The Vikes stand no chance at all, one of my ATS plays.
Try and sell....
Sure there is a God and we all evolved from little sea creatures....also.
Good luck.
"Cheerleader"
she was cute
about 6 foot tall
she had a boyfriend
he played football
she was a cheerleader
complete with pom poms
he was a QB
like to throw bombs
they'd meet up
at the school dance
end up in the backseat
his hands down her pants
Hahahahaha!!!!!!!!!
Can't tell the difference between existence and belief... LOL
That was stupid amigo.Can't tell the difference between existence and belief... LOL
Actually I have changed a couple of people's minds, by simply providing evidence, and showing how ridiculous and ignorant some of the criticisms of evolutionary theory are.We have how many billions of different opinions on all this?
While entertaining to watch this...."I'm the one with the real answer".......it never goes anywhere. Nobody ever..."ok you changed my mind"...hahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
One more time.
I/me....have no idea at all about how all this came about and neither does anyone else. So ya grab onto....theories...or religious beliefs none of which have ever been proven. Being it takes so many different factors to pull this off I think it's foolish to not see how it took a designer.
.
To think it all came about by chance......how could it?
I'm no Christian, I just see their belief in that designer as being a good idea, just not that designer and all the siliness we see in the Bible. Obviously just some author similar to Homer pulling the biggest hoax of all time, not unlike the Koran.
Many years after WWIII and the earth is nothing more than a desolate place full of gases and waste, a race of aliens arrive, while going thru the rubble they come across a charred Superman comic book. Need I go on?
There is no evidence of a designer. None.
That is why it is not a scientific idea. Given the lack of evidence for such an explanation, it is illogical to accept it. It is even further foolish to provide reasoning that is easily shown as a fallacy to support this explanation.
There are mountains of evidence supporting evolutionary theory.
Last edited by RandomGuy; 11-21-2014 at 12:50 PM. Reason: pasted wrong fallacy. apologies.
Nah.
Stupid is ignoring evidence, and not fully understanding a scientific theory before attempting to amateurishly debunk it.
Do you think you know enough about evolution to dismiss it as a theory?
Do you have any idea at all about how much info we have available to us concerning evolution? We all understand the theory of evolution, there is nothing complex about it. We all evolved from a lower life form, wow....complex.
If you have some need for others to agree with your opinions on this ....why? You do know there are also a ton of stuff out there debunking the theory of evolution....right? So I'm not the only one not buying it. You also must know that a vast majority of people do believe that God is responsible for all this....right?
If you need to believe in what you do, go for it, I like billions of others don't buy it...ok?
It's incredibly complex.
Way beyond your comprehension.
Do you think you understand evolution well enough to debunk it?
You don't.
That was my point.
You have never demonstrated anything but the most rudimentary understanding of the science or the theory itself, and have repeatedly stated inaccurate things in regards to the topic.The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias whereby unskilled individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly rating their ability much higher than is accurate. This bias is attributed to a metacognitive inability of the unskilled to recognize their inep ude. [1]
That you appear to think you know enough demonstrates that you are clearly unskilled.
That you retain the illusion that you know enough to make a judgment, simply places you rather low on that sliding scale.
How many ways can someone say.....only an idiot would think we came from a fish?
Do you think at all, do you possess an once of common sense? It apears ya don't. You honestly believe all living creatures have a common ancestor, are you really that far gone? Lizard scales magically turning into feathers.....hahahaha!!!!!!!!! The flea and the elephant with a common ancestor, hahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You might have some weird need to adhere to that sort of ...obvious...bull , nobody with a lick of sense is going to buy it.
Why ignore..
The Theory of Evolution is not a scientific law or a law of biology. A scientific law must be 100% correct. Failure to meet only one challenge proves the law is wrong. This web page will prove that the Theory of Evolution fails many challenges, not simply one. The Theory of Evolution will never become a law of science because it is wrought with errors. This is why it is called a theory, instead of a law.The process of natural selection is not an evolutionary process. The DNA in plants and animals allows selective breeding to achieve desired results. Dogs are a good example of selective breeding. The DNA in all dogs has many recessive traits. A desired trait can be produced in dogs by selecting dogs with a particular trait to produce offspring with that trait. This specialized selective breeding can continue for generation after generation until a breed of dog is developed. This is the same as the "survival of the fittest" theory of the evolutionists. Many different types of dogs can be developed this way, but they can never develop a cat by selectively breeding dogs. Natural selection can never extend outside of the DNA limit. DNA cannot be changed into a new species by natural selection. The same process of selective breeding is done with flowers, fruits, and vegetables. New variations of the species are possible, but a new species has never been developed by science. In fact, the most modern laboratories are unable to produce a left-hand protein as found in humans and animals. Evolutionist fail to admit that no species has ever been proven to have evolved in any way. Evolution is simply pie-in-the-sky conjecture without scientific proof.
That sort of information is all over the place, we are overwelmed with it. TONS...of it, why is that? Are you trying to tell me that ...ALL...of those like the above are wrong and a nut on a silly messgeboard has the real answer, why is it I don;t buy that?
Last edited by Avante; 11-22-2014 at 02:48 AM.
No end in sight....
Evolutionists say birds grew hollow bones for less weight in order to fly. How would a bird pass this long-term plan to the millions of generations in order to keep the lighter bone plan progressing? The idea that birds or anything else has million-generation evolutionary plans is childish. The evolutionary concept of growing a wing over millions of generations violates the very foundation of evolution, natural selection.Birds aren't the only species that proves the theory of natural selection to be wrong. The problem can be found in all species in one way or another. Take fish for example. We are told by evolutionists that a fish wiggled out of the sea onto dry land and became a land creature. So let's examine this idea. OK, a fish wiggles out of the sea and onto the land, but he can't breathe air. This could happen. Fish do stupid things at times. Whales keep swimming up onto the beach where they die. Do you think the whales are trying to expedite a multi-million generation plan to grow legs? That concept is stupid, but let's get back to the fish story. The gills of the fish are made for extracting oxygen from water, not from air. He chokes and gasps before flipping back into the safety of the water. Why would he do such a stupid thing? This wiggling and choking continues for millions of generation until the fish chokes less and less. His gills evolve into lungs so he can breathe air on dry land, but now he is at risk of drowning in the water. One day he simply stays out on the land and never goes back into the water. Now he is a lizard. If you believe this evolutionary nonsense, you need psychiatric help.Giant dinosaurs literally exploded onto the scene during the Triassic period. The fossil record (petrified bones found in the ground as at the Dinosaur National Park in Jensen, Utah, USA) shows no intermediate or transitional species. Where are the millions of years of fossils showing the transitional forms for dinosaurs? They do not not exist, because the dinosaurs did not evolve.
Avante with the
The thing is this mouse, we have a few here who were fed a load of crap and they don't want to accept that fact. It would mean all the time they spent with that fairy tale was a waste. So they...MUST...hang on as the rest of us deal with reality.
There is no way in we can trace all living creatures back to the same source, that is so stupid it's comical.
And.....what did the squid, whale, shark, turtle, swordfish evolve from?
Last edited by Avante; 11-22-2014 at 03:35 AM.
At what point do those of you with your heads stuck three feet up your ass over this, yank it out? How mich do you have to read and see before it hits you that you were given the wrong information?
I think it's pretty obvious that like sexulaity which was once considered a form of mental illness and women not being able to vote, things are changing as we become more intelligent about them. Who out there really thinks anyone will be trying to sell.....we all came from little fishies....50 years from now?
There was a time not so long ago where blacks couldn't attend the University of Mississippi, so what happened? Yep, we matured as a people beyond that barabaric way of thinking. Well this is no different, we are outgrowing this ridiculous....theory of evolution. First off look at how long it has remained just a theory, there is a reason for that....IT CAN'T BE PROVEN....because it never happened.
Ok I'm done with this, if you are simply unwilling to come up to speed and must....but I was taught......go for it. I prefer reality, how things really are. I was taught....I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United State of.............see things are constantly changing, when did Darwin come up with his bull ....we really haven't learned anything since then about this, yes we have so why not pay attention to it?
See ya~~~~~~~
Last edited by Avante; 11-22-2014 at 04:19 AM.
you didnt watch this video
you still don't know what "vast majority" means
you keep proving that
Wrong yet again, dude, are you ever right about anything? What would you like to know about that video?
what was its argument?
That is pretty complex, pretty heavy stuff there. I'll do mu best....ok?
There are 14 people on the bus, it runs off into a ditch full of water. 12 of them drown, yep...the vast majority.
How'd I do?
you dont get the point. you keep posting random videos and say "wow... all these scientists disagree" without realizing that its an insignificant portion of scientists.
its like my example with hail mary plays. you can post hundreds of videos of successful ones. does that prove that the hail mary is an effective, efficient play? no.
just stick to your "i'll never be convinced" talk. at least that way you admit you are ignorant and closed-minded. dont just spam youtube links and act like any of this actually disproves evolution in the slightest
That no it didn;t take eons of time to form things.
I noticed you get off on me while totally ignoring what is being said in those videos/articles, why is that? Do you really think with your limitated education you know more about this than the ones who do this for a living?
Stop with this stupid....random videos...ok, look at you you're just some random stranger in hiding, ok? All those videos are far more intelligent than your...."but I was taught"...ok guy? Those people do that for a living what do you do?
i haven't ignored anything. that video tries to use the half life of polonium as evidence that the rocks were young. polonium dating is never used and isn't considered to be credible. here are some PEER REVIEWED works that discredit this fellas ideas
http://paleo.cc/ce/halos.htm
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/po-halos/gentry.html
basically some guy recorded a video of himself saying "i have proof these rocks are young" without having his experimentation ever reviewed or critiqued. that simply doesn't fly in the scientific community.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
