The evidence AGAINST evolution.

by nicolaou 76 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • cyberjesus

    Now and then sounds more like now then. The tread is evidence AGAINST evolution. Invites people to discuss the topic and people posts to either pro or con and that provides interesting material. Poster who only provide complains or attacks to the board, the thread or other posters do a disservice for the people who read and have the desire to learn more.

    What makes this board a little difficult is posts likes yours who does nothing to improve this.

    Plain and simple. you dont like the thread?... dont get in. Dont like the board? go to you favorite board. Dont like zombies? Stay sleeping at night and dont watch horror movies.

    This board save my life and countless others. If we need a life.... what of the person spending time in a board of losers? what does that tell you?

    Go back to believe what you want to believe. We dont give a sh!t. What i believe, what you believe what we all believe ultimately means nothing.

  • OnTheWayOut

    Zannahdoll's video post: Evidence of God: Physics

    The physics wasn't necessarily "finely tuned" so that life could exist. Life had to adjust to exist within the conditions present. Change the conditions and either life wouldn't exist (as the speaker suggests) or completely different life would exist and the argument would remain the same for those conditions.

    Even if the odds were as incredibly against life ever existing without "creation" as suggested, enough combinations of probabilities eventually existed to defeat those odds. In other words, if life had a one in a trillion trillion trillion chances, eventually several trillion or even several trillion trillion circumstances came up to reduce those odds and life eventually defeated those odds.

    Zannahdoll's video post: The Fossil Record Proves Creation

    Creationists would demand that the fossil record produce an absolutely unchallengeable chain of fossils from single-celled life to all other life forms. The "bat and the whale" argument is a strawman because bats did not evolve into whales (or vice versa). There are more fossil proofs than creationists make it appear, and keep in mind that the overwhelmingly vast majority of all life in the past did not seek to bury the dead or preserve the dead in some way to leave fossils.

  • NowAndThen

    Whales have leg bones? Really?

    Will have to attend a dissection one of these days.

  • nicolaou
  • wobble

    Creationists would expect to find anachronistic fossils, i.e complex lifeforms where Evolutionists only expect to find "simple" lifeforms.

    Or as J.B.S Haldane put it, what would throw a spanner in the works of Evolutionary Theory would be : "Rabbits in the Pre-Cambrian"

    What do we find, the Creationist prediction ? Not yet we haven't, not one anachronistic fossil has turned up, will one ever ? Don't hold your breath.

    Creationists then have to go to the preposterous contention that "Satan" has falsified the fossil record, what nonsense.

  • ProdigalSon

    This is the most comprehensive and logical explanation I have found on how evolution really disproves Darwin and let's an intelligent and benevolent Creator back into the picture.

  • notverylikely

    This is the most comprehensive and logical explanation I have found on how evolution really works....

    This is not an occult science. This is not one of those crazy systems of divination and astrology. That stuff's hooey, and you've got to have a screw loose to go in for that sort of thing. Our beliefs are fairly commonplace and simple to understand. Humankind is simply materialized color operating on the 49th vibration. You would make that conclusion walking down the street or going to the store.

  • mkr32208

    So I guess the short answer is 'there is none?' I mean thats what I'm getting from this thread right!?

  • bohm

    Fromt the article:

    Microbiology experts tell us that 97 percent of our DNA is apparently un-used, but I have been told [I just made this up] that more and more of the chain is ''unzipping'' for those who are able to handle the new fourth-density [what are the other three?] energy structure [/believe my bullshit]. These people may not physically look any different, except perhaps more attractive in subtle ways [fat and ugly], but internally they will develop greater depths of emotion, perception, intuition, and sensitivity. [fat ugly and gullible]

    Some of the younger people will actually develop telekinesis or the ability to ''see dead people.'' [especially when they dont take their meds]. Many others often find that their bodies will no longer tolerate foods of lower vibration, and they are impelled to eat diets high in fresh organic fruits and vegetables. [and twinkies]

    Interestingly, the article newer really touch evolution.

  • nicolaou
    So I guess the short answer is 'there is none?' I mean thats what I'm getting from this thread right!?

    You nailed it mkr. When politely challenged on her comments Alice chose to run from the thread, perhaps NowAndThen will be less cowardly but I don't hold out much hope.

    What I struggle to understand is not how a person might believe in god and/or reject evolution, that's fine and it isn't necessarily a sign of greater or lesser intelligence. It's the dishonest approach to evidence, the laziness when arguing a point, the unwillingness to concede ground to your 'opponent' in the face of overwhelming proof.

    We can all, theists and atheists, be guilty of this but in my opinion it is almost always the theists who resort to 'hit and run' posting and avoidance.

    So c'mon, where IS the evidence against evolution?


Share this