₦airaland Forum

You blame everything on religion Huxley, but religion is not the direct cause of misery.

It is just a tool. Money and power are at the roots. Religion is just a means to gain that money and power and the fundamentalists are the slaves who keep the wheels turning.

Huxley put up JUST ONE SINGLE PAPER . . .

Lies. Lies. Lies.

Apart from the rest of the crap that you have posted, this sentence above exposes you as nothing but an utter liar.

Anyone can go back through the 2 pages of this thread and see where he has posted at least half a dozen links and copy and pastes.

The offer of £100 means that this subject merits it's own thread.

Now let's see if even one single creationist will have the balls to take up the challenge.


Although there's a great danger of this thread being screwed by Olaadegbu with all his copy and paste crap.

Note the complete lack of any attempt to provide substantive analysis of their claims to evolution. Its all ad hominems.

Yet again you are caught in one of your own lies.

All I see are Evolution theory advocates discussing evolution. I never see a Creationist explaining creationist theory. Why not?
Because it's so laughable they daren't broach the subject. All they can come out with is "God did it" and that's the total sum of their argument.

Don't believe me? You can see examples of how well Evolution theory is debated when it delves into the realms of genetics and subdivisions of genetics. I've never seen 1% of that intensity exhibited with Creationist theory. Why? Because it totally falls apart at the slightest general scrutiny.

Evolutionists spend a lot of time here answering your questions David. Yet when you are questioned, you won't answer at all. Why? Because even you know, that you can't defend something you don't even believe in yourself.

Your real lie though is that you state others add nothing when they've written dozens of replies to your silly claims. The truth is David, you're the one who dodges and weaves. You're the one who smoke-screens and removes substance. You're the one who derides others and changes the subject when it comes too close to exposing your idiocy. You're the one who leaves with their tail between their legs only to pop up elsewhere and state how you "won". You're the one who will trivialise, use hypocrisy, lies and fabrications to attack others.

I guess the truth is that you're just not a very nice person.

@noetic

10* Gbosa for u. I can only commend ur intellect and tolerance.

There's no intellect involved when discussing a subject using lies and deceit. You're telling a man with no eyes that he can see well.

It won't keep you busy. A quick scan will suffice

I don't need it.
Your lack of a clear answer speaks volumes.

thou fool, we are not talking about who shares what now. We are asking whether mutation is truly so powerful as to completely change an entire mitocondrial DNA if it cant completely change a mere 10% of genomic DNA.

thou dickhead, we certainly are talking about who shares what. You're the tool who keeps harping on about a lack of similarity between human and cockroach mtDNA.

It's why I never take hypocritical psuedoscience Bible bashers seriously.

What ERV markers are shared between humans and insects!!!

It's totally and utterly irrelevant!!!

1. There is NOT ONE SINGLE PROOF of this "plenty to show".

There is plenty to show that it mutates in human beings alone let alone over the time-scale in discussion here. The first couple of papers there show that.

2. Mutation is too slow and too rare to completely change an entire mtDNA. Even alleged ERVs from failed viral attacks havent changed so drastically in billions of yrs and they only make up 10% of our genome.

ERVs have absolutely nothing to do with this subject. Stop smoke-screening.
And it's very, very hypocritical to use them in your argument when (apart from their irrelevency), you don't even believe that ERV markers have anything to do with evolution. Remember - you said they had no relevancy to evolution in this thread?

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-241487.128.html

But now you dare to try to use them as evidence? Using the word "alleged" doesn't get you off the hook, you slowpoke.

You asked for biblical answers.

Nope. I clearly asked for a yes or no.



You're a fraud David.

You won't answer because you know damn well that life wasn't created in 3 days and that shows you to be nothing but an illogical, hypocritical slowpoke.

Shit. You want us to prove evolution theory? You don't even believe in your own Bible.

i asked for congent scientific publications THAT SUPPORT THE THRASH YOU WERE SPEWING EARLIER. What did your link have to do with cockroach mtDNA?

Firstly, you're the idiot who started burbling on about cockroaches and human beings.
Secondly, my point was regarding mtDNA mutation and it's speed. There is plenty there to show that mtDNA has had time to mutate over the time period in discussion here.

which is EXACTLY your tack, keep us busy with a boatload of irrelevant material that you havent even read . . . giving u enough time to distract from the real questions you fumbled and failed to answer.

It won't keep you busy. A quick scan will suffice.

No, go to the other thread and answer my questions. You fools (you know those who say there is no God) love whinning "answer me answer me" like 3 yr olds and yet run away when we pose questions to you too.

I've been answering your questions in the other thread. You're a liar by stating otherwise. I would have thought the "answer me, answer me" part of your statement is directly applicable to yourself as you've constantly harped on about requiring evidence and demanded replies.

Now have the decency to answer my question. I'm not even asking for scientific papers or loads of research. A simple yes or no will do.

Do you believe that all life on Earth was created in 3 days?

You asked for scientific papers.

I've given them.
In the time between my last post and your post above, there is no way you could have read even a small fraction of them yet you instantly dismiss them.

David. Sometimes you're just a jerk.

Show me scientific papers mr.

Sure. Knock yourself out.

http://www.mitochondrial.net/showcitationlist.php?keyword=mitochondrial%20DNA

Lets say i dont believe in Genesis AT ALL . . . pls convince me to follow the gospel of evolution.

No. Let's say you answer the question.
Do you believe that all living creatures were created in 3 days?

You use twisted science and semantics to get your point across yet again.

this is nonsense . . . mtDNA is so large that it is implausible that mutations (which are rare, mostly deleterious to the organism and notoriously slow) will be responslible for wiping out every single trace of similarity between human and cockroach mtDNA. How come we can trace our mtDNA to a woman who allegedly lived 200,000 yrs ago?

You're comparing 200,000 years with billions of years? Utterly ridiculous. The fact is that mtDNA does mutate and the time-scale in question here is so vast that there's plenty of time for it to mutate beyond recognition. The only way your statement is relevant is if mankind were to evolve directly from the cockroach and nobody has suggested that at all.

Genesis 1 talks of the creation of plants, animals and man NOT the universe and earth.

So you're insinuating that the Earth and the Heavens were not created at the beginning of the 7 days but a couple of weeks before? Or millions of years before but just left lying around without God doing anything to it?

OK. I'll give you that if that's the way you want to play it.

But that's really irrelevant here because what we're talking about is the formation of life. What's really important here are the 3rd to 6th days and that gives you even less playing room.

Are you suggesting that all creatures, including modern man were made in those 3 days? Remember: you stated that you support the Genesis account 100%.

David, stop dodging reality and look at your own words again.

If you believe in Genesis 100% as you state then you must believe that the Universe, the Earth, plants, animals and man were created in 7 days.

Well how come you dont share mtDNA with a cockroach?

Cockroaches do have mtDNA.
The fact that there is such a vast time scale between cockroach and man's evolution dates means that any mtDNA link would have disappeared through mutation. mtDNA mutates slowly but it still mutates.
An analogy is to look at a clock at 1 minute past 12am. Imagine that is when cockroach mtDNA appears. Mankind doesn't appear until 10 seconds before midnight. In that 10 seconds, his mtDNA has mutated. It's just mutated over a small time scale but is still recognisable. Then take into account the preceeding 23 hours 59 minutes and 50 seconds of mutation. Is it any wonder that cockroach mtDNA is any different? The time-scale involved is vast - plenty of time for a full mutation to occur.

The fact that mtDNA exists in any form whatsoever in cockroaches and man-kind shows a common link.

Yeah its not like you have any idea what cambrian periods are anyway

LOL. Any book on dinosaurs refers to the Cambrian so I've been aware of it since I was a child.

But returning to your statement:

I do because modern man as we know him today was not in existence then. As regards the existence of man, i subscribe 100% to the Genesis account.

This is contradictory. The Bible states that modern man existed just a couple of days after the Earth was created. Or are you stating that there was some sort of pre-form man? Mr Amoeba? If that's the case, God is nothing but an amoeba is He? After all, He created Amoeba man in his own image, didn't He? And by that very implication, you are endorsing Evolution.

And what's this about "modern man"? According to creationists, "modern man" was there at the beginning. If there's a modern man that insinuates that there was a pre-modern man. You're again then stepping over into the realms of Evolution.

The problem we have here David is that you can't have your cake and eat it. You can't believe in Genesis and the concept of "modern man".

Since i bluntly felt it a waste of time to pursue serious intelectual debates with a puny brain who doesnt even know what was found in Cambrian rocks.

And you do? Then you know that there are no fossils of man dating back to that era. Strange to see that you're even acknowledging that there was a Cambrian period.
Rather looks like the 7 daya are out the window doesn't it?

So secretive is replaced with being private - semantics.

What crap. If a company has a board meeting, do you expect to be invited if you are not on the board? No. It's not secret, it's private.

Bottom line is that there are things that you would prefer the public not to know about.

Like what? Freemasonry is the single most written about organisation in the world after the Catholic Church. Most of that literature is written by Freemasons themselves. It's hardly secretive nor is there anything that anyone with half a brain can't find out for themselves.

Stop spouting conspiracy clap-trap and bring forward some facts.

LMAO.

Huxley will be really cheered up by the fact that he's doing God's work.

I wonder if anyone here can guess who gave this ringing endorsement of evolution theory?

“New findings lead us toward the recognition of evolution as more than a hypothesis. In fact it is remarkable that this theory has had progressively greater influence on the spirit of researchers, following a series of discoveries in different scholarly disciplines. The convergence in the results of these independent studies—which was neither planned nor sought—constitutes in itself a significant argument in favor of the theory.”

Err, yep. It was the Pope.
These literal, creationist freaks don't even agree with the head of the Catholic church yet we're supposed to swallow their claptrap, bullshit without blinking?

Theodore Hertzel, the founder of Zionism in 1897 in Switzerland said: “Masonic lodges are established all over the world to help us achieve our independence. Those pigs, the non-jewish masons, will never understand the final objects of masonry.”

Firstly: Herzl was never a Freemason.
Secondly: Herzl never said anything of the sort.

The problem with you pricks is that you build a lie upon a lie. Jesus must love you.

@DavidDylan.

What an utter liar. You title the thread "Why are they afraid to debate Evolution" yet any time anyone has argued with you on the subject, you've made a few illogical, fundamentalist, clap-trap posts and then slunk away with your tail between your legs.

Nobody is afraid to debate Evolution with you - they're just tired of your bullshit.


@bawomolo.

A fundamentalist fool will always call someone who disagrees with him an atheist. It matters not if you're a deiist or theist. If you don't believe exactly the same cretinism as they do - you're an atheist in their blind eyes.

Why are you not discussing the commandments given in Exodus 34, which afterall are the replacements of those in Exodus 20.

He's not discussing them simply because he can't find anything to copy and paste about them.

You should know by now that OLAADEGBU is way too brainwashed and way too dumb to be able to use his own thoughts and write his own words in reply to anyone. When was the last time you saw him write more than a sentence on his own?

He's the Copy and Paste Clown of nairaland.

Please, forget your arguments, repent and put your trust in Jesus and be saved from God's wrath. Make Psalm 51 your prayer, then read your Bible daily and always obey what you read

Great. Permission to rape, pillage and murder then as that's what I read in the Old Testament.

That last three posts are all very nice (although cut and paste crap as usual) but they are not what the Bible says.
All of that stuff is what the churches have made up.

Ravalomanana is handing over the reigns to the military who in turn are installing opposition leader Andry Rajoelina as president.

Now forgive me if I'm wrong but installing a politician who was defeated at the last elections as president is nothing more than a coup.
But what does the AU say?
They call it an "attempted coup d'etat".

No morons. It isn't attempted. It is a coup d'etat.
Honestly, the AU just astounds me with it's stupidity sometimes.

The 10 Commandments are irrelevant to Christians.

They were written for the nomadic Hebrew tribes when they "fled" Egypt.

"You shall have no other gods before me"

This was written because the early Hebrews were "idol! worshippers and were steeped in the trappings of other religions. Contrary to popular belief, they were not monotheistic.

You shall not make wrongful use of the name of your God.

This does not refer to blasphemy as many think it does. The Hebrews had no concept of blasphemy and believed that if you took the Lord's name in vain, you would be struck down by him anyway. Instead, it refers to the use of the god's name in magical practices. Using the name of YWH was seen as very powerful ju-ju.

Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy.

For a nomadic tribe fighting their way across the Holy Land, it was imperative that they took rests. Putting a day aside for this purpose was a necessity. It was also a way of tieing the tribe together through common worship.

Honor your father and mother.

The reason for this was because the Hebrews had no concept of Heaven. They literally believed that you lived on in your children when you died. Therefore, you honoured your parents because they would one day become a part of your being.

You shall not murder.

Notice that it's "murder" and not "kill". Murder was only applicable to other members of the Hebrew tribe. Anyone else was fair game and you could take a life as long as it was not another tribe member.

You shall not commit adultery.

Women were property. You did not steal another man's property. By forbidding adultery they also got rid of one of the biggest causes of disharmony in the tribe - fighting over women.

You shall not steal.

This one is a strange one. It does not refer to stealing another man's property (that was already taken as a given). Instead it meant that you did not steal another member of the tribe's freedom. It refers to not selling another Hebrew into slavery.

You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

This one was a pretty important one. It refers to false witness at a legal trial. As any crime would result in either death or exile from the tribe, it was imperative that the truth be told. A lie could quite literally cost a man his life.

You shall not covet anything that belongs to your neighbor.

Self-explanatory. But notice that it specifically refers to "your neighbour" meaning another tribe member. Again, this was to promote harmony so that the tribe would remain strong.




Over the years, people have taken the 10 Commandments and twisted them. The translations that the churches use are nothing like those in the original Hebrew of the Old Testament. They are not the word of God handed down to Christians - they are the word of the god of the Jews and for the Jews.

@ mantraa.

A global flood would have left a signature. There is none.

What is known for sure is that there were regular floodings in the Euphrates valley - home of the Babylonian civilisation and the Epic of Gilgamesh.

The story is based on an original localised flood. There are many signatures found in the local geology that back this up.
As I've said on the previous page: the Hebrews merely took the older myth and gave it a moral twist thus necessitating that the flood in their story be global.

The Old Testament was compiled whilst the Hebrews were in exile in Babylon.
They had access to all of the old Babylonian myths and quite often inserted them into the Bible after giving them a moral twist.

The story of Noah is no exception. It is almost a direct lift of the Babylonian myth - The Epic of Gilgamesh (which in turn was based on the Atrahasis Epic).

http://www.religioustolerance.org/noah_com.htm

It is a story about morality. Only an idiot would take it literally.