Creation vs. Evolution (Earth, Eden, genesis, eternal, bible)

[inca]

As I said what was achieved setting eyes on the wings wasn't a natural process. Everything is already written and I have explained with detail the experiences in the past so I don't think I have to repeat it again. Same happens with adaptations, they can't go beyond certain limits. None of the things you have written have demonstrated "jumps" from species to others.
Even Darwin admit the stupidity of his own logic about the evolution of a complex organ like the eye. Imagine how come the species reproduced themselves until the sexual parts were ready and compatible to interact with each other. It just wouldn't work until each and every part is fully developed! So, if the system would take that time and effort to produce sexual organs, why to create them in first place? Yet, even now after alleguedly millions of years of evolution, we have the same chickens with eggs, the different kind of eggs of the reptiles, the feathers of the birds, the fin in sharks, etc. All kind of Russian salad. No evolution to transform into something else. No bull&%$# ! That story always sound fishy but is marvelous design and set in magazines and BBC specials on tv.All crap packed in golden packages.
All the strata evidence in geological layers demonstrate an explosion of life in different times, no half way process between one thing and another. I don't have the desire to mention each and every scientists (in a long list) admiting insects were insects since the beginning of their appearance into this planet, the same happens with birds, mammals, etc. I could and you can send them letters to respective universities for them (as experts) take you out of misery. But I won't. It's you the one who believes that litter. You do your homework. Mentioning 1% of "good" mutations won't lead you to new species. That's your dogma and I have already mentioned what scientists say. If you don't wanna believe them nothing that I say will change your mind. So let it be written,so let it be done.
Some animals may dissapear and had different shape, yet the dissapearence of some never explained how did they come in first place. That was always a tricky argument used by evolucionists. I can ask you how come spermatozoid appears or egg cell. It's already a program made by a law the scientists rely upon. More than million animal species have a singular program based upon the same "letters" in DNA with the proper alterations. It never meant they HAD to evolve one from another. Darwin , for example, set an imbecil argument about the peaks of some birds, since they were different they meant evolution. That was a huge mistake. That's just a simple adaptation in the same DNA plan. If you now go and say the same idiotic argument in a university talking about the differences of noses in human races they are gonna laugh at you and explain the superficial differences and the genotype and phenotype.
I have said the genetic experience was made upon those "hominids".
Whole life in the universe is something not even the biggest mind have unraveled. Probably you're aware some of the brightest minds are suggesting the whole universe is a hollogram based upon binary code (or other codes) information. Now, if a narrow minded archeologist and palenthologist finds a rudimentary sharp stone like an arrow point, there's no problem in admiting there was someone who did it. Sagan sent a message in code to be understood by alien inteligence. If we receive a code from outside we will recognize an entity, right? But when you see DNA code or marvelous laws in the universe and cosmo - experts talk about anthropic principle, how come the same people can't see evidence of a Law Giver? Is an arrow or Sagan's message something better than life? Therefore, that's my answer to you. God didn't make our life on Earth directly as we understand from Hebrew words in Genesis. There were other creatures created somehow in spiritual realms. These creatures sowed life on Earth. It was not an stupid deaf and dumb meteor in parmsperm theory. When different species created in different times (days in Hebrew is "yown" and indicates thousands of years or even millions, sorry Creationists!) were already existing. It was time to select some of the creatures (maybe Neanderthal) to make genetic experiences to forward "evolution" in short time.
By the way, I don't pretend to write here everything the people believe is usually what they are lead to "eat". I can start with the parallax calculations with trigonometry awfully applied to far away stars and ending in the ignorance about our own planet Earth and Moon formation, past rotation and spinning around the Sun , each one of the methods measuring activity on time RATHER THAN TIME, spilliting of Pangea (the cause is ignored) ,etc,etc,etc.

[inca]

As I said what was achieved setting eyes on the wings wasn't a natural process. Everything is already written and I have explained with detail the experiences in the past so I don't think I have to repeat it again. Same happens with adaptations, they can't go beyond certain limits. None of the things you have written have demonstrated "jumps" from species to others.
Even Darwin admit the stupidity of his own logic about the evolution of a complex organ like the eye. Imagine how come the species reproduced themselves until the sexual parts were ready and compatible to interact with each other. It just wouldn't work until each and every part is fully developed! So, if the system would take that time and effort to produce sexual organs, why to create them in first place? Yet, even now after alleguedly millions of years of evolution, we have the same chickens with eggs, the different kind of eggs of the reptiles, the feathers of the birds, the fin in sharks, etc. All kind of Russian salad. No evolution to transform into something else. No bull&%$# ! That story always sound fishy but is marvelous design and set in magazines and BBC specials on tv.All crap packed in golden packages.
All the strata evidence in geological layers demonstrate an explosion of life in different times, no half way process between one thing and another. I don't have the desire to mention each and every scientists (in a long list) admiting insects were insects since the beginning of their appearance into this planet, the same happens with birds, mammals, etc. I could and you can send them letters to respective universities for them (as experts) take you out of misery. But I won't. It's you the one who believes that litter. You do your homework. Mentioning 1% of "good" mutations won't lead you to new species. That's your dogma and I have already mentioned what scientists say. If you don't wanna believe them nothing that I say will change your mind. So let it be written,so let it be done.
Some animals may dissapear and had different shape, yet the dissapearence of some never explained how did they come in first place. That was always a tricky argument used by evolucionists. I can ask you how come spermatozoid appears or egg cell. It's already a program made by a law the scientists rely upon. More than million animal species have a singular program based upon the same "letters" in DNA with the proper alterations. It never meant they HAD to evolve one from another. Darwin , for example, set an imbecil argument about the peaks of some birds, since they were different they meant evolution. That was a huge mistake. That's just a simple adaptation in the same DNA plan. If you now go and say the same idiotic argument in a university talking about the differences of noses in human races they are gonna laugh at you and explain the superficial differences and the genotype and phenotype.
I have said the genetic experience was made upon those "hominids".
Whole life in the universe is something not even the biggest mind have unraveled. Probably you're aware some of the brightest minds are suggesting the whole universe is a hollogram based upon binary code (or other codes) information. Now, if a narrow minded archeologist and palenthologist finds a rudimentary sharp stone like an arrow point, there's no problem in admiting there was someone who did it. Sagan sent a message in code to be understood by alien inteligence. If we receive a code from outside we will recognize an entity, right? But when you see DNA code or marvelous laws in the universe and cosmo - experts talk about anthropic principle, how come the same people can't see evidence of a Law Giver? Is an arrow or Sagan's message something better than life? Therefore, that's my answer to you. God didn't make our life on Earth directly as we understand from Hebrew words in Genesis. There were other creatures created somehow in spiritual realms. These creatures sowed life on Earth. It was not an stupid deaf and dumb meteor in parmsperm theory. When different species created in different times (days in Hebrew is "yown" and indicates thousands of years or even millions, sorry Creationists!) were already existing. It was time to select some of the creatures (maybe Neanderthal) to make genetic experiences to forward "evolution" in short time.
By the way, I don't pretend to write here everything the people believe is usually what they are lead to "eat". I can start with the parallax calculations with trigonometry awfully applied to far away stars and ending in the ignorance about our own planet Earth and Moon formation, past rotation and spinning around the Sun , each one of the methods measuring activity on time RATHER THAN TIME, spilliting of Pangea (the cause is ignored) ,etc,etc,etc.

[inca]

"The giraffe is THOUGHT to be a relative short creature". You see? That's a theory, no facts. If the relative was a lamb, well, we have different species of animals, some with horns and some without horns. Very close in Africa in the same environment we have very short people side by side to extremely tall people. What the f*$#*& does that mean? That one "evolved" from another? Welcome to the list of stupid arguments accepted by 99.9% of people who don't use the gray mass!!!

[inca]

"The giraffe is THOUGHT to be a relative short creature". You see? That's a theory, no facts. If the relative was a lamb, well, we have different species of animals, some with horns and some without horns. Very close in Africa in the same environment we have very short people side by side to extremely tall people. What the f*$#*& does that mean? That one "evolved" from another? Welcome to the list of stupid arguments accepted by 99.9% of people who don't use the gray mass!!!

[inca]

I tell you something. You're 16. You are certainly someone who reads. That's good. Yet, I'm not gonna butter you up. I regret to say it's not enough memorizing data. You need to think. Try to do this. Keep a file about recent investigations and compare after some years and for once in your life try to be skeptical NOT ONLY IN RELIGION but in what you digest as "science" in order to harvest science from "science". And then after when you have doubts and enough unsolved questions, try studying ancient religions and compare each one of them. Who knows, there's always hope that cocky teenager mind who thinks he(she)knows truthalltruthandnothingbutthetruth... becomes a little less naïve. Don't worry, adults have been accepting the same excrement served as scientific supper and not even asked themselves anything in all this time. You can save yourself and be one of the few who escapes from common mediocrity. But beware! Don't say it aloud your doubts and whay you consider idiotic to your teachers at the university. They SHALL be angry with you. I tell you in advance. Go ahead and make your day. My part in this theme can be extended forever but I already wrote too much. Nobody wants a wise a...s!

[inca]

I tell you something. You're 16. You are certainly someone who reads. That's good. Yet, I'm not gonna butter you up. I regret to say it's not enough memorizing data. You need to think. Try to do this. Keep a file about recent investigations and compare after some years and for once in your life try to be skeptical NOT ONLY IN RELIGION but in what you digest as "science" in order to harvest science from "science". And then after when you have doubts and enough unsolved questions, try studying ancient religions and compare each one of them. Who knows, there's always hope that cocky teenager mind who thinks he(she)knows truthalltruthandnothingbutthetruth... becomes a little less naïve. Don't worry, adults have been accepting the same excrement served as scientific supper and not even asked themselves anything in all this time. You can save yourself and be one of the few who escapes from common mediocrity. But beware! Don't say it aloud your doubts and whay you consider idiotic to your teachers at the university. They SHALL be angry with you. I tell you in advance. Go ahead and make your day. My part in this theme can be extended forever but I already wrote too much. Nobody wants a wise a...s!

[inca]

Painted Wolf: If you took the time to read EVERY LINK that I posted you could well be aware of the question you ask me about who were Adam & Eve. The Genesis account hides things and there was a Sumerian influence. In fact there were several experiences with genetic engineering of the Annunaki. George Lucas probably figured the name ANAKIN from them or the Biblical giants children of Anac and the saber beam sword was inspired in Genesis 3:24 (although he probably ignores Judges 6:21, 22). If you have time and DESIRE to learn something, read again everything that I posted and don't "jump" information. You can take the spiderweb and dust out of your Bible and check those texts.
In the Sumerian account there were a lot of mutants including some modern diseases explicitly mentioned in the creation of the several Adamus or Adapas. The very name in Sumerian means "in their image". I recomend you to read Zecharia Sitchin's "Genesis Revisited", "Cosmic Code" and "12th Planet". Criticism always will come by the same people who hate reading and "jump" information. So go ahead, read and judge after and keep on studying until finding "nearer" to the truth. Truth is probably somewhere in the middle, between Creation and Evolution, something like an hybrid between 2001 Space Odysee & Planet of the Apes (the old versions and the new one). Then you can read the Popul Vuh of the Mayas and you will also read the same myths about monkey-men...but in inverse process! Don't make fun of Artur Clark, he was a friend of Carl Sagan who was a friend of Hoagland. Sitchin & Hoagland are Nasa's consultant. And as chimp Dr. S, says to astronaut interpreted by Charlton Heston: "don't look for it, Taylor, you may not like what you find".

[inca]

Painted Wolf: If you took the time to read EVERY LINK that I posted you could well be aware of the question you ask me about who were Adam & Eve. The Genesis account hides things and there was a Sumerian influence. In fact there were several experiences with genetic engineering of the Annunaki. George Lucas probably figured the name ANAKIN from them or the Biblical giants children of Anac and the saber beam sword was inspired in Genesis 3:24 (although he probably ignores Judges 6:21, 22). If you have time and DESIRE to learn something, read again everything that I posted and don't "jump" information. You can take the spiderweb and dust out of your Bible and check those texts.
In the Sumerian account there were a lot of mutants including some modern diseases explicitly mentioned in the creation of the several Adamus or Adapas. The very name in Sumerian means "in their image". I recomend you to read Zecharia Sitchin's "Genesis Revisited", "Cosmic Code" and "12th Planet". Criticism always will come by the same people who hate reading and "jump" information. So go ahead, read and judge after and keep on studying until finding "nearer" to the truth. Truth is probably somewhere in the middle, between Creation and Evolution, something like an hybrid between 2001 Space Odysee & Planet of the Apes (the old versions and the new one). Then you can read the Popul Vuh of the Mayas and you will also read the same myths about monkey-men...but in inverse process! Don't make fun of Artur Clark, he was a friend of Carl Sagan who was a friend of Hoagland. Sitchin & Hoagland are Nasa's consultant. And as chimp Dr. S, says to astronaut interpreted by Charlton Heston: "don't look for it, Taylor, you may not like what you find".

[inca]

...The wise ones will check the books, the pages, the authors..the stupid ones will grab to the same old leftover...

[inca]

...The wise ones will check the books, the pages, the authors..the stupid ones will grab to the same old leftover...