Evidence for God from Science

Kenny wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:I started this thread with good intentions to be changed based on scientific evidence life evolves but if we go back through and look for evidence I think that evidence for evolution is about being ignorant about evolutution and being offended and taking it personally that another disagrees with you about evolution,declarations it is true,that change is evolution and variations in reproduction plus the fact life can adapt is evidence life evolves.

If you see flaws in Evolution; what is stopping you from publishing your findings, and becoming world famously known as the man who disproved evolution

abelcainsbrother wrote:How am I to know I was wrong and you are right about evolution without evidence life evolves?

What evidence have you been looking at?

abelcainsbrother wrote:I'm not at all convinced that a christian should be willing to accept evolution and have to not take the bible literally in order to accept it without evidence life evolves.I'll stick with reading the bible literally and rejecting life evolves based on the evidence in science.

Even the Pope accepts evolution! And the Vatican called creation “blasphemous”.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/church/2014/1 ... #.VJ1W_psA

Ken

The world wide conspiracy will never permit the publication of
such disproof of evolution.

(Does that explain why AIG etc only publish falsehoods / misrepresentations etc?)

Kenny wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Kenny wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote: What I said about the depth of the oceans is true.I do not have to prove the earth's surface was level,

Yes you do! Because unless the earth’s surface is level, we don’t have enough water for a global flood thus your argument fails.
Care to try again?

abelcainsbrother wrote:I do not deny the evidence you gave for evolution because life can adapt and survive hostile environments but explain to us how the insects evolved because they are the same kind of insect as before the insecticide was added,

True! A mosquito that has evolved is often still a mosquito. The fact that you are unaware of this proves the point I made previously that most people who dismiss evolution are ignorant of it.

abelcainsbrother wrote:I will remind you that evolution has always been about one kind of life evolving into another kind of life

No it has not. Evolution has never been restricted to “species change”.

abelcainsbrother wrote:My evidence for a global world wide flood is stronger evidence.

Until you can provide scientific proof that the Earth’s surface was level, your argument will continue to fail.

Ken

It did not evolve because it remained a mosquito,so no evolution happened at all,it only adapted and evolution has always been about "species change "and your denials is telling.

You are wrong. I gave you examples of Evolution; I even provided a link that supports my claim. Do you have anything (other than your personal POV) that supports your claim? Or are you content with burying your head in the sand insisting what science calls evolution is not evolution?

Ken

I tried to explain to you why showing insects,plants,etc adapt is not evidence life evolves,yet you believe what scientists say instead of go by what their evidence shows.Despite your denials evolution means one kind of life evolves into another kind of life yet you must weaken this to variations in reproduction and adaptation in order to claim they evolved.It is you changing the meaning in the middle of the game hoping nobody will notice,but we do know variations in reproduction and life adapting is not evidence one kind of life evolves into another kind of life no matter what scientists say.

Audie wrote:

Kenny wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:I started this thread with good intentions to be changed based on scientific evidence life evolves but if we go back through and look for evidence I think that evidence for evolution is about being ignorant about evolutution and being offended and taking it personally that another disagrees with you about evolution,declarations it is true,that change is evolution and variations in reproduction plus the fact life can adapt is evidence life evolves.

If you see flaws in Evolution; what is stopping you from publishing your findings, and becoming world famously known as the man who disproved evolution

abelcainsbrother wrote:How am I to know I was wrong and you are right about evolution without evidence life evolves?

What evidence have you been looking at?

abelcainsbrother wrote:I'm not at all convinced that a christian should be willing to accept evolution and have to not take the bible literally in order to accept it without evidence life evolves.I'll stick with reading the bible literally and rejecting life evolves based on the evidence in science.

Even the Pope accepts evolution! And the Vatican called creation “blasphemous”.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/church/2014/1 ... #.VJ1W_psA

Ken

The world wide conspiracy will never permit the publication of
such disproof of evolution.

(Does that explain why AIG etc only publish falsehoods / misrepresentations etc?)

True Audie and you've never heard me bring AIG evidence into this.I go by the evidence scientists use for evolution and I see myself how weak it is.

Kenny wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:I started this thread with good intentions to be changed based on scientific evidence life evolves but if we go back through and look for evidence I think that evidence for evolution is about being ignorant about evolutution and being offended and taking it personally that another disagrees with you about evolution,declarations it is true,that change is evolution and variations in reproduction plus the fact life can adapt is evidence life evolves.

If you see flaws in Evolution; what is stopping you from publishing your findings, and becoming world famously known as the man who disproved evolution

abelcainsbrother wrote:How am I to know I was wrong and you are right about evolution without evidence life evolves?

What evidence have you been looking at?

abelcainsbrother wrote:I'm not at all convinced that a christian should be willing to accept evolution and have to not take the bible literally in order to accept it without evidence life evolves.I'll stick with reading the bible literally and rejecting life evolves based on the evidence in science.

Even the Pope accepts evolution! And the Vatican called creation “blasphemous”.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/church/2014/1 ... #.VJ1W_psA

Ken

I've been trying to convince Christians old earth Gap theory creationism is the only creation theory that can defeat evolution.I do not think it can happen through peer review but from the outside by teaching the truth to the masses of people decieved by evolution.Satan fights hard to keep this truth suppressed just like he uses astrology to cover up the truth about the 12 signs in the heavens that represented the 12 tribes of Israel in the OT but line up with the NT too. Like Leo representing the lion of the tribe of Judah Jesus Christ,Virgo representijg the virgin birth of Jesus Christ,etc.Evolution is a cover up to cover up the truth

I don't go by what people say including the Pope I go by the evidence in science used as evidence for evolution.With no real evidence in science life evolves the Gap theory will be more believable using much of the same evidence evolutionists use,especially when we tell the truth about how this evidence was hyjacked away from christians who started modern science in order to use it for evolution like evidence the earth is old and not young,the fossils,evidence of death and extinction in the earth,etc.

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Kenny wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Kenny wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote: What I said about the depth of the oceans is true.I do not have to prove the earth's surface was level,

Yes you do! Because unless the earth’s surface is level, we don’t have enough water for a global flood thus your argument fails.
Care to try again?

abelcainsbrother wrote:I do not deny the evidence you gave for evolution because life can adapt and survive hostile environments but explain to us how the insects evolved because they are the same kind of insect as before the insecticide was added,

True! A mosquito that has evolved is often still a mosquito. The fact that you are unaware of this proves the point I made previously that most people who dismiss evolution are ignorant of it.

abelcainsbrother wrote:I will remind you that evolution has always been about one kind of life evolving into another kind of life

No it has not. Evolution has never been restricted to “species change”.

abelcainsbrother wrote:My evidence for a global world wide flood is stronger evidence.

Until you can provide scientific proof that the Earth’s surface was level, your argument will continue to fail.

Ken

It did not evolve because it remained a mosquito,so no evolution happened at all,it only adapted and evolution has always been about "species change "and your denials is telling.

You are wrong. I gave you examples of Evolution; I even provided a link that supports my claim. Do you have anything (other than your personal POV) that supports your claim? Or are you content with burying your head in the sand insisting what science calls evolution is not evolution?

Ken

I tried to explain to you why showing insects,plants,etc adapt is not evidence life evolves,yet you believe what scientists say instead of go by what their evidence shows.Despite your denials evolution means one kind of life evolves into another kind of life yet you must weaken this to variations in reproduction and adaptation in order to claim they evolved.

Where did you get this definition? Did you just make it up yourself? A fellow creationist? You obviously didn’t get it from science.

Judging from your replies; it’s obvious you agree with what is referred to as “micro evolution”; and disagree with macro evolution.
If you have serious questions about the evidence of macro evolution; why not address your concerns to a paleontologist; an expert in the field? And if your concerns have merit, maybe you can become rich and famous as the person who disproved evolution! Unless of course you don’t like the idea of being rich and famous.

Ken

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Audie wrote:

Kenny wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:I started this thread with good intentions to be changed based on scientific evidence life evolves but if we go back through and look for evidence I think that evidence for evolution is about being ignorant about evolutution and being offended and taking it personally that another disagrees with you about evolution,declarations it is true,that change is evolution and variations in reproduction plus the fact life can adapt is evidence life evolves.

If you see flaws in Evolution; what is stopping you from publishing your findings, and becoming world famously known as the man who disproved evolution

abelcainsbrother wrote:How am I to know I was wrong and you are right about evolution without evidence life evolves?

What evidence have you been looking at?

abelcainsbrother wrote:I'm not at all convinced that a christian should be willing to accept evolution and have to not take the bible literally in order to accept it without evidence life evolves.I'll stick with reading the bible literally and rejecting life evolves based on the evidence in science.

Even the Pope accepts evolution! And the Vatican called creation “blasphemous”.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/church/2014/1 ... #.VJ1W_psA

Ken

The world wide conspiracy will never permit the publication of
such disproof of evolution.

(Does that explain why AIG etc only publish falsehoods / misrepresentations etc?)

True Audie and you've never heard me bring AIG evidence into this.I go by the evidence scientists use for evolution and I see myself how weak it is.

name one research paper you have read

Audie wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Audie wrote:

Kenny wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:I started this thread with good intentions to be changed based on scientific evidence life evolves but if we go back through and look for evidence I think that evidence for evolution is about being ignorant about evolutution and being offended and taking it personally that another disagrees with you about evolution,declarations it is true,that change is evolution and variations in reproduction plus the fact life can adapt is evidence life evolves.

If you see flaws in Evolution; what is stopping you from publishing your findings, and becoming world famously known as the man who disproved evolution

abelcainsbrother wrote:How am I to know I was wrong and you are right about evolution without evidence life evolves?

What evidence have you been looking at?

abelcainsbrother wrote:I'm not at all convinced that a christian should be willing to accept evolution and have to not take the bible literally in order to accept it without evidence life evolves.I'll stick with reading the bible literally and rejecting life evolves based on the evidence in science.

Even the Pope accepts evolution! And the Vatican called creation “blasphemous”.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/church/2014/1 ... #.VJ1W_psA

Ken

The world wide conspiracy will never permit the publication of
such disproof of evolution.

(Does that explain why AIG etc only publish falsehoods / misrepresentations etc?)

True Audie and you've never heard me bring AIG evidence into this.I go by the evidence scientists use for evolution and I see myself how weak it is.

name one research paper you have read

I have read quite a many of them.Atheists like to give links and I read them,sometimes you can't read all of it unless you pay,but they give a brief summary.You should know I've read many by the points I make if you know about evolution.Explain how a virus evolved,or bacteria.You must assume little changes lead to big changes but you have no way of knowing based on evidence.

"Kenny"]

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Kenny wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Kenny wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote: What I said about the depth of the oceans is true.I do not have to prove the earth's surface was level,

Yes you do! Because unless the earth’s surface is level, we don’t have enough water for a global flood thus your argument fails.
Care to try again?

abelcainsbrother wrote:I do not deny the evidence you gave for evolution because life can adapt and survive hostile environments but explain to us how the insects evolved because they are the same kind of insect as before the insecticide was added,

True! A mosquito that has evolved is often still a mosquito. The fact that you are unaware of this proves the point I made previously that most people who dismiss evolution are ignorant of it.

abelcainsbrother wrote:I will remind you that evolution has always been about one kind of life evolving into another kind of life

No it has not. Evolution has never been restricted to “species change”.

abelcainsbrother wrote:My evidence for a global world wide flood is stronger evidence.

Until you can provide scientific proof that the Earth’s surface was level, your argument will continue to fail.

Ken

It did not evolve because it remained a mosquito,so no evolution happened at all,it only adapted and evolution has always been about "species change "and your denials is telling.

You are wrong. I gave you examples of Evolution; I even provided a link that supports my claim. Do you have anything (other than your personal POV) that supports your claim? Or are you content with burying your head in the sand insisting what science calls evolution is not evolution?

Ken

I tried to explain to you why showing insects,plants,etc adapt is not evidence life evolves,yet you believe what scientists say instead of go by what their evidence shows.Despite your denials evolution means one kind of life evolves into another kind of life yet you must weaken this to variations in reproduction and adaptation in order to claim they evolved.

Where did you get this definition? Did you just make it up yourself? A fellow creationist? You obviously didn’t get it from science.

Judging from your replies; it’s obvious you agree with what is referred to as “micro evolution”; and disagree with macro evolution.
If you have serious questions about the evidence of macro evolution; why not address your concerns to a paleontologist; an expert in the field? And if your concerns have merit, maybe you can become rich and famous as the person who disproved evolution! Unless of course you don’t like the idea of being rich and famous.

Ken[/quote]

You cannot demonstrate life evolves without evidence for macro because all micro really is is variations in reproduction despite it being called micro evolution.I don't think evolution can be defeated that way they refuse to give up and admit life does not evolve,hence the Mito Eve theory.

So you cant name even one.

Go ahead Abel, name one you have read, I think it will clear the impression to audie that you are not talking about things you have not studied.

neo-x wrote:Go ahead Abel, name one you have read, I think it will clear the impression to audie that you are not talking about things you have not studied.

Hint: I've never seen one that was not way over his evident reading level.

You both are changing the subject to avoid the evidence that demonstrates life evolves.There is no reason for you to imply I don't know about evidence for evolution.This is a tactic evolutionists use when asked for evidence that demonstrates life evolves.You cannot hide behind your evolution wall because everybody can see the lack of evidence that life evolves which is what this thread is about.Perhaps I'm not worthy to see the evidence to you and you just expect me to believe you but without scientific evidence that demonstrates life evolves I'll stick with the bible

neo-x wrote:Go ahead Abel, name one you have read, I think it will clear the impression to audie that you are not talking about things you have not studied.

Neo I read some links you gave me and told you why the evidence is weak.Remember the dinosaurs evolved into birds one you posted? You must believe them by faith in the paper because there is no evidence that demonstrates life evolves,you must believe them by faith,meanwhile I don't believe them by faith,I believe the bible by faith already,no need for two faiths especially when I must not take the bible literally in order to believe God used evolution.

abelcainsbrother wrote:You both are changing the subject to avoid the evidence that demonstrates life evolves.There is no reason for you to imply I don't know about evidence for evolution.This is a tactic evolutionists use when asked for evidence that demonstrates life evolves.You cannot hide behind your evolution wall because everybody can see the lack of evidence that life evolves which is what this thread is about.Perhaps I'm not worthy to see the evidence to you and you just expect me to believe you but without scientific evidence that demonstrates life evolves I'll stick with the bible

May I ask what you would consider as scientific evidence that life evolved, slowly over billions of years, as is claimed?

Guy come on, the burden of proof that ACB requires is too high, you would never be able to convince him of anything, you're best just to leave him alone to his own thoughts.