Is Evolutionist Science worth believing?

[Mr.Ho_chia]

Di ba you don't deny that man was created by magic? are you created through magic? you live in a mgical world ho chia make a not to that.

not by magic but by GOD.

evolution is by magic, from dirt.............. and youcame to be. Of ape heritage. bwahahaha!

[Tattva]

yah who knows is not science, so if it is not science what it is then? faith and if it is faith the basis of which is what? trusting you and your maybe after 500 years...... so in the final analysis............ who is a false witness and a big lie then? of course |YOU, the one that manipulate words and suggest a possibility after 500 years!

i have faith and I admit it. you? meditation and science? and you say proof? all you are assumptions and hope that what we see in microevolution within the context of minimal genetic changes you suggested a large scale change and assume the possibilitities of it with the known scientific facts!

in medicine --- a drug that is tested in a small scale popultion and found to be beificail is not an assurance that it is benificial in the field it claims. a large scale study will prove it! because there are a lot of small scale population studey that differ in the large scale population. that is why assumption is a dangerous thing!


so who's lying now? making assumptions? withput the facts? see now? so cosmic and chemical elements where created by GOD and only living form evolved? hahaha, what a lame evolutionist you are. tell me you don't have any explanation how the cosmic bodies where formed? how the elements of the periodic table was formed? and the laws that govern the universe where did it came from. if not evolution then where?
|GOD created them. hahaha. a confused evolutionist!


ow please! spare me the hypocracy! you giving a clear picture? of what? you are not even decided if you are an evolutionist or just a half-half. half evolutionist-- half what? meditation?

make up your mind!

wow, we have a psychic here who can read my mind, assuming that im half half, hehe, judging me that im a hypocrite. This guy doesnt even know a cent about me. sorry but this one right here is ridiculous, i mean your assessment about me. what is this anyway? you are starting to lean on personal attacks. Focus, okay, can you do that?


what is "if its not science"? so far everything i gave here is based on science.

Possibilities? Yes of course, Science is a field of possiblities. I am not manipulating words here, basing from past achievements of science like genetic engineering, discovery of microevolution, discovery of dinosaur fossils, invention of lasers , Cloning and etc. I can say that with thousands of uncharted territories in our genes there is a great possibility that science will one day find a complete explanation of what Evolution is.

Who would have thought that cloning is possible? Different people from all walks of life shouted that this is impossible but after many many years(drum rolls) cloning took birth. Thats why im telling you my friend that this suggestion of mine about the possibility of discovering a complete mechanism for evolution is base on proven causes.


Let me take you back to the days where religious people shouted "NO there is no Oounce of evidence for evolution" but after many many years these people got the shock of their lives when biology discovered microevolution. I am also reminded during my early childhood where religious people including preachers and priests would tell us that dinosaurs are not real and cloning is not possible but AGAIN science w/ the proper tool and brain discovered fossils and revolutionised genetic engineering w/ the birth of cloning.

Now microevolution w/c is under the umbrella of the theory of common descent shows us that evolution is a fact. Yes the mechanism is still incomplete but that doesnt mean that we should abandon the evidence. Evidence is evidence complete or not. We dont reject evidence on the premise that it is insufficient specially when the case is still ongoing. Exhaust every detail and possibilites before reject it as untrue. and let me repeat...there are still thousands of uncharted areas of potential evidence for evolution. That my friend should be your attitude towards evolution and not make hasty conclusion that it is not Science. Because if you do then you join the statistics of people shamed by their declaration that cloning and evolution is not true.



oh yes microevolution is one of the sources for macroevolution and its not base on assumption. Have you ever seen a horse that looks more like a giraffe? tho science branded "it" as a horse but the appearance leans more on being a half horse and half giraffe. When you look at it( isaw it on T.V) you'll be confuse as to the identity of this interesting creature. Why is that? Microevolution did that my friend. And according to science, that more of that fluctuation will result into a different KIND. There is no barrier for that certain creature into becoming another kind of animal. Yes mininmal changes but it produces a major change in the appearance. By the way can you pls explain why during fluctuations the offspring inherits a certain trait when trace to the parents gene is nowhere to be found? i really love to hear your explanation.

Sorry but your medicine analogy is not applicable. But i do agree that assumption is a dangerous thing.

So have you read what evolution is and what evolution is not? because i really dont want you to spread a lie. And i dont want you to be a victim of misinformation done by the other group.

[munzter666]

not by magic but by GOD.

evolution is by magic, from dirt.............. and youcame to be. Of ape heritage. bwahahaha!

adam and eve story is magic too. dirty water magic. ]

check out this simpson's episode about evolution and creationsim:
http://exchristian.net/exchristian/2007/06/simpsons-evolution.html

[Sinyalan]

oh yes microevolution is one of the sources for macroevolution and its not base on assumption. Have you ever seen a horse that looks more like a giraffe? tho science branded "it" as a horse but the appearance leans more on being a half horse and half giraffe

In addition to this, science acknowledged Whales, dolphins as mammals. Apes produces milk too... so as humans.

[Sinyalan]

not by magic but by GOD.

evolution is by magic, from dirt.............. and youcame to be. Of ape heritage. bwahahaha!

Sure that man wasn't made by your god out from dust? How do you explain the quantity of body liquids? If we are made by god from dust... we all dry and stiff. ooppsss... there's nothing to argue because god did it. that was easy.

remember, you are the one that is strongly agrees that man was made by gods. How did "they" made man? By magic. Evolution don't need magic ho chia, science observed that - I think you have been indoctrinated by so much faith.

[saint niceguy]

I think you put to much "faith" in science. pardon the pun.

If the so called theory of evolution is true, then men came from apes, apes from fish, fish from single-cell organisms, single-cell organism from where?

simple proteins?


can you ever imagine how to assemble a single strand of amino acid? they come in eighty different types, but only twenty of them are found in living organisms. the trick then is to isolate only the correct amino acids, linked them together in the right sequence in order to produce protein molecules. even if you optimized the conditions in a pre-living earth, the odds of creating just one functional protein molecule would be 1 in 10 with 60 zeroes after it.

the odds of linking one hundred amino acids to create one protein molecule by random chance are all pratically zero.

no proteins equals no cell organisms, no fish, no apes, and definately no MEN.

good day to all.

[boomer]

adam and eve story is magic too. dirty water magic. ]

check out this simpson's episode about evolution and creationsim:
http://exchristian.net/exchristian/2007/06/simpsons-evolution.html

grrrr, this one requires quicktime.

[Sinyalan]

@ saint niceguy

the right term for that is a, "supporter" not faith. If I have faith on it, it becomes religion because someone here is adamant and insisting that evolution is not science but religion.

Let's put a simple experiment. If you fill up a glass with water and a rock. Given periods of time... what will happen to both elements? There is new life. you may not see it with your own eyes but hey, biology at work! I'm not saying that it will turn out to be human but the process there is life within just a simple experiment. Now, widen your thoughts, how big planet earth is, do you think that the most abundant element will not produce anything? Bacteria? It may not happen in an instant process all it takes in long long process. di ba? Let's take a look at fossilized dinosaurs, they have been dated millions of years.. heck even billions of years. during that progression, do you think there were no other living organisms?

Since, evolution does not study on one single subject (APES) because in part... we and apes and everything had ancestor/s. It's like a tree with branches... We and animlas down to a single crawling insects are branches of a tree.

that's why science explained it clearly than that of magic. Poof! there it is/was!

[Mr.Ho_chia]

adam and eve story is magic too. dirty water magic. ]

check out this simpson's episode about evolution and creationsim:
http://exchristian.net/exchristian/2007/06/simpsons-evolution.html

well thanks for admitting that evolution is as magic as creation. therefore, evolution is not science at all.

[Mr.Ho_chia]

wow, we have a psychic here who can read my mind, assuming that im half half, hehe, judging me that im a hypocrite. This guy doesnt even know a cent about me. sorry but this one right here is ridiculous, i mean your assessment about me. what is this anyway? you are starting to lean on personal attacks. Focus, okay, can you do that?


what is "if its not science"? so far everything i gave here is based on science.

Possibilities? Yes of course, Science is a field of possiblities. I am not manipulating words here, basing from past achievements of science like genetic engineering, discovery of microevolution, discovery of dinosaur fossils, invention of lasers , Cloning and etc. I can say that with thousands of uncharted territories in our genes there is a great possibility that science will one day find a complete explanation of what Evolution is.

Who would have thought that cloning is possible? Different people from all walks of life shouted that this is impossible but after many many years(drum rolls) cloning took birth. Thats why im telling you my friend that this suggestion of mine about the possibility of discovering a complete mechanism for evolution is base on proven causes.


Let me take you back to the days where religious people shouted "NO there is no Oounce of evidence for evolution" but after many many years these people got the shock of their lives when biology discovered microevolution. I am also reminded during my early childhood where religious people including preachers and priests would tell us that dinosaurs are not real and cloning is not possible but AGAIN science w/ the proper tool and brain discovered fossils and revolutionised genetic engineering w/ the birth of cloning.

Now microevolution w/c is under the umbrella of the theory of common descent shows us that evolution is a fact. Yes the mechanism is still incomplete but that doesnt mean that we should abandon the evidence. Evidence is evidence complete or not. We dont reject evidence on the premise that it is insufficient specially when the case is still ongoing. Exhaust every detail and possibilites before reject it as untrue. and let me repeat...there are still thousands of uncharted areas of potential evidence for evolution. That my friend should be your attitude towards evolution and not make hasty conclusion that it is not Science. Because if you do then you join the statistics of people shamed by their declaration that cloning and evolution is not true.



oh yes microevolution is one of the sources for macroevolution and its not base on assumption. Have you ever seen a horse that looks more like a giraffe? tho science branded "it" as a horse but the appearance leans more on being a half horse and half giraffe. When you look at it( isaw it on T.V) you'll be confuse as to the identity of this interesting creature. Why is that? Microevolution did that my friend. And according to science, that more of that fluctuation will result into a different KIND. There is no barrier for that certain creature into becoming another kind of animal. Yes mininmal changes but it produces a major change in the appearance. By the way can you pls explain why during fluctuations the offspring inherits a certain trait when trace to the parents gene is nowhere to be found? i really love to hear your explanation.

Sorry but your medicine analogy is not applicable. But i do agree that assumption is a dangerous thing.

So have you read what evolution is and what evolution is not? because i really dont want you to spread a lie. And i dont want you to be a victim of misinformation done by the other group.

not at all, it wasn't psychic at all. it was you who revealed your being a fake evolutionist. Did you remember saying that dirt transforming to everything including life form is not part of evolution. Bwahahaha. such a short memory!
chemical and cosmic evolution also not part of it. bwahahahaha. just because you can't prove it, it's not part of evolution? what a fake. bwahahahaha!

I only assessed you on being an evolutionist. your words and post are complete evidence how you don't even understand evolution. your right i don't know you at all, but judging from your post, you are no evolutionist! Duha namo. Bwahahahaha!

really everything you gave here is based on science? naman? pagmata oi, ga-meditate patingali ka ni Buddha. asa dha imong science? nga dirt turning to everything including life form is science? hunong sa dha dong ug paghuna-huna kay mura kuwangan ra!

a really saying about discovery of fossils, genetic mutation, micro-evolution, cloning. yes those are science terms and scientific processes but it is not evidence to evolution theory! nothing in there that will definitely explain in exact details nor can be proven in a lab that will be factual evidence to evolution. those are scientific words alright, but to fit evolution you need a lot of imagination and FAITH!.

again, please expalin how matter, space, time, energy came to be! chemical evolution as well! show your proof! even organic evolution your evidence is still very much an assumption! that is no science those are fortune telling! wake up and understand what is scientific evidence.

yah, one day, eventually in the far future, but until then it is not science and cannot be used a basis for scientific facts! remeber ernst heackel? well, he deceived many alot! to support evolution he fraudulently fabricated evidence in the name of science, that's why we need to be critical about it and ask for evidence in the most stringent way, not allowing assumptions and hypothetical logic in exchange of scientific facts!lest we be decieved again. look at what that fraud did to you!

micro-evolution is nothing new. from the St. Bernard to the chihuahua. it is supported by Biblical evidence on creation... they will bring forth their own kind! nothing new! to say that it was discovered and the world was shock, is one big fat lie! FRAUD just like ERNST Heackle the father of evolution fraud!

have anyone here saw an apple turning into a sexy Caucasians lass? hahaha! far out! Stupid to say the least! i am sorry to use the word but there is no kinder way to describe it but stupidity, for one to believe that a bee can be an elephant is sick in the head. it defies science, logic and intellectual reasoning. much more a rock transforming to people!

lets not assume too much, because micro-evolution can be examined and proven to occur and how it occurs in molecular genetics. but to expand it into large scale evolution is a dream, it will defy genetic science! and we cannot do that, can we? hahaha!

that should be our attitude towards evolution and science, we welcome advancement, but let's be ready to reject blatant lies, unless we want a repeat of pareng ernst aka fraud heackle! especially if it breaks known scientific facts! which evolution clearly defy!

a horse and a giraffe. hehehe, that's your proof of evolution? common, you must be kidding me! its not new! in the phil we have the tamaraw! not the FX lest your confused. mix breeding is not evolution! mix breeding will produce new offspring that will be the parents "kind". a simple ana. dili na surprising! and you are amazed by it and attribute it to evolution? ha? Bwahahaha! pag-meditate nalang dong kay mura dili ka for science. it's just so funny! how you try to manipulate real evidence with hearsay evidence, using other scientific advancement like cloning and cross breeding to prove your evolution! that is not clear thinking but misleading logic! too bad you are deep into it! desperate for evidence in the name of evolution. hahahaha

but before I forget......... can you now please tell us your brand of evolution? where did life originate. don't be shy........ go ahead...... your very own brand of evolution...............

lest you just want to deceive many and spread lies, that's another story!