 He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved.
The same bible says the earth does not move and has foundations. LoL
Even today there are Christians that still believe the earth is flat, TV01 and Ihedinobi3 for example do not believe the earth moves around the sun or that it is round. And they have the bible verses to prove it. So please your book of ancient fables is more useful as a doorstop than as a text to know what the universe is like.

Confusion seekers, is that's not what all atheists are known for?

You dearly wish everyone should be confused just as your faculty has made millions of atheists all of you coming together only to argue, exhibit your eloquence in speaking of an imposed language {English} and by the end walk away with nothing to gain than your ego!

NO! NO!! NO!!! My atheist friend, Christianity is not like that. We're one happy global family of peace-loving worshippers having the same line of thought! Romans 15:5-6, 1Corinthians 1:10, 2Corinthians 13:11, Ephesians 4:3, Philippians 2:2 compared to John 17:20-23
So if you found anyone or group of persons claiming Christians without UNISM in thought, they're not Christians but misinformed churchgoers!

Well let me educate you on Psalms 104:5!

The earth is just one out of nine planets of our Solar system, it's the only planet that has life and liquid water on it. Mountainlike objects are moving in space and most times do hit the surface of other planets, which most of them are either too hot{due to closeness too the Sun} or too cold {due to being too far from the Sun}. But never can such happen to earth because JEHOVAH covered the earth with thick gases called the atmosphere protecting it's surface, so that even if such objects should accidentally face the earth, it will continue to rub against the atmosphere and before reaching the surface it will varnish!
How else do you expect JEHOVAH to direct an ancient writer who can't understand any of these than to tell him 'i have established the earth on a solid foundation so that it could NEVER be shaken' ?

Sorry my atheist friend, just ask us what's written in our book and will enlighten you about the sacred secrets, it can never to be understood by arrogant individuals! Daniel 12:10

Maximus69:


Confusion seekers, is that's not what all atheists are known for?

You dearly wish everyone should be confused just as your faculty has made millions of atheists all of you coming together only to argue, exhibit your eloquence in speaking of an imposed language {English} and by the end walk away with nothing to gain than your ego!

NO! NO!! NO!!! My atheist friend, Christianity is not like that. We're one happy global family of peace-loving worshippers having the same line of thought! Romans 15:5-6, 1Corinthians 1:10, 2Corinthians 13:11, Ephesians 4:3, Philippians 2:2 compared to John 17:20-23
So if you found anyone or group of persons claiming Christians without UNISM in thought, they're not Christians but misinformed churchgoers!

Well let me educate you on Psalms 104:5!

The earth is just one out of nine planets of our Solar system, it's the only planet that has life and liquid water on it. Mountainlike objects are moving in space and most times do hit the surface of other planets, which most of them are either too hot{due to closeness too the Sun} or too cold {due to being too far from the Sun}. But never can such happen to earth because JEHOVAH covered the earth with thick gases called the atmosphere protecting it's surface, so that even if such objects should accidentally face the earth, it will continue to rub against the atmosphere and before reaching the surface it will varnish!
How else do you expect JEHOVAH to direct an ancient writer who can't understand any of these than to tell him 'i have established the earth on a solid foundation so that it could NEVER be shaken' ?

Sorry my atheist friend, just ask us what's written in our book and will enlighten you about the sacred secrets, it can never to be understood by arrogant individuals! Daniel 12:10

LMFAO! Don't preach your long stories to me, preach it to your fellow christians who still believe the earth is flat and unmoving.

LordReed:


LMFAO! Don't preach your long stories to me, preach it to your fellow christians who still believe the earth is flat and unmoving.

He loves the world so much, remember?
So you're included in his program, it's you that will turn down his offer just as millions are still doing now due to all the junks they've acquired, which they're claiming is knowledge when it's neither of any benefit to them nor their neighbors!

LordReed:


LMAO! That book of fables that can be used to prove anything you like.

Psalm 104:5 New International Version (NIV)
5 He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved.

The same bible says the earth does not move and has foundations. LoL

Even today there are Christians that still believe the earth is flat, TV01 and Ihedinobi3 for example do not believe the earth moves around the sun or that it is round. And they have the bible verses to prove it. So please your book of ancient fables is more useful as a doorstop than as a text to know what the universe is like.

I already know that you are dishonest, but just for the sake of others I'll ask:

Where have I ever stated that I do not believe that the earth orbits the sun or that it is round?

LordReed:
Sure mere scrambling will not get you to coherence but when there is only a limited number of ways in which the letters can be arranged then every time it is scrambled there exists a non-zero possibility that it will achieve coherence.

If indeed there is "a limited number of ways". But that is not the case, unless of course you are able to show otherwise.

And why should\how can a supposedly random & blind process ever achieve coherence?

LordReed:
Why do you persist with this same definition of mutation when I have shown you that mutation is not always degenerative? Look at that picture again, is it only loss that is depicted there?

There is always a loss of information. Mutation not being always degenerative is disputable. I won't do that at this point, suffice to say, mutation does not give rise to novel coherent information which would code for new morphology.

LordReed:
This does not help. How do we know what kind of creatures fit into a kind? What parameters are used to determine a kind and the creatures that would fit into it? If you can't explain what a kind is can you at least provide a resource that does?

First, and, as I have stated before, taxonomy is not at the heart of this discussion. Secondly, I'm no expert, but please peruse Bbaraminology to read what those who have pursued this line of inquiry further have to say.

Mutation, natural selection, genetic drift and the like only act on pre-existing information. They do not write wholesale new coherent detail that leads to wholesale changes in morphology.

And, any postulation to that effect has never been observed, has not been evidenced and cannot be shown experimentally. TOE is speculation at best.


TV

Ihedinobi3:

I already know that you are dishonest, but just for the sake of others I'll ask:

Where have I ever stated that I do not believe that the earth orbits the sun or that it is round?

Because I am not dishonest I will tell you that I conjectured it from your statements that indicated the universe was engulfed in a flood. The only way that would be possible will be if you believe the world is flat with a dome covering that incorporates the sun and the moon. Yes this is all conjecture and I am not denying it.

EDIT: If you do not believe the earth is flat and does not revolve around the sun, lemme know I will remove your name from my post.

kkins25:
this guy self, an increase in genetic information does not always imply that the organism is going to acquire a new trait. now you are going to make me repeat myself; mutation like lordreed has already told you over and over again, so also as budaatum but it seems your skull is thicker than titanium- does not only mean a change in sequence(which i believe you think is only deleterious) but also involves addition of dna sequence in processes known as insertion,duplication,deletion,inversion and translocation.

Please leave my beautifully created skull out of this . Not sure what your point is here, you appear to be warring with your own belief in macro-evolution. The kind of morphological changes evolution claims require an increase in novel and coherent information.

To acquire new morphology, new information needs to be acquired. How does that happen? For a fish to evolve into an amphibian, or something that is not an ape into a number of different types of ape. How can ?

kkins25:
An organism can acquire new genetic information by
1) losing genetic information, : you might wonder how does a loss of gene result in a gain in genetic information? but a simple deletion in a gene codec would most times result in noticeable phenotypic expressions.

2) substitution of genetic information: on nairaland, to bold a text you have to use the "{b}" tag for example, i have used the tag for this text. [b if i miss out an element of the bold tag like the "]" then the text does not appear bold[/b] this is how DNA works. when a gene is missing, duplicated or altered we get a different result.

3) duplication of genetic information: duplication of information can lead to advantageous consequences as we frequently see in plants but deleterious as we see in animals. klinefelter syndrome is an example in humans.

So it's deleted or deleterious then And, non of the above demonstrates the capacity to give rise to wholesale morphological changes. Oga, you are struggling

kkins25:
4) mechanical insertion by another another organism(naturally by viruses and bacteria, and artificially by humans via gene editing); yeah, virus are fond of installing their own dna into the hosts'.

Please, I love comic too. X-men na die, Spidey is baaaad-ass, but I am able to distinguish what reality is, what nature is able. Don't go all Marvel on me now. Abi TOE na comic fantasy

kkins25:
Now imagine if guys with six toes and fingers were the ones girls were tripping for, probably because they appeared more sexy or they made more money or for some reason. As time goes on the children with six toes and fingers would increase. before you know it, these children would start marrying themselves and boooom! we have an explosion of six digit individuals. since every body wants to marry a six digit female or male, the five digit female and males would be less desired by the society. consequently fading out(over a long period of time of course].

this is an example of random evolution triggered by spontaneous genetic shuffling.

Please sir, are human beings with six digits no longer humans? Or, on their way to becoming an altogether different creature . Bro' no wound me jor

kkins25:
humans are the most complex of species, but that those not mean we have a higher number of genes. a Dog has 36 chromosomes, plants can have 100s. so acquisition of "new DNA" isn't a prerequisite for evolution but rather a change or modification of already exist DNA

How does DNA that codes for a limb evolve to code for a wing What will happen is impairment, loss of function, likely death and removal form the gene pool. Moreso, as mutation, changes and the like are akin to typos, which the genome is intelligent enough to try and correct.

kkins25:
yes humans have a higher number of chromosomes than micro organisms, meaning that humans have acquired new genes. yes, in this case budaatum has already explained this mechanism. let me find that post for you for the very last time.

Prof please, just answer the question or otherwise demonstrate/evidence how this modification of existing DNA can over time lead to wholesale morphological changes.

Ah, ah Broda Prof!


TV

LordReed:


Because I am not dishonest I will tell you that I conjectured it from your statements that indicated the universe was engulfed in a flood. The only way that would be possible will be if you believe the world is flat with a dome covering that incorporates the sun and the moon. Yes this is all conjecture and I am not denying it.

EDIT: If you do not believe the earth is flat and does not revolve around the sun, lemme know I will remove your name from my post.

Yes I completely believe that there was a global flood in Noah's day, but it is a leap of logic to posit from that that I also believe in a flat earth. Even if I were in error -and I am not - to believe both that there was such a flood and that the earth is round, it is illogical to claim that because I believe one I cannot also believe the other. As it is, and as I have actually said, I believe both.

When you conjecture, state it as conjecture, otherwise you make claims that you are presenting as factually correct, and thus become liable to such accusations as you are looking to extricate yourself from here.

Finally, not that it is even disputable, but you are dishonest.

TV01:

If indeed there is "a limited number of ways". But that is not the case, unless of course you are able to show otherwise.

And why should\how can a supposedly random & blind process ever achieve coherence?

Very simply, the number of molecules that make up DNA are finite, their combinations will also be finite.

The random process works within the constraints of physical laws, they will produce coherence because any time there is a new combination there is a non-zero chance that coherence will emerge. The same way every time you flip a coin there is a non-zero chance that it will be heads.

There is always a loss of information. Mutation not being always degenerative is disputable. I won't do that at this point, suffice to say, mutation does not give rise to novel coherent information which would code for new morphology.

Mutation, natural selection, genetic drift and the like only act on pre-existing information. They do not write wholesale new coherent detail that leads to wholesale changes in morphology.

And, any postulation to that effect has never been observed, has not been evidenced and cannot be shown experimentally. TOE is speculation at best.

At this point I will say you have decided you will be willngfully ignorant. No need to belabour the point with you any further.

Ihedinobi3:

Yes I completely believe that there was a global flood in Noah's day, but it is a leap of logic to posit from that that I also believe in a flat earth. Even if I were in error -and I am not - to believe both that there was such a flood and that the earth is round, it is illogical to claim that because I believe one I cannot also believe the other. As it is, and as I have actually said, I believe both.

When you conjecture, state it as conjecture, otherwise you make claims that you are presenting as factually correct, and thus become liable to such accusations as you are looking to extricate yourself from here.

Finally, not that it is even disputable, but you are dishonest.

And you are indisputably a piece of shít. Your name will be removed from the post.

LordReed:


Very simply, the number of molecules that make up DNA are finite, their combinations will also be finite.

The random process works within the constraints of physical laws, they will produce coherence because any time there is a new combination there is a non-zero chance that coherence will emerge. The same way every time you flip a coin there is a non-zero chance that it will be heads.



At this point I will say you have decided you will be willngfully ignorant. No need to belabour the point with you any further.

As in, I can't answer the question and anything I am able to posit cannot be evidenced, demonstrated or otherwise observed, therefore I am throwing in the towel. I knew you'd look for the out. Enjoy the sport jawe, Fed vs. Nadal, what's not too like?


Cheers
TV


^{...and yes, the earth is flat and unmoving. If you can show me any evidence of the earth moving - on an axis, or around the sun. I'd love to see it...}

TV01:

As in, I can't answer the question and anything I am able to posit cannot be evidenced, demonstrated or otherwise observed, therefore I am throwing in the towel. I knew you'd look for the out. Enjoy the sport jawe, Fed vs. Nadal, what's not too like?

^{...and yes, the earth is flat and unmoving. If you can show me any evidence of the earth moving - on an axis, or around the sun. I'd love to see it...}

You've been shown over and over again but you say you've not seen anything. There is no need, I am not masochistic.

TV01:

First, and, as I have stated before, taxonomy is not at the heart of this discussion. Secondly, I'm no expert, but please peruse Bbaraminology to read what those who have pursued this line of inquiry further have to say.

General Criticisms:
Lack of Objective and Robust Methodology

The author presents no systematic, objective and rigorous methodology for determining what "kinds" are. Friar does present a list of guidelines for determining what holobaramins are (hereafter "kinds" and holobaramin will be used interchangeably) but this list is tantamount to a list of features that might be important – similarities in form, ontology, ecology, fossils and the ability to hybridize. But Friar provides no systematic methodology for how one determines holobaramins, and offers no explanation of how or why each of the data sources are relevant or important.

A Review of Friar, W. (2000): Baraminology - Classification of
Created Organisms.
https://web.archive.org/web/20070630032923/http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/baraminology_ta.htm

TV01:

First, and, as I have stated before, taxonomy is not at the heart of this discussion. Secondly, I'm no expert, but please peruse Bbaraminology to read what those who have pursued this line of inquiry further have to say.

Using creation science to demonstrate evolution: application of a creationist method for visualizing gaps in the fossil record to a phylogenetic study of coelurosaurian dinosaurs.

It is important to demonstrate evolutionary principles in such a way that they cannot be countered by creation science. One such way is to use creation science itself to demonstrate evolutionary principles. Some creation scientists use classic multidimensional scaling (CMDS) to quantify and visualize morphological gaps or continuity between taxa, accepting gaps as evidence of independent creation and accepting continuity as evidence of genetic relatedness. Here, I apply CMDS to a phylogenetic analysis of coelurosaurian dinosaurs and show that it reveals morphological continuity between Archaeopteryx, other early birds, and a wide range of nonavian coelurosaurs. Creation scientists who use CMDS must therefore accept that these animals are genetically related. Other uses of CMDS for evolutionary biologists include the identification of taxa with much missing evolutionary history and the tracing of the progressive filling of morphological gaps in the fossil record through successive years of discovery.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20561133

LordReed:


General Criticisms:
Lack of Objective and Robust Methodology

The author presents no systematic, objective and rigorous methodology for determining what "kinds" are. Friar does present a list of guidelines for determining what holobaramins are (hereafter "kinds" and holobaramin will be used interchangeably) but this list is tantamount to a list of features that might be important – similarities in form, ontology, ecology, fossils and the ability to hybridize. But Friar provides no systematic methodology for how one determines holobaramins, and offers no explanation of how or why each of the data sources are relevant or important.

A Review of Friar, W. (2000): Baraminology - Classification of
Created Organisms.
https://web.archive.org/web/20070630032923/http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/baraminology_ta.htm

Aha that's not fair boss... I've not read the book and I'm neither here nor there about it but if I'm to critique a person's work, atleast I'll try giving it a quick once over myself or at the very least read as many reviews and opinions as possible about it. To take one review as ur basis for criticism is really not being objectively fair. Just saying

omokoladejames:


Aha that's not fair boss... I've not read the book and I'm neither here nor there about it but if I'm to critique a person's work, atleast I'll try giving it a quick once over myself or at the very least read as many reviews and opinions as possible about it. To take one review as ur basis for criticism is really not being objectively fair. Just saying

I am just showing that apparently the book (by extension the system of classification itself) doesn't do justice to allay the concerns I already expressed to TV01. The methodology for establishing what a kind is is very poor and lacking, in fact it doesn't seem to be much better than intuition.

LordReed:


I am just showing that apparently the book (by extension the system of classification itself) doesn't do justice to allay the concerns I already expressed to TV01. The methodology for establishing what a kind is is very poor and lacking, in fact it doesn't seem to be much better than intuition.

My friend,
If you sincerely want to have peace of mind, the chance is open in two ways.
¤Drop your ego and learn from true Christians what's giving us bliss in a joyless world!
Or
¤Forget discussing with intelligent creatures about what's in their minds!

*If you choose option A, you'll be happy helping many in your neighbourhood to gain insight and such ones will ever be grateful to you as their brother, friend or father, And you'll always be happy seeing those whose lives have been touched by your preaching and teaching!

*If you choose option B, you'll also be happy on your own without having to carry the weight of other people's thoughts or feelings in your head. And you'll be alone in your paradasic state of mind!

Anything short of these two will only bring you headaches and pains!