Evil-ution

You cannot stay on topic. This is not a comparison of science vs religion. Quote where I said anything about religion, or 6000 years etc. You can't do it because I didn't other than to say that you elitists are hypocrites for putting one down as being crazy because it cannot be proved, yet wholeheartedly believing in the other which also cannot be proved.
I did not say you said anything about 6000 years, I suggested you will continually hide behind what you do not say, rather than what you DO say. Prove anything. Prove Adam and Eve. Prove the garden of Eden. Prove... absolutely anything. You wont, because you cannot. You will instead hide behind the opinion that because science cant prove everything, it cant prove anything, and thus is no better than faith which cant prove a single claim it makes.

 
I did not say you said anything about 6000 years, I suggested you will continually hide behind what you do not say, rather than what you DO say. Prove anything. Prove Adam and Eve. Prove the garden of Eden. Prove... absolutely anything. You wont, because you cannot.
I'm hiding behind that? Lol. I've said nothing about it. You're hiding behind it because you have no valid points. You can't tell me to prove God when I've never made a single claim about it. You NEED me to be arguing for religion so you have an argument... yet I haven't done that. So you don't have an argument. You're just grasping at straws as usual because you've been shown for what you are. A person does not have to believe in any religion to see that you evolutionists have a religion of your own in phony science.

You will instead hide behind the opinion that because science cant prove everything, it cant prove anything, and thus is no better than faith which cant prove a single claim it makes.
What is opinion? You all have made the claim that the theory of evolution is so proved and so valid etc. I made the claim that remains unchallenged that the theory of evolution must be believed on faith since it cannot be proved. It is NO DIFFERENT than religion, and you actually verified that with this ignorant post I just quoted. You drew the parallel yourself without knowing it. Now i know you will come back and lie about that and deny it, but it can't fool anyone. Unless (like you've done before when I nailed you like this) delete all of the evidence from the thread. Lol.
 
Common cold, HIV, delta 32 allele, and most incurable bacterial/viral infection. I know not 5 but those are BEYOND perfect examples of positive mutations. As for billions of people getting cancer, cancer is inevitable considering the shortening of telomeres after each cell replication. EVERYONE will get cancer sooner or later, so most of your arguments of cancer are irrelevant. And getting cancer can also be an evolutionary advantage, not for the individual, but of the species
Mutations within the human species (or a single species) Mutations in viruses only display positive mutations clearly because the infection rates are in the millions of transcription per infection. Negative mutations cause the virus not to be effective which basically makes it invisible to humans. Honestly though i'm starting to lose respect for your intelligence because you apparently are not able to grasp this simple concept. You're arguments about cancer are irrelevant. The view of cancer as an evolved trait has been studied and discredited. Selective force is external not in internal. Cancer is degeneration and usually deletion of genes, often nothing to do with telomere shortenings. as I said the vast majority of glioblastomas are cause by a transcription error during glial cellular mitosis. The fact that everyone gets it is due to the accumulated neutral mutations that predispose to cancer. Because they are neutral, they aren't selected against, and every time one of the billions of time mitosis occurs in the body it's like playing Russian roulette.

 
I'm hiding behind that? Lol. I've said nothing about it. You're hiding behind it because you have no valid points. You can't tell me to prove God when I've never made a single claim about it. You NEED me to be arguing for religion so you have an argument... yet I haven't done that. So you don't have an argument. You're just grasping at straws as usual because you've been shown for what you are. A person does not have to believe in any religion to see that you evolutionists have a religion of your own in phony science. What is opinion? You all have made the claim that the theory of evolution is so proved and so valid etc. I made the claim that remains unchallenged that the theory of evolution must be believed on faith since it cannot be proved. It is NO DIFFERENT than religion, and you actually verified that with this ignorant post I just quoted. You drew the parallel yourself without knowing it. Now i know you will come back and lie about that and deny it, but it can't fool anyone. Unless (like you've done before when I nailed you like this) delete all of the evidence from the thread. Lol.
So if the science community as a whole has said there is enough info for it to be a theory but not a law it is phony? Thus meaning all science would have to be phony. This theory has to abide by the same rules and guidelines of any other theory. So if you truly believe that this theory is a phony science then to you all science has to be phony.

Now before you go and starting claiming that I am all about evolution and it is my life way or something, it is not. I am actually open to what ever can be proven to me or brought about in a manner that has tangible evidence. So my religious or other beliefs have no barring on my feelings on the theory of evolution.

 
I'm hiding behind that? Lol. I've said nothing about it. You're hiding behind it because you have no valid points. You can't tell me to prove God when I've never made a single claim about it. You NEED me to be arguing for religion so you have an argument... yet I haven't done that. So you don't have an argument. You're just grasping at straws as usual because you've been shown for what you are.What is opinion? You all have made the claim that the theory of evolution is so proved and so valid etc. I made the claim that remains unchallenged that the theory of evolution must be believed on faith since it cannot be proved. It is NO DIFFERENT than religion, and you actually verified that with this ignorant post I just quoted. You drew the parallel yourself without knowing it. Now i know you will come back and lie about that and deny it, but it can't fool anyone. Unless (like you've done before when I nailed you like this) delete all of the evidence from the thread. Lol.
WTF are you talking about? When have I ever deleted 'evidence'? You've gone off the deep end now, bro. But since you want to make such a ridiculous and personal attack that I delete evidence, I will pull off the gloves here.

You claim science is no better than religion on the basis of believing in in it due to faith. Science does not demand faith, it demands proof, it demands testing, it demands something be called a 'theory' until is IS proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. Religion cannot make this claim. Far from it, it claims things that cannot be proven, it suggests no method to prove it, and relies simply on believing it because we are told to. Prove Adam and Eve. Prove the garden of Eden. Come even close to proving them as evolution has come. Where are fossils to prove the garden? There are fossils to claim creationism does not exist, so prove otherwise. You cant. All you can do is hope to claim religion holds the same intellectual ground as science because science cant prove absolutely everything you can imagine. The difference is, religion claims to prove nothing. No fossils, no scientists proving Jesus ascended to heaven as the holy ghost, no guy in a lab working with beakers and notes to prove Heaven. There is NOTHING to prove God or Heaven. But because science does not prove everything, to you it proves nothing.

Science does not require faith, as you claim it does. If you dont believe scientific theories, science welcomes you to pose your own theory, and prove it with verifiable evidence and duplication of the results. Religion holds no open interpretation of its claims, it relies solely on faith. So you can claim all you want that religion is intellectually equivalent to science, but that's simply not true to anyone but the horribly biased.

Go ahead, claim that creationism is in any way close to being as proven as evolution. Its not. No fossils in the ground to suggest adam ever existed, no carbon dating to suggest the bible's timeline is accurate, nothing. Not one single shred of evidence to suggest God Exists. The only thing you have to suggest God exists, is the holes where science has yet to fill in. As science continues to advance, religion will continue to recede. Fact. Religion, every day, feeds off the scraps science leaves at the table. Oh, science cant prove the big bang theory 100%, must be God instead. Oh, science hasn't found the missing link yet... must be God instead. Oh, science doesn't ahve all the answers proven, it must be intellectually equivalent to the theory (religion) that claims to have no need to prove anything.

Again, religion has some footholds in this debate, but you fail to see any of them, and cling to ones it fails at to science. More evidence that religion, in general, is playing a desperate game of catch-up to science in terms of what can and cannot be proven.

Lastly, since the gloves have come off, you rely on science every day, yet choose to ignore it when your faith sees fit. When you are sick, do you go to a doctor, or do you pray? Yes, to you God gave you doctors, God gave you medicine, gave you cures. You cant say why or how, you can only claim God did. Science says how. You go to a doctor because sense tells you its right, you ride an airplane because science has told you it will fly. Religion simply says that whatever science comes up with, religion will alter its claims to absorb into its own interpretation of the universe.

I have no valid points? Where have you even touched on my claim that animals roamed the Earth long before 'man' did? Where have you even touched on the idea that creationism does not account for what we now know is a much larger universe than this Earth? Fossils? Carbon dating? Actually address a few of my points before you discredit them all as invalid.

 
So if the science community as a whole has said there is enough info for it to be a theory but not a law it is phony? Thus meaning all science would have to be phony. This theory has to abide by the same rules and guidelines of any other theory. So if you truly believe that this theory is a phony science then to you all science has to be phony.
Now before you go and starting claiming that I am all about evolution and it is my life way or something, it is not. I am actually open to what ever can be proven to me or brought about in a manner that has tangible evidence. So my religious or other beliefs have no barring on my feelings on the theory of evolution.
There are plenty of scientists who disagree with the theory of evolution as stated by darwin. To assume it is accepted by everyone is folly. Your argument is based on the premise that even though they can't substantiate at all what they say, it must still be true because lots of people think it is. Lots of people also think we faked the moon landing. Lots of people think they have seen space ships, and abducted by them. Lots of people think they have seen the Lochness monster. They must also be true.....

 
There are plenty of scientists who disagree with the theory of evolution as stated by darwin. To assume it is accepted by everyone is folly. Your argument is based on the premise that even though they can't substantiate at all what they say, it must still be true because lots of people think it is. Lots of people also think we faked the moon landing. Lots of people think they have seen space ships, and abducted by them. Lots of people think they have seen the Lochness monster. They must also be true.....
Actually you are wrong. My standpoint is that science allows something to be a theory if it meets a few requirements. However, it will not be a law until it can be proven. Yes there are people in the science community that do not agree with all parts of any theory of evolution.

What is funny is that you are grasping at straws here to try and break down what anyone says. However, it will not work with the way you are attempting. There is nothing to break down here. I'm sorry that you feel the need to attempt to make the world see your flawed view point, but as it is everyone has their own idea on everything. So everything you think you are doing from an "intelligent" stand point is folly.

Perhaps if you were a science major and had any type of evidence to say evolution is 100% false then you would have a leg to stand on. However you can not prove nothing other then that you like to argue.

Another part of your reply that makes no since that you go into to random claims from basic people. We are discussing scientists and you are discussing the common man who has limited knowledge about what they see/hear/taste what ever. Why would you stretch out your position to include such an idea as that has nothing to do with the discussion at hand.

Another issue is that Darwin is not the only theory of evolution.

 
There are plenty of scientists who disagree with the theory of evolution as stated by darwin. To assume it is accepted by everyone is folly. Your argument is based on the premise that even though they can't substantiate at all what they say, it must still be true because lots of people think it is.
This is the entire crux of the fallacy that is science is no better than religion based on relying on faith. Again, evolution is defined as a theory in the scientific community because science relies on irrefutable testing and verification. Religion is not bound by any such sensible rules. Science welcomes alternative theories, in a search for truth. Religion says 'believe or else'. But because not every single scientist agrees, you claim this is some sort of proof that what none of those scientists have said (that God or Heaven exists) must be true.

Lets try this from another angle. Instead of trying to prove Gob to us by disproving Science, how about PROVING God to us on the merits of its own theory...? All religion seems to have to hold on to these days is, again, the table scraps science leaves for it. Oh okay, science has proven what the sun in the sky is, well then the bible was referring to a metaphor when mentioning the sun. But oh okay, something science hasnt proven yet must mean the bible is being literal and accurate. Im sure thats exactly what religious people 150 years ago said when it was suggested the Earth was not the center of the universe.

 
WTF are you talking about? When have I ever deleted 'evidence'? You've gone off the deep end now, bro. But since you want to make such a ridiculous and personal attack that I delete evidence, I will pull off the gloves here.
You did and you lied about it. It was in the sound deadener showdown thread where i exposed don aka rudy for what he is. You circled the wagons, I proved you wrong. You deleted the posts. It's all right there in that thread. It's not personal, it's just who you are. You became mod and in an effort to not get banned everyone circle jerks you but you think you're the utmost authority on everything. You think you're much smarter than you actually are, and with these posts, you are arguing me based on something I have not said... because you assume that's what i believe. Your arrogance is unparalleled. Pull those gloves off. Dollars to donuts in the rest of this post, it will be the same irrelevant drivel.
You claim science is no better than religion on the basis of believing in in it due to faith. Science does not demand faith, it demands proof, it demands testing, it demands something be called a 'theory' until is IS proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.
These sentences were the only part of your reply that is even somewhat relevant. Science is supposed to demand proof. Instead, you have a theory from darwin, and since then a bunch of scientists trying to find evidence to support this theory. Science is supposed to work the other way. Things are supposed to be observed that lead to a conclusion. darwin came up with his theory prior to DNA and RNA were able to be observed, thus proving that the theory was created prior to any way to support it. Don't get all self righteous thinking you're dropping some big knowledge bomb. Apply what you're saying to your own point of view and you'll realize what you believe DOES require faith. It hasn't been proved. There actually is nothing there to even give it reasonable credibility. It's circumstantial evidence that people say can lead to only 1 conclusion, when in fact there is not enough data to point it at any conclusion at all. Science is NOT about attempting to draw conclusions with too little data and coming up with a theory and then saying "that must be right because it's a theory and we all know nothing can ever be proved (if that were true why even have science? lol)" You guys talk all over yourselves thinking you're vastly superior beings, yet you don't realize how contradictory what you're saying is.

Religion cannot make this claim. Far from it, it claims things that cannot be proven, it suggests no method to prove it, and relies simply on believing it because we are told to.
You just told me that the theory of evolution cannot be proved. It is a theory and because of that it's as good as it gets etc yet you insist it is true. That is faith pal. No matter how you try to spin it... it is faith. You believe something without having any proof. FAITH.

Prove Adam and Eve. Prove the garden of Eden. Come even close to proving them as evolution has come. Where are fossils to proven the garden? There are fossils to claim creationism does not exist, so prove otherwise. You cant. All you can do is hope to claim religion holds the same intellectual ground as science because science cant prove absolutely everything you can imagine. The difference is, religion claims to prove nothing. No fossils, no scientists proving Jesus ascended to heaven as the holy ghost, no guy in a lab working with beakers and notes to prove Heaven. There is NOTHING to prove God or Heaven. But because science does not prove everything, to you it proves nothing.
I haven't argued any of this, so I don't have to prove it. You're going out of your way to frame my argument around proving religion, when I've never argued religion at all. It's clear this is your attempt to take the focus off of the fact that you cannot provide any sort of proof of evolution, yet you believe it based on faith.

Science does not require faith, as you claim it does. If you dont believe scientific theories, science welcomes you to pose your own theory, and prove it with verifiable evidence and duplication of the results. Religion holds no open interpretation of its claims, it relies solely on faith. So you can claim all you want that religion is intellectually equivalent to science, but that's simply not true to anyone but the horribly biased.
To believe evolution without anything there to show you it's real, it's faith... You have FAILED to show how it is different than religion. I am in here showing how your faith is absurd and you're slandering me saying I'm defending religion, when really I'm in here knocking yours. So how does science welcome opposition? There was a link posted showing a scientist just trashing Christians but moreso anyone who doesn't believe in evolution. That is not welcoming an opposing view.

Go ahead, claim that creationism is in any way close to being as proven as evolution. Its not. No fossils in the ground ti suggest adam ever suggested, no carbon dating to suggest the bible's timeline is accurate, nothing. Not one single shred of evidence to suggest God Exists. The only thing you have to suggest God exists, is the holes where science has yet to hill in. Religion is, every day, feeds off the scraps science leaves at the table. Oh, science cant prove the big bang theory 100%, must be God instead. Oh, science hasn't found the missing link yet... must be God instead. Oh, science doesn't ahve all the answers proven, it must be intellectually equivalent to the theory (religion) that claims to have no need to prove anything.
I don't have to prove anything about creationism because I haven't argued it. Again, you made it up so you'd have SOMETHING to argue. All I can tell you is evolution isn't proved at all. It was a theory developed before the science existed to observe the circumstantial evidence that scientists tout as compelling. Clearly showing the conclusion was drawn and then evidence was gathered to support it. This is all true and cannot be disputed, yet everyone will because I'm attacking their religion and they are not open to other ideas.
Again, religion has some footholds in this debate, but you fail to see any of them, and cling to ones it fails at to science. More evidence that religion, in general, is playing a desperate game of catch-up to science in terms of what can and cannot be proven.
Totally irrelevant. The failures of science aren't ok just because you wish I was arguing for some religion. lol

 

---------- Post added at 01:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:04 PM ----------

 

This is the entire crux of the fallacy that is science is no better than religion based on relying on faith. Again, evolution is defined as a theory in the scientific community because science relies on irrefutable testing and verification. Religion is not bound by any such sensible rules. Science welcomes alternative theories, in a search for truth. Religion says 'believe or else'. But because not every single scientist agrees, you claim this is some sort of proof that what none of those scientists have said (that God or Heaven exists) must be true.
Lets try this from another angle. Instead of trying to prove Gob to us by disproving Science, how about PROVING God to us on the merits of its own theory...? All religion seems to have to hold on to these days is, again, the table scraps science leaves for it. Oh okay, science has proven what the sun in the sky is, well then the bible was referring to a metaphor when mentioning the sun. But oh okay, something science hasnt proven yet must mean the bible is being literal and accurate. Im sure thats exactly what religious people 150 years ago said when it was suggested the Earth was not the center of the universe.
Not a shred of this post was relevant.

 
You did and you lied about it. It was in the sound deadener showdown thread where i exposed don aka rudy for what he is. You circled the wagons, I proved you wrong. You deleted the posts. It's all right there in that thread. It's not personal, it's just who you are. You became mod and in an effort to not get banned everyone circle jerks you but you think you're the utmost authority on everything. You think you're much smarter than you actually are, and with these posts, you are arguing me based on something I have not said... because you assume that's what i believe. Your arrogance is unparalleled. Pull those gloves off. Dollars to donuts in the rest of this post, it will be the same irrelevant drivel.
I'll be your huckleberry... what evidence in the SDS thread did you prove, and I deleted? Go ahead, post up the data you claim I deleted. I wont delete one single solitary word you post here. Do it, I dare you to try. I have NEVER deleted any content from this forum based on saving face for myself or anyone else. When Im wrong, I admit it. What I dont do is sit idly by while someone like you makes wild and ridiculous claims like this. So again, post up that oh so scary data Im too frightened to allow to be posted on this site. LOL!!!!!!!!!!

 
I'll be your huckleberry... what evidence in the SDS thread did you prove, and I deleted? Go ahead, post up the data you claim I deleted. I wont delete one single solitary word you post here. Do it, I dare you to try. I have NEVER deleted any content from this forum based on saving face for myself or anyone else. When Im wrong, I admit it. What I dont do is sit idly by while someone like you makes wild and ridiculous claims like this. So again, post up that oh so scary data Im too frightened to allow to be posted on this site. LOL!!!!!!!!!!
You deleted it. I'm not admin. I can't go get it. Are you really this dense?

 
These sentences were the only part of your reply that is even somewhat relevant. Science is supposed to demand proof. Instead, you have a theory from darwin, and since then a bunch of scientists trying to find evidence to support this theory. Science is supposed to work the other way. Things are supposed to be observed that lead to a conclusion. darwin came up with his theory prior to DNA and RNA were able to be observed, thus proving that the theory was created prior to any way to support it. Don't get all self righteous thinking you're dropping some big knowledge bomb. Apply what you're saying to your own point of view and you'll realize what you believe DOES require faith. It hasn't been proved. There actually is nothing there to even give it reasonable credibility. It's circumstantial evidence that people say can lead to only 1 conclusion, when in fact there is not enough data to point it at any conclusion at all. Science is NOT about attempting to draw conclusions with too little data and coming up with a theory and then saying "that must be right because it's a theory and we all know nothing can ever be proved (if that were true why even have science? lol)" You guys talk all over yourselves thinking you're vastly superior beings, yet you don't realize how contradictory what you're saying is.
You make zero sense. You dont pose a scientific theory after you've proven it. Your grasp of scientific testing seems remarkably lacking.

 
Furthermore, want proof the earth is older than 6000 years?

Go outside and look at the stars. You can see stars that are 1o million light years away.

News Flash, to see something 10 million light years away it has to have been there at least 10 million years

 
Furthermore, want proof the earth is older than 6000 years?
Go outside and look at the stars. You can see stars that are 1o million light years away.

News Flash, to see something 10 million light years away it has to have been there at least 10 million years
Stop it, you know we don't like to have any kind of common since here. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/swordfight.gif.e3de6069f3ffe402fc3ab4a827365101.gif

 
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
6,518
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