CHALLENGE TO EVOLUTIONISTS

So then there can't be open systems since everything is part of the universe.

*deleterious

The only people advocating an open system is you and the sources you dont cite. If the universe is a closed system, this includes everything in it.. (for the 5th time)

look retard, you don't seem to be getting the fact that the same science that explains what an closed system is considering Thermodynamics defines humans as open systems.

Here let me show you once again

"Open System
An open system is a system that freely exchanges energy and matter with its surroundings. For instance, when you are boiling soup in an open saucepan on a stove, energy and matter are being transferred to the surroundings through steam. The saucepan is an open system because it allows for the transfer of matter (for example adding spices in the saucepan) and for the transfer of energy (for example heating the saucepan and allowing steam to leave the saucepan).
Let us examine how matter and energy are exchanged in an open system. Matter can be exchanged rather easily: by adding matter (i.e spices) or removing matter (i.e tasting what is being cooked). Energy exchange is a little bit more complicated than matter exchange. There are a couple of ways energy can be exchanged: through heat and through work (a more in-depth discussion of heat and work has been included below). Energy induced through heat can be demonstrated by bringing the system close to an object that dissipates heat (i.e. Bunsen burner, stove, etc.). By doing so, one is able to change the temperature of the system and therefore, induce energy through heat. Another way to increase the energy is through work. An example of inducing work is by taking a stirrer and then mixing the coffee in the cup with the stirrer. By mixing coffee, work is done as the coffee is being moved against a force.
"

[link to chemwiki.ucdavis.edu]

Humans are not in there at all.

So humans don't exchange matter and energy?

First off, please do not hit me with arguments. I am not a scientist, nor am I religious. I am a cynic in this matter.

As much as I would like to believe in evolution as a more sensible approach to the origins and process of life on this planet, the more I think and consider life and its intricacies, the more I see Darwinism as the more insensible belief (and I don't have to explain why, it's my own idea and I don't want to share it with anyone else).

I said belief, because I don't care how you try to defend them, but it's clear as the light of high summer noon that both creationism and evolutionism are belief systems, as Atheism is no less a religion as any other religion they so rabidly detest. Yes, I abhor atheists because they're just like the religious fundamentalists--they think only they hold the keys to enlightenment and everyone else is wrong.

All this matter and energy is contained within the closed system (universe). Where no energy or matter is created or destroyed (1st law). Why do you keep questioning, where is this eventually going to get you?

OK. Let me explain how this works. I'm not providing you scientific evidence of anything, and here's why.

The standard of proof you used in your argument doesn't call for scientific argumentation. You claimed that God talked to you and told you the truth. Ergo, I am not going to provide you scientific evidence to refute your wholly unscientific claim.

All I can say to you is that God spoke to me and told me that people who deny evolution have only imagined such things. Otherwise, I do not owe you the dignity of providing scientific evidence when you have provided none yourself. Understand?

No, because I didnt specify 'God' in that post. I mentioned mutations, which you want to cleverly sidestep. If you dont know, dont bother.

for the record, i havent attacked you and you have continually done so to me (not very christian of you). because of this i wonder if you are even a christian at all.

you are asking absolute proof of a theory which is in itself impossible. much like absolute proof of a god.

personally i think there is absolutely someone or something more powerful than ourselves out there. but i cant prove that to ya either.

Page 14 and the best(only) argument we have for Evolution is that we don't find a dog fossil in the Cambrian.

there is a difference in believing in the FACT of adaptation and variation, but automatically assuming that because of this, species can change from one to another is just pseudo-science. and people who vehemently defend this are adhering to it like its a religion to them.
ill say it again. ADAPTATION AND VARIATION EXIST AND ITS A KNOWN FACT (micro-evolution if you will)

expanding that to MACROEVOLUTION (one specie to the next) is just a FARSE

If I have shown any aggression it's because you have been spamming this thread constantly, attempting to derail the discussion with philosophical questions after I repeatedly asked you not to. After 12 or so pages You finally blurted out the words "anatomical paralogy" and I responded.

Now you're inserting a strawman claiming I'm asking for "absolute proof" which I am not. All I'm asking for is a scientific argument/evidence for Evolution. At the very least, something that can be falsified, which is the minimum requirement for a real scientific theory.

So you should support creationists when we try to get the lies out of the textbooks. If theres no proof for evolution, those theories shouldnt be posing as facts in the books.

Next they will play their Speciation card, even though speciation is simply reproductive isolation and does not result in any new functional information that the original species did not already possess.

Well maybe we have, and it got tossed out by the museum, with all those giant skeletons.

Well well thanks for calling me clever - that's probably the best compliment I'm going to get from you so I'll take it. Actually, I was responding to your original post (as you can see by reading my first response), which stated:

"It was through studying evolution, that God revealed to me that this 'theory' was the imagination of foolish men, and delivered me to the Lord Jesus Christ. I pray for the same for others reading. Seek the Absolute Truth!"

It didn't occur to me that a scientific-minded person would have made that statement, so you'll have to, ahem, forgive me for not refuting you using PROPER scientific documentation, doctor (which I'm assuming is your title, naturally).

And if I am mistaken, and you are indeed the next Albert Einstein of microbiology, ready to stun us all with your powerful and compelling evisceration of doctrinal evolutionary theory, even you should know, with that powerful scientific mind of yours, that disproving evolutionary theory does not amount to proving the existence of God or intelligent design. It would merely serve to disprove evolution. You still haven't provided one shred of evidence proving the existence of God, so your case remains unproven, and unfalsifiable (besides the voices in your head, of course).

Wow, thanks to who posted this link earlier. Very comprehensive and up to date list of scientific contradictions to evolution/deep-time hypotheses.

[link to scienceagainstevolution.info]

Of course, they can't answer that.

The tip top of the atheistic capstone can't answer straight.

The Ultimate Fraudster... the atheists' god..

No other than Dawkins himself..

It wouldn't matter if we did. They could find a human in the cambrian and it would be dismissed as an anomaly, like all those dinosaurs fossils with soft-tissue dated under 40k years.

That wasnt me, quote better next time.

Agreed, I just didnt want to concede anything (even sarcastically) to that John fellow.

this is sad...you cannot prove god wrong, nor can you prove evolution wrong. they call reliigon a faith because people CHOOSE to believe in it. They call evolution a theory because of the ignorant close-minded creationist who will TRY to prove it incorrect although it has been proven true NUMEROUS times.

If you believe in your religon so much stop trying to prove it...have faith in what you believe and stop trying to change what other people believe. If you are looking to prove the existance of God then its not faith. you shouldnt need to prove God if you believe so much.

Personally I believe in a wacky combo of a Higher power and evolution and you have no right to challenge my beliefs or the beliefs of anyone else. the whole god vs. evolution battle is getting stale...you shouldnt be judging people based on their belief, thats like saying "My religion is right, and yours is incorrect." Its complete Bull$H!T :]


and honestly OP

Mutations = One of the dumbest supposedly proof for evolution.

You can prove evolution wrong by showing there is no proof. So there is no fact, only a theory based on no observations.

Lol. You know, you people understand science perfectly. Obviously, if you can challenge one aspect of evolutionary theory, clearly God exists and evolution is bullshit. No further scientific inquiry required.

I'm telling you jackasses, Adam and Eve weren't created by God 6,000 years ago and put in a Garden of Eden. The Earth has been around for billions of years and the Bible is full of so much bullshit about what the actual physical world we live in IS that it makes the theory of evolution look inscrutable by comparison, and you all now it so stop being so disingenuous and boorish.

As it's perfectly obvious there has been no "whining and cajoling" from O.P.'s side in this argument, if anyone sounds desperate it's you, for saying such a preposterous thing.

Mmm not sure what happened with that quote above. Anyway, thanks for starting this thread..op.