The main merit of the ideas you propose is their source- so what do you expect?
-
This is a new section being rolled out to attract people interested in exploring the origins of the universe and the earth from a biblical perspective. Debate is encouraged and opposing viewpoints are welcome to post but certain rules must be followed. 1. No abusive tagging - if abusive tags are found - they will be deleted and disabled by the Admin team 2. No calling the biblical accounts a fable - fairy tale ect. This is a Christian site, so members that participate here must be respectful in their disagreement.
Water as a Problem for Abiogenesis
- Thread starter JudgeRightly
- Start date
Isn't that what the Origen of Species is - a religious text?
Evolution is not science. Science is something which can either accurately make specific predictions or can be replicated. Since evolution insists that any meaningful change takes at least a million years, it is impossible to replicate.
Evolution is as successful at predictions as the run-of-the-mill psychic. Didn't predict the CCP-virus. Didn't predict how it would spread. Didn't correctly predict flightless birds, etc.
So Evolution fails the only thing it could possibly be tested on - prediction.
Evolution is not a theory, it's not even a hypothesis since hypotheses have to be able to be tested. Evolution is a conjecture in the style of Aristotle. All that is demanded is that everyone agrees to it, whether the "understand" it or not.
Then leave. There are many forums online which heavily restrict name-calling. This one hasn't. Why did you come to this one?
A rational response. Silence would do it.
Defending using a fallacy won't help you, Chair.
Go look up "genetic fallacy."
It's a fallacy for a reason.
I've been on this forum for many years. Once upon a time, it was mostly polite and there were interesting discussions. It's turned into a self-congratulatory pub for people with extreme views, and a place to post absurd ideas.
In short- I am likely to leave soon. Then you guys can enjoy wallowing in the mud and patting each other on the back.
From the get-go, you weren’t polite. Go back and read your very first post.
If you're going to complain about how we run the site, then maybe it's time for you to take a break.
If you're going to posture about how you're thinking about leaving, then I'm going to temp ban you until you figure it out.
Come back when your ban is up. Or don't. Up to you.
musterion
Well-known member
Remember, he's firmly in the party of "2+2 = whatever we need it to equal at the moment."
It's been years since a Darwinist has issued a sensible challenge.
Including people who think nothing exploded to create everything, fish turned into people, babies aren't people and joebiden won the election.
Don't let the door hit you in the butt on your way out.
Then stop running from arguments where we discuss reasonable evidence. Stop getting sidelined by people who aren't.
Because you don't do this, it makes you look weak minded, and causes you to use moronic arguments.
And one more thing. Stop being a hypocrite. You toss as many insults implied or directly as anyone on this forum.
This is a prime example of you ignoring a discussion at the level you accept and triggering on arguments that insult you. Instead, if you were interested in truth, you would shrug off the insults (you can't expect to control strangers on the internet), and you would respond to the reasonable challenges to the popular ideas you support.
My guess is chair did exactly that which is why he stopped posting on this thread. Oops.
Chair was in timeout for threatening to leave and whinging about people being not nice.
Darwin was a racist. He thought aborigines were an evolutionary link between monkeys and humans.
How many biological parts are required to make one living cell? How can that single cell magically create itself if its parts are dissolved before the assembly is finished? How many different biological pieces must have been first randomly created before being randomly assembled with no help from God?
Francis Crick did breakthrough research on DNA, for which he received a Nobel Prize. He understood from his studies in microbiology that life could not possibly have originated on earth without God because to do so would have required violating many known scientific facts. So Crick came up with a different possibility, called the panspermia theory. That theory rests on the idea that aliens brought biological dust to earth on spaceships and sprinkled the dust into the earth's atmosphere. Somehow his theory was widely accepted and promoted by secularists with an aversion to God.
I'm back, but only in a very limited fashion.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Maybe JR can come up with a very limited ban - Deny you the use of a third of the letters on your keyboard?
There's actually an odd thing about bans. The details are available in the forum, or in the forum messages- but when banned, you don't have access to those.