Users Online Now:
1,897
(
Who's On?
)
Visitors Today:
1,997,506
Pageviews Today:
2,947,200
Threads Today:
805
Posts Today:
16,665
11:57 PM
Directory
Adv. Search
Topics
Forum
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
REPLY TO THREAD
Subject
If Darwin was illuminati,does that means evolution is fake?
User Name
Font color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Indigo
Violet
Black
Font:
Default
Verdana
Tahoma
Ms Sans Serif
In accordance with industry accepted best practices we ask that users limit their copy / paste of copyrighted material to the relevant portions of the article you wish to discuss and no more than 50% of the source material, provide a link back to the original article and provide your original comments / criticism in your post with the article.
[quote:Galfeslaf:MV8yNTM2NzIyXzQzOTkxMTA3XzQyNUQ2MjJF] [quote:Engonoceras:MV8yNTM2NzIyXzQzOTkwNTgwX0FCNTVCMjND] [quote:Galfeslaf:MV8yNTM2NzIyXzQzOTkwMzM4XzQyRjc5Rjc3] [quote:Anonymous Coward 57281494:MV8yNTM2NzIyXzQzOTUyNTMyX0M5NTYyRjUx] [quote:Anonymous Coward 55920081:MV8yNTM2NzIyXzQzOTUyNDk1X0FDMUYzODRG] like duh [/quote] Why are 99% scientists believe in evolution then? [/quote] They don't believe in evolution in all its forms. They can prove that microevolution exists, but not macroevolution. [b]However, because they are stupid humans, they believe that through sophistic arguments coupled with popularity, they can create "truth" where there is none[/b] and use it as an excuse for their adoption of such false beliefs in order to fool God into believing they were genuinely led to believe falsities, as if God cannot read their hearts and know their most inner thoughts. Their adoption of the belief of macroevolution is nothing more than an excuse to not admit they believe they are held accountable by a higher power - especially if the higher power has absolute truth on its side, as this would mean their imagined moral freedom to "do as thou wilt" is folly. [/quote] As I stated earlier the details of Evolution (and the geologic record) are detailed in 10s of thousands of scientific papers that have been published continually for at least 100 years. The earliest papers WERE sketchy because of the relative lack of good complete fossils and less than modern techniques of study. In the interviewing years many animals have been reassigned to different genuses and species as more fossils are discovered. "Evolution" is not some idea a bunch of God-hating scientists cooked up. Most of the detailed work that has been done over the years most people (especially Creationists) have no clue about. But, I can understand how something like a 100 page study on Ammonite zonation of the Western Interior Seaway or a study of global eustatic sea levels cross correlated with Texas and French ammonite records might be too much to try and absorb. Professional "Creationists" (the ones making money) surely must KNOW the enormity of the scientific data that's been published and how simple it is for a lay person to find fossils and investigate the geologic column themselves but they'll never tell you that. I just did. By the way, science NEVER claims to have 100% of the answers to anything. Every new discovery changes something or at least fills in more details. [/quote] Again, another evolutionist trying to pass off microevolution as proof of macroevolution. [/quote]
Original Message
Check this video:
[
link to www.youtube.com (secure)
]
Is this vid right or wrong?
Pictures (click to insert)
General
Politics
Bananas
People
Potentially Offensive
Emotions
Big Round Smilies
Aliens and Space
Friendship & Love
Textual
Doom
Misc Small Smilies
Religion
Love
Random
View All Categories
|
Next Page >>