The Roman Catholic Church~ Questions

[noy]

---

Science itself DEMANDS that for any Theory to be a FACT, Evolution Theorists has to prove the following:

1. THE THEORY NEEDS TO BE REPLICATED.
- No scientists has ever created a "living" molecule despite the advances in science. Evolutionists have FAILED TREMENDOUSLY to re-create the "primordial soup" which is thought to be the originator of life.

Guess what? the "primordial soup" that is thought to have existed (actually no evidence and cant be replicated) is just another GUESSWORK of another "scientist".

Have they found this "soup" somewhere ? ? The answer might surprise you.


2. There is SOLID MATERIAL EVIDENCE of what it asserts.
- Evolutionists have FAILED big time to present a CHRONOLOGICAL, DETAILED, PRECISE, AND ACCURATE material evidence of the missing links.


Where are the LIVING human-monkey intermediate forms ? ? ? ?
Oh wait, they've turned into fossils. (standard answer from evolutionists).
REALLY ? ? ?
(So much for the clownish reply from evolutionists.)



And science nowadays has found out that ALL of the human remains/fossils found belong to the single specie: Homo erectus.
This proves that humans in fact, goes from a CONSISTENT LINE OF ANCESTORS AND HAS NOT EVOLVED FROM ANY LOWER FORMS.

Clue: Read the latest editions of the scientifically produced Nature magazine (the FULL VERSION).

pwede pud..hahaha!

[porbidaman]

Science itself DEMANDS that for any Theory to be a FACT, Evolution Theorists has to prove the following:

1. THE THEORY NEEDS TO BE REPLICATED.
- No scientists has ever created a "living" molecule despite the advances in science. Evolutionists have FAILED TREMENDOUSLY to re-create the "primordial soup" which is thought to be the originator of life.

Guess what? the "primordial soup" that is thought to have existed (actually no evidence and cant be replicated) is just another GUESSWORK of another "scientist".

Have they found this "soup" somewhere ? ? The answer might surprise you.


2. There is SOLID MATERIAL EVIDENCE of what it asserts.
- Evolutionists have FAILED big time to present a CHRONOLOGICAL, DETAILED, PRECISE, AND ACCURATE material evidence of the missing links.


Where are the LIVING human-monkey intermediate forms ? ? ? ?
Oh wait, they've turned into fossils. (standard answer from evolutionists).
REALLY ? ? ?
(So much for the clownish reply from evolutionists.)



And science nowadays has found out that ALL of the human remains/fossils found belong to the single specie: Homo erectus.
This proves that humans in fact, goes from a CONSISTENT LINE OF ANCESTORS AND HAS NOT EVOLVED FROM ANY LOWER FORMS.

Clue: Read the latest editions of the scientifically produced Nature and the Scientific American magazine (the FULL VERSION).

This is not a shocking surprise bro, science will continue to face BIG OBSTACLES in searching for answers, and scientists are not embarrassed to admit it. How about you familiarize yourself w/ this image...

[newbie.86]

This is not a shocking surprise bro, science will continue to face BIG OBSTACLES in searching for answers, and scientists are not embarrassed to admit it. How about you familiarize yourself w/ this image...

You facing difficulties in proving your claims is your problem. Science itself, and recent discoveries contradict previously held claims and it is quite embarrassing for evolution FANATICS like you.

The mortal sin any "science" person can commit is to uphold GUESSWORK as fact.


Mind you, Richard Dawkins passed on the "SELFISH GENE" as a scientific "fact" when in fact, studies on the human genome contradicts it. Yet, none of his sheep dared to question this.

Fracking stupidity from supposedly intelligent people.



WHY NOT GIVE PROOFS TO YOUR CLAIMS OR COUNTER MY ARGUMENTS INSTEAD OF DISHING OUT EMOTIONAL STATEMENTS ? ? ?

[TheClockworks]

You facing difficulties in proving your claims is your problem. Science itself, and recent discoveries contradict previously held claims and it is quite embarrassing for evolution FANATICS like you.

The mortal sin any "science" person can commit is to uphold GUESSWORK as fact.

Mind you, Richard Dawkins passed on the "SELFISH GENE" as a scientific "fact" when in fact, studies on the human genome contradicts it. Yet, none of his sheep dared to question this.

Fracking stupidity from supposedly intelligent people.

WHY NOT GIVE PROOFS TO YOUR CLAIMS OR COUNTER MY ARGUMENTS INSTEAD OF DISHING OUT EMOTIONAL STATEMENTS ? ? ?

Mao ba. Cge kung dili tinuod ang evolution, asa diay gikan ang mga modern humans? pwede paki explain?

[noy]

Wala ko kabalo kung asa na christian website or kinsang pseudo christian scientists nimo nakuha na.

But your ignorance is your loss not mine.

and you call this knowledge?

There are NO "Specific Laws" in the universe.

and

the word "Specifics" on your vocubulary when discussing about the cosmos, because nothing is specific when it comes to the universe.

ultimo dictionary brad, mo disgree na sa imu..
Cos-mos -
1. the universe especially when it is understood as an ordered system.
2. an orderly harmonious systematic universe
3. a complex orderly self-inclusive system

ordered system pero wala specifics..haha! you funny guy..

website? christian website? Lol we all learn these things through Natural Science oi..

you definitely are Captain Backfire.. "your ignorance is your loss not mine"...Lol

[noy]

This is not a shocking surprise bro, science will continue to face BIG OBSTACLES in searching for answers, and scientists are not embarrassed to admit it. How about you familiarize yourself w/ this image...

makatawa man ko sa i don't know, therefore God..maka imagine lang ko ba if ingun ana jud literally ang mahitabo sa mga preachings..murag wa na siguroy mubalik nga myembro bisan usa..haha

on the other hand, so when an Atheist answers "i don't believe that God exists" to the question "Do you believe in God?" ..they actually mean Let's find out? hahaha..

[<SMILE>]

Kani lang akoa di ni sya question but eclarify lang kung unsa inyong ikasulti about sa akong pagkaila sa Catholicism. Basing man gud sa akong nabantayan kay ang catholicism man gud nasagulan ug paganism by which ang bibliya na mismo ang niingun na ang christianity kay dili usa ka pagano na belief. The idea of creating images itself is a practice of paganism. Repeating of prayers is one. Nakarealize man gud ko na catholicism kay mura rag the same sa saunang panahun like ang pagsimba nilang Zeus or jupiter etc. Catholicism is following the same pattern although mixed with christianity. with all due respect to all catholics I'm just asking what can you say about my point at least to justify catholicism. daghan man gud ug nausab sa catholicism which is not the same sa kung unsa jud ang real foundation sa christianity.

I have a question If a Pagan would believe,glorify, and emulate Jesus Christ,
could you consider him a Christian or Not?

[noy]

Luoya nimo oi, nagsalig ka sa dictionary kung unsay tinuod na meaning sa "cosmos"? hahahaha!

Again, wala koy paki-alam kung unsa pa ang interpretation sa isa ka kristiyanong ignorante sa universe, they can believe anything they want.

But, I only base my knowledge on the research presented by renowned, Phycisists,Cosmologists,Astronomers and other experts.

Naa ra na sa imuha kung mao na imung pag tuo, kung gusto nimo magpa biling ignorante go ahead. hahahaha ignorante f*cker.

hahaha! binastos nalang dayun kay wala nay laing maistorya...

so ingun ang mga astrophysicists nga walay Specifics ang cosmos or universe?hahahaha!
unsay may ilang gi studyhan in the first place kung walay constant basis?
unsa may gi basehan sa mga theories regarding origins?
kung walay specifics, nag dugay kaha ug billions of years ang universe?..unya naka jackpot pa jud ug life form ang earth?

gisaway nimu ang Dictionary?
kanang definition sa dictionary brad..gikan na sa mga result sa mga scientific studies oi..LOL desperate moves naka du?

o backfire na pud "Naa ra na sa imuha kung mao na imung pag tuo, kung gusto nimo magpa biling ignorante go ahead."

[porbidaman]

You facing difficulties in proving your claims is your problem. Science itself, and recent discoveries contradict previously held claims and it is quite embarrassing for evolution FANATICS like you.

The mortal sin any "science" person can commit is to uphold GUESSWORK as fact.

That's the beauty of science bro, it will admit when its wrong. How about religion?

Mind you, Richard Dawkins passed on the "SELFISH GENE" as a scientific "fact" when in fact, studies on the human genome contradicts it. Yet, none of his sheep dared to question this.

mao ba bro, naa kai proof?

Fracking stupidity from supposedly intelligent people.

Well, what's more stupid, and downright *****ic is for people to believe in a talking snake and talking donkey

WHY NOT GIVE PROOFS TO YOUR CLAIMS OR COUNTER MY ARGUMENTS INSTEAD OF DISHING OUT EMOTIONAL STATEMENTS ? ? ?

I have nothing to counter your arguments bro because in fact, you are "DISHING OUT" information based on a SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN JOURNAL and not from the BIBLE. If what you say is true and you're not INVENTING stories.

Unless, you type something like this...
1. THE THEORY NEEDS TO BE REPLICATED.
- No scientists has ever created a "living" molecule despite the advances in science. Evolutionists have FAILED TREMENDOUSLY to re-create the "primordial soup" which is thought to be the originator of life because a talking snake injected a "Careless Whisper" venom into their frontal lobe thus preventing the evolutionists to interact appropriately.
2. There is SOLID MATERIAL EVIDENCE of what it asserts.
- Evolutionists have FAILED big time to present a CHRONOLOGICAL, DETAILED, PRECISE, AND ACCURATE material evidence of the missing links because a talking donkey pees on their grey matter w/o stopping.

Then I will gladly counteract your claims.

Now I have a question for you, With all these scientific flaws that you mentioned, does it proved that your god is indeed the creator of life?

[battouter]

good evening children our lesson for today... bawal ang pikon.