This shows you that atheism and evolution retards people

[christians4jews]

1).No hovind has debated many top professors of different universities, and destroyed them all, they are on on video, and the audience all sided with hovind. These were not hand picked audiences, these were secular universities that promote the fairy tale of evolution. I can show you fossils that have ben dated over 50 millions year old of scorpions, turtles, dragon flies lizzards etc and they look identical, no different to what they do today. please stop using the fossill record rubystars, do us all a favour, because its makes you look extremely foolish.

2)
How can you know more about something that doesnt exist??? if thats your claim to fame over me, then good luck to you. But i hate to break it to you, its nothing to brag about.

3) So why are there no half apes half mean still alive???ill let lee strobal school you on this one..



4) you simply described how a bomberdeer beatle works, lmao, that was shoddy ruby, and avoided my question.

5) As for that picture of the bird and the dinosaur, i can only assume you think i have iq of less than 40 with that. I wouldnt even show a 3 year old to try and explain evolution, that was shocking rubystars. Im sorry, you have failed dramtically. Comprehensively failed at convincing me. i think both you and KWRBT should give up on this thread, discuss topics you actually understand and exist, and quit making folls of yourself. As soon you to will be claiming that tobacco shares a common ancestor with humans.

out of 10 ruby, 1, and thats for grammar.

[FreedomFighter08]

*Warning, this has a christian twinge to it, so be warned before watching*

This vid proves that just like everytime i debate a atheist/evoliutionist, they end up embarasing themselves.

The difference between science and religion is that religion is based on authority and fear while science is based on reason, research, and understanding. This is why science always wins.

[christians4jews]

*Warning, this has a christian twinge to it, so be warned before watching*

This vid proves that just like everytime i debate a atheist/evoliutionist, they end up embarasing themselves.

The difference between science and religion is that religion is based on authority and fear while science is based on reason, research, and understanding. This is why science always wins.

your first statement has no evidence to support it, you second one is simply wrong. How can sciecne have reason when top scietists and prosessors are losing their jobs for not belieivng in the fairy tale of evolution.

That top israeli scietists is more qualified than everyone of us on this forum, including you freedom fighter. yet he got sacked the other day for saying evolution is a load of crap. Thats hardly a fair and reasoned atmosphere the scientific world have got.

Even as i type, in top school science text books they teach the peppered moth "proves" evolution.  When that got publically debunked back in 1999, peppered moths didnt even live on tree trunks....Again another example of atheists pushing their religion.

So believe in what you want, but never ever dare say infront of me on this forum that science cumminity is "reasoned". look at what its done to rubystars and KWRBT brains to dbunk your incorrect statement..

[FreedomFighter08]

You don't understand. Of course some people are pushing an "atheist religion", but pure science is research, while pure religion is authority. What you don't get is that YOU are also pushing your religion on everybody. Don't believe me? Look how Christians have limited stem cell research and preached Christian ideas to people who just don't care.

We should try to learn as much as we can, but until you drop your books and start thinking with an open mind, you will not truly be free. You have already picked a side so there is no reason to debate you because you fear religion more than you desire freedom.

[Rubystars]

Thanks C4J. I think this is the most I can expect, so I'll go ahead and respond now.

1).No hovind has debated many top professors of different universities, and destroyed them all, they are on on video, and the audience all sided with hovind. These were not hand picked audiences, these were secular universities that promote the fairy tale of evolution. I can show you fossils that have ben dated over 50 millions year old of scorpions, turtles, dragon flies lizzards etc and they look identical, no different to what they do today. please stop using the fossill record rubystars, do us all a favour, because its makes you look extremely foolish.

It's easy to convince an audience if you're more skilled at public speaking, know how to use humor, set up straw men that the audience won't realize are straw men, etc. The scientists by comparison have an almost monumental task in trying to both educate the audience AND respond to Hovind's points, all while having less rhetorical skill. Just because you "win" a live debate doesn't make you right.

One real problem I have with Hovind is that he outright uses falsehoods in order to "win" those debates. He never actually refutes any of the evidence for evolution effectively. Instead he tries to make evolution look silly by claiming it says we came from rocks. Nobody is going to believe we came from rocks!

2)How can you know more about something that doesnt exist??? if thats your claim to fame over me, then good luck to you. But i hate to break it to you, its nothing to brag about.

If you're going to argue against something, you need to have a good idea of what you're arguing against. Most creationists I've debated with have a very, very poor understanding of what evolution even is, or how it works.

Let me use an analogy. If a democrat criticizes the pro-life position, and says something ridiculous like "You want women to die in back alleys!" is that accurate? No, nobody on the pro-life side wants women to die in back alleys. However, they might go around saying that pro-lifers are all about killing women in back alleys. Of course people who hear this will be against the pro-life position, they might even win debates against pro-lifers with that. It's not even true. If they don't know what the pro-life position is, then they can't begin to argue against it in any real way without lying.

3) So why are there no half apes half mean still alive???ill let lee strobal school you on this one..

There were other hominids that lived at the same time as modern human beings, but they went extinct. Earlier hominids than that evolved into us or went extinct.

My response to the video's points:
1. Macroevolution and microevolution are the same process. The only difference is how much change has happened, a little, or a lot.

2. Future discoveries did bear out Darwin's basic theory (and expanded upon it).

3. Bats and whales both share the same basic mammalian skelton and mammalian characteristics. There are not too many fossil transitionals of bats because they are small and don't preserve well, but there are a lot of whale transitionals, and there are also early mammal remains which could have been their common ancestor (and ours).

4. I really have no idea why he thinks that list of universities that have professors that are against evolution is relevant. He never even said what their credentials are. They could be professors of physics, or theology.

5. If it's not a faith versus science issue, but a science versus science issue, then creationists really need to come up with some serious scientific arguments against evolution.

4) you simply described how a bomberdeer beatle works, lmao, that was shoddy ruby, and avoided my question.

I gave you 15 steps explaining how the bombadier beetle could have evolved its mechanism gradually, and not all at once. Please read it again more slowly and thoroughly. "Invagination" means like forming a pocket, a folding in.

5) As for that picture of the bird and the dinosaur, i can only assume you think i have iq of less than 40 with that.

I was trying to show you that the skeletons look very much the same, just slightly modified. There are dinosaur skeletons that look much more similar to the chicken than the T-Rex though, but I figured since its such an iconic dinosaur, I might as well use that one, since its similar enough to make the point.

I wouldnt even show a 3 year old to try and explain evolution, that was shocking rubystars. Im sorry, you have failed dramtically. Comprehensively failed at convincing me.

What can I show you that would be more convincing?

i think both you and KWRBT should give up on this thread, discuss topics you actually understand and exist, and quit making folls of yourself. As soon you to will be claiming that tobacco shares a common ancestor with humans.

You knew I was going to say this. Here goes, yes tobacco shares a common ancestor with humans.

out of 10 ruby, 1, and thats for grammar.

At least I got that compliment

[christians4jews]

You don't understand. Of course some people are pushing an "atheist religion", but pure science is research, while pure religion is authority. What you don't get is that YOU are also pushing your religion on everybody. Don't believe me? Look how Christians have limited stem cell research and preached Christian ideas to people who just don't care.

We should try to learn as much as we can, but until you drop your books and start thinking with an open mind, you will not truly be free. You have already picked a side so there is no reason to debate you because you fear religion more than you desire freedom.

i use to be an atheist up to the age of 23(well i became atheist at age 15/16), so your essay just got blown completely out of the water. You are making me out to be a guy whos literally never lived around atheists, etc. You need to leanr to think yourself if you didnt know that creationists are 90 percet of people that made the great scietific discoveries, from pascal to issac newton, all believed in the bible, or did they hold science back.

BTW im not pushing my religion at all. I am simply showing atheism and evolution to be what it truely is, a fraud.

Hopefully you will use reason and logic to admit i am right, and step away from the debating stage against me.

cheers.

[elsasdream]

my Bf is a psychologist and he tells me that a large number of physicians are religious or at least believe in some form of higher power. As Drs are clearly scientists doesnt that blow your whole science = atheist argument out of the water???

[christians4jews]

You don't understand. Of course some people are pushing an "atheist religion", but pure science is research, while pure religion is authority. What you don't get is that YOU are also pushing your religion on everybody. Don't believe me? Look how Christians have limited stem cell research and preached Christian ideas to people who just don't care.

We should try to learn as much as we can, but until you drop your books and start thinking with an open mind, you will not truly be free. You have already picked a side so there is no reason to debate you because you fear religion more than you desire freedom.

i use to be an atheist up to the age of 23(well i became atheist at age 15/16), so your essay just got blown completely out of the water. You are making me out to be a guy whos literally never lived around atheists, etc. You need to leanr to think yourself if you didnt know that creationists are 90 percet of people that made the great scietific discoveries, from pascal to issac newton, all believed in the bible, or did they hold science back.

BTW im not pushing my religion at all. I am simply showing atheism and evolution to be what it truely is, a fraud.

Hopefully you will use reason and logic to admit i am right, and step away from the debating stage against me.

cheers.

firstly you have completely bulshitted about hovind. I have seen many of his debates and he occasionally mentions the rain onto rocks thing a few times. bUt you make out thats all he says. I dont think YOU understand what hovinds tryingt to say. He simply puts what atheists believe in non science jargon. And they do believe we came from rain onto rocks. He even shows science texts books and quotes them, to prove his points. So if you feel hes misquoting your religion then have beef with the text books that are indoctrinating our children, not hovind. I think hovinds wrong on alot of things, but he also right on alot of things. He is spot on about israel, islam, abortion etc, the things hes wrong on,are basically hes taken the bible literaly to literally. Which i will happily admit.

But this leads me onto my second point, i predicted you would say the classic "oh they dont understand evolution" jargon. I knew you would say that, i even predicted you would say that a few posts back, and guess what, i was right. the bible/torah is a brilliant book because it can be understood eve by people who are not particularly academic. They may not get all of the deeper meanings of the bible, but they will get the fundemental teachings of adam and even, noahs ark etc.

But when you have to claim that college students, whom are all probably have average/above average iq, to "not understand the religion of evolution" then im afriad its game over for you rubystars.

Look you been destroyed here in this debate, hopefully youll learn from it and move on, i think both you and KWRBT are great people and posters. That wil hopefully agree that you been conned into the myth of evolution.

If one day you actually do have testable and observalbe and repeatable evidence then i will be the first to admit to it, but i bet my house that that day will never come...keep trying though.

[christians4jews]

my Bf is a psychologist and he tells me that a large number of physicians are religious or at least believe in some form of higher power. As Drs are clearly scientists doesnt that blow your whole science = atheist argument out of the water???

it would do if i claimed atheism and evolution were one of the same thing, but i didnt, so my arguement holds perfectly. Good effort though.

[Rubystars]

firstly you have completely bulshitted about hovind. I have seen many of his debates and he occasionally mentions the rain onto rocks thing a few times. bUt you make out thats all he says. I dont think YOU understand what hovinds tryingt to say. He simply puts what atheists believe in non science jargon. And they do believe we came from rain onto rocks. He even shows science texts books and quotes them, to prove his points.

There are many theories about how abiogenesis occurred (the origin of life), but the origin of life has nothing to do with evolution. Evolution deals with how the first life diversified into all the life that has ever been. It doesn't deal with how life got there in the first place.

I think what he might be referring to is how certain things essential to forming the first life, like certain proteins, etc. may have formed through natural processes. However the way he says it makes it sound like he's claiming that a rock is our ancestor. Nobody claims that.

So if you feel hes misquoting your religion then have beef with the text books that are indoctrinating our children, not hovind.

My religion is Christianity. He twists and misquotes the textbooks.

I think hovinds wrong on alot of things, but he also right on alot of things. He is spot on about israel, islam, abortion etc, the things hes wrong on,are basically hes taken the bible literaly to literally. Which i will happily admit.

All of which is irrelevant to whether evolution is supported by the evidence. If he's a nice guy, then great, but that doesn't make him right about this.

But this leads me onto my second point, i predicted you would say the classic "oh they dont understand evolution" jargon. I knew you would say that, i even predicted you would say that a few posts back, and guess what, i was right. the bible/torah is a brilliant book because it can be understood eve by people who are not particularly academic. They may not get all of the deeper meanings of the bible, but they will get the fundemental teachings of adam and even, noahs ark etc.

But when you have to claim that college students, whom are all probably have average/above average iq, to "not understand the religion of evolution" then im afriad its game over for you rubystars.

If they never got any training in evolution, how can they understand it? You should know what you're arguing against in order to effectively argue against it.

Look you been destroyed here in this debate, hopefully youll learn from it and move on, i think both you and KWRBT are great people and posters. That wil hopefully agree that you been conned into the myth of evolution.

I very much disagree that either KWRBT or I have been "destroyed" in this thread. If you want to agree to disagree, and are tired of debating, then just say so. No need to put in a jab at us.

If one day you actually do have testable and observalbe and repeatable evidence then i will be the first to admit to it, but i bet my house that that day will never come...keep trying though.

I will ask one more time: what kind of evidence would convince you?

[elsasdream]

http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/lenski.html

[Chai]

I have been thinking alot about this Evolution does seem possible with finding by archeologists , yet I do see creatures that defy this, Im not going to get into it because I think the real issue should be time. I think IT has slowed down became there are temporal anomalies in the center of the universe; all the while the universe is expanding and it should not be. ol AL Einstein was very surprised and had kept the expanding theory  to himself for various odd reasons.

So the Answer is Time is not a constant. You cant go in time to prove that wrong lol so we will never know.

What do you think Dan?

Chai, do mean that time could be contracting and expanding? That there is a temporal flux and perhaps the way we perceive time and the ultimate reality may not be the same? How do you see this theory tying in with evolution?

Good question

This image my illustrate what im saying with time not a constant. I believe time doe fluctuate. King David said it best 1000 years is a day in gods eyes and this 1000 years for G-d is 1000^9x  I believe that was what kind David was trying to convey in his message.

 http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/upload/2009/07/the_last_100_years_1979_and_in/history-of-the-universe.gif

and

http://www.spacescan.org/entry/how-has-our-universe-evolved-existing-model-confronted/

 Who here is to say time has not slowed down and time time line for evolution is not what is seems. (Gods slight of hand?)

The question if we evolved from what anthropologists say is a primitive one, compared to the question how did the universe via space time evolve .

As you can see universe has epochs too!  This is more important to me.

If we can get a better understanding of this on the macro level then the micro level being the archaeologists view of the evolution can be better explained.

YES ,Time can bend , slow down  and accelerate  , Therefore the bones we have dated may be incorrect and therefore confuse the understanding on how the earth has changed or "evolved" how ever you want to call it.

Isnt how the universe unfolded a hell of alot more interesting because it deals with so many more variables , but with a singular understanding of anthropology or archeology we are missing a pice of the puzzle , a big pice and you are all arguing on what this  jigsaqw  puzzle is with out the box.
It is like studying micro economics without understanding macroeconomics

Im saying "we dont know" and you cant prove it with out more study and you must keep in your head  macro evolution  has a possibility incorrect.  As a science that is not really a science it seems to really try to push its theory as fact , thats what I dont like. One should question everything
 There are only 2 things im pretty sure of.
There is a G-d.

Islam is bad.

[Dr. Dan]

c4j, evolution doesn't indicate that humans came from apes.  Evolution states that humans and apes came from a similar ancestor that probably looked like a mini monkey mouse called a shrew.

C4J, evolution claims that all living things came from one source called prokaryotes.  Bacteria are a type of prokaryote..and where do scientists hypothesize prokaryotes came from?  From complex organic molecules combining together to form the basic blocks of cells..and what are organic molecules...basically the dust of the earth combined with water, fire, and whatever else you can think of...

Gd created man from the dust of the ground and breathed in him life....and guess what?  The very organic molecules that come from dust is essentially where we came from as well as other living things...However, Gd made us much more unique and here we are.

The bible does not contradict science..it is our lack of understanding of what the Bible says that makes us feel science contradicts it.

You, my friend, are stuck in the dark ages with this stubborn attitude...You are making claims which are false and lies and misunderstandings of the Bible.

DENIAL of what evidence, we all agree the fossil recods dont show evidence for evolution, atheists and evolutions admit this.

Chromosomes got schooled by kent hovind, so well move on from that...

Back pains evidence???wtf, please tell me i misread that???


There is NO observable and testable evidence that humans came from apes(decendants), none. The best evidence for a missing link thus far goes to KWRBT and rubystars for trying to insult my intelligence by putting up quite laughable evidence....


if evolution was a muderer in court and KWRBT and Ruby provided that evidence then it would be a white wash and the judge would laugh you both out of court.

[Dr. Dan]

*Warning, this has a christian twinge to it, so be warned before watching*

This vid proves that just like everytime i debate a atheist/evoliutionist, they end up embarasing themselves.

The difference between science and religion is that religion is based on authority and fear while science is based on reason, research, and understanding. This is why science always wins.

Not all of religion is based on authority and fear.. Judaism is also based on reason, logic and science...what's flawed is how we think we understand Judaism.  Science does not always win.

[Dr. Dan]

You don't understand. Of course some people are pushing an "atheist religion", but pure science is research, while pure religion is authority. What you don't get is that YOU are also pushing your religion on everybody. Don't believe me? Look how Christians have limited stem cell research and preached Christian ideas to people who just don't care.

We should try to learn as much as we can, but until you drop your books and start thinking with an open mind, you will not truly be free. You have already picked a side so there is no reason to debate you because you fear religion more than you desire freedom.

well said

[Rubystars]

I'd be scared if my doctor wasn't an evolutionist because I'd figure that they pretty much don't understand biology at all.