Its called education, you should try it sometime, its far better than guessing.
To be honest, repeating what someone tells you is not an education. Being taught how to process what you are told and enable yourself to know if it is true, is an education.
Cheap snide remarks are not asset or a sign of an education.
Precisely what a said and you denied. Yes also the device that stared the evolution of life on this planet, not the evolution itself.
Not what I said. Neither denied. No science chemical or otherwise has given the answer to how life came into existence.
Evolution is a theory... it has no start and no end as far as life. Biogensis is the only evolution we have that living matter produces living matter and so far that is the only evolution we have witnessed the same thing happening over and over again. A human producing a baby a chicken producing an egg. But nowhere has evolution ever provided an answer to where life first originated since no new life has come into existence from dead things regarding species of living beings.
Fact, that is not true. The evidence for abiogenesis is strong .the evidence for god did it with god magic is non existent.
Learn some science rather than asking stupid questions after i have already given you the answer.
SCIENCE does not prove the none existence of God. Nor does it give evidence of Abiogenesis as the way life evolved regarding humans and living species which are nothing to do with plants erc. You have shown no evidence or proof. A name or the scientific names do not provide proof. Biogensis is proved because living matter gives birth to new living matter.
May be education is about knowing why you believe what you do. In my personal case I know the difference between theory and fact. The latter of the two does not appear to be part of the education you have received.
D'oh!
Time appears to be something creationists really have a problem with. Ten BILLION years is not nit picking.
The evidence that many people both religionists and like yourself, atheists miss out on when reading the bible is this:-
When God created the world he made it a mature world. When God created a man (not a baby) at a day old he was years old.
Had the world the day it was created been examined by scientist it would to all intents and purposes been an aged world by scientific measures and terms.
Just as Adam and Eve would have appeared to have been alive for many human years at just a day old.
God created everything in 7 days but he had to make a mature world and man to survive. In truth man at a day old was biological years old.
But the truth is he was just a day old. The earth was a mature earth but was only created on the day God made it.
The obvious is sometimes overlooked. Please don't D,oh me till you are capable of understanding what the bible and science bring to the table in truth.
Understanding and education should be something you can work out for yourself without having to be told everything.
And i would be really impressed in you actually bothered to even read the link. It seems previous attempts of teaching you biology at school have failed so i wont be wasting my time.
Life's First Spark Re-Created in the Laboratory
So who or what brought them together and mixed them correctly? Which Laboratory made the first spark.
You don't get it., do you. Had life been just a spark the spark would have been ongoing.
No one has created a human being yet from that spark or anything human. How did one spark make so many species and keep on going in life forms but why has it not been on going?
No! THEY HAVE NOT created life from non life. Look at the first sentence "
A fundamental but elusive step in the early evolution of life on Earth has been replicated in a laboratory.
Not lifes first spark as the title wrongly states,...Not the actual creation of life. replicated in a laboratory... if it requires a laboratory then it requires someone to create it.
It speaks more for God than just an accident. Because it appears they it does not happen outside a Laboratory or anything already living or in existence.
It brings us back to the old joke....
There’s a scientist and God. And the scientist challenges God to a contest of who can make the better human being. God tells him that he’s on, at which time the scientist, in great delight, bends over to pick up some dust to make his human being. Then God says, ‘No, no … you go and find your own dust.’
So please don't waste both our times with such as the above as it is really not what you are parading it to be.
Bullpoop, consider your coccyx.
First apes appeared 50 to 55 million years ago. First humans (homo genus) about 5 million years ago. The first modern humans (homo sapiens) appeared about 200,000 years ago.
Again quoting from books and not what knowledge you could have gained for yourselves. Only God has shown the ability to create something out of nothing.
Earliest Human Remains Outside Africa Were Just Discovered in Israel | Science | Smithsonian
Just to show you can never take for granted anything you are told regarding the age of existence when it comes to the human kind.
Exactly the same argument you use, funny how you make excuses in an attempt to discredit it
NOT TRUE.. Do you believe throwing such things into the mix will hide your inability to support your arguments?
You see a belief system regarding the Jews and Christians are connected. A Christian is the fulfilment of the OT promises God made to his people.
The New Covenant involving the Messiah would bring Gentiles into the faith with Jews. So believing in the Messiah Gentiles become part of the New Covenant and one people in Gods sight
believing in one Messiah and all Jews. The reason I told you that you need to be educated better is shown by the fact you never understood the Christian is a Jew under the new covenant. Not a new being or faith but the faith fulfilled in it's promised new covenant and the Messiah.Still remains the Jewish faith no new faith.
Misrepresentation of Pasteurs work does not help your claim. And waffling nonsense doesnt either. Dont tell me what i do and dont understand, projection doesnt help you either.
If a baker bakes a bad loaf, does that make the baker a bad person? Will you stoop at nothing to protect your own ignorance being shown?
Magic?
Dont tell me what i am saying when what you say i am saying is bull. Of course our bodies are made 100% of chemicals. Dna for example is made of the chemicals adenine, guanine, cytosine and thymine.
It is a fact try looking beyond your text books and try researching the scientific findings of the late 70's early 80.s
It points to the truth scientists are always changing their minds with new findings and research. You came here to blow people out of the water and ended up falling in yourself.
Once again you show your ignorance and prove you have not bothered to learn about the subject. Cross breeding had nothing to do with the rise of either species, environment did.
Your ignorance is astounding... My reference was to show that there are no new species from scrap. Cross breeding makes new breeds but still they are dogs or whatever animals you cross. Life still proceeds from life.. I was merely showing you no new species have come into being by the same process life first started with. That nothing living comes from dead matter.
More bull and misrepresentation. This time based on the fear of nuclear testing and inadequate comprehension of the data.
Again, because you did not read the information you are unable to accept what I actually said. Proof again you believe what you choose to believe not what you can understand.,
If it weren't true you would have took great delight in showing us. However, it is true....
RESOLUTION said:
↑
Not true... animals may cross breed but they still remain just another breed of dog etc.
However did you allow yourself to give that answer to that quote?
When you CROSS breed two dogs you still get a dog. Never seen two cats give birth to a dog when cross bred or vice versa.
So you say the entire early human race were deformed?
RESOLUTION said:
↑
Joseph Merrick came to mind... Also
Acromegaly Is a Disorder of an Excess Growth Hormone these are modern day and would you say this man had a large head and the second was a giant? Living in their times does it make them somehow a new species? You see these things prove nothing. We have different human being originating from all over the world. Many difference including size of skulls and even skeletons.
Does reference to Joseph Merrick make the entire early human race deformed? So why suggest such an outrageous thing?
My reply is clear that it shows your argument to carry NO WEIGHT WHATSOEVER. So if you cannot reply in a debatable manner suitable to the argument at hand I suggest you remain quiet till you can.
Once again misrepresentation of the facts does not mean you have a point, just that you misrepresent the facts.
And to finish, i will say DNA does not lie
Again only you have been shown to misrepresent both your own arguments and even shown yourself misrepresenting my arguments. This shows a lack of understanding and ability to debate issues clearly and present any proper arguments on your own behalf. You alone deliberately misrepresented what I said as if you could build an attack to stop people seeing you were incapable of proving your points, Now everyone can see you are not capable of debating issues at hand because you don't understand what you believe or what others are saying.
Apologies for any spelling mistakes or grammar error dealing with an emergency at present.
