Evidence for God from Science

I would like evolutionists on here to explain how Pakicetus https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakicetus could evolve into a whale,because all of your evidence in evolution science only proves variability amongst the populations,which has been known about for thousands of years by plant and animal breeders,hence dogs and roses.You have no evidence one kind of life can evolve into another kind of life,and this is just one example,your evolution chart is bunk science built on speculation,assumptions and evolution imagination. Because your evidence proves viruses always remain viruses,bacteria always remains bacteria,fruit flies always remain fruit flies,salamanders always remain salamanders,with just normal variation amongst the populations.How could this be peer reviewed? Money!

abelcainsbrother wrote:I would like evolutionists on here to explain how Pakicetus https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakicetus could evolve into a whale,because all of your evidence in evolution science only proves variability amongst the populations,which has been known about for thousands of years by plant and animal breeders,hence dogs and roses.You have no evidence one kind of life can evolve into another kind of life,and this is just one example,your evolution chart is bunk science built on speculation,assumptions and evolution imagination. Because your evidence proves viruses always remain viruses,bacteria always remains bacteria,fruit flies always remain fruit flies,salamanders always remain salamanders,with just normal variation amongst the populations.How could this be peer reviewed? Money!

Proves proves proves, you still dont even know that simple little thing, after all
your so called research. Science-does-not-do-proof.
Say it a time or two. Commit to mrmory.

You havent clue one, its just your same ol same ol
ignorant dogma over. And ovrt. Give it a flippin' rest already. Even better,
go do some actual study. Sounding like the clueless buduless just
makes your gappery look even worse than it already is.

We would get better science if science did proof,but they don't,so we don't. Just believe them speculate.They ignored philosophy and this is why they have this idea that nothing can really be proven and that we cannot really know the truth,so no need to try to prove what we speculate about.

Ab, what I said reflects some well earned exasperation with you.

I dont doubt you are a sincere and decent person.

IF you actually "like" the sincere observation and suggestion on my part,
and actually took it to heart, we'd all benefit from it.

Try shorter sentences and, break up your paragraps a bit, too.

Audie wrote:Ab, what I said reflects some well earned exasperation with you.

I dont doubt you are a sincere and decent person.

IF you actually "like" the sincere observation and suggestion on my part,
and actually took it to heart, we'd all benefit from it.

Try shorter sentences and, break up your paragraps a bit, too.

Are you being nice to me? Come on now,I believe in that wacky gapism.I'm just explaining why I'd reject evolution even if I was an atheist.It has nothing to do with my faith in God although I do believe now the gap theory fits the evidence in the earth better and is a better theory than the ToE.

abelcainsbrother wrote:We would get better science if science did proof,but they don't,so we don't. Just believe them speculate.They ignored philosophy and this is why they have this idea that nothing can really be proven and that we cannot really know the truth,so no need to try to prove what we speculate about.

Now take your "religion". Science is very straightforward and up front about how it deals
with probabilities based on dara. It isnt about a need to try to prove ( oh clueless one) but that,
like swallowing yourself or a square circle, it simply is impossible.

Your "religion" tho. Fake certainties. Claims of "truth". (Your truth, my truth, everyone has a truth-truth
every one of them different) Absolutes and inerrant and infallible.

All based on, uh, data? Math? What is religion based on?

You got dreams, wishes, but usually just lies. Like mohammed really rode a winged horse to heaven.

Speculations thst not only cannot be proved to anthing but vapourware, but generally the claims
(Like "flood") can be disproved and exposed for the childidh superstitions they are

Tho the childish and uncomprehending minds will bittrrly cling to their superstitions no matter what.

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Audie wrote:Ab, what I said reflects some well earned exasperation with you.

I dont doubt you are a sincere and decent person.

IF you actually "like" the sincere observation and suggestion on my part,
and actually took it to heart, we'd all benefit from it.

Try shorter sentences and, break up your paragraps a bit, too.

Are you being nice to me? Come on now,I believe in that wacky gapism.I'm just explaining why I'd reject evolution even if I was an atheist.It has nothing to do with my faith in God although I do believe now the gap theory fits the evidence in the earth better and is a better theory than the ToE.

Not really. But yiu could sure show the rest of us some courtesy by following my suggestion,

Your bias is showing again believe in science books even when they don't do proof but doubt the bible because it doesn't do proof.

Audie wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Audie wrote:Ab, what I said reflects some well earned exasperation with you.

I dont doubt you are a sincere and decent person.

IF you actually "like" the sincere observation and suggestion on my part,
and actually took it to heart, we'd all benefit from it.

Try shorter sentences and, break up your paragraps a bit, too.

Are you being nice to me? Come on now,I believe in that wacky gapism.I'm just explaining why I'd reject evolution even if I was an atheist.It has nothing to do with my faith in God although I do believe now the gap theory fits the evidence in the earth better and is a better theory than the ToE.

Not really. But yiu could sure show the rest of us some courtesy by following my suggestion,

Evidence would be nice to counter the excellent points I have made against the ToE. My suggestion for you is learn how to examine evidence and then try to apply it to the ToE,don't just believe their preaching,challenge them and ask for evidence to back up what they are explaining.Go through the evidence they have provided and see if it backs up what they are explaining.

Also realize,this is science we rely on for knowledge in our world and it matters much,much more if they are wrong compared to creationists. It should not matter to scientists what creationists think about their science,instead they should just work on proving themselves right,regardless of critics.Their credibility should matter,but it does'nt and instead of focusing on evidence they got into a theory fight with YEC's,got complacent and forgot what science is supposed to be about. This has caused them to push an evolution myth that they know they can't prove and haven't proven. YEC's messed them up!

You have not explained yet how Pakicetus could evolve into a whale when the evidence behind evolution shows it cannot happen.

Hi abelcainsbrother! I notice you haven't managed to wriggle out of you own argument proving that speciation is just natural variation. I think you'll find that whales are just a natural variation of even-toed ungulates. The rest of your subsequent comments are your usual old shibboleths.


Now here's a thing. Can you answer me a simple question? Were dinosaurs, birds and whales all created at the same time? What do you reckon?

abelcainsbrother wrote:Your bias is showing again believe in science books even when they don't do proof but doubt the bible because it doesn't do proof.

Notvatvall. That is simply you making up "facts", as usual. You really ought to stop it.
It cheapens you.

hughfarey wrote:Hi abelcainsbrother! I notice you haven't managed to wriggle out of you own argument proving that speciation is just natural variation. I think you'll find that whales are just a natural variation of even-toed ungulates. The rest of your subsequent comments are your usual old shibboleths.


Now here's a thing. Can you answer me a simple question? Were dinosaurs, birds and whales all created at the same time? What do you reckon?

Disgraceful wriggling out of ice versus flood too.
Tell ya what. No disvussion of anything with the ab until he cooperates with
your investigation.

hughfarey wrote:Hi abelcainsbrother! I notice you haven't managed to wriggle out of you own argument proving that speciation is just natural variation. I think you'll find that whales are just a natural variation of even-toed ungulates. The rest of your subsequent comments are your usual old shibboleths.


Now here's a thing. Can you answer me a simple question? Were dinosaurs, birds and whales all created at the same time? What do you reckon?

I haven't wriggled out. You have not explained why not being able to breed leads you to believe it is important when it comes to life evolving. You brought up speciation and it is based on not being able to breed.Please explain how in the case of certain cats not being able to cross breed or in some very rare cases it can happen it will eventually lead to a different kind of life than a cat. Because cats will always be cats despite normal variability amongst its population.God created and made kinds to produce after their kind and they always will.

As to your question dinosaurs were created before birds were in the former world,and the birds and whales we have in this world were created or made after their kind when God made this world Genesis 2:2.

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Audie wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Audie wrote:Ab, what I said reflects some well earned exasperation with you.

I dont doubt you are a sincere and decent person.

IF you actually "like" the sincere observation and suggestion on my part,
and actually took it to heart, we'd all benefit from it.

Try shorter sentences and, break up your paragraps a bit, too.

Are you being nice to me? Come on now,I believe in that wacky gapism.I'm just explaining why I'd reject evolution even if I was an atheist.It has nothing to do with my faith in God although I do believe now the gap theory fits the evidence in the earth better and is a better theory than the ToE.

Not really. But yiu could sure show the rest of us some courtesy by following my suggestion,

Evidence would be nice to counter the excellent points I have made against the ToE. My suggestion for you is learn how to examine evidence and then try to apply it to the ToE,don't just believe their preaching,challenge them and ask for evidence to back up what they are explaining.Go through the evidence they have provided and see if it backs up what they are explaining.

Also realize,this is science we rely on for knowledge in our world and it matters much,much more if they are wrong compared to creationists. It should not matter to scientists what creationists think about their science,instead they should just work on proving themselves right,regardless of critics.Their credibility should matter,but it does'nt and instead of focusing on evidence they got into a theory fight with YEC's,got complacent and forgot what science is supposed to be about. This has caused them to push an evolution myth that they know they can't prove and haven't proven. YEC's messed them up!

You have not explained yet how Pakicetus could evolve into a whale when the evidence behind evolution shows it cannot happen.

Incoherent blather.

Audie wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Audie wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Audie wrote:Ab, what I said reflects some well earned exasperation with you.

I dont doubt you are a sincere and decent person.

IF you actually "like" the sincere observation and suggestion on my part,
and actually took it to heart, we'd all benefit from it.

Try shorter sentences and, break up your paragraps a bit, too.

Are you being nice to me? Come on now,I believe in that wacky gapism.I'm just explaining why I'd reject evolution even if I was an atheist.It has nothing to do with my faith in God although I do believe now the gap theory fits the evidence in the earth better and is a better theory than the ToE.

Not really. But yiu could sure show the rest of us some courtesy by following my suggestion,

Evidence would be nice to counter the excellent points I have made against the ToE. My suggestion for you is learn how to examine evidence and then try to apply it to the ToE,don't just believe their preaching,challenge them and ask for evidence to back up what they are explaining.Go through the evidence they have provided and see if it backs up what they are explaining.

Also realize,this is science we rely on for knowledge in our world and it matters much,much more if they are wrong compared to creationists. It should not matter to scientists what creationists think about their science,instead they should just work on proving themselves right,regardless of critics.Their credibility should matter,but it does'nt and instead of focusing on evidence they got into a theory fight with YEC's,got complacent and forgot what science is supposed to be about. This has caused them to push an evolution myth that they know they can't prove and haven't proven. YEC's messed them up!

You have not explained yet how Pakicetus could evolve into a whale when the evidence behind evolution shows it cannot happen.

Incoherent blather.

Ms. Potts, meet Mr. Kettle.