Evolution is now A FACT OF LIFE

[Malic]

]So evolutionist do not believe we evolved from primordial soup? That man is the decendant of a process that started as one cell microorganisms, forming into more complex cells, which left the soup and evolved form primate to the modern man? The embryo charts use in textbooks throughout the world which are attempts to show that human embryos as well as those of other land animals have remnants of gill structures and fish tail, never happen. That every time they find a new dead monkey they are not trying to force it into our past history.

The above statement is totally different from what you previously stated let me quote it...

Evolution wants man to have crawled out of a pond(ancient aquatic species) climbed into a tree(ape species) then drop out of trees, learned to walk upright use a computer and make ridicules claims of origin(humanoid)

can you spot the difference james? I and others can. the latter is a circus you created. again you're showing your intense desire to manipulate information. and the former still has inaccuracies(see texts in green). com' on james just drop your side comments and focus on what is real, in that way we can have a healtheir discussion.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

When I give a very lenient math formula showing population growth from 8 people over 4,500 years can easily account for 6 billion and in 41,000 years from just 1 breading pair would be trillions of humans. and when I ask for DNA prof which is the only modern conclusive test to verify commonality of species.
You tell me, then study the scientific case for common descent.

good effort on the math formula but it does not really negate the idea of Evolution. I rather discuss the obvious. Correct james, the reason behind the suggestion to study the case is for you to self examine the content first hand. don't worry what you asked for is there, scientifically explained.

Then I give a list of questions that defy common descent, and evolutionist time theories, showing the possibility of a flood and Noah event is possible within the biblical story. And doubt of the claim that the earth is 4.5 billion years old, even Millions old, not even 100,000 years old. And use true and accurate variable natural facts you say, these further proves the intelligence of a hidden force.

where is your list of questions?

"these further proves the intelligence of a hidden force" was a reply meant to describe the beauty of the brain.


honestly james, i was in a hurry. don't worry i'll answer those points. be patient, its a good virtue than being dishonest.

Have you thought of a career in politics, you do have the rhetoric skills for it. I am impressed at the skill of your evasiveness. You are slipperier than Teflon, I will give you that one. You can call a man a lier and answer no questions. Insult and man's family and give no apology. Disregard anything you want and present anything you choose as Law. Even when trapped in contradictions by you own posts chose to change the subject, And when presented with hard questions that directly contradict evolution theories, you choose to hint of a higher power. Incredible

careful james, im not done yet.

[Malic]

DNA proved species we know fish DNA, we know monkey DNA, and we know DNA. So what in our human genome sequencing actualy connects the 3 different DNA signatures that must still be present lock away by this 6 million year walk through fantasy land.

let's take your argument one at a time, okay james? Obviously you spread a quite number of objections that concerns various field in science.

this point already assumed that DNA plays a vital role in the development of the species. kindly explain your position that made you think so. don't take this the other way, i just want to know your idea.

read this...Biology 442, Human Genetics - The Human Genome, DNA, Chromosomes and Gene Structure lecture - CarolGuze.com

pay attention on the pseudogene explanation. by the way, why only give 3 options? fish, apes and humans? when there could be other options.

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

OT : I am just wondering , do both parties ( CREATION and EVOLUTION ) actually read and understand the contents of the LINKS and SOURCES provided since the discussion started ?

Honestly , I dont . Even if we memorized it word for word , understanding its core is far more realistic in protraying the knowledge absorbed since these are all sourced out and the chances are that even if it only takes 1 UNRELIABLE SOURCE to exist will cause a domino effect to discredit all the arguments out of personal point of views because of a missing link ( no pun intended ) in connecting the dots or completing the puzzle .

.2 cents

[Malic]

OT : I am just wondering , do both parties ( CREATION and EVOLUTION ) actually read and understand the contents of the LINKS and SOURCES provided since the discussion started ?

Honestly , I dont . Even if we memorized it word for word , understanding its core is far more realistic in protraying the knowledge absorbed since these are all sourced out and the chances are that even if it only takes 1 UNRELIABLE SOURCE to exist will cause a domino effect to discredit all the arguments out of personal point of views because of a missing link ( no pun intended ) in connecting the dots or completing the puzzle .

.2 cents

good point.

[chad_tukes]

Yup I agree, but to establish the link, we need the specific genetical make-up of Lucy, then compare it to our genes, as proof of the link.....

Lucy is not complete thus discrediting Lucy's validity should not be conclusive. consider Lucy as one big jigsaw puzzle (which, by the way, most fossils are).

[chad_tukes]

Yes I read that they have created a 3 dimensional digital rendering of the bone fragments That is a good thing because there will an accurate preserved digital record of each fragment.

They did not conduct any test that could have been used for the authenticity of the bone fragments. She was looking worst for ware when I took my son to see the exhibit in March of 2008 while it was displayed at the Houston Museum of Natural Sciences. I had originally taken him there so he could see the extensive Philippine sea shell and butterfly collection. I wanted him to see the natural beauty of the Philippine species before we were to move here.

I am working on your other biblical questions, just saw them this morning. Had been busy, we run several businesses which required attending.

I am also looking for the fraud evidence on Lucy, the internet is a poor place to find anything on some subjects. especially if from over 10 years ago. I miss have large reference libraries. Surigao City does not really have a public library. I want to post only from reliable site locations.

you don't have to go to a public libraray, James. you can find reliable articles/sources on the internet. a scientist, like yourself, should have access to private databases (from the company you worked for or universities) to pull resources from. i'm surprised that you don't. i'm waiting.

[chad_tukes]

Afterall ... MAGIC or not ... there is a MOVER of all things UNMOVED . If we say its MAGIC , there is what we call the The GREATEST MAGICIAN , MAGICIAN of all MAGICIANS , PROVIDER of all MAGICS etc. Hope SCIENCE can expound more on what kind of MAGIC WAND was used to create all things in just 6 days .

this is the very creationist ideal that evolution is ought to disprove. if we say it's MAGIC, then you are correct, there should be a MAGICIAN. but what if there wasn't? what if everything was created by CHANCE? i have been reading different creationists blog and they always throw the argument that it is scientifically impossible that everything came from NOTHING. which to me, is very absurd.

see Steady State theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[unsay_ngalan_nimo]

-thumbs up lang ko ani na comment ako nabasa ..

Creationists
Wed Jun 11 08:22:28 BST 2008 by David

First of all, I'll state that I'm Christian. Did you ever stop to think that possibly evolution was the tool God used to create?

Did you ever stop to think that Genisis was written in terms that people of those times could understand? How do you explain to people 6000 years ago what 1 billion years is? How do you explain to people who just learnt how to write what a single cell organism is?

and i agree with this one... my hubby said the oldest profession was not prostitution but programming..
GOd is like a computer programmer/ designer...

and evolution is like a program... mura gud muduwa ka mu-level up ka...

[chad_tukes]

-thumbs up lang ko ani na comment ako nabasa ..

Creationists
Wed Jun 11 08:22:28 BST 2008 by David

First of all, I'll state that I'm Christian. Did you ever stop to think that possibly evolution was the tool God used to create?

Did you ever stop to think that Genisis was written in terms that people of those times could understand? How do you explain to people 6000 years ago what 1 billion years is? How do you explain to people who just learnt how to write what a single cell organism is?

it could be possible. but is that supposed to make evolutionists believe there was an intelligent designer? that would conflict with the theories and facts of evolution, wouldn't it?

[jamesmusslewhite]

OT : I am just wondering , do both parties ( CREATION and EVOLUTION ) actually read and understand the contents of the LINKS and SOURCES provided since the discussion started ?

Honestly , I dont . Even if we memorized it word for word , understanding its core is far more realistic in protraying the knowledge absorbed since these are all sourced out and the chances are that even if it only takes 1 UNRELIABLE SOURCE to exist will cause a domino effect to discredit all the arguments out of personal point of views because of a missing link ( no pun intended ) in connecting the dots or completing the puzzle .

.2 cents

No not .2 cents, I think your point was a 1,000 peso note. with plagiarism, lazy reporting, bias and agenda groups, and limited access to good and reliable research material. It is all suspect even if it seems to be on official news or science website. Yet it not necessaryly perclude and website, because good data can be found on a Evolution, Darwinian, or Creationist supporting website. Each questions the other and puts the points that support their position.

Critical thinking and scientific reasoning should allow a non-bias intellectual to use the information, facts, and questions from all websites and use them to get a clear picture.

Example when police go to a scene of a domestic dispute, the police automatically know there will be 3 sides to the story. His side, her side, and then the truth. They ask him, her, then ask family, friends, and neighbors; take all the information then make the right decisions. If they came to the scene with a preconceived bias it would taint the evidence and could bring about the wrong conclusions. You would call them bad investigators?

So how is this different? Science is investigation and you have to look at all the variables, exclude no source, but check everything. If a member find a controversial question off a evolutionist, Darwinian, or creationist websites the a good investicator with a scientific mind should make the right conclusion.

If real science acted like some of these members, the earth would still be flat, all life come from spontaneous generation, and the universe would evolve around the earth. Each of those theories had supporters who just knew they were right, some I am sure would argue to a rock in support of their beliefs.