If you look, you'll find several debates between Gish and others with different views.
His main weapon is "I don't believe that because the Bible doesn't say so."
BTW I'm still waiting for a coherent and reasonable explanation for the fossil record.
Are We the highest form of life in the universe?
- Thread starter passport
- Start date
- Status
If you look, you'll find several debates between Gish and others with different views.
His main weapon is "I don't believe that because the Bible doesn't say so."
BTW I'm still waiting for a coherent and reasonable explanation for the fossil record.
Maybe you need potty training. (If you would have said Lederhosen, instead of pants, you would have s*x in your post, too!)
Eh? Some socialized healthcare and tithing 10% of your income at the chapel will clear that right up so you won't miss your date tonight in your Hummer H2 with the escort girl you hired.
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,587
I hope that escort girl is as hot as Pablo is full of hot gas.
Humans currently are at the threshold of being able to spread higher life forms to other planets. A rock chipped from Mars might carry bacteria to Earth, but that's about all that can survive the trip. All previous higher species on Earth have not been able to travel through space as far as I know.
I think earthlings are about average in intelligence; there's probably civilizations out there that are much older and more advanced.
There's a scientist that postulated a theory that our sun lies in a 'habitable zone' in the Milky Way galaxy, which is in the outer reaches of the spiral arms. Less radiation, gravity, etc. out here. We might have lots of neighbors, smarter than us and maybe even better looking.....
There's a scientist that postulated a theory that our sun lies in a 'habitable zone' in the Milky Way galaxy, which is in the outer reaches of the spiral arms. Less radiation, gravity, etc. out here. We might have lots of neighbors, smarter than us and maybe even better looking.....
carbon footprint. Hairy, but small. Size 8.5.
I hope you catch something from her. Or worse the Lederhosen are stuck in place!!!
I hope you catch something from her. Or worse the Lederhosen are stuck in place!!!
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,587
Pablo has sailors on his mast.
He has big rocks, but only in his back yard.
I once was a believer of Darwinism probably owing to my misfortune of having had a public education. After a cursory examination of the 'facts' such as they are about evolution I've become an apostate and realized that things couldn't be the way they are randomly.
This was Darwin's challenge: "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down."
Several noted scientists and mathmaticians have taken Darwin
s challenge and beaten him.
A scientist named Behe (describing a cell) demonstrated that it is a mathmatical impossibility for all 30 parts of the flagellem (or 200 parts of the cilium) to have been brought together by the "numerous, successive, slight modification " of natural selection. Life at the molecular leval "is a loud clear, piercing cry of design." from page 205 of Godless by Ann Coulter.
There's more. Another recognized scientist named Hoyle calculated that the chances of the human eye evolving randomly is about 1:42K zeros or impossible.
More:
The evidence so far proffered by the Darwiniacs has been debunked.
1. piltdown man is a meltdown, total fraud
2. the peppered moths of England was a fake
3. most of the animal phyla of today began during a short time during the Cambrian period of which there are NO fossil antecedents.
4. The finches of the Galapagos islands much of which Darwin based his theory upon are the same creatures today some 170 years later.
5. NOT one fossil has been discovered which proves beyond a reasonable doubt that any species has done more than adapted to environmental changes. None has successfully morphed into a new species.
There's one more thing. Simply claiming that because some individual 'looks' like a different individual doesn't cement the nexus between them. Bonobos look humanoid but
whow would venture to say that one evolved into Michael Moore?
Would it advance the theory of evolution that because of physical similarities Elton John might be Janet Reno's son?
This was Darwin's challenge: "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down."
Several noted scientists and mathmaticians have taken Darwin
s challenge and beaten him.
A scientist named Behe (describing a cell) demonstrated that it is a mathmatical impossibility for all 30 parts of the flagellem (or 200 parts of the cilium) to have been brought together by the "numerous, successive, slight modification " of natural selection. Life at the molecular leval "is a loud clear, piercing cry of design." from page 205 of Godless by Ann Coulter.
There's more. Another recognized scientist named Hoyle calculated that the chances of the human eye evolving randomly is about 1:42K zeros or impossible.
More:
The evidence so far proffered by the Darwiniacs has been debunked.
1. piltdown man is a meltdown, total fraud
2. the peppered moths of England was a fake
3. most of the animal phyla of today began during a short time during the Cambrian period of which there are NO fossil antecedents.
4. The finches of the Galapagos islands much of which Darwin based his theory upon are the same creatures today some 170 years later.
5. NOT one fossil has been discovered which proves beyond a reasonable doubt that any species has done more than adapted to environmental changes. None has successfully morphed into a new species.
There's one more thing. Simply claiming that because some individual 'looks' like a different individual doesn't cement the nexus between them. Bonobos look humanoid but
whow would venture to say that one evolved into Michael Moore?
Would it advance the theory of evolution that because of physical similarities Elton John might be Janet Reno's son?
ignoring the entire controversy, i am impressed at the level of restraint you members have. debates like this usually end with name calling and peeing on matches.
weither you believe in evolution or not, or where we came from, big bang whatever. you got to admit thats a funny picture.
so im sure the mods are watching this thread closely. perhaps it is that they will let the forum evolve into more topics than not so long as we keep it civic? err, civil?
weither you believe in evolution or not, or where we came from, big bang whatever. you got to admit thats a funny picture.
so im sure the mods are watching this thread closely. perhaps it is that they will let the forum evolve into more topics than not so long as we keep it civic? err, civil?
- Status
Similar threads
