Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,462 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 1,947,823
Pageviews Today: 2,645,971Threads Today: 586Posts Today: 11,729
08:41 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?

 
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 22163977
Germany
08/18/2012 01:03 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
Oh not this again. Another Darwin thread.

You know before Mammals where the dominating form of life there where others.

Sharks as an example are 400 Million years old they lay eggs or give birth to a almost complete Shark baby from an egg inside the Mother Shark, they get nutrition from the egg content and oxygen through a thin membrane wich makes it possible to exchange with it´s surroundings.

Eggs are not sealed either eggs have many microscopic holes large enough to support life but small enough to be robust and hinder Microbilogical life to enter the egg.

Actually one theory why dinosaurs died out is about the egg shell, either the eggs where too large to gather enough oxygen from the surrunding enviroment, or the egg shell was to thin to save the embryo from dehydration.

What works is kept and copied what doesn´t is discarded.

At one point keeping the embryo inside of the body was better then just laying eggs and overtime the eggshell vanished and was replaced by a cord supporting the embryo with the nutrition and oxygen needed.
DGN (OP)
Revelation in real time

User ID: 19756625
United States
08/18/2012 01:20 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
And now my response from your other thread

Ah, the fallacy that for evolution to be true, one day something would have had to have been born fully developed into the form you see it today. This is going to be fairly long, but I will keep it as short as possible, since I know most of you aren't really interested in getting an answer anyway, you just want to try and shoot holes in evolution that don't exist.

Early on, all organisms were completely lacking in sex. They reproduced through mitochondrial division, which usually produced nearly identical copies of themselves. Over time, as organisms became more complex (multi-celled) they became what one would commonly think of as asexual. In these cases, they needed genetic material from other organisms to produce an offspring, but either organism could create the offspring. They both possessed the ability to do so. This method of reproduction allowed them to create stronger offsprings that shared the trait of paired reproduction, and was able to take advantage of the genetic traits of both parents. Organisms that possessed traits that gave themselves a competitive advantage survived to reproduce further. Asexual organisms that reproduce in this manner still exist, as do the aforementioned organisms that reproduce without the need to interact with others.

As organisms continued to develop into more complex organisms, members with certain chromosome combinations began developing primary sexual characteristics, while their reproductive characteristics for the other half of the reproductive function became less developed. Certain members of the species were better able to function in reproductive roles than others of that species, and thus began the divergence into two sexes. The specialized sexual characteristics allowed these organisms to breed stronger offspring as their reproductive characteristics were better suited for breeding strong offspring and their body could devote a greater part of its make-up to the single sexual characteristic instead of having to split evenly between both, so, as is always the case of survival of the fittest, the weaker members without these specialized characteristics began dying off. Note, these were gradual changes. Slowly the primary sexual characteristics became stronger while their opposite sexual characteristics waned. This was not as you probably want to characterize it, suddenly one insect was born a male and another a female.

Through this progression, we gradually ended up with two well-defined sexes that were only capable of breeding with a member of the opposite sex, but could create far stronger offspring due to their highly developed sexual characteristics. You can find organisms all over the world today that are at the various stages of sexual development and definition throughout the spectrum I have briefly explained.


Now, I eagerly await the straw men and fallacies you religitards use to shoot this down. I don't have any illusions that explaining this to you will change your mind or enlighten you, as I am sure that by this point, you are beyond hope. I only answered because you asked the question and no one else showed you the courtesy to explain how it works under evolutionary theory. I'll also note that I tried to keep this brief, so I am obviously leaving out a lot and don't have room to cite and explain everything in depth. You wanted an answer, I gave it. Now you know how it is explained. You are free to believe whatever you like though.



 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 9664906


QFT
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 21964569


Explain "continued to develop" and "progression". These are not scientific explanations, just, 'never mind why this is believed' phrases. As in, never mind science has discovered DNA, the divine blueprint for the assembly of every cell, which ruins our theory of 'random chance' and spontaneous generation'. I also like the little monkey, big monkey drawings,are they offered instead of half and half fossils, because they don't exist?
1rof1
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 21964569
United States
08/18/2012 01:36 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
And now my response from your other thread

Ah, the fallacy that for evolution to be true, one day something would have had to have been born fully developed into the form you see it today. This is going to be fairly long, but I will keep it as short as possible, since I know most of you aren't really interested in getting an answer anyway, you just want to try and shoot holes in evolution that don't exist.

Early on, all organisms were completely lacking in sex. They reproduced through mitochondrial division, which usually produced nearly identical copies of themselves. Over time, as organisms became more complex (multi-celled) they became what one would commonly think of as asexual. In these cases, they needed genetic material from other organisms to produce an offspring, but either organism could create the offspring. They both possessed the ability to do so. This method of reproduction allowed them to create stronger offsprings that shared the trait of paired reproduction, and was able to take advantage of the genetic traits of both parents. Organisms that possessed traits that gave themselves a competitive advantage survived to reproduce further. Asexual organisms that reproduce in this manner still exist, as do the aforementioned organisms that reproduce without the need to interact with others.

As organisms continued to develop into more complex organisms, members with certain chromosome combinations began developing primary sexual characteristics, while their reproductive characteristics for the other half of the reproductive function became less developed. Certain members of the species were better able to function in reproductive roles than others of that species, and thus began the divergence into two sexes. The specialized sexual characteristics allowed these organisms to breed stronger offspring as their reproductive characteristics were better suited for breeding strong offspring and their body could devote a greater part of its make-up to the single sexual characteristic instead of having to split evenly between both, so, as is always the case of survival of the fittest, the weaker members without these specialized characteristics began dying off. Note, these were gradual changes. Slowly the primary sexual characteristics became stronger while their opposite sexual characteristics waned. This was not as you probably want to characterize it, suddenly one insect was born a male and another a female.

Through this progression, we gradually ended up with two well-defined sexes that were only capable of breeding with a member of the opposite sex, but could create far stronger offspring due to their highly developed sexual characteristics. You can find organisms all over the world today that are at the various stages of sexual development and definition throughout the spectrum I have briefly explained.


Now, I eagerly await the straw men and fallacies you religitards use to shoot this down. I don't have any illusions that explaining this to you will change your mind or enlighten you, as I am sure that by this point, you are beyond hope. I only answered because you asked the question and no one else showed you the courtesy to explain how it works under evolutionary theory. I'll also note that I tried to keep this brief, so I am obviously leaving out a lot and don't have room to cite and explain everything in depth. You wanted an answer, I gave it. Now you know how it is explained. You are free to believe whatever you like though.



 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 9664906


QFT
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 21964569


Explain "continued to develop" and "progression". These are not scientific explanations, just, 'never mind why this is believed' phrases. As in, never mind science has discovered DNA, the divine blueprint for the assembly of every cell, which ruins our theory of 'random chance' and spontaneous generation'. I also like the little monkey, big monkey drawings,are they offered instead of half and half fossils, because they don't exist?
1rof1
 Quoting: DGN


Progression is easy, it is what your brain is refusing to do.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 21964569
United States
08/18/2012 01:39 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
As far as continued to develop. Every human has up to 200 DNA mutations. [link to www.cosmosmagazine.com]
DGN (OP)
Revelation in real time

User ID: 19756625
United States
08/18/2012 01:48 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
And now my response from your other thread

Ah, the fallacy that for evolution to be true, one day something would have had to have been born fully developed into the form you see it today. This is going to be fairly long, but I will keep it as short as possible, since I know most of you aren't really interested in getting an answer anyway, you just want to try and shoot holes in evolution that don't exist.

Early on, all organisms were completely lacking in sex. They reproduced through mitochondrial division, which usually produced nearly identical copies of themselves. Over time, as organisms became more complex (multi-celled) they became what one would commonly think of as asexual. In these cases, they needed genetic material from other organisms to produce an offspring, but either organism could create the offspring. They both possessed the ability to do so. This method of reproduction allowed them to create stronger offsprings that shared the trait of paired reproduction, and was able to take advantage of the genetic traits of both parents. Organisms that possessed traits that gave themselves a competitive advantage survived to reproduce further. Asexual organisms that reproduce in this manner still exist, as do the aforementioned organisms that reproduce without the need to interact with others.

As organisms continued to develop into more complex organisms, members with certain chromosome combinations began developing primary sexual characteristics, while their reproductive characteristics for the other half of the reproductive function became less developed. Certain members of the species were better able to function in reproductive roles than others of that species, and thus began the divergence into two sexes. The specialized sexual characteristics allowed these organisms to breed stronger offspring as their reproductive characteristics were better suited for breeding strong offspring and their body could devote a greater part of its make-up to the single sexual characteristic instead of having to split evenly between both, so, as is always the case of survival of the fittest, the weaker members without these specialized characteristics began dying off. Note, these were gradual changes. Slowly the primary sexual characteristics became stronger while their opposite sexual characteristics waned. This was not as you probably want to characterize it, suddenly one insect was born a male and another a female.

Through this progression, we gradually ended up with two well-defined sexes that were only capable of breeding with a member of the opposite sex, but could create far stronger offspring due to their highly developed sexual characteristics. You can find organisms all over the world today that are at the various stages of sexual development and definition throughout the spectrum I have briefly explained.


Now, I eagerly await the straw men and fallacies you religitards use to shoot this down. I don't have any illusions that explaining this to you will change your mind or enlighten you, as I am sure that by this point, you are beyond hope. I only answered because you asked the question and no one else showed you the courtesy to explain how it works under evolutionary theory. I'll also note that I tried to keep this brief, so I am obviously leaving out a lot and don't have room to cite and explain everything in depth. You wanted an answer, I gave it. Now you know how it is explained. You are free to believe whatever you like though.



 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 9664906


QFT
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 21964569


Explain "continued to develop" and "progression". These are not scientific explanations, just, 'never mind why this is believed' phrases. As in, never mind science has discovered DNA, the divine blueprint for the assembly of every cell, which ruins our theory of 'random chance' and spontaneous generation'. I also like the little monkey, big monkey drawings,are they offered instead of half and half fossils, because they don't exist?
1rof1
 Quoting: DGN


Progression is easy, it is what your brain is refusing to do.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 21964569


Not exactly a scientific explanation of what imaginary mind is progressively rewriting our dna and upgrading us is it?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 8769940
United States
08/18/2012 01:57 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
All that really matters is that there is no god.

There is no god.
There is no god.

When you die, you're not going to heaven. There is no supreme being looking out for you or me or anyone else. It's all fiction. We are all just random little animals running around on a big rock for no reason. There's no divine point to any of this. When you die, your body will rot in the ground and you will be no more. That's it, and that's all. There is no heaven. There is certainly no hell.

You've done nothing but waste your life on false belief, and all you can do with your time is mock and ridicule the work of men who are about 1,000 times smarter than you, who actually got off their asses and figured shit out, unlike you, who can do nothing but hide behind a fucking book with a smirk and a middle finger.

Fuck you and your god.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1644017
Germany
08/18/2012 02:42 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
...


QFT
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 21964569


Explain "continued to develop" and "progression". These are not scientific explanations, just, 'never mind why this is believed' phrases. As in, never mind science has discovered DNA, the divine blueprint for the assembly of every cell, which ruins our theory of 'random chance' and spontaneous generation'. I also like the little monkey, big monkey drawings,are they offered instead of half and half fossils, because they don't exist?
1rof1
 Quoting: DGN


Progression is easy, it is what your brain is refusing to do.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 21964569


Not exactly a scientific explanation of what imaginary mind is progressively rewriting our dna and upgrading us is it?
 Quoting: DGN


Who said there is a mind? Chemical process can do just fine without a consciousness directing them.
DGN (OP)
Revelation in real time

User ID: 19756625
United States
08/18/2012 02:53 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
...


Explain "continued to develop" and "progression". These are not scientific explanations, just, 'never mind why this is believed' phrases. As in, never mind science has discovered DNA, the divine blueprint for the assembly of every cell, which ruins our theory of 'random chance' and spontaneous generation'. I also like the little monkey, big monkey drawings,are they offered instead of half and half fossils, because they don't exist?
1rof1
 Quoting: DGN


Progression is easy, it is what your brain is refusing to do.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 21964569


Not exactly a scientific explanation of what imaginary mind is progressively rewriting our dna and upgrading us is it?
 Quoting: DGN


Who said there is a mind? Chemical process can do just fine without a consciousness directing them.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1644017

Can it do this, without intelligence? Scientists can't even do it with many minds.

Last Edited by DGN on 08/18/2012 02:56 PM
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1473574
United States
08/18/2012 02:58 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
putin
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 6630717
DGN (OP)
Revelation in real time

User ID: 19756625
United States
08/18/2012 03:02 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
...


Progression is easy, it is what your brain is refusing to do.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 21964569


Not exactly a scientific explanation of what imaginary mind is progressively rewriting our dna and upgrading us is it?
 Quoting: DGN


Who said there is a mind? Chemical process can do just fine without a consciousness directing them.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1644017

Can it do this, without intelligence? Scientists can't even do it with many minds.
 Quoting: DGN


Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1557297
Germany
08/18/2012 03:04 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
Hey, Mr.Darwin! Do us a favour and make sure this idiot's gene pool reaches an evolutionary cul de sac via castration because his spamming of GLP is a pain in the scrotum :-)
DGN (OP)
Revelation in real time

User ID: 19756625
United States
08/18/2012 03:28 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
...


Not exactly a scientific explanation of what imaginary mind is progressively rewriting our dna and upgrading us is it?
 Quoting: DGN


Who said there is a mind? Chemical process can do just fine without a consciousness directing them.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1644017

Can it do this, without intelligence? Scientists can't even do it with many minds.
 Quoting: DGN


 Quoting: DGN


The "building blocks assembled themselves"....?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1644017
Germany
08/18/2012 10:59 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
...


Progression is easy, it is what your brain is refusing to do.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 21964569


Not exactly a scientific explanation of what imaginary mind is progressively rewriting our dna and upgrading us is it?
 Quoting: DGN


Who said there is a mind? Chemical process can do just fine without a consciousness directing them.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1644017

Can it do this, without intelligence? Scientists can't even do it with many minds.
 Quoting: DGN


Yes it can. As far as scientists supposedly not being able to write dna, bulllshit.

Further, I've already shown you that every person has over 200 dna mutations. It is a natural process.
DGN (OP)
Revelation in real time

User ID: 19756625
United States
08/19/2012 12:29 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
...


Not exactly a scientific explanation of what imaginary mind is progressively rewriting our dna and upgrading us is it?
 Quoting: DGN


Who said there is a mind? Chemical process can do just fine without a consciousness directing them.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1644017

Can it do this, without intelligence? Scientists can't even do it with many minds.
 Quoting: DGN


Yes it can. As far as scientists supposedly not being able to write dna, bulllshit.

Further, I've already shown you that every person has over 200 dna mutations. It is a natural process.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1644017

So... what does the lab and scientist who rigged the intelligently designed experiment symbolize?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 22171446
Canada
08/19/2012 12:52 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
OP - We recognize your desire to substantiate your trust in your choice of theological doctrine by attempting to refute a diametrically opposing explanation.

The theory of evolution is just that, a theory. Those in the scientific community are prepared to verify or disprove that theory by observation. Belief, on the other hand, by definition is unverifiable by scrutiny.

The doctrine, however, can be scrutinized. There are many widely varying secular interpretations. Many denominations believe in the trinity, while others say there is but a single god, indivisible. They cannot all be the correct interpretation of the same irrefutable word of the Christian god.

If your faith is based upon incorrectly interpreted doctrine, then is there not the possibility that your argument against the theory of evolution, based on the interpretation of scripture, is also flawed?

Can you be sure that some form of evolution is not the tool of intelligent creation?

In modern English, we define a day to mean twenty-four hours, the time is takes the Earth to complete one full spin on it's axis. If before the Universe was created on the first day there was no Earth, no matter and no time, why did your god decide that the planned rotation of the planet Earth should govern His/Her/It's itinerary?

Do you know for absolute certain that the translated word that was interpreted as 'day' actually signified a period of twenty-four hours in the language of the scriptures?

Translating a language is much more difficult than simply exchanging a word in language A for a word in language B. The structure of the phrase must be taken into account as well as the lexicon. How we say the words in our language may be very different than how they were originally spoken.

Take the English word 'SET.' Depending on how it is used it can have as many as 464 different meanings. Also, remember that those who translated the doctrinal texts only had a working, rudimentary knowledge of the language that was at that time already a millennium and a half out of date. It was a "best guess" interpretation.

If the meaning and language of doctrine cannot be completely ascertained, and your belief is based upon that doctrine than you cannot irrefutably claim that the tenants of your faith are truth.

We can electrically stimulate your hippocampus and induce a state of spiritual ecstasy. If we give you false information and then reward you with an electrical impulse, whatever we say will be the word of god.

We do not have to. You do this to yourself. Your belief and faith is based upon a biochemical reaction in a tiny part of your physical brain that induces a euphoric state of passion.

If we chemically block the receptors in that part of your brain we can induce a spiritual crisis. We can strip you of your faith.

So, we implore you, please do not interfere with the advancement of knowledge because it contradicts your flavor of belief that is unverifiable, has a high probability of being incorrect and is so easily manipulated.

We thank you.

WOP - 2017
DGN (OP)
Revelation in real time

User ID: 19756625
United States
08/19/2012 01:00 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
OP - We recognize your desire to substantiate your trust in your choice of theological doctrine by attempting to refute a diametrically opposing explanation.

The theory of evolution is just that, a theory. Those in the scientific community are prepared to verify or disprove that theory by observation. Belief, on the other hand, by definition is unverifiable by scrutiny.

The doctrine, however, can be scrutinized. There are many widely varying secular interpretations. Many denominations believe in the trinity, while others say there is but a single god, indivisible. They cannot all be the correct interpretation of the same irrefutable word of the Christian god.

If your faith is based upon incorrectly interpreted doctrine, then is there not the possibility that your argument against the theory of evolution, based on the interpretation of scripture, is also flawed?

Can you be sure that some form of evolution is not the tool of intelligent creation?

In modern English, we define a day to mean twenty-four hours, the time is takes the Earth to complete one full spin on it's axis. If before the Universe was created on the first day there was no Earth, no matter and no time, why did your god decide that the planned rotation of the planet Earth should govern His/Her/It's itinerary?

Do you know for absolute certain that the translated word that was interpreted as 'day' actually signified a period of twenty-four hours in the language of the scriptures?

Translating a language is much more difficult than simply exchanging a word in language A for a word in language B. The structure of the phrase must be taken into account as well as the lexicon. How we say the words in our language may be very different than how they were originally spoken.

Take the English word 'SET.' Depending on how it is used it can have as many as 464 different meanings. Also, remember that those who translated the doctrinal texts only had a working, rudimentary knowledge of the language that was at that time already a millennium and a half out of date. It was a "best guess" interpretation.

If the meaning and language of doctrine cannot be completely ascertained, and your belief is based upon that doctrine than you cannot irrefutably claim that the tenants of your faith are truth.

We can electrically stimulate your hippocampus and induce a state of spiritual ecstasy. If we give you false information and then reward you with an electrical impulse, whatever we say will be the word of god.

We do not have to. You do this to yourself. Your belief and faith is based upon a biochemical reaction in a tiny part of your physical brain that induces a euphoric state of passion.

If we chemically block the receptors in that part of your brain we can induce a spiritual crisis. We can strip you of your faith.

So, we implore you, please do not interfere with the advancement of knowledge because it contradicts your flavor of belief that is unverifiable, has a high probability of being incorrect and is so easily manipulated.

We thank you.

WOP - 2017
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22171446

Condense this down to a focused paragraph and I'll respond, I don't waste time on undeveloped theory, k? With all due respect.hf
anonymous coward
User ID: 1408355
Australia
08/19/2012 01:17 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
I love DGN!!

I loves.......hfratdance
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 21936353
Australia
08/19/2012 01:19 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
Condense this down to a focused paragraph and I'll respond, I don't waste time on undeveloped theory, k?
 Quoting: DGN

In fact you repeatedly "waste time on undeveloped theory", your "anti-evolution" arguments are quite undeveloped.
DGN (OP)
Revelation in real time

User ID: 19756625
United States
08/19/2012 01:31 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
Condense this down to a focused paragraph and I'll respond, I don't waste time on undeveloped theory, k?
 Quoting: DGN

In fact you repeatedly "waste time on undeveloped theory", your "anti-evolution" arguments are quite undeveloped.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 21936353

Oh really? Show me one single half and half fossil. You can make it up with clay, crayolas, spackel, what ever! you can just draw them with colored pencils, make little ones followed by bigger ones to substitute for real life fossils,k?
captain
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 22218257
United States
08/19/2012 01:35 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
...


Who said there is a mind? Chemical process can do just fine without a consciousness directing them.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1644017

Can it do this, without intelligence? Scientists can't even do it with many minds.
 Quoting: DGN


Yes it can. As far as scientists supposedly not being able to write dna, bulllshit.

Further, I've already shown you that every person has over 200 dna mutations. It is a natural process.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1644017

So... what does the lab and scientist who rigged the intelligently designed experiment symbolize?
 Quoting: DGN


What does the naturally mutating DNA symbolize. Wait, not symbolize. What IS the naturally mutating DNA?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 21952090
United States
08/19/2012 01:38 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
Hey OP, I always notice your threads and wonder if you are retarded.
DGN (OP)
Revelation in real time

User ID: 19756625
United States
08/19/2012 01:39 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
Hey OP, I always notice your threads and wonder if you are retarded.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 21952090


If I am, where does this leave you?
DGN (OP)
Revelation in real time

User ID: 19756625
United States
08/19/2012 01:41 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
...

Can it do this, without intelligence? Scientists can't even do it with many minds.
 Quoting: DGN


Yes it can. As far as scientists supposedly not being able to write dna, bulllshit.

Further, I've already shown you that every person has over 200 dna mutations. It is a natural process.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1644017

So... what does the lab and scientist who rigged the intelligently designed experiment symbolize?
 Quoting: DGN


What does the naturally mutating DNA symbolize. Wait, not symbolize. What IS the naturally mutating DNA?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22218257

You tell me, it's your question.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 21936353
Australia
08/19/2012 01:46 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
Condense this down to a focused paragraph and I'll respond, I don't waste time on undeveloped theory, k?
 Quoting: DGN

In fact you repeatedly "waste time on undeveloped theory", your "anti-evolution" arguments are quite undeveloped.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 21936353

Oh really? Show me one single half and half fossil. You can make it up with clay, crayolas, spackel, what ever! you can just draw them with colored pencils, make little ones followed by bigger ones to substitute for real life fossils,k?
captain
 Quoting: DGN


see? "undeveloped theory". basically all you ever say is "EVOLUTION IS STUPID AND WRONG!!! DERRRRR!". you never even discuss anything that evolutionists say.
Nine's

User ID: 20491395
United States
08/19/2012 01:48 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?


Last Edited by Nine's on 08/19/2012 02:25 AM
Nine's

User ID: 20491395
United States
08/19/2012 01:51 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?


Last Edited by Nine's on 08/19/2012 02:25 AM
DGN (OP)
Revelation in real time

User ID: 19756625
United States
08/19/2012 01:51 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
OP - We recognize your desire to substantiate your trust in your choice of theological doctrine by attempting to refute a diametrically opposing explanation.

The theory of evolution is just that, a theory. Those in the scientific community are prepared to verify or disprove that theory by observation. Belief, on the other hand, by definition is unverifiable by scrutiny.

The doctrine, however, can be scrutinized. There are many widely varying secular interpretations. Many denominations believe in the trinity, while others say there is but a single god, indivisible. They cannot all be the correct interpretation of the same irrefutable word of the Christian god.

If your faith is based upon incorrectly interpreted doctrine, then is there not the possibility that your argument against the theory of evolution, based on the interpretation of scripture, is also flawed?

Can you be sure that some form of evolution is not the tool of intelligent creation?

In modern English, we define a day to mean twenty-four hours, the time is takes the Earth to complete one full spin on it's axis. If before the Universe was created on the first day there was no Earth, no matter and no time, why did your god decide that the planned rotation of the planet Earth should govern His/Her/It's itinerary?

Do you know for absolute certain that the translated word that was interpreted as 'day' actually signified a period of twenty-four hours in the language of the scriptures?

Translating a language is much more difficult than simply exchanging a word in language A for a word in language B. The structure of the phrase must be taken into account as well as the lexicon. How we say the words in our language may be very different than how they were originally spoken.

Take the English word 'SET.' Depending on how it is used it can have as many as 464 different meanings. Also, remember that those who translated the doctrinal texts only had a working, rudimentary knowledge of the language that was at that time already a millennium and a half out of date. It was a "best guess" interpretation.

If the meaning and language of doctrine cannot be completely ascertained, and your belief is based upon that doctrine than you cannot irrefutably claim that the tenants of your faith are truth.

We can electrically stimulate your hippocampus and induce a state of spiritual ecstasy. If we give you false information and then reward you with an electrical impulse, whatever we say will be the word of god.

We do not have to. You do this to yourself. Your belief and faith is based upon a biochemical reaction in a tiny part of your physical brain that induces a euphoric state of passion.

If we chemically block the receptors in that part of your brain we can induce a spiritual crisis. We can strip you of your faith.

So, we implore you, please do not interfere with the advancement of knowledge because it contradicts your flavor of belief that is unverifiable, has a high probability of being incorrect and is so easily manipulated.

We thank you.

WOP - 2017
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22171446

Condense this down to a focused paragraph and I'll respond, I don't waste time on undeveloped theory, k? With all due respect.hf
 Quoting: DGN

You must have read it far better than I did, because I saw no undeveloped theory. This post took a lot of time and thought. It was thoughtfully written with short, two or three sentence paragraphs.

It's impossible to condense this down to one paragraph. It's next to impossible to shorten it without leaving out important points, but because the OP took the time to post this with short paragraphs and being polite, and because I know you don't like long posts, I'm going to try to shorten it and put it in simple language.

OP, if I say something you didn't mean, it would be greatly appreciated if you'd correct me. My "condensed" version is next post.
 Quoting: Nine's


yawn, get to the point, i don't have attention for jibberish.
IvantZtrooth

User ID: 21403272
United States
08/19/2012 01:56 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
ok so god just poofed into existence magically, but slowly becoming what he is/was is stupid? you are trying to be a master of logic, but you are skipping all the fundamentals. For something to exist to create, something has to be created to exist. Evolution is a fact. Maybe not how Charles Darwin classified it, but something similar. It is impossible for someone to understand something like evolution 100%. It's incredibly complicated. You are talking about a million years as if you've been around long enough to see the changes that occur. You cant even wrap your mind around a million years. think before you rant child
Nine's

User ID: 20491395
United States
08/19/2012 02:02 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?


Last Edited by Nine's on 08/19/2012 02:26 AM
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 8597527
United States
08/19/2012 10:34 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Strange how embryos survived a million years before the evolution created umbilical cords right Mr Darwin?
All that really matters is that there is no god.

There is no god.
There is no god.

When you die, you're not going to heaven. There is no supreme being looking out for you or me or anyone else. It's all fiction. We are all just random little animals running around on a big rock for no reason. There's no divine point to any of this. When you die, your body will rot in the ground and you will be no more. That's it, and that's all. There is no heaven. There is certainly no hell.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8769940


My what a profound Faith in the Evolution Fairies.

Surely you have some sort of evidence to back up your Naturalist Religion claims?

So hundreds of millions of humans believe and worship God and long for the afterlife/salvation, because there is no God or afterlife, right 'Chuck' ?

It's all mass hysteria and you are the "intelligent" one because you believe in a creation story similar to the Ninja Turtles cartoon with animals morphing out of slime. lol

News








We're dropping truth bombs like it's the end of days!