Just Accidental?

[Aupmanyav]

Well, we have our multitude to think about.

 

[Deeje]

Just one all-powerful, all-knowing God will do me just fine.....I have trouble remembering names.

 

[McBell]

Just because you think it is a strawman doesn't mean it is.....perhaps your version is the strawman.

I guess we will all know soon enough.

Your avoidance is most revealing.

 

[Deeje]

Much like the "something from nothing" crowd.

Well, actually evolution is a "something from nothing" scenario. How did life begin Mestemia? If you don't know how it started, what does it matter how much you argue about it's mode of change?

The whole "I do not agree with the nonsense I made up and assigned to the 'other side' " tactic is not an argument.
Hells bells, it isn't even a side.

Sorry, but it is valid to those who hold to Intelligent Design and the existence of a grand designer. It is as valid to us as your belief is to you.
You do understand that evolution is a "belief" for which no one can furnish anything but educated guesswork and assumption based on biased leanings.....yet that is what you accuse ID proponents of being. Mexican stand-off.

Your avoidance is most revealing.

Yours is too.

 

[McBell]

Well, actually evolution is a "something from nothing" scenario. How did life begin Mestemia? If you don't know how it started, what does it matter how much you argue about it's mode of change?

Evolution does not address the question of how life began.

IMO, it does not matter how life started.
There is life.

Now since all you have to offer is magical poofing from nothing (isn't the bull **** strawman game fun?)....

Sorry, but it is valid to those who hold to Intelligent Design and the existence of a grand designer.

I agree.
Creationists are the ones who keep beating up strawmen because that is all they have.
Not facts, not truth, etc.
Just their pride in how well they can deny their made up lie.

It is as valid to us as your belief is to you.

I never did understand how you can expect people outside the choir to take you seriously when you so firmly believe that strawmen lies are valid.

You do understand that evolution is a "belief" for which no one can furnish anything but educated guesswork and assumption based on biased leanings.....yet that is what you accuse ID proponents of being. Mexican stand-off.

You do understand that your continued use of bold faced lies and strawmen only works for the choir, right?

Yours is too.

Except I am not avoiding the facts and claiming that lies and strawmen are valid.
That would be you.

 

[Deeje]

Evolution does not address the question of how life began.

IMO, it does not matter how life started.

Well, in my opinion it matters more than "how" life changed once it was here. Evolution does not address the question of how life began, because it can't.You know this.
No answers...just blank stares.

"I dunno" is not a very scientific position, is it?

There is life.

And evolution also says that life just "poofed" into existence out of the primordial "soup".
Who was the cook?

How many bowls of soup have you had that nobody made?

I know that if I leave a bowl of soup on my sideboard for a few weeks, life will appear in that bowl.....but at least I can explain scientifically, why that happened.

The one thing science knows and can prove is that "all life comes from pre-existing life".....then you have evolution which flies in the face of this established fact of true science. Science has never been able to create life from non-living matter. So the fact is science is so clever that it cannot even make a blade of grass. You do understand this?

Now since all you have to offer is magical poofing from nothing (isn't the bull **** strawman game fun?)....

Evolution does "poofing" too. Life just happened, uncreated, undirected and when you add a few billion years to the pot, all of a sudden you have all that we see in this vast universe and on this small planet.

Condescension does not furnish proof of one's position. I have not seen you post one fact that proves evolution ever happened.

I agree.
Creationists are the ones who keep beating up strawmen because that is all they have.
Not facts, not truth, etc.
Just their pride in how well they can deny their made up lie.

Since you have never provided proof for your own position, it seems like you are all talk.

or is it just that "you" cannot defend "their" made up lie?

I never did understand how you can expect people outside the choir to take you seriously when you so firmly believe that strawmen lies are valid.

This is still pure condescension, but no evidence. You don't really learn anything with your nose in the air ya know.

You do understand that your continued use of bold faced lies and strawmen only works for the choir, right?

As does yours. Is it a numbers game for you Mestemia? It's never been a numbers game for God. He has never been mainstream. He is outside of any human estimation of "what" he actually is, so no one can categorically say that he can't exist. He presents himself to us earthlings as the Creator. He has even revealed his name...YHWH. You should meet him sometime, he is really nice.

Except I am not avoiding the facts and claiming that lies and strawmen are valid.
That would be you.

You never had facts to begin with. Evolutionists have no facts that are provable by any scientific method used for any other branches of science.
And your strawmen are all made by someone else......they aren't even your own work.

I am beginning to wonder if you have any real knowledge of the subject at all?

 

[McBell]

Well, in my opinion it matters more than "how" life changed once it was here. Evolution does not address the question of how life began, because it can't.You know this.
No answers...just blank stares.

"I dunno" is not a very scientific position, is it?



And evolution also says that life just "poofed" into existence out of the primordial "soup".
Who was the cook?

How many bowls of soup have you had that nobody made?

*yawn*
Here you go with your strawmen bull ****.
Sorry luv, your ignorance, be it intentional or not, makes for a non productive discussion with you on the topic.

That you find such dishonesty "valid" is disheartening.

I know that if I leave a bowl of soup on my sideboard for a few weeks, life will appear in that bowl.....but at least I can explain scientifically, why that happened.

The one thing science knows and can prove is that "all life comes from pre-existing life".....then you have evolution which flies in the face of this established fact of true science. Science has never been able to create life from non-living matter. So the fact is science is so clever that it cannot even make a blade of grass. You do understand this?

Yes, I understand that you still "confuse" abiogenesis with evolution.

Interesting that you are so proud to display you dishonesty.

Evolution does "poofing" too. Life just happened, uncreated, undirected and when you add a few billion years to the pot, all of a sudden you have all that we see in this vast universe and on this small planet.

Again with the dishonesty.

Condescension does not furnish proof of one's position. I have not seen you post one fact that proves evolution ever happened.

That is because you ignore truth in favour of your strawmen.

Since you have never provided proof for your own position, it seems like you are all talk.

or is it just that "you" cannot defend "their" made up lie?

ignoring the truth and facts that have been presented do not make them go away.
another show of dishonesty from you.

This is still pure condescension, but no evidence. You don't really learn anything with your nose in the air ya know.

You flat out stated, with your nose in the air, you think strawman arguments are valid.

As does yours. Is it a numbers game for you Mestemia? It's never been a numbers game for God. He has never been mainstream. He is outside of any human estimation of "what" he actually is, so no one can categorically say that he can't exist. He presents himself to us earthlings as the Creator. He has even revealed his name...YHWH. You should meet him sometime, he is really nice.

I gave up my imaginary friends years ago.
Though I never claimed my imaginary friends condone dishonesty.

You never had facts to begin with. Evolutionists have no facts that are provable by any scientific method used for any other branches of science.

How many times being shown you are flat out wrong before you are a bold faced liar?

And your strawmen are all made by someone else......they aren't even your own work.

what strawmen?
Point them out.
Or apologize for lying.

I am beginning to wonder if you have any real knowledge of the subject at all?

I flat out admit I have little to no knowledge of your strawmen.
To be perfectly honest, I am not interested in your particular misrepresentation of the truth.

Interestingly enough, you have shown your knowledge of evolution is nil to none.
You have flat out stated you think strawmen are valid.


I eagerly await your next reply.
No doubt you will merely further demonstrate my points.

 

[Deeje]

All that insulting

and not a single fact to support your evolutionary argument.....oh well.

 

[Smart_Guy]

These are a few different species of ducks....one can only marvel at their artistic designs and color schemes.

Who could possibly think that these just evolved and turned out like this through the process of gene mutations and adaptation? What survival advantage is there in being this beautiful?

There must be a creator with great creation power behind it. If it was just random mutation, it wouldn't have included beautiful design like this.

 

[McBell]

All that insulting

and not a single fact to support your evolutionary argument.....oh well.

thank you.

 

[psychoslice]

There must be a creator with great creation power behind it. If it was just random mutation, it wouldn't have included beautiful design like this.

Maybe, but he isn't a man with legs and arms, she could be anything, we will never know, all our scriptures are from pure ignorance.

 

[Smart_Guy]

Maybe, but he isn't a man with legs and arms, she could be anything, we will never know, all our scriptures are from pure ignorance.

Not necessarily, and it's okay really. it's just a belief

 

[psychoslice]

Not necessarily, and it's okay really. it's just a belief

That's it, you got it, yea yea.

 

[Smart_Guy]

That's it, you got it, yea yea.

I always get it... including a beating

 

[Deeje]

Now here are some more amazing designs.....bird nests.

You know what the most incredible thing is about these designs? No one taught these birds how to build these particular nests, yet all these birds build the same nests as their parents did in exactly the same way, out of the same materials....yet none of them were alive when their parents made them. How do they know what to do?

Its all pre-programmed by the one who designed them. They know instinctively what to do. Beautiful bits of engineering.

 

[Deeje]

What about butterflies and moths?
They start out as little eggs on a leaf....then they hatch out into little caterpillars, which feed and grow into large caterpillars, ready to pupate.

At some pre-determined time, the caterpillar instinctively knows when it is time for a most dramatic transformation.
Inside its chrysalis, which no one taught it to make, and unseen to prying eyes, this chunky caterpillar turns into a completely different creature.

Just happened by chance mutations? No designer required?

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=...7AkIJw#tbm=isch&q=pics+beautiful++butterflies


Then there are the moths.....https://www.google.com.au/search?q=...H_DYUQ7AkIJw#tbm=isch&q=pics+beautiful++moths

It isn't until you see the variety and the colors that you can truly appreciate that these beautiful things did not create themselves.

 

[AndromedaRXJ]

Your avoidance is most revealing.

He avoided my last post to him entirely when I pointed out the logical error of his view. Revealing indeed.

 

[AndromedaRXJ]

Just happened by chance mutations? No designer required?

How many times are you gonna ask this question?

Natural Selection accounts for every inheritable trait we see in life on Earth. Every last one of them, no matter what it is, whether it's an instinctual trait, a visual trait, or anything else. As long as its genetic, Natural Selection accounts for it. I'm not sure you understand Natural Selection very well, even though you say you do. I think you need us to explain it to you more in depth.

 

[Deeje]

How many times are you gonna ask this question?

Natural Selection accounts for every inheritable trait we see in life on Earth. Every last one of them, no matter what it is, whether it's an instinctual trait, a visual trait, or anything else. As long as its genetic, Natural Selection accounts for it. I'm not sure you understand Natural Selection very well, even though you say you do. I think you need us to explain it to you more in depth.

Save your breath. I see "natural selection" in a completely different way to you evolutionists. You guys throw it over everything as if it is the blanket answer to the whole question....but if you can't tell us how life began, what is the point of arguing about how it changed over time?

I see adaptation as something minor that takes place within the boundaries of a single species or Genesis "kind". There is no evidence whatsoever for one "kind" mutating itself into a completely different "kind" no matter how much time toy give it.

Instinct is not an undirected accident....design in nature is not an undirected accident. You can believe whatever you like....I cannot swallow what you accept as proof, when most of it is not proof of anything beyond scientific guesswork. Throw in the jargon and the power of suggestion and voila! life is just one big happy accident.

 

[AndromedaRXJ]

You guys throw it over everything as if it is the blanket answer to the whole question....but if you can't tell us how life began, what is the point of arguing about how it changed over time?

That's what a scientific theory is meant to do. It's meant to answer a wide range of questions. When science has a theory that can do that, it means it has a working theory. It really is a blanket answer to any question regarding a heritable trait of a lifeform. That, and how life evolves. It doesn't tell us how life started though.

Tell me what you know about Natural Selection. I still don't think you understand what it is.

I see adaptation as something minor that takes place within the boundaries of a single species or Genesis "kind".

You've said this already, which I had a response to that you never addressed. This is what keeps you going in circles and asking the same question over and over. You don't address people's follow-up points.

What exactly is a kind? "Kind" is not a formal term in biology. If it's ever used by a biologists regarding animal groups, it means he/she is using the term loosely and informally, which also means there's no wrong way to use the term. E.g. you can say cats are a kind, but you can also say meat-eaters are a kind, or grazers, or bipeds, or digitigrades (animals that walk on their toes). It's definitely not a synonym for species, and I'm willing to bet your train of thought leads you to believe that commonly known animal groups are a kind while others are not, such as mice for example? Do mice qualify as a single kind? There's like 30 species of mice. Mice themselves fall under the group murinae, which includes rats as well. And murinae it self fall under the group known as rodent.

So are each of the 30 species of mice their own kind, or do they all fall under one kind, or are mice and rats together considered one kind, or is rodent considered one kind?

Instinct is not an undirected accident....design in nature is not an undirected accident.

You're the only one here using the word "accident". The traits of lifeforms are directed, just without intent. Natural Selection directs the evolution of lifeforms.

I cannot swallow what you accept as proof, when most of it is not proof of anything beyond scientific guesswork.

No amount of real proof will get through to you if you're not even willing to try to understand.