[TheEarthIsRound]

Re: 20 Questions For Evilutionists

now i have read this thread and the thread about the earht being flat and i have some problems with the contradictions between the two now in this thread you ask about if the answers are reasonable right, and scientifically provable yet you denounce every scientifically provable fact and say that science is garbage and doesnt prove anything, if this is true going off your reasoning then my answer is as good as yours since neither of them can be proven by science so just as you believe the earth is flat and evolution doenst exist then at the same time my belief that the earth is round and that evolution does indeed exist must mean that both theories are true and that they are existing at the same time OBVIOUSLY causing us to live in two place at the exact same time on the exact same earth except my earth is round and yours is flat
After you have answered the preceding questions, please look carefully at your answers and thoughtfully consider the following questions.


1. Are you sure your answers are reasonable, right, and scientifically provable, or do you just believe that it may have happened the way you have answered? (Do these answers reflect your religion or your science?)



2. Do your answers show more or less faith than the person who says, "God must have designed it"?



3. Is it possible that an unseen Creator designed this universe? If God is excluded at the beginning of the discussion by your definition of science, how could it be shown that He did create the universe if He did?


4. Is it wise and fair to present the theory of evolution to students as fact?



5. What is the end result of a belief in evolution (lifestyle, society, attitude about others, eternal destiny, etc.)?



6. Do people accept evolution because of the following factors?

[JP Obregon]

Re: 20 Questions For Evilutionists

now i have read this thread and the thread about the earht being flat and i have some problems with the contradictions between the two --yadda, yadda, yadda, heathen nonsense...---
After you have answered the preceding questions, please look carefully at your answers and thoughtfully consider the following questions.


1. Are you sure your answers are reasonable, right, and scientifically provable, or do you just believe that it may have happened the way you have answered? (Do these answers reflect your religion or your science?)

What does that have to do with anything? Of course we are sure our answers are reasonable and above all RIGHT, for they come from the source of Truth® Itself, the Word of the Almighty LORD, Praise! Science away from the Truth® of the Bible is nothing but trickery of the Devil to deviate feeble, weak minds such as yours from the True© Way.

2. Do your answers show more or less faith than the person who says, "God must have designed it"?

I hope my answers show as much Faith® as possible, for faith is the only Way to Salvation®!

3. Is it possible that an unseen Creator designed this universe? If God is excluded at the beginning of the discussion by your definition of science, how could it be shown that He did create the universe if He did?

He did. Thinking otherwise is just a one-way, first-class ticket to Hell, where you will be constantly sodomized by well-endowed demons, but suit yourself...

4. Is it wise and fair to present the theory of evolution to students as fact?

As wise and fair as it would be to let them have sex outside of marriage, pursue a Homersexural lifestyle or any other horrible ways of sin. I would never let my students go to Hell, now, would you?

5. What is the end result of a belief in evolution (lifestyle, society, attitude about others, eternal destiny, etc.)?

Nazis, Communism and Hell, of course.

6. Do people accept evolution because of the following factors?

Unsaveds do...

[dalegribble]

Re: 20 Questions For Evilutionists

where did god come from?

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

Re: 20 Questions For Evilutionists

where did god come from?

Here you are - spend less than an hour of your life learning something instead of scratching your ass staring at TV with a Big Mac in your hand.

[dalegribble]

Re: 20 Questions For Evilutionists

ha i'm not going to waste my time watching this, this idiot thinks the earth is only 6,000 years old. and it's funny that you are the pastor for diversity and tolerance, because that was pretty hateful PM you sent me. how do i dock you points or whatever

[Bible Student]

Re: 20 Questions For Evilutionists

ha i'm not going to waste my time watching this, this idiot thinks the earth is only 6,000 years old. and it's funny that you are the pastor for diversity and tolerance, because that was pretty hateful PM you sent me. how do i dock you points or whatever

Did someone forget to tell you your rights at Landover Baptist Church? Calling for Pastor Ezekiel! Calling for Pastor Ezekiel! We have some Unsaved Trash who doesn't know what the Sticky Threads are for.

[Booger]

Re: 20 Questions For Evilutionists

Filthy Christ-killing joos! Why do you persecute us? The Bible is the literal Word of God! Why can't you just accept that?

I thought it was god's plan the whole time to kill jesus? How can you be mad at the jews if god wanted them to kill him? And if they didn't kill him wouldn't all your sins not be cleansed? In fact you should be praising them...Isn't logic a bitch?

[Cursed]

Re: 20 Questions For Evilutionists

I thought it was god's plan the whole time to kill jesus? How can you be mad at the jews if god wanted them to kill him? And if they didn't kill him wouldn't all your sins not be cleansed? In fact you should be praising them...Isn't logic a bitch?

For shame! This is a family forum, you watch our language missy!

[Born Again Bob]

Re: 20 Questions For Evilutionists

I thought it was god's plan the whole time to kill jesus? How can you be mad at the jews if god wanted them to kill him? And if they didn't kill him wouldn't all your sins not be cleansed? In fact you should be praising them...Isn't logic a bitch?

Mmmmm.... Have you ever been in love? It's so dreeeeeamy....

I hope you find love someday.

*bab*

[Pastor Ezekiel]

Re: 20 Questions For Evilutionists

Still no Darwinistas willing to answer these questions, eh?

Jesus wins again!

[Alterboy]

Re: 20 Questions For Evilutionists

Still no Darwinistas willing to answer these questions, eh?

Jesus wins again!

GLORY!

[NathanBrigsby]

Re: 20 Questions For Evilutionists

Still no Darwinistas willing to answer these questions, eh?







Jesus wins again!

The reason darwinists can't answer these questions is because they are all busy having intercourse with monkeys and chimpanzees. I cannot believe sinners like those exist. It's bad enough they don't believe in Christ and the Lord, it's bad enough they plant fake evidence such as mass manufactured "dinosaur bones" across the world that probably say "Made In China", but making justifications for animal-human intercourse is disgusting. In the name of the Almighty, they will pay for their sins in eternal damnation.

[murdythenumbskull]

Re: 20 Questions For Evilutionists

You got shot down in the first day? Now you bring up a 2 year old thread. Want more? All joking aside please look over thoroughly if you wish, as I will answer these the best that I can.

1. Where did the space for the universe come from?

The space in the universe is infinite, you can't reach an end of it. Only being able to be further from one origin to another.

2. Where did matter come from?

It is believed to be a singular point of matter that chain reacted, whether it was the foundation of the universe or the excretion of another is undecided. However there are also theories on colliding systems of matter that interact violently and created an explosion a supernova pales to. My opinion if it matters to you(no pun intended) is that of not distinguishing a single smallest particle, unlike the string theory and god particle(boson), I believe that matter retracts infinitely at any point, becoming smaller and smaller to indistinguishable areas. In my mind an entire solar system can exist at the end of a hair. Not that I literally think of that at every end of hair, but in a matter-wise relation that's how I regard matter and the density of particles.

3. Where did the laws of the universe come from (gravity, inertia, etc.)?

Matter is just a bunch of particles, when they congregate closely they create a larger mass which makes a larger weight and pull for gravity. They came from the matter that passes in space. Inertia comes from the lack of resistance of other particles, when friction is present, the resistance will slow the kinetic energy and transfer it into either heat or momentum. I'm guessing you'd like to know about light, sound, electromagnetic waves. Light was established as photons, they travel in waves and spectrums and are energized by plasma sources. The way light travels has been further investigated and sufficiently examined in new ways with equipment and viewing methods provided by MIT on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_9vd4HWlVA. It reflects in the same properties and laws as inertia, the impact of these very small particles are less noticeable but still there. Sound waves work as vibrations which travel like waves you would see on a sonar screen, they will start from their original point in an omnidirectional scatter pattern, and bounce off of surfaces that are resistant to passing the vibrations. (solids, less with water[water will still affect the speed and direction these waves travel though]). Frequencies at which these vibrations oscillate at change the pitches and tone of the noise. Electromagnetism operates like light, because light that we see is a part of the spectrum of electromagnetic radiation. Also being a part of these waves are radio waves, infrared and uv light, and x-rays. They all work within the laws of gravity and inertia but the spectrums and frequencies determine the resistance the particles receive. Sorry for not making this any shorter, but I believe you are looking for a more thorough answer.

4. How did matter get so perfectly organized?

It's not necessarily perfect(if it were, why would we have to construct so many buildings and homes), what we have here on earth is the product of diffusion, lets say there's an empty space and a dust bomb explodes; when the dust settles it will gather together due to gravity. The way it comes back together isn't really predictable, just as the amount of meteorites that drop matter onto the planet after formation to give the crust so much iron and aluminum isn't able to be determined. The construction of cells comes together from the buildup of membranes, energy transfer systems developing in cells and eventually modes of transportation like a flicking tail-like attachment to let the cell go mobile. It doesn't necessarily get organized, it runs it's course. It's not like volcanoes would sit idle when building up pressure. It all reacts sequentially and leads up to what we know today.

5. Where did the energy come from to do all the organizing?

Energy is transferred, whether it was the potential energy pent up before a big bang, or the reactions that take place in a supernova, there is quantities of energy that exist in the universe to fuel life as we know it for eons beyond what we believe we have. The sun itself is a gigantic resource of fuel through nuclear fusion. All of the water on earth is also a fuel, electrolysis can act as a process to separate the molecule into HHO which is the main sources in combustion rockets. The energy comes from the particles that have the potential to transfer potential to kinetic. Say before the big bang there were just reactive chemicals to compounds that would cause such an explosion to propel the galaxies of matter away from this central point, if this matter was present at that time it wouldn't be created, it would be awaiting it's initiation to transfer the potential energy it holds for the reaction into the kinetic motion and explosion that propels all of this matter.

6. When, where, why, and how did life come from dead matter?

It isn't necessarily dead matter, more of developing nuclei and other membranes to send signals to different parts of the cells. I don't think you can pin a when or where to this as it could occur on any planet. The way all the cells handle ATP, cellular respiration, and the conversion from the nutrients the specific cell handles to the adenosine triphosphate and wasted molecules in this reaction all give the organism this piece of life. From this point the enzymes that code and construct DNA and RNA give instruction to send out to major celled organisms and store all the information that is critical to the processes of growing.

7. When, where, why, and how did life learn to reproduce itself?

When and where again not necessary. After chromosomes were developed from these large strands of DNA cells would clone themselves by replicating a second chromosome and start to form all the other components of the cell around it, as well as the membranes. This happens because proteins naturally became more and more complex, which developed larger quantities of resources and waste products with more instructions to run them. Life replication became a larger scale of this meiosis, and involves organs to transport DNA directly into fertile germ cells which are labeled gametes and are the sources of babies and reproduction, but are executed in the same processes as explained above.

8. With what did the first cell capable of sexual reproduction reproduce?

Would have to be there? I'm not a man with a time machine. Maybe God can relay the answer to you so you can let me in on this.

9. Why would any plant or animal want to reproduce more of its kind since this would only make more mouths to feed and decrease the chances of survival? (Does the individual have a drive to survive, or the species? How do you explain this?)

Mouths to feed? So if there was an abundance of food to go in the mouth you think nature wouldn't instinctively fill up the population of the consumer of this resource? I can explain this through supply-demand, bottleneck effects, really it depends on what sources and organisms we are specifically talking about Reverend. (this would be one of those questions where you'd be like, Bats, Owls, Venus Fly Traps.)

10. How can mutations (recombining of the genetic code) create any new, improved varieties? (Recombining English letters will never produce Chinese books.)

No, DNA does not work like characters. Let's say there is an abundance of land and a shortening frontier of water. A mutation of boney more endurant fins would benefit the ability to attain a new food source on land. Another example would be if a mutation made the appendages of a fowl lighter to keep flight times less straining on the amount of energy used in each flap in flight for looking for food or nesting. Another would be a change in a rodent's fur color from white to brown to fit into a woodland area to not be preyed on by snakes, owls, hawks, and other predators.
If you really are out of touch with the other half of the world, they are experiencing a Romanization. You may think they will not use the Latin-Alphabet, but they do and have been incorporating a transfer of these dialects into a language in our alphabet called 'Pinyin'

11. Is it possible that similarities in design between different animals prove a common Creator instead of a common ancestor?

Is it possible that if the world was not ever frozen over and there were no arctic critters created that they would not be able to adapt with new coats of fur, habits, diets, migrations, or hibernations? I guess I shouldn't answer with a question. I believe it is very possible for animals to have a common ancestor. If they had a common creator, why would flightless birds have vestigial appendages, seemingly should be phased out into more useful limbs and bones but still very apparent in these organisms.

12. Natural selection only works with the genetic information available and tends only to keep a species stable. How would you explain the increasing complexity in the genetic code that must have occurred if evolution were true?

I'm not sure what is meant by the genetic information available, if this refers to the mutations that allows certain mutations to be prevalent in bottleneck effect scenarios then that is why the genetic code is prevalent and to your perspective more complex? Just trying to understand the question.

13. When, where, why, and how did
a. Single-celled plants become multi-celled? (Where are the two and three-celled intermediates?)
b. Single-celled animals evolve?
c. Fish change to amphibians?
d. Amphibians change to reptiles?
e. Reptiles change to birds? (The lungs, bones, eyes, reproductive organs, heart, method of locomotion, body covering, etc., are all very different!)
f. How did the intermediate forms live?

a.) All cells operate the same, plants rarely have single-celled organisms, algae is one, but the only one I can think of. What I know is the change from a single-celled unit takes place by mitosis, cloning the information of the cell structure, in order to cohere the chlorophyll from one cell to another.

b.) The animal kingdom does not have a single celled organism, these are classified into the Protista kingdom. There are clues to the beginning of the animal kingdom in predator-like protista organisms but this will not be confirmed until further investigation in the future.

c.) Fish could have advanced into amphibians for many reasons, food sources, climate changes, predatory levels, comfortableness after mutations. They all describe the situations that persisted after countless relentless decades of trial and error, natural selection doesn't tend to be an overnight sequence. The growth of legs would either be a mutation or reinforced muscle developed by these creatures.

d.) Reptiles most likely did not evolve from amphibians, as they share more features in common with birds and fish than amphibians. Reptiles have common vertebrae and circulatory systems, as well as digestive tracks.

e.) Birds are determined by archaeologists to be in between the Paleozoic and Mesozoic eras which is when dinosaurs were in existence, and before the smaller reptiles were around. There structures were the products of those immediate ancestors breaking into new ground just like the fins developing into pedal laying feet. Comparing nesting traits is one way to link these groups into a more relative timeline.

f.) Strangely I would say. When you watch a tadpole slowly turn into a frog or a caterpillar into a butterfly does it not surprise you? These organisms in between these stages of new habitats most likely struggled and many died off in an attempt to assimilate with the new way of life, sadly.

14. When, where, why, how, and from what did:
a. Whales evolve?
b. Sea horses evolve?
c. Bats evolve?
d. Eyes evolve?
e. Ears evolve?
f. Hair, skin, feathers, scales, nails, claws, etc., evolve?

a.) Dorudon are the ancestors of whales and dolphin, and oddly enough had small rear legs. The Rodhocetus was the gap when mammals diverted heavily into a saltwater habitat, by forming webbed feet and a fin ended tail.

b.) Seahorses are relatives to the pipefish. As a fun fact; did you know that the male seahorse is the one that goes through labor and gives birth?

c.) Bats are not as easy to identify, because of the brittle bone structure the likeliness for the fossil to survive would be in the most pristine and optimum conditions. I don't believe it is too far-fetched for these flying rodents to appear, as we have seen the similarities crossed between squirrels and flying squirrels, or dorudon's adaptation with echolocation to distinguish the highly intelligent dolphin variety.

d.) Eyes took hold on bottom-feeding ocean floor-dwelling arthropods, marrella. these creatures are invertebrate with exoskeletons and developed compound eyes to differentiate food sources through the minimum exposure of light.

e.) Inner ears were developed with fish, and all animals with vertebrae. Cephalization refers to the neurological link between the complex sensory organs, the brain, and the vertebral column. All of these things are relative to the protein intake and growth of a more complex neurological system.

f.) All of these extremity appendages are developed out of coping in climate changes after generations. Claws and nails are different. While nails are more specifically for grooming claws became necessary for gripping in sea creatures, balancing in later tetrapods, and used offensively and also for gripping in later species.

15. Which evolved first (how, and how long, did it work without the others)?
a. The digestive system, the food to be digested, the appetite, the ability to find and eat the food, the digestive juices, or the body痴 resistance to its own digestive juice (stomach, intestines, etc.)?
b. The drive to reproduce or the ability to reproduce?
c. The lungs, the mucus lining to protect them, the throat, or the perfect mixture of gases to be breathed into the lungs?
d. DNA or RNA to carry the DNA message to cell parts?
e. The termite or the flagella in its intestines that actually digest the cellulose?
f. The plants or the insects that live on and pollinate the plants?
g. The bones, ligaments, tendons, blood supply, or muscles to move the bones?
h. The nervous system, repair system, or hormone system?
i. The immune system or the need for it?

a.) Eukaryotes possessed a digestive system, and this organic structure existed to a dated 3.5 billion years. These protists were cannibals consuming other smaller protista. This is all thanks to the fossil stromatolites found almost a decade ago that dated and showed the remnants of photosynthetic bacteria. Back then it simply was a mouth pore, gullet and vacuoles which excreted unused cytoplasmic resources through an anal pore, the first one way digestive tract. A two way digestive system is what involves the bile inside of a gallbladder or pancreas, or chambers within a stomach, and lead to intestines to aid in consuming multiple meals before the first is done being processed, distributed and excreted.

b.) Ever since the first cell existed so did the cloning process which would reproduce and start the chain of life that we know today to be.

c.) Echinoderms were the first to establish gills. Things relative to sea cucumbers, urchins, starfish, sea lilies, sand dollars and brittle stars. These appeared around 550 million years ago in the Cambrian period, the first period of the Paleozoic Era. The quantity of oxygen first consumed on these creatures would be whatever molecules the gills would intake, reaction takes place to disperse the oxygen into their circulation.

d.) mRNA and the enzymes used to transcribe it would be the original culprits for working in the nucleus

e.) Flagella. They have existed in eukaryotes which are the foremost known organic structure in the timeline of Earth.

f.) Photosynthetic bacteria are the same family as algae, which classifies as a plant. The first organic structures could have also included these over 3 billion years ago.

g.) Bones, ligaments, tendons, a circulatory system, and muscles all became distinguished in c. Echinoderms. Prior to this sponges were not capable of having any of these tissues, the only process they attained was a digestive system aided by the flow of water to deposit nutrients into the tracts and flagella to assist that.

h.) Also another evolution of the Echinoderm, the nervous system was introduced at this stage. Hormones are present in some species of echinoderms but as for others asexual reproduction is possible. Hormones become more abundant in fish than these creatures.

i.) As long as there was a circulatory system in the cytoplasm of cells there were mechanisms to keep microbes from polluting the cell, although unanswered this is possibly the first sign of the traits of immune systems. Operating through membranes inhibitors would allow the right proteins that would fit like a key where they were needed. The complexity of the immune system has evolved into a catalogue of all the viruses, bacteria, microbes, parasites, and whatever the body responds to as damaging so that it can function properly and continue to strengthen it's own defenses

16. There are many thousands of examples of symbiosis that defy an evolutionary explanation. Why must we teach students that evolution is the only explanation for these relationships?

They are taught because these are the changes that have taken place even under symbiotic relationships. While evolution is believed to be the product of predatory threats and competition for food, breeding, and nesting. But the relationships 2 organisms share that result in a co-dependency can also result in a co-evolution, which has traits that help the dependent interactions succeed more often and strengthen the 2 organisms chances of survival.

17. How would evolution explain mimicry? Did the plants and animals develop mimicry by chance, by their intelligent choice, or by design?

Chance.

18. When, where, why, and how did man evolve feelings? Love, mercy, guilt, etc. would never evolve in the theory of evolution.

Technically they can, say you wouldn't know mercy without brutality, or love without a companion, or do you believe deceit was a feeling an action before jealousy or any motive for it existed?

19. How did photosynthesis evolve?

The plantae kingdom all possess chlorophyll. Which either became from a eukaryote or fungi that developed the processes and structures capable of intaking light sources to convert into cells fuel for further reactions.

20. How did thought evolve?

When stimulations in mammals brains went beyond just basic motivations for bare necessities like food shelter mating and not becoming a victim to a predator. In a scientific answer the advanced cephalization made it possible for sensory organs to gather more information than necessary causing lapses in activity and advancing memory and the details stirred in our neurological system.

21. How did flowering plants evolve, and from what?

From the start: green algae developed into larger more complex bodies of plants called Embryophytes which are standard plants on land. Much of which are vegetation like ferns and mosses, all around 540 million years ago. Eventually leading to plants that create seeds within their own fertilization 370 million years ago, from this point the ancestors of flowering plants diverge from these species around 240-150 million years ago which require external pollenization from the stamen to the pollen sacs.

22. What kind of evolutionist are you? Why are you not one of the other eight or ten kinds?

I'm a man simply living life. I don't expect any rewards as life is great in itself. I have no need to debit my existence in tribulations of afterlife complications, as I am content being a good person with no regrets of my actions and experiences.

23. What would you have said fifty years ago if I told you I had a living coelacanth in my aquarium?

I don't eat seafood. What if I were to tell you I saw a great white while spearfishing in the Ft. Pierce inlet in Florida?

24. Is there one clear prediction of macroevolution that has proved true?

Since evolution has only been theorized since early 1800s I don't believe there has been enough time to fully map out and predict the next big leap in a species adaptation. Considering man-kind has progressed so rapidly and became so adept at exterminating species it might be a wise prediction to say there could possibly a countering to our attacks some day. Whether it will come to fruition would be in debate until that day comes.

25. What is so scientific about the idea of hydrogen gas becoming human?

Hydrogen gas, if you refer to the remnants of the core creating carbon and carbon and oxygen molecule structures; it is only human when relating it to all the building blocks of organic compounds it took to make the cells, protists, structures in bacteria and plants, so on and so forth...if you wish to believe.

26. Do you honestly believe that everything came from nothing?

Nothing came from nothing. I honestly believe each division of matter is to complex even beyond atom's and sub-atomic particles. I believe there is much more to this; beyond a microscopic level there are infinite levels of dimension, which someone would like to think would end somewhere, but I don't. It is important to me that this theory will be further reinforced in the future when god particle and string theories get discarded by smaller particles and discoveries leading to the fact that all matter here in the universe will always be here, and can only be changed not destroyed or created.

Post-Questionnaire Report

1. Are you sure your answers are reasonable, right, and scientifically provable, or do you just believe that it may have happened the way you have answered? (Do these answers reflect your religion or your science?)

Reasonable, yes. Right, they are very close if they are wrong. Scientifically provable, mostly, if requested I will give legitimate sources. The only answer I believe to be my own theory is the dimension of matter. Others exist I choose to ignore the scope of 'what is the smallest thing in existence'.

2. Do your answers show more or less faith than the person who says, "God must have designed it"?

My answers show less faith, but more commitment. There are no cop outs in the truth of the universe so it is up to mankind to interrogate the inner workings, it would be nice to receive credit for deciphering or reverse engineering existence.

3. Is it possible that an unseen Creator designed this universe? If God is excluded at the beginning of the discussion by your definition of science, how could it be shown that He did create the universe if He did?

Is it possible that an array of unknown elements forged this creator that disobeyed the laws of the universe. If it is then whatever being that somehow has existed has done an excellent job of being unseen for the remainder of the periods humans have been around. What bewilders me is why all the galaxies are expanding and traveling further away, if it were a big stasis in space it would be much harder to pinpoint an origin of all the matter in every galaxy we can see with our most advanced technology. When we get a better look at the crime scene that is the origin of all the galaxies first point we might be able to explain what might have taken place in the time before it.

4. Is it wise and fair to present the theory of evolution to students as fact?

I don't believe it has been done, it isn't fair to present anything as a fact that is still in a theory or hypothesis stage. It is why our justice system(don't think of the flaws!) is the way it is. We want to prove beyond a reasonable doubt before we set in stone the truth as we know it and forever will.

5. What is the end result of a belief in evolution (lifestyle, society, attitude about others, eternal destiny, etc.)?

Comfort, expectations of the future, tolerance of lifeforms, understanding of the sacrifices and delicate balance this planet ran on to lead up to the present day. Why would you want to never learn the history of our home?

6. Do people accept evolution because of the following factors?
a. It is all they have been taught.
b. They like the freedom from God (no moral absolutes, etc.).
c. They are bound to support the theory for fear of losing their job or status or grade point average.
d. They are too proud to admit they are wrong.
e. Evolution is the only philosophy that can be used to justify their political agenda.

a.) Most of the people I was taught with were given the same stories as me, we all have had children's bibles and were told Adam and Eve, and Noah's ark as the truth. Hearing something that made a little more sense might have been what spurred people to pursue a more scientific approach.

b.) First hearing about evolution doesn't prove God is not real, some in my class struggled to accept evolution because of a heavy creationism attachment, but the morals that incurred from our religious background is not why we pursue our scientific understanding. Philosophically universal truths can be a much stronger bond to moral fiber than a threat of eternal damnation.

c.) I have never heard of this before

d.) Why would pride intervene with the educational process. Academics are essential for development and growth of the mind, we are told of many other theories in the course of scientific classes but should definitely not reject the principles and efforts of their work because of pride.

e.) I am not familiar with political science so I do not know how it affects any areas of democracy besides the education system. If they are using evolution to support schooling in campaign then they are grasping at straws to make it in that industry.

7. Should we continue to use outdated, disproved, questionable, or inconclusive evidences to support the theory of evolution because we don't have a suitable substitute (Piltdown man, recapitulation, archaeopteryx, Lucy, Java man, Neanderthal man, horse evolution, vestigial organs, etc.)?

Yes! It is a theory; so if someone claims it to be fact and the history of earth they would be an awful mistake. It Archaeologists are always working to find better well-kempt specimens to further reinforce their findings they've made previously. It is a hard field because it's like treasure hunting but I believe it's worth it, it is the history of our world buried beneath us.

8. Should parents be allowed to require that evolution not be taught as fact in their school system unless equal time is given to other theories of origins (like divine creation)?

Because schools are institutions of the state, and evolution is a theory of science, it is practical to have the theory taught in schools. In the United States our forefathers declared there to be a separation of state. While this is sometimes a fuzzy line of separation it must be upheld. Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State. It is like a cage for an animal in layman's terms, we want to protect the government's establishment from the influences of religion, and also protect religion from the establishment of regulation and government.

9. What are you risking if you are wrong? As one of my debate opponents said, "Either there is a God or there is not. Both possibilities are frightening."

I am risking nothing as I am happy with my life and am not frightened of any consequences for the way I live.

10. Why are many evolutionists afraid of the idea of creationism being presented in public schools? If we are not supposed to teach religion in schools, then why not get evolution out of the textbooks? It is just a religious worldview.

Evolution is a religious worldview? I don't think so. If creationism gave legitimate theories to the proposed methods of how things actually were 'created' with some forms of real evidence, then I'm sure it would stand a chance of being implemented in curriculums and lessons.

11. Aren't you tired of faith in a system that cannot be true? Wouldn't it be great to know the God who made you, and to accept His love and forgiveness?

Not quite sure what system is being referred to as not true, but the world we live in is all true. The creation of my being is very appreciated, and I would like to give my thanks to the things responsible. Like when evolution gets proven, I will have much joy in accrediting the lineage of all species for coming so far to progress the advancement of all races and creatures

12. Would you be interested, if I showed you from the Bible, how to have your sins forgiven and how to know for sure that you are going to Heaven? If so, click on the Paypal button at the bottom of this screen.

I understand the processes of forgiveness and am not interested. I will fight until I die to live without ideas being forced upon me that I do not agree with. Oppressing an imaginary hell-scape does not budge my stance.


P.S. Sorry for my lengthy responses :0

[Didymus Much]

Re: 20 Questions For Evilutionists

...P.S. Sorry for my lengthy responses :0

That's the same score I give it: 0

[Basilissa]

Re: 20 Questions For Evilutionists

Goodness gracious, you should be in Congress. You have an innate ability to produce lengthy documents with lots of words and zero meaning.

The space in the universe is infinite, you can't reach an end of it. Only being able to be further from one origin to another.

Yet you believe that at some point in time (specifically, at the beginning of time) that entire infinity was condensed into a space smaller than head of a pin.

2. Where did matter come from?
It is believed to be a singular point of matter that chain reacted, whether it was the foundation of the universe or the excretion of another is undecided. However there are also theories on colliding systems of matter that interact violently and created an explosion a supernova pales to. My opinion if it matters to you(no pun intended) is that of not distinguishing a single smallest particle, unlike the string theory and god particle(boson), I believe that matter retracts infinitely at any point, becoming smaller and smaller to indistinguishable areas. In my mind an entire solar system can exist at the end of a hair. Not that I literally think of that at every end of hair, but in a matter-wise relation that's how I regard matter and the density of particles.

All that talk doesn't explain, where did matter come from? How can you create something from nothing - without a God?

6. When, where, why, and how did life come from dead matter?

It isn't necessarily dead matter, more of developing nuclei and other membranes to send signals to different parts of the cells. I don't think you can pin a when or where to this as it could occur on any planet. The way all the cells handle ATP, cellular respiration, and the conversion from the nutrients the specific cell handles to the adenosine triphosphate and wasted molecules in this reaction all give the organism this piece of life. From this point the enzymes that code and construct DNA and RNA give instruction to send out to major celled organisms and store all the information that is critical to the processes of growing.

You are not answering the question: where did the first life come from - how did the transition from inorganic to organic happen? I think that in labs you can create basic aminoacids, but the next step?

7. When, where, why, and how did life learn to reproduce itself?

When and where again not necessary. After chromosomes were developed... blah blah...

wait, wait, what? How were they developed? From what?

8. With what did the first cell capable of sexual reproduction reproduce?

Would have to be there? I'm not a man with a time machine. Maybe God can relay the answer to you so you can let me in on this.

I thought that evolution assumed no participation of God?

10. How can mutations (recombining of the genetic code) create any new, improved varieties? (Recombining English letters will never produce Chinese books.)

No, DNA does not work like characters. Let's say there is an abundance of land and a shortening frontier of water. A mutation of boney more endurant fins would benefit the ability to attain a new food source on land.

You do realize that according to Darwinian theory, the mutations happen by chance - which means that in case of"abundance of land and shortening frontier of water" most species will simply die out, not adapt.

11. Is it possible that similarities in design between different animals prove a common Creator instead of a common ancestor?

Is it possible that if the world was not ever frozen over and there were no arctic critters created that they would not be able to adapt with new coats of fur, habits, diets, migrations, or hibernations? I guess I shouldn't answer with a question.

No, you shouldn't

I believe it is very possible for animals to have a common ancestor.

Isn't the evolution supposed to be based on evidence, not belief?

b.) The animal kingdom does not have a single celled organism

Umm... don't protozoa (e.g.: amoeba) ring a bell?

c.) Fish could have advanced into amphibians for many reasons, food sources, climate changes, predatory levels, comfortableness after mutations. They all describe the situations that persisted after countless relentless decades of trial and error, natural selection doesn't tend to be an overnight sequence. The growth of legs would either be a mutation or reinforced muscle developed by these creatures.

Darwinian and Lamarckian theories in one sentence, that must be a new record

e.) Birds are determined by archaeologists to be in between the Paleozoic and Mesozoic eras which is when dinosaurs were in existence, and before the smaller reptiles were around. There structures were the products of those immediate ancestors breaking into new ground just like the fins developing into pedal laying feet. Comparing nesting traits is one way to link these groups into a more relative timeline.

Aren't you supposed to say something about dinosaurs with feathers and Archaeopteryx?

18. When, where, why, and how did man evolve feelings? Love, mercy, guilt, etc. would never evolve in the theory of evolution.

Technically they can, say you wouldn't know mercy without brutality, or love without a companion, or do you believe deceit was a feeling an action before jealousy or any motive for it existed?

Avoiding the answer again

26. Do you honestly believe that everything came from nothing?

Nothing came from nothing.

So what was before Big Bang? Where did all the "everything" come from?

2. Do your answers show more or less faith than the person who says, "God must have designed it"?

My answers show less faith, but more commitment.

Oh, really?