Evolution is a hoax

[IsusCu]

Why there are still monkeys around if they were part of our evolutionary beginnings ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cz0gFarCfBE

Bible clearly disproved human evolution. And  even though our human knowledge have evolved so much in terms of science and technology yet,  Bible still a very concise reference. So Human evolution is indeed a hoax.

Does the bible explain anything? Do you know it's full of scientific mistakes and retarded laws? What's your IQ, <50 right?

Bible is a great thing if you use it the right way. If you use it to teach people to do good and be good to others. But yeah it's not exactly a source of valid information and facts.

[1713505161]

1713505161

[1713505161]

1713505161

[twthmoses]

Evolution is a hoax.

I had to go to page 1 of this thread to see what the original question was for this thread. “Why there are still monkeys around if they were part of our evolutionary beginnings”. Which is a rather easy question? Romans coins, in the millions, are also around, despite not being used for 1500 some years.
 
Evolution is a hoax according to you.  We spend 150 some pages of post arguing about that. I try and turn it around. If evolution is a hoax, how does it all work according to you? What is instead of evolution? creation?, limited evolution?, adoption?, something else? Are we carved in stone, all species?   

I have seen the number 6000 years several times in this thread, what is this number? Where does it come from, and what meaning does it have? Is it to be understood that nothing was before that time?

[Astargath]

Evolution is a hoax.

I had to go to page 1 of this thread to see what the original question was for this thread. “Why there are still monkeys around if they were part of our evolutionary beginnings”. Which is a rather easy question? Romans coins, in the millions, are also around, despite not being used for 1500 some years.
 
Evolution is a hoax according to you.  We spend 150 some pages of post arguing about that. I try and turn it around. If evolution is a hoax, how does it all work according to you? What is instead of evolution? creation?, limited evolution?, adoption?, something else? Are we carved in stone, all species?   

I have seen the number 6000 years several times in this thread, what is this number? Where does it come from, and what meaning does it have? Is it to be understood that nothing was before that time?

According to the bible, the world and universe are about 6 to 10k years old at most. Obviously science has shown they are much older so that's already a big mistake. Badecker believes in creationism yet there is literally 0 evidence for it. He might think all the evidence we have for evolution is wrong but he doesn't even have 1 piece of evidence for his claim.

[twthmoses]

According to the bible, the world and universe are about 6 to 10k years old at most. Obviously science has shown they are much older so that's already a big mistake. Badecker believes in creationism yet there is literally 0 evidence for it. He might think all the evidence we have for evolution is wrong but he doesn't even have 1 piece of evidence for his claim.

I see. 6000 years is a hard one to defend! Even with skill there are just too many things past that age. Wonder what the take on dinosaurs is then? All those bones and not one older than 6000 years? Even if c14 method is a bit off, it should be a lot off to account for this timeframe.

[BADecker]

According to the bible, the world and universe are about 6 to 10k years old at most. Obviously science has shown they are much older so that's already a big mistake. Badecker believes in creationism yet there is literally 0 evidence for it. He might think all the evidence we have for evolution is wrong but he doesn't even have 1 piece of evidence for his claim.

I see. 6000 years is a hard one to defend! Even with skill there are just too many things past that age. Wonder what the take on dinosaurs is then? All those bones and not one older than 6000 years? Even if c14 method is a bit off, it should be a lot off to account for this timeframe.

The only clear place where we see 6,000 years is the Bible. Other literature or ideas are not clear on the 6,000-year point. And even the Bible was not meant to be a historical record that shows 6,000 years, even though it does.

How does the Bible show 6,000 years to, say, 6,200 years (not 10,000)? Indirectly. Here is the link that shows how the Bible does it - http://www.albatrus.org/english/theology/creation/biblical_age_earth.htm.

Now, here is the important part that folks seem to not get. In verse 2 of Genesis 1, the ancient Hebrew for the word "was" (הָיְתָ֥ה) can, also, be translated as "became," even though such translation is not popular. If "became" were used, the picture would change entirely to a heavens and earth that that was created some (possibly great) time before the earth became formless and void, and that this "era" was started about 6,000 years ago.

In other words, an understanding of disruption of the physics of the pre-beginning universe is plausible. The beginning spoken of, might only be the beginning of this era of created things, where God made a new universal physics, the physics of the universe we have today. Yet, some of the old physics remains embedded in the new. And that is why we understand such a variety of possible ages for the universe. Present universal physics is not the same as it was prior to about 6,000 years ago. And 6,000 years ago was when the new beginning started, even though the old beginning was an indeterminable time prior to the new beginning.

At this point, in this thread, I'll not go into why and how the universe physics was changed, but there is evidence in the Bible for such.

Regarding the C-14 point, there is evidence in the Bible that C-14 was not in existence on earth before the Great Flood, which the Bible link, above, shows came about roughly 4,500 years ago. (If there happened to be some pre-4,500-year-ago C-14, it was in such limited quantities that we could never know for sure which C-14 we were working with. And that would further complicate accurate time measurement.)

[Astargath]

According to the bible, the world and universe are about 6 to 10k years old at most. Obviously science has shown they are much older so that's already a big mistake. Badecker believes in creationism yet there is literally 0 evidence for it. He might think all the evidence we have for evolution is wrong but he doesn't even have 1 piece of evidence for his claim.

I see. 6000 years is a hard one to defend! Even with skill there are just too many things past that age. Wonder what the take on dinosaurs is then? All those bones and not one older than 6000 years? Even if c14 method is a bit off, it should be a lot off to account for this timeframe.

The only clear place where we see 6,000 years is the Bible. Other literature or ideas are not clear on the 6,000-year point. And even the Bible was not meant to be a historical record that shows 6,000 years, even though it does.

How does the Bible show 6,000 years to, say, 6,200 years (not 10,000)? Indirectly. Here is the link that shows how the Bible does it - http://www.albatrus.org/english/theology/creation/biblical_age_earth.htm.

Now, here is the important part that folks seem to not get. In verse 2 of Genesis 1, the ancient Hebrew for the word "was" (הָיְתָ֥ה) can, also, be translated as "became," even though such translation is not popular. If "became" were used, the picture would change entirely to a heavens and earth that that was created some (possibly great) time before the earth became formless and void, and that this "era" was started about 6,000 years ago.

In other words, an understanding of disruption of the physics of the pre-beginning universe is plausible. The beginning spoken of, might only be the beginning of this era of created things, where God made a new universal physics, the physics of the universe we have today. Yet, some of the old physics remains embedded in the new. And that is why we understand such a variety of possible ages for the universe. Present universal physics is not the same as it was prior to about 6,000 years ago. And 6,000 years ago was when the new beginning started, even though the old beginning was an indeterminable time prior to the new beginning.

At this point, in this thread, I'll not go into why and how the universe physics was changed, but there is evidence in the Bible for such.

Regarding the C-14 point, there is evidence in the Bible that C-14 was not in existence on earth before the Great Flood, which the Bible link, above, shows came about roughly 4,500 years ago. (If there happened to be some pre-4,500-year-ago C-14, it was in such limited quantities that we could never know for sure which C-14 we were working with. And that would further complicate accurate time measurement.)

The bible is evidence that people who wrote it knew nothing about the world. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errors

It's proven that the bible is simply wrong on almost anything. Morals, science, history. God from the bible is proven beyond a doubt to be false.

[BADecker]

The bible is evidence that people who wrote it knew nothing about the world. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errors

It's proven that the bible is simply wrong on almost anything. Morals, science, history. God from the bible is proven beyond a doubt to be false.

But, since nobody has that proof...

Oh that's right. Proof against the Bible isn't proof. It's just blabber.

Evolution is a hoax.

[Astargath]

The bible is evidence that people who wrote it knew nothing about the world. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errors

It's proven that the bible is simply wrong on almost anything. Morals, science, history. God from the bible is proven beyond a doubt to be false.

But, since nobody has that proof...

Oh that's right. Proof against the Bible isn't proof. It's just blabber.

Evolution is a hoax.

I just gave it to you. Proof against the bible is indeed proof that god is not real. An all knowing god wouldn't make mistakes, wouldn't let an outdated book to be the only ''proof'' of his existence either. Everything in the bible is pretty much wrong which indicates it was written by people to deceive other people.

You have 0 proof that god is real, already debunked everything in the other thread, most people accept evolution, religious, the pope, 99.99% of scientists. Only delusional people like flat earthers wouldn't accept it.

[BADecker]

The bible is evidence that people who wrote it knew nothing about the world. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errors

It's proven that the bible is simply wrong on almost anything. Morals, science, history. God from the bible is proven beyond a doubt to be false.

But, since nobody has that proof...

Oh that's right. Proof against the Bible isn't proof. It's just blabber.

Evolution is a hoax.

I just gave it to you. Proof against the bible is indeed proof that god is not real. An all knowing god wouldn't make mistakes, wouldn't let an outdated book to be the only ''proof'' of his existence either. Everything in the bible is pretty much wrong which indicates it was written by people to deceive other people.

You have 0 proof that god is real, already debunked everything in the other thread, most people accept evolution, religious, the pope, 99.99% of scientists. Only delusional people like flat earthers wouldn't accept it.

You forget the major thing about the Bible. And that is, the Bible isn't a scientific text in the terms of modern science. Rather, it is a religious text that uses the terms of an ancient race of people who had different ways of thinking than even their modern counterpart.

For simple example. The way that the Ancient Israel people calculated days and months and weeks was different than the way that we calculate them. It is possible that some Middle East folks still calculate them as did Ancient Israel, even though their governments have adopted the form used in Europe and America. See https://biblethingsinbibleways.wordpress.com/2013/09/08/what-is-the-biblical-day-week-month-year-and-does-it-really-matter/ to see what the "calendar" of Bible times was really like.

The point is, the Bible isn't wrong. Rather, modern science is trying to use it as a measurement in the wrong way.



EDIT: The real point, again, is that the Bible is an accurate record, and can be used accurately by those who have studied how to use it. Even if evolution wasn't backward in the way it is being applied - the truth is that the longer the time, the greater the chance for deterioration and destruction of beneficial mutations (assuming that there are some) - the Bible is a witness to the things that really happened.

Evolution is a hoax.

[Astargath]

The bible is evidence that people who wrote it knew nothing about the world. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errors

It's proven that the bible is simply wrong on almost anything. Morals, science, history. God from the bible is proven beyond a doubt to be false.

But, since nobody has that proof...

Oh that's right. Proof against the Bible isn't proof. It's just blabber.

Evolution is a hoax.

I just gave it to you. Proof against the bible is indeed proof that god is not real. An all knowing god wouldn't make mistakes, wouldn't let an outdated book to be the only ''proof'' of his existence either. Everything in the bible is pretty much wrong which indicates it was written by people to deceive other people.

You have 0 proof that god is real, already debunked everything in the other thread, most people accept evolution, religious, the pope, 99.99% of scientists. Only delusional people like flat earthers wouldn't accept it.

You forget the major thing about the Bible. And that is, the Bible isn't a scientific text in the terms of modern science. Rather, it is a religious text that uses the terms of an ancient race of people who had different ways of thinking than even their modern counterpart.

For simple example. The way that the Ancient Israel people calculated days and months and weeks was different than the way that we calculate them. It is possible that some Middle East folks still calculate them as did Ancient Israel, even though their governments have adopted the form used in Europe and America. See https://biblethingsinbibleways.wordpress.com/2013/09/08/what-is-the-biblical-day-week-month-year-and-does-it-really-matter/ to see what the "calendar" of Bible times was really like.

The point is, the Bible isn't wrong. Rather, modern science is trying to use it as a measurement in the wrong way.



EDIT: The real point, again, is that the Bible is an accurate record, and can be used accurately by those who have studied how to use it. Even if evolution wasn't backward in the way it is being applied - the truth is that the longer the time, the greater the chance for deterioration and destruction of beneficial mutations (assuming that there are some) - the Bible is a witness to the things that really happened.

Evolution is a hoax.

''the Bible is an accurate record'' It is not accurate if it's wrong on almost everything, the history taught in the bible is nowhere to be found. Flood? Noah's Ark? Talking snakes? None of those things existed, accurate because you say so? ROFL

https://www.wired.com/2008/12/evolutionexampl/

Slap yourself and wake up.

[BADecker]

You forget the major thing about the Bible. And that is, the Bible isn't a scientific text in the terms of modern science. Rather, it is a religious text that uses the terms of an ancient race of people who had different ways of thinking than even their modern counterpart.

For simple example. The way that the Ancient Israel people calculated days and months and weeks was different than the way that we calculate them. It is possible that some Middle East folks still calculate them as did Ancient Israel, even though their governments have adopted the form used in Europe and America. See https://biblethingsinbibleways.wordpress.com/2013/09/08/what-is-the-biblical-day-week-month-year-and-does-it-really-matter/ to see what the "calendar" of Bible times was really like.

The point is, the Bible isn't wrong. Rather, modern science is trying to use it as a measurement in the wrong way.



EDIT: The real point, again, is that the Bible is an accurate record, and can be used accurately by those who have studied how to use it. Even if evolution wasn't backward in the way it is being applied - the truth is that the longer the time, the greater the chance for deterioration and destruction of beneficial mutations (assuming that there are some) - the Bible is a witness to the things that really happened.

Evolution is a hoax.

''the Bible is an accurate record'' It is not accurate if it's wrong on almost everything, the history taught in the bible is nowhere to be found. Flood? Noah's Ark? Talking snakes? None of those things existed, accurate because you say so? ROFL

https://www.wired.com/2008/12/evolutionexampl/

Slap yourself and wake up.

Since the Bible isn't wrong, it is an accurate record. The scientific methodology that shows what the Bible is, and how it couldn't exist in the form in which it exists, shows the miraculousness of the Bible, and that God made it. So, God and the bible are true, and science is guessing at multitudes of things that are outside of its scope to understand.

The flaws and lies in your link are enormous deceptions. There are as many holes in the points in the link, as there are missing missing-links in the fossil record = possibly millions, but more like billions or trillions.

Evolution is a pure and unadulterated hoax.

[Flying Hellfish]

@BADecker

[IsusCu]

@BADecker

http://www.evolvefish.com/thumbnail.asp?file=assets/images/magnets/EF-MAG-00017.jpg&maxx=300&maxy=0

if only more people realized that. Would would be a much better place, just imagine

[jak3]

Absolutely, I completely agree with you. I mean how can you even differentiate between a man and a monkey if you are in the evolutionary state. You see in human beings are just a bit smarter than monkeys but we are not super smart beings. Whenever you purify the water you cannot be verified up to 100% there will be some impurities to be present in it. Just like that when a huge amount of aggressive evolved there are left or better we say for another experiment which nature does on them. Evolution happens when an organism causes difficulty and his DNA to adjust in that situation so it is possible that those species do not go through the same difficulties which we humans do.

[CoinXMan]

Dad did not change.
My father has not changed.
I did not change.

[twthmoses]

The only clear place where we see 6,000 years is the Bible. Other literature or ideas are not clear on the 6,000-year point. And even the Bible was not meant to be a historical record that shows 6,000 years, even though it does.

How does the Bible show 6,000 years to, say, 6,200 years (not 10,000)? Indirectly. Here is the link that shows how the Bible does it - http://www.albatrus.org/english/theology/creation/biblical_age_earth.htm.

This limited timeframe of 6000 years just brings up a lot of continuity questions. Everything has to fit inside 4000 B.C to now.

Who build all the ancient structures? I mean, people did, yes we can agree on that – but where did the people come from? You need labor and God only created two of them! Where did all the manpower come from to build these structures located all over the world within 500-1500 years of creation?

How did we go from two people to 150-300 million in just 4000 years? (to year 1). Do the math.

[BADecker]

The only clear place where we see 6,000 years is the Bible. Other literature or ideas are not clear on the 6,000-year point. And even the Bible was not meant to be a historical record that shows 6,000 years, even though it does.

How does the Bible show 6,000 years to, say, 6,200 years (not 10,000)? Indirectly. Here is the link that shows how the Bible does it - http://www.albatrus.org/english/theology/creation/biblical_age_earth.htm.

This limited timeframe of 6000 years just brings up a lot of continuity questions. Everything has to fit inside 4000 B.C to now.

Who build all the ancient structures? I mean, people did, yes we can agree on that – but where did the people come from? You need labor and God only created two of them! Where did all the manpower come from to build these structures located all over the world within 500-1500 years of creation?

How did we go from two people to 150-300 million in just 4000 years? (to year 1). Do the math.

I know, I know. You want me to do the research for you. Then you won't accept it anyway.

First, check the Bible to see that folks lived over 900 years in some cases, before the Great Flood, and 400 or more, in some cases, in the first 500 years after. Second, consider that the earth was much more fertile in those days, because devolution didn't have as much time to set in as later years. Next, get out your Excel spreadsheet, and set a woman's average lifespan to 400 years (could have been 600 to 800).

At 20-y-o a woman starts having kids. She has one every year for 400 years, both because sex is fun, and because everything is healthier (less devolution). Now, considering that half the kids were male, and half were female, the approximately 1,600 years before the flood would produce billions on the earth. Do the math, or at least look it up in a search engine.

https://answersingenesis.org/noahs-ark/pre-flood-population/
http://www.ldolphin.org/pickett.html
https://biblescienceguy.wordpress.com/2014/06/18/4-population-growth-how-many-died-in-noahs-flood/ = trillions
https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/32623/what-was-the-population-of-the-world-at-the-time-of-the-flood

[BADecker]

@BADecker

Yes. Start using your head.

1. Evolution theory evolution is impossible. Google "impossible evolution." The rebuttals to impossible evolution rebut themselves by being filled with assumptions, circular references, and ambiguities.

2. In a previous post I showed an article where mitochondrial DNA for life could not have existed beyond 200,000 years ago, scientifically speaking. The point is that science agrees that it is self-contradictory regarding when the first life appeared. Time to throw the baby out with the bath water.

3. All the supposed missing links in the fossil record, cannot be proven to have been missing links. Why not? Because the jump between any of them would have to be so great that the number of mutations from the before, to the ML, is unequivocally impossible in any form of evolution theory imaginable.

4. All supposed evolution forms that have been found, fit adaptation far easier than they fit evolution theory evolution.

5. In a previous post I showed that some of the smartest evolutionists agree that evolution barely has a leg to stand on, Stephen Gould being one of them.

6. No scientifically provable example of evolution has ever been found.

In other words, evolution as reality is impossible. If thinking evolutionists said that evolution was simply an idea, things would be different. But because they tout evolution as reality when nobody knows that it is...

Evolution is a hoax.

[Astargath]

You forget the major thing about the Bible. And that is, the Bible isn't a scientific text in the terms of modern science. Rather, it is a religious text that uses the terms of an ancient race of people who had different ways of thinking than even their modern counterpart.

For simple example. The way that the Ancient Israel people calculated days and months and weeks was different than the way that we calculate them. It is possible that some Middle East folks still calculate them as did Ancient Israel, even though their governments have adopted the form used in Europe and America. See https://biblethingsinbibleways.wordpress.com/2013/09/08/what-is-the-biblical-day-week-month-year-and-does-it-really-matter/ to see what the "calendar" of Bible times was really like.

The point is, the Bible isn't wrong. Rather, modern science is trying to use it as a measurement in the wrong way.



EDIT: The real point, again, is that the Bible is an accurate record, and can be used accurately by those who have studied how to use it. Even if evolution wasn't backward in the way it is being applied - the truth is that the longer the time, the greater the chance for deterioration and destruction of beneficial mutations (assuming that there are some) - the Bible is a witness to the things that really happened.

Evolution is a hoax.

''the Bible is an accurate record'' It is not accurate if it's wrong on almost everything, the history taught in the bible is nowhere to be found. Flood? Noah's Ark? Talking snakes? None of those things existed, accurate because you say so? ROFL

https://www.wired.com/2008/12/evolutionexampl/

Slap yourself and wake up.

Since the Bible isn't wrong, it is an accurate record. The scientific methodology that shows what the Bible is, and how it couldn't exist in the form in which it exists, shows the miraculousness of the Bible, and that God made it. So, God and the bible are true, and science is guessing at multitudes of things that are outside of its scope to understand.

The flaws and lies in your link are enormous deceptions. There are as many holes in the points in the link, as there are missing missing-links in the fossil record = possibly millions, but more like billions or trillions.

Evolution is a pure and unadulterated hoax.

''
Since the Bible isn't wrong, it is an accurate record'' Literally all history shows that it isn't. No noah's ark anywhere, no indications of a massive flood, no talking snakes or other creatures like demons, no possessions. You keep saying it's accurate, it's accurate on what exactly?

[twthmoses]

I know, I know. You want me to do the research for you. Then you won't accept it anyway.

First, check the Bible to see that folks lived over 900 years in some cases, before the Great Flood, and 400 or more, in some cases, in the first 500 years after. Second, consider that the earth was much more fertile in those days, because devolution didn't have as much time to set in as later years. Next, get out your Excel spreadsheet, and set a woman's average lifespan to 400 years (could have been 600 to 800).

At 20-y-o a woman starts having kids. She has one every year for 400 years, both because sex is fun, and because everything is healthier (less devolution). Now, considering that half the kids were male, and half were female, the approximately 1,600 years before the flood would produce billions on the earth. Do the math, or at least look it up in a search engine.

https://answersingenesis.org/noahs-ark/pre-flood-population/
http://www.ldolphin.org/pickett.html
https://biblescienceguy.wordpress.com/2014/06/18/4-population-growth-how-many-died-in-noahs-flood/ = trillions
https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/32623/what-was-the-population-of-the-world-at-the-time-of-the-flood

Narr not really. Capable enough to find my own answers.

It’s all assumptions! If and if and if, all the lovely things you complain about in evolution!

Not dealing with all the issues of incest and inbreeding, after all you only have one male and female to begin with, and never mind turning women into nonstop breading machines – for 100s of years at a time, you also surpassed growth percent of a factor 100 vs. any other time in history.

And how about the food for this massive population explosion? All other animals and plants have also just been created, they need time too, to super populate like the humans.

And while this is just in the beginning – few humans and few animals, humans start to build super structures of massive sizes all over the world.  Impressive! Never mind I disregard the Neolithic structures predating 4000 B.C, cause I don’t know how they were build, since no humans where around?