Evil-ution

You didn't see the past tense in the statement?
Well, I am in this thread, meaning that I was in it in the past...

 

I explained it already. No squirming necessary. Your fire stoker must be damaged. You are not good at this.
I didn't catch it. Let me "pull an ecrack" and force you to find it for me otherwise I'll call you liar and say you have no proof for your argument.

 
I'm referring to the specific points being argued, like science relying on as much faith as religion, evolution having NO proof to back it up, all the BS lying and playing stupid with the audioholic stuff, and others that are probably too worthless to remember. The dude's a joke, and he doesn't even see it.
You do realize putting someone down instead of proving them wrong is a logical fallacy and actually means you lose. I only put people down in a response to their personal attacks... never use it AS the argument as you just did.

 
This entire statement is based on your belief that you are unquestionably right. That is the same as Bible beaters. Neither side can prove what they say.
The issue is that evolution IS sufficiently proven and you are basically using the uncertainty principle to try to discredit it. Frankly, give one, JUST one at a time please (lets keep this orderly) piece of evidence that contradicts evolution and I promise you I'll be able to show the reason it's not credible. All the evidence you need to see that it does happen I've already given you. Here the main points are again.

#1. Random mutations always occur. Proven unequivocally.

#2. Mutations are positive negative or neutral based on their effect on the organisms suitability for reproduction in it's environment. Proven

#3. Negative mutations tend to be eliminated via selection. Again Proven.

#4. Positive mutations tend to remain in the population. Proven

#5. Because all living things are coded for by a combination of the same 4 chemicals. Anything has the possibility to change into anything by the re-combination and addition or subtraction of genetic information. Again PRROOOOVEN

Thus, in your opinion. Something that SHOULD happen. IE (If you release a ball in the air, it will fall.), Won't happen for some reason. And you can articulate no solid reason that it would not.

You are a nut job alarmist and you have nothing meaningful to contribute. Come see me when you get brain cancer though.

We DO know that gas guzzlers aren't hurting anything. We know global warming is phony science as proved by the hacked emails of the climate research center in east anglia. We know it was created for political reasons. We know electric cars get their energy from the power grid which operates on fossil fuels and there are several efficiency losses when power is converted. So none of the things you said here are actually smarter.

 
Well, I am in this thread, meaning that I was in it in the past...

I didn't catch it. Let me "pull an ecrack" and force you to find it for me otherwise I'll call you liar and say you have no proof for your argument.
That would be audioholic with the link to the other thread. You got confused.

 
You really can't handle some one not agreeing with you lol. Sure am going to doubt or at least not follow blindly behind some one who post ''proof'' on a, at current times, unprovable scenario. I believe theory is a synonym for ''educated guess'' In my realm of understanding a guess is not a positive unarguable fact. Just like I don't believe you make 7 figures unless you count the 2 after the decimal point.
I don't make that much yet lol, thats a plan. Surgeon Salary

I'm positing that under your acceptable definition of proof in this area, you would believe nothing. Your standard is biased. It is more than reasonably proven.

 
You do realize putting someone down instead of proving them wrong is a logical fallacy and actually means you lose. I only put people down in a response to their personal attacks... never use it AS the argument as you just did.
What exactly was I arguing in that post? I was making statments and opinions, none of which had anything to do with any kind of argument.

 
The issue is that evolution IS sufficiently proven and you are basically using the uncertainty principle to try to discredit it. Frankly, give one, JUST one at a time please (lets keep this orderly) piece of evidence that contradicts evolution and I promise you I'll be able to show the reason it's not credible. All the evidence you need to see that it does happen I've already given you. Here the main points are again.#1. Random mutations always occur. Proven unequivocally.

#2. Mutations are positive negative or neutral based on their effect on the organisms suitability for reproduction in it's environment. Proven

#3. Negative mutations tend to be eliminated via selection. Again Proven.

#4. Positive mutations tend to remain in the population. Proven

#5. Because all living things are coded for by a combination of the same 4 chemicals. Anything has the possibility to change into anything by the re-combination and addition or subtraction of genetic information. Again PRROOOOVEN

Thus, in your opinion. Something that SHOULD happen. IE (If you release a ball in the air, it will fall.), Won't happen for some reason. And you can articulate no solid reason that it would not.
Mutations are mistakes in the genetic copying process. They effect one nucleotide base at a time and are called point mutations. Once in every 10,000 to 100,000 copies there is a mistake made. Our bodies have a compare – correct process that is very efficient. In fact it is 1016 times better than the best computer code, but once in every 1,000,000,000 or 10,000,000,000 copies a mutation “gets out” so to speak. That is equal to a professional typist making a mistake in 50,000,000 pages of typescript. You see mutations are predominately bad and the cell tries to make sure they don’t happen.

The Neo-Darwinists made random mutations the engine of evolution. They claim that many very small mutations are the basis of the “goo to you” hypothesis of evolution. For mutations to be the driver of the massive amount of information there must be two things true of those mutations.

1. The mutations must be positive and allow the organism to procreate and pass them on.

2. The mutations must add information to the genome of the organism.

To date no evolutionist has pointed out such a mutation and if they exist they must be exceedingly rare.

The smallness of the point mutation is also in question. Dawkins seems to think that the mutation can be as small as needed to make the hypothesis work, but it appears that one nucleotide base is as small as you can get. So a positive mutation cannot add but a single bit of information to the genome or one nucleotide’s worth. But is that enough? And if that truly does occur will natural selection grab and go with it?

You are a nut job alarmist and you have nothing meaningful to contribute. Come see me when you get brain cancer though.We DO know that gas guzzlers aren't hurting anything. We know global warming is phony science as proved by the hacked emails of the climate research center in east anglia. We know it was created for political reasons. We know electric cars get their energy from the power grid which operates on fossil fuels and there are several efficiency losses when power is converted. So none of the things you said here are actually smarter.
 

You simply used a putdown to try to prove your point.

 
Cotjones, hopefully you can see the posts I've made before they get lost in this mess. I wanted only to lay out some facts of how the Bible and science agree instead of arguing beliefs. There's not much more reason to continue to do so as this is just a mess now but I have enjoyed what little sanity was present here.

 
The Genesis account opens with the simple, powerful statement: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” (Genesis 1:1) Bible scholars agree that this verse describes an action separate from the creative days recounted from verse*3 onward. The implication is profound. According to the Bible’s opening statement, the universe, including our planet Earth, was in existence for an indefinite time before the creative days began.Geologists estimate that the earth is approximately 4*billion years old, and astronomers calculate that the universe may be as much as 15*billion years old. Do these findings—or their potential future refinements—contradict Genesis 1:1? No. The Bible does not specify the actual age of “the heavens and the earth.” Science does not disprove the Biblical text.
Again, this is not correct logic. This means that the heavens and the earth were the first things in existence. lets just post the whole first 6 days here:

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

6 And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” 7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.

9 And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good.

11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.

14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

20 And God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky.” 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living thing with which the water teems and that moves about in it, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.” 23 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.

24 And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the creatures that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its kind.” And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

27 So God created mankind in his own image,

in the image of God he created them;

male and female he created them.

28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”

29 Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.

31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.
This book literally says that light existed before the sun moon and stars which were created on the fourth day (after plants.) That totally makes 0% sense. And if the 7 days of creation did occur sequentially ~6000ya. By the biblical account it would be impossible for us to see most of the stars we see.

 
Activity
No one is currently typing a reply...

About this thread

cotjones

10+ year member
CarAudio.com Veteran
Thread starter
cotjones
Joined
Location
Wilmington, NC
Start date
Participants
Who Replied
Replies
517
Views
6,630
Last reply date
Last reply from
MANTI5
IMG_20260516_193114554_HDR.jpg

sherbanater

    May 16, 2026
  • 0
  • 0
IMG_20260516_192955471_HDR.jpg

sherbanater

    May 16, 2026
  • 0
  • 0

New threads

Top