~~~~ This is exactly what I thought you were going to say. You are only arguing side by side me. Not making a claim that my statement is wrong, only claiming that yours is right. That is translated as saying "this is right" "no this is right" "no this is right, your wrong"....does not prove anything, pointless to even state.~~~~




~~~~Really? When did we discover what the earth use to be made of? I think not! If you are postulating that life began eons ago in a primordial soup of organic chemicals involving an extremely complex process that culminated in the creation of a living cell. ok then. The only problem is that oxygen would have destroyed the would-be cell in its early stages of development, correct? So evolutionists came up with this "theory" or as i like to call "an excuse in order to save the evolution theory" that the earth's atmosphere once upon a time contained only methane, ammonia, and water vapor — but no free oxygen? yea right.

Unfortunately, for the evolutionist, scientific discoveries have proven conclusively that no such atmosphere ever existed! (Read "Oxygen in the Precambrian Atmosphere" by Harry Clemmey and Nick Badham) In other words, evolution could not have even started. This was proven false in the 90's! The sources you have on this matter are really old. ~~~~



~~~~Haha. I find this funny because my major is forensic science in college and you do not need to explain to me about mutations, genes and DNA! I believe you are the one that needs the explainations. Things have changed since whenever you have heard these now illegitimate theories.

There is NO evidence of gradually-changing DNA codes in nature that would allow periodic mutations to occur which would gradually transform a given type of organism, over long periods of time, into a completely different type of organism. None! Instead, organisms can MUTATE ONLY so much before insurmountable DNA limits are reached. Forensic science has proved this. That is what the evidence today demonstrates. Although modern biochemistry can explain complex chemical changes and mutations in living organisms, there is no explanation about HOW or WHY an inexorable drive for ever-greater organized complexity would exist in living organisms if evolution were true. This problem is further compounded when the laws of mathematical probability are applied to the evolutionary equation, which i won't get into right now.

You must get up to date. ~~~~

Creation.

Last week in the news paper, they had found a fossil with cartilage on it.
But if it’s billions of years old the cartilage wouldn’t be there.
So instead of saying the fossils are newer than they thought they decided to say it was the soil which in my opinion is retarded.

Sea monkeys, they say haven’t changed at all and they are prehistoric.
Which totally goes against Darwin’s theory about evolving

I could go way into this, because the church I go to on Sundays is actually on this subject at the moment.
BUT I don’t feel like typing a buttload of stuff right now.

both i guest.

did i say evolution occured on earth? i said evolution is possible. that it's possible for organisms to come out of inorganic compounds.

yet again, i hear the 'impossible' because of probablility argument.

so, i ask you.

the universe is infinetly big. let's say ever 1/10^10 of the universe has a star with a planet. let's say of all these planets, 1/10^12 of them is able to support life.

now, it is on these planets that evolution could occur.

so:

the size of the universe (infinity) times the ration of planets that can support life to the universe's size (1/ 10^12) times the probablility that evolution would occur on only one of those planets (1/10^213434234) =
you do the math.

it's highly probable that evolution occurs.


anways; i'm done defending evolution. now it's your turn to defend creationism.

who created the creator? and what did the creator make everyone out of? and how did he make so many species, all of which are different?







wow... this is, quite... wrong.


1. anything can be preserved. it just usually isn't.

2. evolution doesn't have to do constant. only an environment change or something of the sort promts any evolution.

3. try typing the buttload of stuff. it might help your argument.

sorry if it seemed like it but I did not say evolution was completely impossible,lol but some of your claims make it out to be.... I have some better arguments myself on the evolutionist's point of view than i have seen here on this thread. your not doing a very good job defending evolution... a lot of contridictions i see lol

If you read my original post I am not defending creationism! I am fighting the fact that evolution is not PROOF there is no Creator. Evolution is not proof in itself at all! Some other posts have said this many times. That is why i'm stressing it.

This applies to everyone: You must understand both sides to fully to construct an argument. If you don't submit yourself to the other side, and just say "well i'm atheist and this is how i feel so blah blah blah" or "I'm religous and i go to church so blah blah blah" no! it doesn't work that way. You cannot ask where did the Creator come from? Who created the Creator?.... Why? because you are subjected to follow the guides of what we know as human beings, and realize the bible is not based on facts of science and you CANNOT dismiss it for the very fact it is not. That is why this topic is so hard to debate. Most important of all you MUST understand the bible and its purpose! I say the same for evolution, but again evolution is based on facts and in that case you are subjected to argue this theory on facts and only facts, not individual beliefs.

I am not a religous person at all, quite the opposite is my case, but i study the bible and understand most of it (in principal). I'm coming from a scientists standpoint and even I can see a justified truth in creationism as well as evolution.

okay well at the moment I still dont feel like it...I should maybe tomorrow
However, I do have a question for you
if you believe in evolution and you think we evolved from apes

Why is it that we havent evolved into anything else yet?

I hope u meant we evolved from apes.... not into apes?... ...LoL

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/qa.asp
that is an awesome site
and you should go and read the stuff on there
and here
http://www.leaderu.com/real/ri9403/evidence.html

hmm...i don't like the first site at all...only because (and it clearly states this at the end) it is someone trying to push there beliefs on another, and show them "God's way is best." That is ridiculous, I'm not religous and I am MORE for creationism than evolution, but there are many other people and religions that believe in creationism and not God. As I said before in my last post, if you bothered to read it, you must not argue evolution with your beliefs, because evolution is based upon facts. The second one I can deal with because it is by a scientist who has done research. But are we debating with you or a bunch of sites? come on challenge yourself a little...

because evolution doesnt happen over night. it happens over millions of years.
and our world today has a very controlled environment , espcially with all the surgery that happens today . we dont let nature happen. like if babies were being born with third arms or tales they would perform some surgery to remove that. so the things that we do today are controlled by technology .

-Creation-
is what i believe and know to be truth.

humans ourself are way to complex to be made by accident.
we have feelings.
like love
and hurt
fear
and never ending feelings.

i don't think you could evolve if you are so complex. does that make sence?

Ok, so how is evolution not an option? You have different species of animals. How? because they evolved and that's one reason why you have variation. Just because humans are complex doesn't mean they can't evolve or couldn't have evolved. Feelings and emotions have nothing to do with it.

we have feelings cause our brain evolved. duurr.

XoJennaoX, i assumed that you were going to use creationism as the basis that evolution was false. it's what most people in this thread have been doing.

evolution and creationims aren't mutally exclusive, but the bible's version of creationism is exclusive of evolution.

guess i shouldn't assume things.





1. we didn't evolve from apes, we evolved from ancient apes. there is a difference.
2. evolution of highers sperm toxicities in fruit flies takes 80 generations. if humans were to have any noticable change it'd take more than 800 generations. that's from before christ. (30 years a gen.) how do you know we haven't changed?

3. we have changed. Each generation's height average gets larger. bubonic plaugue resistance was evolved in medival europe, and that also affords resistance to HIV today.

ahh i see now, yes most people have said this and i also feel that is incorrect to do so. quite the contrary i believe. I TOTALLY agree that evolution is possible....I just feel that nothing from evolution PROVES creationism is impossible. that was my point.

My feeling is that - evolution is facts without certainty and creationism is certainty without facts.

I am only debating that it is not IMPOSSIBLE for either one.... cuz i think i heard plenty of people said that only one is possible.

i believe in both. Creation can be a very powerful idea but some might think its impossible. In my opinion, i think creation isn`t that accurate, but i still think god had something to do with it. Evolution is also a powerful idea, I mean IT is possible that life started out with single-celled animals and things like that.

Well, everyone has a different opinion .. and religion DOES interfere with this debate. I`m catholic and i do believe in creation but in the beginning of this school year we learned a LOT of things on evolution. i dont know what to believe in

i was just saying another thing that makes creation more believe able.

Evolution CAN be proven, Creation can't....so Evo.

Actually neither can be proven
Because to prove something they have to repeat the hypothesis
And they cant repeat the "big bang"
Nor can they repeat creation.....


But I'd like to hear why you think evolution can be proven and creation cant

evolution has been proven and obserbed.

in viruses, bacteria, and fruit flys, and dogs. also obserbed in all species including humans.

what we can't prove is speciation.

i believe in both cause like even though gases can create bacteria and so on. i dont think they could just come out of no where. what i mean is that evolution had to have a start and i believe creation started it.

ever read that verse in Psalms?

"a thousand years is like a day to God"

and also
you know how people believed the world was flat?
well, in the Bible, the original greek words used to describe the Earth in the book of Genesis is the word used to describe a spherical object
if they only read the Bible, they wouldn't need Columbus to go find that out !

don't set up a child's representation of creation and debate against it
if you really want to know, talk to a creationist.
Creation has just as much research behind it as evolution

Well said!

If only the Church was as wise and as able as you to understand what the world knows now, many lives could have been spared, many humiliations could have been prevented. If only the Church would correctly read the Bible instead of childishly interpret it as the earth being flat and that the sun revolves around the earth.

Wouldn't you say that the Church was the child then?

Forgive me for pointing this out, but... better men, better Christians than you have thought that the world was flat once upon a time.

If you don't know what I'm talking about read up about Bruno, someone who believed in a spherical earth, and that the earth revolves around the sun was burned at the stake (by the Church, obviously). Of course, there are many more examples, but I'm sure you can find them on your own.

We can have a Scripture duel all day/month/year and it will beget nothing because virtually any interpretation of the Scripture can be made about the earth being flat, or not so flat.

how do you know the greek words actually said that? you can read greek and have the original greek version?..