[Cranky Old Man]

Re: Questions that evolutionist can’t answer

The whole religon is known to be a joke.

You think religions, followed by billions of people, are just a joke?

[Justin Z]

Re: Questions that evolutionist can’t answer

You think religions, followed by billions of people, are just a joke?

All hell bound Atheist think that, unfortunately.

[Johny Joe Hold]

Re: Questions that evolutionist can’t answer

wow, your clever, well im not the one who's taking this forum seriously when it was started as a joke.

Let's see. I just returned from the beautiful Sunday services at Landover Baptist Church. I am sitting in my place in the City of Freehold.

And, you are saying none of this exists. I think you need some kind of therapy that puts you in touch with reality my friend.

JJH, Mayor

[Benedict A. Davis]

Re: Questions that evolutionist can’t answer

Let's see. I just returned from the beautiful Sunday services at Landover Baptist Church. I am sitting in my place in the City of Freehold.

And, you are saying none of this exists. I think you need some kind of therapy that puts you in touch with reality my friend.

JJH, Mayor

Mayor J.
Since you admit that none of this exists does that mean I don't have to pay city wage taxes this year, I guess I will just print your comment and send it in instead. Glory!

[Rev. Phillip Dean]

Re: Questions that evolutionist can’t answer

Atoms do not exist, stupid boy. They are a liberal hoax in a desperate attempt to cover up Biblical Truth™:

Son, I praise and love the lord as much as you but you simply cannot deny a proven fact that has been in place for hundreds of years and activity that has been happening since the dawn of time. God certainly did create the earth, universe and the stars but one cannot simply create life on their own, not even God, if God could create everything in the universe, then he wouldnt have created animals and humans to help make the Earth grow, God cannot keep the earth going all by himself, so I believe that god entrusted the help from atoms and particles to create our glorious world.

Sorry to ramble, god bless you x

[Didymus Much]

Re: Questions that evolutionist can’t answer

Son, I praise and love the lord as much as you but you simply cannot deny a proven fact that has been in place for hundreds of years and activity that has been happening since the dawn of time. God certainly did create the earth, universe and the stars but one cannot simply create life on their own, not even God, if God could create everything in the universe, then he wouldnt have created animals and humans to help make the Earth grow, God cannot keep the earth going all by himself, so I believe that god entrusted the help from atoms and particles to create our glorious world.

Sorry to ramble, god bless you x

A Christian "Reverend" who says that God cannot create life?

So do you use Wite-Out™ or scissors to remove the "inconvenient" bits (like Genesis) from your Bible?

[Rev. Phillip Dean]

Re: Questions that evolutionist can’t answer

A Christian "Reverend" who says that God cannot create life?

So do you use Wite-Out™ or scissors to remove the "inconvenient" bits (like Genesis) from your Bible?

I think you'll find as I quite clearly put in my post that God did create life, he created everything around us, what we see, hear, smell and touch. But just for the reason that Jesus was placed on our earth to reach out and bring the lord to the people, it can be said (now please keep in mind this is my opinion and how I have been brought up around the bible) that perhaps our Lord asked for help by creating these atoms and electrons to speed up the process. Our lord is very powerful but you must admit to achieve creating the earth in 6 days is tough work

[Cranky Old Man]

Re: Questions that evolutionist can’t answer

Our lord is very powerful but you must admit to achieve creating the earth in 6 days is tough work

Nothing is tough for God. He could have created everything in 6 seconds if He wanted to. Luke 18:27 "And he said, The things which are impossible with men are possible with God."

[Didymus Much]

Re: Questions that evolutionist can’t answer

I think you'll find as I quite clearly put in my post that God did create life...

I guess I somehow misunderstood this bit:

...one cannot simply create life on their own, not even God...

...Our lord is very powerful but you must admit to achieve creating the earth in 6 days is tough work

Your Lord is obviously NOT the God of the Bible, which clearly states (in all versions that I've seen) that He DID create the Heavens and the Earth and everything else, alone, in six days. So, if you don't worship the God of the Bible, who or what DO you worship? (And if you're going to pretend to worship the God of the KJV1611, please capitalize references to Him, the True Christians™ here get rather touchy).

[Imam Rashik]

Re: Questions that evolutionist can’t answer

Yemenite Cleric Abd Al-Majid Al-Zindani expalins the myth of Dawins evolution. Darwin was confused when Allah transformed the Isralites who rebelled against Him into apes and pigs.

The Holy Quran teaches us Allah(pbuh) created people.

SURA 22.
3. And among men there is he who disputes about Allah without knowledge and follows every rebellious Shaitan;
4. Against him it is written down that whoever takes him for a friend, he shall lead him astray and conduct him to the chastisement of the burning fire.
5. O people! if you are in doubt about the raising, then surely We created you from dust, then from a small seed, then from a clot, then from a lump of flesh, complete in make and incomplete, that We may make clear to you; and We cause what We please to stay in the wombs till an appointed time, then We bring you forth as babies, then that you may attain your maturity; and of you is he who is caused to die, and of you is he who is brought back to the worst part of life, so that after having knowledge he does not know anything; and you see the earth sterile land, but when We send down on it the water,it stirs and swells and brings forth of every kind a beautiful herbage.

[KirovH]

Re: Questions that evolutionist can’t answer

Here is some questions for the scientific theocrats of the Darwinist Gestapo to try and answer;

I already know this is a waste of time, but this post so thoroughly amused me I felt compelled to respond. Let me start off by saying that the above quote delivers the wrong message. You've basically identified your adversary as a group of Nazi police/scientists who believe in a religion-controlled government. I'm hope that even you can see the error in that statement, but all evidence seems to lead to the contrary. Now on to the fun.
*Note that any comments in regards to grammar or spelling are strictly annotation.

Account for the missing land sharks
If we evolved from fish, why haven’t sharks, who according to your theory predate us, evolved into land animals and are hunting us?

First off, this is a very basic misunderstanding. No animal that is alive today is the ancestor of any other animal. We did not evolve from monkeys, apes, 'fish', or any other member of the animal kingdom; that is not to say that we do not share common ancestry.

Explain floods on Mars with out the Great Flood of the Bible
If Noah’s flood didn’t happen then how do explain the evidence of a great flood on Mars?

I'd like to take this moment to point out that conditions on Mars have absolutely no relevance to the biblical Diluvian theory. Now that we've established this (ha ha, who am I kidding?), I'd like to explain to you a few things. 1, Mars has an extremely weak atmosphere that support extremely high velocity winds. This allows for an extremely high level of wind erosion. It is also an accepted theory that long ago, when the planets atmosphere was stronger, water erosion could have occurred in some locations. At the present, however, it is quite impossible for water to exist on Mars in liquid form.

Account for fools
If evolution is survival of the fittest then how do explain the continued survival of unsuccessful groups of stupid humans?

This is just to easy so I won't go there. I'll assume that what you mean to say, is that you question natural selection based on the fact that people of lower intellect have flourished as opposed to dying out. This is a very easy question to answer: 1. Technology and 2. Social Reform. You don't have to be particularly bright to flip hamburgers or avoid being killed by wild animals in the modern age.

Explain why human's aren't perfect
If we are evolving why don’t we have third arms now?

Wow, okay. First off, evolution isn't an overnight deal. You don't just wake up one day mutated. Nor after being struck by lightening, or involved in an industrial accident, or exposed to gamma radiation. Mutations are random changes, most often negative ones, but rarely one that provides a new strength to the affected species. The proliferation of mutation is directly related to the ability to procreate. If a human was born with three arms, as has happened before, it would most likely put the human at a severe disadvantage as well as increase the difficulty of finding a mate. Not to mention that the mutation may not be hereditary at all. A better question would be, if humans were created in your god's image, why aren't they perfect?

Explain infant murder
If we are evolved to nature (I believe 'nurture' is the word you are looking for) our young then how do you secular humanist explain your groups pathological desire to kill yours with abortions?

Believe it or not, not all atheists kill their children or have a desire to. I would go so far as to say that using the bible as a source, the judeo-christian world has killed more children than atheists ever had. Though I assume the rules are different when the baby belongs to someone else. Incidentally, humans are not the only species on the planet known to kill their own young on occasion.

Why no bodies?
If humanity was roughly a million people living at one time. If the human race is 150,000 years old like you maintain that means there have been 150,000,000,000 who lived before the current era. If each corpse takes up 3 by 6 feet then that means the remains of human ancestors cover 1350 billion square feet of the earth! Why are we not buried under the remains of 150 billion people?

Any estimation you have regarding how many people have ever lived is most obviously not correct. So right off the bat, that negates the accuracy of your math. Secondly, it has been estimated that 40% of the humans to have ever lived did not survive past their first birthday. This, while also a 'guestimation', seems plausible and ergo makes the assumption of average body size inaccurate. Thirdly, human bodies decompose, bones included, but I didn't need to really tell you that did I?

Were do angels and demons fit into the Evolutionist tree of life?
Please explain the earliest common ancestor with all animals, angles and demons. What is their ancestry and transitional form?

They don't, because they're not real.

Explain talking snake in the garden threw (See me after class.) evolution.
Please tell me when serpents lost the power of speech and the process with which it happened. Please include any fossil of impaired speech snakes.

Serpents could never talk. Even if they could, fossil evidence would in no way be able to indicate impairments of that nature in a specific creature. Though I'm sure you will argue otherwise with circular reasoning, simply because the bible says something does not make it evidence to be disproven.

Explain the Loch Ness Monster threw evolution.
I find it hard to believe that a whole species can sustain itself from so few individuals as observed in Loch Ness. Sounds like a hole in your theory to me

Okay, the loch ness monster, assuming you mean a Plesiosaur, has been extinct for millions of years. It's as real as big foot, mothman, dracula, and frankenstein's monster. Though I might add that underwater mapping has disproven the loch ness monster's existence a few times. Seriously though, you don't believe in evolution, but you believe in Nessie?

If evolution is true, then why don't trees stretch up to the stratosphere?
Scientists say that trees grow taller and taller because natural selection forces them to compete for light with other trees. However, they have supposedly had hundreds of millions of years to evolve, but the tallest tree in the world is a mere 370 feet tall.

If evolution were true, we should be living in pitch dark, because the entire troposphere would be encased in a big sheet of tree leaves. Asked by Pastor Billy-Rueben

Thank you for asking this obviously ignorant question, Billy. Firstly, I'd like to acknowledge your casual disregard for a living being 370 feet tall. Secondly, I'd like to say that it amazes me that while members of this church ridicule the idea of gravity, round earth, and time zones, the various layers of the atmosphere have apparently found accreditation. As the answer to this question lies mostly with the strength of the Earth's gravitational pull and the weakness of our satellite's (the moon), you'll most likely ignore anything further so I'll just save myself the time.

Why don't we act like monkeys
If we are evolved from monkeys why do we behave like them; service our selves constantly an throw our feces about? Asked by Eight or Better

Well Eight, as stated previously, we did not evolve from monkeys, though self-gratification and the hurling of fecal matters is hardly restricted to them. In short, we do not act like monkeys, because we are not monkeys.

Why are there still monkey?
Evolution predicts the stronger species (humans) would crush and exterminate the weaker species(monkeys) it evolved from. Asked by ChristianSoldier

Monkeys are not competitors for the necessities of human life ergo we would have no rational reason to 'crush and exterminate' them. Once again, we did not evolve from monkeys. You are distantly related to all forms of life on this planet, do you go out of your way to crush and exterminate every puppy, pine tree, horse, or rose bush you come across?

Please account for quick extinctions.
According to evolution theory it takes millions of years for a species to go extinct. Yet we have examples of species dying out in a few hunderd years like the Dodo. Please account for this.

It is actually not unheard of for a species to go through rapid extinction. Typically when a foreign predator is introduced into a new environment, the native species have trouble adapting and can possibly be 'crushed and exterminated'. This has happened many times in modern history thanks to the proliferation of the human race, mostly. We're kind of retarded like that.

Were are ancestors and fossilizes remains of the dragon, satyr and unicorn?
I would say the lack of fossils for these three creatures presents a clear gap in the record.

Really? These aren't real things, they never were. I don't even really know how to respond to that other than to say that you should be content with a lack of proof for something that never existed.

Why are no human ancestors mentioned in The Bible?
The very fact that Neandertals, Homo-Erectuces are not mentioned in The Bible proves they are made up. I mean you would think God would have mentioned them 6,000 years ago when He wrote The Bible. duh.

Now we're getting to the nitty-gritty.
1. As mentioned previously, simply because the bible states something does not make it irrefutable evidence.
2. Not referencing something does not mean that it isn't real.
3. I think it is (nearly, obviously) universally accepted amongst the judeo christian world that your god did not personally write the bible.

Explain wasps with evolution.
Wasp paralyze spiders and then implant their young in them to feed on living, but helpless insect. If evolution was true them spiders would have anti-wasp poison in their blood. But they don’t. The only way you can get such a horrific death as those countless spiders suffer is threw the power of God.

The vast majority of wasps do not reproduce in this manner, educate yourself. For the species that do (if there are any, I'm not a 'waspologist') there would be no point in developing this ability if all of the wasp's prey were immune to it. Most likely, given a long period of time, mutations that made this process more difficult would emerge and so the wasp would have to evolve to keep up with the Jones'. Evolution does not make every creature invincible. You are susceptible to to death by asphyxiation, this does not disprove evolution.

How could Cain could procreate with his sisters if evolution was true?
If can was getting busy with his sister like The Bible relates then the human race should be a race of inbreed deformities like the English Royal Family. Instead we see the general population is healthy. This can only happen if Cain and his sister were of the pure first generation after Adam not corrupted by sins yet.

1. You assume that Cain was a real person (because the bible says so, I know.)
2. Incest does not guarantee physical deformity.
3. Using your logic, the entire human race would be an inbred mess. If anything this disproves creationism rather than evolution.

The Genealogy of Henry III
The "Evidence From Genealogy" display, donated by Edgar Nurnberg, is one of the more favorite displays of our visitors. These scrolls from the Lambeth Palace in England trace the genealogy of King Henry the 6th back to Adam and Eve.
Asked by Heathen Basher 8/18/09

Given enough time and effort I could produce genealogical records tracing back to mother goose. Simply because someone claims something that is relevant to your interests does not give it credibility, Heather.

Unicorn Horns
What so-called "evoloutionary role" does the horn on a unicorn play? I was taught evolutionary theory, and I can't figure it out! Asked by H. Montague Worthington's 8/24/09

Well Monte, your teacher might need to brush up on his trade if he allowed you to leave the class believing in unicorns.

Transitional fossils for single celled organism.
The Darwinists would have us believe that life evolved from single-celled organisms to more complicated forms. If that's true, then we should expect to see intermediaries between organisms with one cell and organisms with millions/billions/trillions of cells, but that's exactly what we don't see. Where are all the two-celled organisms that we should see if evolution was true? Where are all the five-celled organisms or twelve-celled organisms? Are we supposed to believe that 50 million amoebas randomly assembled into a fully formed flatworm by chance? Asked by Pastor Billy-Reuben. 8/25/09

Well Billy, I'm sure that even you would have to admit that the fossilization of a two-celled organism would be exceptionally hard to find. Ultimately, the fossilization process itself is one of exceptionally rare occurrence; we are quite fortunate to even have fossils at all or we might still be thinking the earth was made a few thousand years ago. (Ha ha!) The truth is that from time to time, there are evolutionary intermediaries discovered in fossils. The problem of course is that people like you are impossible to reason with. You are convinced that you are right, based entirely on faith and when given evidence to the contrary you either ignore it, or dismiss it without inquiry. But I digress, if ever we happen to find a microscopic fossil of a two celled organism, I'm sure you will be the first person contacted for factual analysis.

Why is there still mud?
Darwinists claim that life originate in mud. If you really believe that a big pile of mud turned into a fish, which sprouted legs and arms and turned into monkeys, which turned into human beings, then you're more stupid than I thought. For a start, if that's true, why's there still mud around, and why do babies not have tails like monkeys when they're born? Asked by Rachel Pierce 11/4/09

Hello Rachel, I'm glad you asked this question. You see creationists believe life originated in clay. They believe that a big pile of clay turned into a human male, I know it's more stupid than you thought. As for your observation that as of this current time, there yet exists mud in the world, and why babies don't have tails like monkeys, I can only say that your parents have failed somewhere along the way as well as your educators, but let's not kid ourselves as we know they are both the same people. Mud exists due to a very complex system commonly seen when dirt (chemical symbol, Di) and water (H2O) are mixed. As for babies not being born with tails, humans do not have tails and so there would be no reason to assume their offspring would have them (unless due to mutation). I hope that helped, Ms. Pierce.

Why don't chemicals think?
If our brains are just a mishmash of biochemistry, how come chemicals like gasoline or bug spray can't think? Rev. Jim Osborne 1/11/10

Good question, Jimbo. (Can I call you that?) To my knowledge, neither gasoline or bug spray are technically biochemicals as they are not part of the biological structure of any known organisms, but I'll assume you already knew that. So to answer your question, chemicals like gasoline and bug spray do not think because they are not living organisms. For a more in depth answer you could always do some research into the work of one Richard Dawkins, if you can get past his undeniably evil agenda that is. Despite that flaw, he is a respected evolutionary biologist and would be more than happy to give you a long dissertation regarding the biochemistry of living organisms. At the very least, he'll be wasting his time as opposed to me wasting mine looking up information that you yourself could easily find online.

Why don't we have natural clothing?
People have been wearing clothes for thousands of years. Why haven't our bodies evolved natural clothes that come out of our skin then? Rev. Jim Osborne 1/11/10

Well Jimbo, there are many, many answers to this question. I could say that clothing is not made from parts of the human body and would therefore be impossible to produce naturally. i.e. We can't grow cotton or denim or silk because we have no means to. I could also say that clothing does not directly impact the ability to reproduce and survive as a species and therefore would not really be subject to natural selection. Evolution doesn't work like a wish-list. I could go on to say that if anything, natural clothing would inhibit reproduction. Have you ever tried having sex with your clothes on? Imagine if you couldn't take them off. But in the end, I'm just going to say that we ended this series with a question that has already been dignified with more responses than it warrants. I'm starting to wonder if nobody has answered the questions as of yet because they recognized the lack of intelligence that went into postulating them.

Please be sure to refute every statement with circular reasoning and as many non-contextual bible verses as you can find. Feel free to throw in a few 'whores' or 'fags' as well, as I now the lot of you are want to do.

[God's Flaming Sword]

Re: Questions that evolutionist can’t answer

I already know this is a waste of time, but this post so thoroughly amused me I felt compelled to respond. Let me start off by saying that the above quote delivers the wrong message. You've basically identified your adversary as a group of Nazi police/scientists who believe in a religion-controlled government. I'm hope that even you can see the error in that statement, but all evidence seems to lead to the contrary. Now on to the fun.
*Note that any comments in regards to grammar or spelling are strictly annotation.

First off KirovH me laddie I am not going to reproduce your whole post again here as it is full of so much drivel it is untrue.

Do not barge into a forum for True Christians and insult one of our Good Reverends by calling him Jimbo....as unsaved trash you should know your place and respect forum members.

You haven't sited one single biblical reference in any of your post - so just for you this might be useful:

Genesis - Chapter 1

1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
3 And God said, Let there be light:and there was light.
4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.
11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.
14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
15 and let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
18 and to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.
23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.
30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.
31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
Truly God's beautiful inerrant words sum it up better than we can - He created all life.

Now please - I have given you the best start possible - Go and finish the rest of the Good Book.

[KirovH]

Re: Questions that evolutionist can’t answer

First off KirovH me laddie I am not going to reproduce your whole post again here as it is full of so much drivel it is untrue.

Do not barge into a forum for True Christians and insult one of our Good Reverends by calling him Jimbo....as unsaved trash you should know your place and respect forum members.

You haven't sited one single biblical reference in any of your post - so just for you this might be useful:

I hate to be the one to point this out, but you in fact did reproduce my whole post again, albeit without responding.

Also I would like to point out that Jimbo has never stated his dissatisfaction with the nickname and I for one respect him enough to think he is entitled to speak for himself. As your forum had by default labeled me as 'unsaved trash', I think that might also be an assumption on your part. On the contrary, I am not in need of saving as I am in no immediate danger. I didn't bother siting a biblical source as the citation of the bible had nothing to do with answering questions in regards to the truth of evolution. I'd also like to add that I've read the bible through several times in my life, and simply copy/pasting the first chapter of Genesis doesn't really mean anything to me.

As a closing remark, I find it highly amusing that I received a warning for answering questions about evolution in a thread asking for someone to answer questions about evolution. Ha ha.

Dear KirovH,

You have received an infraction at The Landover Baptist Church Forums.

Reason: Practicing occultism (science or other) on GOD's favorite forum
-------
I Timothy 6:20-21
20O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: 21Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.
-------

This infraction is worth 75 point(s) and may result in restricted access until it expires. Serious infractions will never expire.

Science = Occultism, classic. /highfive jed

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: Questions that evolutionist can’t answer

the imagined mechanism of evolution is a hidden mechanism = an occult mechanism

(some definition of "occult" from a witch is not applicable here)

it follows, then, that this is an occult science, a false science

that is why evolutionists can never answer real questions about their false belief system, and resort to ridicule when facing inevitable defeat

The best way to deal with religious people is humour and ridicule. Slag the shit out of them. Show how retarded they are in a funny way. It makes you feel better and makes a religious person feel worse, but best of all, there is no comeback for ridicule. When you can get others to laugh at a person’s stupidity it’s very difficult for them to come back from it. And let’s face it, making fun of religions is as easy as a Catholic priest raping a 9 year old altar boy with loads of lube.
One hilarious remark is worth more than 100 logical arguments against religion. Dawkins simply doesn’t get that. He does throw in a few slightly humorous and witty comments every now and again, but he totally lacks the ridiculing abilities required to show up the religious for the dumb asses that they are.

SOURCE HERE

[KirovH]

Re: Questions that evolutionist can’t answer

I honestly thought this was some kind of joke forum, but now I realize you people are just crazy. Wow.