Let's go over this again, shall we, about chances--

I said in a previous post, "and I have decided upon research that is NOT evolution per the Darwinian imaginings. Obviously you can believe what you want to. But as you already mentioned, you just go along with it."

ImmortalFlame said:

I never said that. Please do not spread lies about my position.

Click to expand...

Whether you used those words particularly, would you then say you don't go along with the theory of evolution?

ImmortalFlame said:

What do you want me to do? Pay for you to fly to a museum? Hire some scientists to visit your house and explain this to you with actual examples?

This is a forum. All we have is words. That's obvious.


The fact that organic organisms can form from basic chemical interactions actually does prove that. You, for example, were the result of a chance meeting between chemical interactions.


Nothing you have said actually addressed my argument. This is just you putting your fingers in your ears.

I never made the argument that life formed without intelligence. I am explaining how the evidence for evolution works. You can accept that or leave it, but don't act like you actually understand what the evidence is when I make repeated, good faith attempts to explain it to you, and then you respond like this.

Click to expand...

I KNOW how the so-called evidence for evolution works. I've read reports and reports of experiments. It does not prove/demonstrate/evidence it is in truth evolution.

YoursTrue said:

I know it sounds repetitious, but fossils do not demonstrate evolution. Only in the minds of those who believe the theory. Furthermore IF fossils could actually show the transfer (evolution in little tiny increments to another genetically different organism) in realtime, that would be another story, right? (But they don't.) My conclusion: if you want to believe in the Theory of Evolution, that's your choice. I no longer do. I believe that God (1) made allowance for construction from the beginning, and (2) no 'branch' started from chance meeting of chemicals.

Click to expand...

Is there anything at all that you would accept as evidence for evolution? Is there any conceivable observation that you would accept as a disproof of creationism?

Astrophile said:

Is there anything at all that you would accept as evidence for evolution? Is there any conceivable observation that you would accept as a disproof of creationism?

Click to expand...

If I could see on a film or video real time change from one complete form to another during their lifetime, I would have to change. But there is nothing to substantiate that other than theory. Period. And yes, I know "films" were not invented way back when...experiments do not show that anyway. They may show that one element binds with another but again -- does not prove evolution at all. It proves/shows/evidences/shows that elements can bond or break up under certain conditions.

YoursTrue said:

If I could see on a film or video real time change from one complete form to another during their lifetime, I would have to change. But there is nothing to substantiate that other than theory. Period. And yes, I know "films" were not invented way back when...experiments do not show that anyway. They may show that one element binds with another but again -- does not prove evolution at all. It proves/shows/evidences/shows that elements can bond or break up under certain conditions.

Click to expand...

But that sort of observed change would disprove evolution. You are making an incredibly ignorant and self contradictory demand.

And there is plenty to substantiate the theory. You have to know that by now. You are just using the ostrich defense at best.

YoursTrue said:

You can say whatever you want, but you show nothing beyond your words. There is absolutely nothing to show that life began with a chance meeting of elements burgeoning out to become something greater. Like bones. And breath within a body.

Click to expand...

There you go again.

@ImmortalFlame was talking about fossil records of life that already exist, and on diversity of species.

But what I highlighted in bold from your reply, had nothing to do with what ImmortalFlame was saying.

ImmortalFlame wasn’t talking about the origin of first life, ImmortalFlame wasn’t talking about Abiogenesis.

Your reply isn’t a response to his or her post. You keep confusing Evolution with Abiogenesis.

Are you utter incapable of understanding the differences between Abiogenesis & Evolution?

YoursTrue said:

So far bats remain bats, butterflies remain butterflies,

Click to expand...

You know what I'm going to say, don't you?
I've said it more then enough times already.

Maybe you should say it this time.
What would it mean to evolution theory if a bats produced non-bats?

However God enabled the different forms, He did it.

Click to expand...

Bold claim in need of evidence.

I no longer consider by rationale that it happened by itself.

Click to expand...

Not "by itself". Instead, through the process of evolution (mutate, survive, reproduce, repeat).

There is an intelligent force behind the various forms of life and existence on this earth

Click to expand...

Bold claim in need of evidence.

Are all things from God? No

Click to expand...

How do you tell the difference?

(thousand bucks says that an argument from ignorance / incredulity / god-of-the-gaps is coming up)

But He allows things and will not always allow what is hurtful. There is a better future in store for those that God blesses.

Click to expand...

Bold claim in need of evidence.

YoursTrue said:

Evolution is a theory that yes, life happened somehow by magnetic connection

Click to expand...

It doesn't say anything like that. Not even remotely.

Why do you insist on being wrong all the time?
How is it, that after all this time discussing this topic, you still have learned diddly-squad?

But after a while of observing life forms and understanding the differences of activity between the various animals and plants, I'd certainly open up my mind maybe a little

Click to expand...

Clearly you paid no attention in school then when learning about biology and evolution. As the interaction between species and the processes they are subject to, are very well understood.



Understand that every time you lie about evolution like that, you are bearing false witness.

Isn't that a sin in your religion?

YoursTrue said:

Like what? If you can't go over it again, at least please give me post numbers.

Click to expand...

"bats remain bats"
"butterlfy remain butterflies"
"fruit flies remain fruit flies"
...

I don't remember the amount of times I pointed out the strawman.
It's a couple dozen at least. And that's just me. Many others did also.
So in total, in just the past months, you must have had pointed that out to you well over 50 times.

YoursTrue said:

Simply not true. If I believed in the THEORY of Evolution as conjectured, I'd tell you. And others. But as I researched it, there is nothing to convince me that the THEORY is true.

Click to expand...

Either you are lying or you "researched" it on creationist websites and / or other non-scientific sources.
That, or you read from proper sources and didn't comprehend / remember a word you read.

It must be one of those options, or you wouldn't be making such mega rookie mistakes like saying "bats remain bats" as if that is somehow an argument against evolution theory (while in fact it's a prediction of the theory... if bats would NOT remain bats, then evolution would be falsified).

Someone who comprehends the basics of how evolution actually works, would not make such basic errors.

YoursTrue said:

If I could see on a film or video real time change from one complete form to another during their lifetime, I would have to change.

Click to expand...

Such an observation would disprove evolution.

Funny how an observation that would make you believe in evolution, would actually be disproving evolution.

Maybe you should finally get serious and actually learn what evolution ACTUALLY says.
It's one thing to not believe it (for whatever reason). It's a whole other thing to insist on strawmanning it / lying about it.

TagliatelliMonster said:

It doesn't say anything like that. Not even remotely.

Why do you insist on being wrong all the time?
How is it, that after all this time discussing this topic, you still have learned diddly-squad?




Clearly you paid no attention in school then when learning about biology and evolution. As the interaction between species and the processes they are subject to, are very well understood.



Understand that every time you lie about evolution like that, you are bearing false witness.

Isn't that a sin in your religion?

Click to expand...

Careful, I get unfairly hit with warnings when pointing out this fact. Even if I tone it down to "when you make false claims about others that is breaking the Ninth Commandment" I get dinged with a warning. It was one point that really got to the creationists and one that they never had an answer for except to claim that I called them a liar and that was somehow against the rules here.

Subduction Zone said:

Careful, I get unfairly hit with warnings when pointing out this fact. Even if I tone it down to "when you make false claims about others that is breaking the Ninth Commandment" I get dinged with a warning. It was one point that really got to the creationists and one that they never had an answer for except to claim that I called them a liar and that was somehow against the rules here.

Click to expand...

If it is against the rules to point out facts, then so be it. (and shame on the rules in that case also)

Subduction Zone said:

Careful, I get unfairly hit with warnings when pointing out this fact. Even if I tone it down to "when you make false claims about others that is breaking the Ninth Commandment" I get dinged with a warning. It was one point that really got to the creationists and one that they never had an answer for except to claim that I called them a liar and that was somehow against the rules here.

Click to expand...

You are not allowed to direct personal attacks against other posters and to claim someone is a liar, is an attack that requires evidence. But there is no evidence for that, because there are other models of understand them than that they are liars.

In the end for the everyday world the evidence is that they think, feel and attack differently than you. That is all. There are no evidence that they are a negative as wrong, liars and so on. That is morality and science/evidence doesn't work on that.

mikkel_the_dane said:

You are not allowed to direct personal attacks against other posters and to claim someone is a liar, is an attack that requires evidence. But there is no evidence for that, because there are other models of understand them than that they are liars.

In the end for the everyday world the evidence is that they think, feel and attack differently than you. That is all. There are no evidence that they are a negative as wrong, liars and so on. That is morality and science/evidence doesn't work on that.

Click to expand...

And I made clear that I was not calling them a liar. The Ninth Commandment is a law about making false statements about others. Even if a person does not know that something is false, for example if he or she was lied to and believed that lie, repeating that lie would be a breaking of the Ninth Commandment.

You don't have to lie yourself to break it. It cautions people. If you are going to say something negative about someone else you better be able to prove it. "Sam told me" is not a valid excuse.

Subduction Zone said:

And I made clear that I was not calling them a liar. The Ninth Commandment is a law about making false statements about others. Even if a person does not know that something is false, for example if he or she was lied to and believed that lie, repeating that lie would be a breaking of the Ninth Commandment.

You don't have to lie yourself to break it. It cautions people. If you are going to say something negative about someone else you better be able to prove it. "Sam told me" is not a valid excuse.

Click to expand...

Yet you are doing it yourself. I have no evidence as evidence for valid and invalid excuses. That is not science. That is morality in the end and nobody in recorded history have been able to do that with objective reason, logic and evidence.

mikkel_the_dane said:

You are not allowed to direct personal attacks against other posters and to claim someone is a liar, is an attack that requires evidence.

Click to expand...

There is evidence. Plenty of it.
YT keeps repeating the same falsehoods about evolution regardless how many people have pointed it out COUNTLESS times (with evidence, citations, papers,......)

There comes a time where one can no longer assume mere innocent ignorance.
There comes a time when one has to conclude that the spreading of the falsehoods are done on purpose.

What... there are rules against calling someone a liar (while it is in fact demonstrably true that they are lying), but there are no rules agains the act of lying?

Those are cosa nostra mafia rules. When made guys are in a sit down, they lie through their teeth and that's fine. But if you call it out and say the guy is lying, you automatically lose the sitdown. AND the other guy, the liar who's being called out, even has grounds to ask for permission to kill you for that "disrespect".

Honestly, if such are the rules on this forum, then shame on the forum.

TagliatelliMonster said:

There is evidence. Plenty of it.
YT keeps repeating the same falsehoods about evolution regardless how many people have pointed it out COUNTLESS times (with evidence, citations, papers,......)

There comes a time where one can no longer assume mere innocent ignorance.
There comes a time when one has to conclude that the spreading of the falsehoods are done on purpose.

What... there are rules against calling someone a liar (while it is in fact demonstrably true that they are lying), but there are no rules agains the act of lying?

Those are cosa nostra mafia rules. When made guys are in a sit down, they lie through their teeth and that's fine. But if you call it out and say the guy is lying, you automatically lose the sitdown. AND the other guy, the liar who's being called out, even has grounds to ask for permission to kill you for that "disrespect".

Honestly, if such are the rules on this forum, then shame on the forum.

Click to expand...

You can't see as see false. That is a standard in your brain. I can do false and evidence too, but to me that is cognitive and I can use different results if I compare different versions of false and evidence.

So here is one version. Religion as a human behavior can't as such be false, because you observe other humans doing religion.
All of your post is in effect about how you think/feel about other humans behaviour. But that is morality, utility and so on.
And science as evidence can't do that:
Science has limits: A few things that science does not do - Understanding Science

So you conflate evidence and morality. But that is not unique to you and that is not false/wrong. It is a part of how the everyday world works and I can still do it differently.

YoursTrue said:

If I could see on a film or video real time change from one complete form to another during their lifetime, I would have to change.

Click to expand...

And that reveal just how very little you understand Evolution.

You clearly don't understand HOW Evolution work, for you to say something as foolish the statement above.

In Evolution, evidence are from comparison of extant species with earlier species or with extinct species.

Tell me, YoursTrue. Do you expect to SEE miracles TODAY, like healing leper or blind person with just touch of hand?

You have only read stories from the gospels of such abilities, by Jesus or his disciples, but you haven't seen such miracles today, right in front of you, AND YET I think you readily believe these New Testament miracles without question and without seeing them.

I see that hypocritical that you don't expect to see real miracles in front of you, but you demanding to see Evolution to happen instantly or in lifetime.

The problem is that you don't understand what is evidence or what isn't evidence. So even if someone to present evidence to you, YOU WON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT ARE PRESENTED TO YOU.

That's because of your lack education in natural sciences in general. Your high school sciences are below average, and that is demonstrated in your reply to @Astrophile's questions.

mikkel_the_dane said:

Yet you are doing it yourself. I have no evidence as evidence for valid and invalid excuses. That is not science. That is morality in the end and nobody in recorded history have been able to do that with objective reason, logic and evidence.

Click to expand...

When did I ever do that without evidence? You clearly do not know the circumstances of when I have used that claim. If anything you just made a claim without evidence since you would have known of the evidence supporting my l claims when I have done that.