₦airaland Forum

But W.H.O doesn’t recommend face mask for people who are not sick.
Face mask will increase the chance of being infected if used wrongly.

geoworldedu:
1. The Bible said that God created us in his own image.
2. Jesus said that if you have seen him, then you have also seen God.
3. The Bible said that God sits on his throne and he makes the physical earth his footstool.
4. Moses saw the back part of God.
5. God walked in the garden of Eden and Adam and Eve saw him.
6. The finger of God wrote Mene Mene Tekel Upharsin on a wall and King Betshazzar and others saw it.

Now if God has a finger, a buttock for sitting on a throne, feet to lay on the earth, etc, will it not mean that God is a disabled being if he doesn't have a penis?

You are so hilarious

Lol

MrPresident1:
Well, I cannot give you the evidence you seek. Sorry.

ok thanks

Renida:
Focus on your life. Channel this energy to your life and you just may improve your lot hypocrite

This is a very serious matter and we must talk about it because it affects everyone. Sorry I can’t stop talking about it.

It’s not just about me, it’s about everyone.

MrPresident1:
You're atheist?

I don’t know what you mean by atheist I just want to get evidence for hell or heaven.

JudasNaCarrot:
My dear it's not just about Christianity. Purge yourself of that thing that makes you think there is no God and see the light.
You think the universe and multi verse is just there without a designer?

Just take a look at yourself, your life and everything around you....you think you are thinking right?

If a beautiful mansion, beautiful cloth, car and even the phone you're using to type this message now, all is designed by someone, yet you believe in your heart that this world have no designer....a maker?

May you encounter him soon and when you do, please do not hesitate to preach to those you have misled that there is a supreme being whose power and glory is everlasting.

I should purge myself of logical reasoning and starting believing that a virgin can give birth without evidence?

Common dude, I can’t do that.

budaatum:
A tiny voice told me they will be converted into hospitals if needed.

I sincerely think they should. It will serve a better purpose if they can do that.

MrPresident1:
Evidence of what, life?

Heaven and hell

MrPresident1:
Ashes to ashes, the spirit goes to God. The flesh is just a body suit for the life-force, this returns to God upon the completion of the cycle of assignment

still no evidence for this.

A lot of us come out and totally highlighted how the title for the “biggest church auditorium” in The world won’t add any value to us. Christians fought fiercely against every form of criticism.

The question now is, can you now go to those big churches?
What value can they add now that we need them most?
Can you see that it was a total waste of resources building such structures?

It’s coronavirus time and all Christians say is that the church is not the building but the people of God are the church.

Are you people not deceiving yourselves? Why did you spend humongous sums that could have been channeled into something relevant in building them if the church is the people of God?

I just hope we can think about this

MrPresident1:
We talking about death in the sense that we all know it.

When a person dies, he does not go to heaven or hell, his spirit goes to God, and his soul goes to rest until he reincarnates to pay for the judgment debts of past life

Thats what I’m saying. No heaven or hell.

When you die, your heart stops pumping blood, antibodies and nutrients, leaving your cells to saprophytes to recycle.

Anything other than this stated above is not provable.

When all is over, they will all come out and open their churches to say that God did it.

The big churches and auditorium they built is obviously a waste now. It’s providing no value and they can’t even proffer any solution.

Religion is scam.

Christian actor do their normal acting to justify rubbish.
Na toady? We have seen a lot fake things from Christians

They have come again, a lot of people are gonna be scammed when all these is over.

In actual sense, nothing really dies. You literally being recycled into other forms of energy when you die.

.

JMAN05:
True, am not an expert in evolutionary science. That was not my field of study, neither is it now.

However, there are differences despite the similarity in DNA. DNA could be strikenly similar, but this does not mean that one evolved from the other. We do not have that prove of chimp to humans. 96% can account for a closeness to humans, but their are great differences between us and chimps.

Instead of thinking that there was a leap from chimp to humans, we understand the DNA as a code of instruction unique to a specie. Changes can occur within the chimp family, but it will remain chimp, nothing more. Mutation is largely harmful. Holding on to it as building block onto entirely new specie requires faith.

The theory of gradualism can't account for full formed organisms we observe in the fossil records. All the gradual links to another specie can't be seen in the record.

There are changes within a specie, this is micro evolution, a changed onto other species is macro. I understand that there are debates on this. So I see why you hold a different view.

So what explanation would you give to to similarities in protein amino acid sequence and DNA sequence and how these similarities fades away systematically as you study the sequencing from humans down to bacteria?

How do you explain that Apes share ailments with humans but some other order of classification do not? How do you explain that a group of birds share ailments but not with apes?

How else do you want to explain these similarities if we don’t share common ancestry?

Let me educate you again a little on evolution. Did you know? The invention of polio vaccine was purely evolutionary biology both on a micro and macro level?
The polio virus (picornaviridae) was cultured over generations in a monkey tissue culture. Because we share great similarities in certain enzymes and proteins with monkeys, the virus was able to evolve to a lesser infective strain in a monkey culture. The attenuated strain from the monkey tissue was now mass produced as vaccines. How do you explain the choice of the culture tissue? Why didn’t the virus grow in rat tissues or some other animal?
I have given several applications of evolution, both macro and micro. We simply cannot do anything in science without evolution.

I’m a specialist in virology, this is what I do everyday. We can’t save you without applying evolution. I can go on an on to show you application of macro and micro evolution in science. Science most especially biological science is senseless without evolution, whether micro or macro.
Again, mutation is not largely harmful, that’s wrong. Mutation happen at every meiotic division, mutation happen at every division of gamete cells including sperms and ova cells and that’s why you don’t look exactly like your siblings.

Mutations are most times not harmful, very essential and mutation overtime will result in the development of new species. Mutations are very essential for the survival of a specie, this ensures versatile gene pool and makes sure species do not go extinct easily as external conditions changes. You have a lot to learn about evolution before arguing against it.

Leave this for the experts

JMAN05:
Macro and micro doesn't make any sense. So you don't know there is a difference. While you can prove a minor changes in s specie, but to state that reptiles gradually brought about humans is a huge leap. Something you can't prove through experiment.

It is not like the genetic makeup of a coronavirus, which sample you can test. My guy there is a huge difference. That is why there theory falls flat in the face of what happened during the Cambrian period. Macro evolution is not about things you go to a lab to test. So don't bring the issue of what happens in the field of science here. It is mostly micro evolution that is accepted cos it's provable. Not when you start talking about what happened millions of years ago when you were not there. Making assumptions of what you didn't see nor can reproduce in a lab.

One application of creationism on what? I believe in creation.

let me give you another logical reasoning on microevolution using SARScov 2.

SARScov 2 gain entry into host cells using The Angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE 2) present in the lungs. This enzyme has homologous in those animals that are closely related to humans.
For example chimpanzees, SARScov 2 will easily infect a chimpanzee than say a rabbit because we are genetically closely related to chimpanzees than rabbits.

Let me give you another example, Ebola virus can infect all great apes and even some other primates, it can’t infect rabbits or lab rats because we share some genetic attributes with other apes. The virus interacts with T-cell immunoglobulin and mucin domain which have similar structures in all Great Apes. It’s an evidence that we are closely related to other apes, we share diseases because our genomes are closely related than any other order of species.

You can extract these proteins from different animal species and study the amino sequence, that will give you an idea of how close we are related to them.

It’s common sense.

JMAN05:
Macro and micro doesn't make any sense. So you don't know there is a difference. While you can prove a minor changes in s specie, but to state that reptiles gradually brought about humans is a huge leap. Something you can't prove through experiment.

It is not like the genetic makeup of a coronavirus, which sample you can test. My guy there is a huge difference. That is why there theory falls flat in the face of what happened during the Cambrian period. Macro evolution is not about things you go to a lab to test. So don't bring the issue of what happens in the field of science here. It is mostly micro evolution that is accepted cos it's provable. Not when you start talking about what happened millions of years ago when you were not there. Making assumptions of what you didn't see nor can reproduce in a lab.

One application of creationism on what? I believe in creation.

So what happens to accumulated microevolution in a multicellular organisms over thousands and millions of years in a constantly changing environment?

Radiometric dating of fossils, do they prove micro or microevolution? Cos I don’t know what you are saying about not being able to test macroevolution in lab.

I think you really do not understand evolution deeply. The difference between micro and macro evolution is just timeframe. It has nothing to with the inability to test anything in the lab.

You can analyze DNA samples from fossils in the lab and check for similarities to establish macroevolution. It’s not rocket science to say that birds are the closest relatives of dinosaurs alive after analyzing DNA or glycan samples gotten from their fossils and comparing them with living species of animals. This is actually done in a lab and people have established this fact.

I don’t understand what you mean by macroevolution cannot be tested in a lab.

Don’t allow people tell you things that doesn’t make sense. You can test by yourself how closely related you are to every specie of primates in the world. You just need to get their DNA samples, analyze them and make a comparison with yours in “lab”. You can establish macroevolution with that.

JMAN05:
I didn't ignore them. I did say there are changes within species. That is microevolution makes some sense. But you are the one making it sound as if evolution has it all. It is irrefutable. I am telling you to let go off that assertion bro. There are valid questions evolution hasn't answered. I mean big time questions at that, especially under macroevolution.

Of course, that is how I see it with evidence. Many scientist would not accept a thing from religion, as if they have all the questions answered in evolution. Some even accept rubbish in the field of abiogenesis and move on without question while calling religious people irrational. How many come out to say that we have some big time shit in this evolution? They will present it as if we-have-all-the-facts for a single pin we believe in, but then paint religion as if they are dumb since they think religion has no fact to back their claims.

They should also know that they live by some sort of faith. After all, macro evolution is based largely on assumptions. Isn't that a sort of faith?

So, you guys should spare us the noise of we have all the facts. It's not true.

you talking a lot about micro and macroevolution...
Microevolution can’t work independently from macroevolution.

This is why you can easily make vaccine for a DNA viruses and vaccines for RNA viruses are harder. The rate of evolution of a DNA virus is similar to that of the human host, while that of the RNA virus is faster.

In biology, pharmacology, medicine name it, Evolution is everything, the enterprise of science doesn’t even make any sense without evolution. You are using the macro and micro evolution thing in the wrong context, they can’t occur independent of each other. And accumulated microevolution in a multicellular specie will eventually lead to macroevolution. Talking about micro and macro evolution as a separate entity doesn’t make any sense.

Just tell me one application of creationism. We will end this, if you give me one application of creation in modern science then we are good.

...

JMAN05:
That is what I'm saying. so evolution is a sort of another way around the belief in a creator. That is just how I see it. this does not mean that all experiments as you said, supports it. There are valid questions that evolution till date cannot answer. One example is what happened in what is called the Cambrian period.

Its a not question of how you see it, it’s a question of what evidences suggest. You cannot deliberately ignore the million of questions evolution has answered because of a few ones it hasn’t.
Evolution doesn’t in anyway suggest the existence of any creator.

JMAN05:
No. That logic doesn't follow. You cannot say since there are changes in species, then that life must have come from inanimates at some point. Such happening is highly improbable. Accepting it needs more faith than accepting a creator.

Do not think that all questions as to how humans evolved is entirely answered. It lives valid questions that up until now is still debated. So, do not consider all aspects of evolution to be irrefutable. Most of these theories are accepted just to find another way around the existence of an intelligent creator.

So what other logical explanation do you have for the origin of evolving species?

In science, evolution is fact. It’s irrefutable unless just for the purpose of argument. The evidences are overwhelming and experiments conducted multiple times backs it.

We simply cannot do anything in biological and medical science without the knowledge of evolution serving as a basis.

JMAN05:
Then you shouldn't be in this discussion. You can't compare evolution to creation when you can't tell us anything about abiogenesis. The op began from a faulty premise.

The idea of creation is totally baseless since it’s suggest that every organism has remained the same since creation. That’s a far cry from the reality.

Abiogenesis is the logical explanation to what presided evolution.

I think the op doesn’t understand this. A lot of people really do not understand this

JMAN05:
That's the problem. The op have that view. The thread itself combines the two. He wants to know wether life came through creation or through evolution.

Now, when you want to talk about why life can't come about through evolution, using the reasoning that life can't emerge from non-living things, Evolutionist will tell you that that is abiogenesis. how can you then be making a case for Life through evolution when you don't want to discuss abiogenesis?

You practically should not then be talking about evolution versus creation. Because that would make no sense.

Abiogenesis is not completely understood but evolution is completely understood. The idea of abiogenesis is just a result of a common sense that since life evolves from another life, there must have been a point in time when life must have come from an inanimate.
It’s difficult to completely proof abiogenesis because you may have to simulate the exact environmental condition that gave rise to the first living cell but evolution is well established and the evidences are irrefutable in science.

Abiogensis is built on logic, if evolution is a fact that we know and it tells us that new species can form over a period of time due to changing environmental condition, it’s illogical to say that life has always been in existence. Life must have emanated from inanimate at some point.

JMAN05:
The op is obviously not talking about microevolution. He is rather discussing evolution as a source of Life versus creation, that is, God making all things.

That's being the case, I do not think that evolution is really the source of life. Personally, that doesn't make any sense to me. That was basically my point.

Actually, there could be changes within an organism or a specie. The Bible is not against this. But that life came through evolution, that is against the Bible. Even without the Bible, the point in itself that evolutionist makes to prove their point is not convincing. Besides, they avoid abiogenesis, which is not reasonable to me.

Evolution doesn’t talk about source of life. Wtf is microevolution? Evolution is evolution in any case.

Usorohtheman:
I'm sorry, I can't expose the place here. There are repercussions for such.

Lol, dude. You think you are talking to dummies?

To give any scientific explanation, you have to give proof that this really happened.

That’s how science works. We have seen a lot of bogus claims.

BlueBanana:
God Bless The Great Industrialist.
IGBO Amaka
Ya kpotuba na o were Ihe n'eme

guy all down, don’t bring tribalism into it.

Ps: I’m also Igbo

All your G.Os didn’t see covid19 in their 2020 prophecy, they can’t even open church now. None of them is even seeing any vision about the cure.

When will you guys wake up from the delusion?

Activistman:
The only measure at this time is compulsory wearing of face masks by the populace and constant hand washing. Lobatan!

This will only enhance the spread. Face mask when used incorrectly will get you infected.