Posts by Jehu

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Does evolution contradict creationism?

    01/06/2005 2:11:55 PM PST · 1,046 of 1,048
    Jehu to shubi
    Yes to God can do it anyway He wants. Whether God was some harried busybody creating every detail of life I don't know. Probably not. Seems to me God makes living things, including other beings of a high order. Maybe they had something to do about the blueprints of life. Everything (biological) on this earth appears to have been designed, and that at certain distinct stages. Thus blue-green algae to condition a proper atmosphere. When that is ready then the introduction of most of the forms of life...all at once. Later we have mammals and the environment that they are best suited for. Almost as if the earth was being specially prepared for us.

    I have stated my theological opposition to ToE. Simply that it discounts and stands in opposition to the doctrine of original sin and redemption. That may not mean anything to you. But if I accept that premise, then eventually I have no need of a Redeemer. It is why much of Christianity is weak. Just like the early Church, once you dilute the truth with the surrounding pagan belief systems, you loose the power and miracles of the early Church. You get the Dark Ages. Same thing IMO. You accept false theories, the pagan theory of ToE, of our day (disguised in the Priestly robes of science) and you weaken and eventually destroy your faith. You go ahead and do that, I refuse.
  • Does evolution contradict creationism?

    01/05/2005 2:54:38 PM PST · 1,042 of 1,048
    Jehu to shubi
    ToE does not "pretend" to explain speciation. It explains speciation insofar as our knowledge goes at this time. ToE postulates that a single cell is the common ancestor of all life on Earth. This is a Theory incorporated in the ToE called the Theory of Common Descent.

    Your previous two posts were telling me that ToE does not incorporate the idea (theory) of where life came from, but right here you tell me it does...sigh!

    There is not as much evidence for this as there is for the fact of evolution. There are other explanations that could work,

    Name them!

    but so far all indications are that a single cell developed into all the life you see on Earth. God was pretty smart to be able to do this, wasn't he?

    NO! The indications are that single-celled life first existed in the early seas, reduced the early atmosphere to an oxygen bearing atmosphere, capable of supporting multicellular life. Then about half a billion years ago life exploded into existence on this earth in almost all its basic forms...NOT a slow progression of ever more complex life. That is the evidence. Yours is an interpretation of that evidence, through an already convinced mind that evolution is a "fact!" Maybe it did work that way, but the evidence is against ToE and for special creation. If God is the problem for science, then don't even mention Him, but at least interpret the data as it is, not as you want it to be...that is not science.
  • Does evolution contradict creationism?

    01/05/2005 7:19:34 AM PST · 1,037 of 1,048
    Jehu to shubi
    ToE infers life arose entirely by materialistic processes. It is still shown as such in primary school textbooks. The story of life crawling out of the slime is all from YOUR side of the isle. Sorry but you evolutionists tarred yourself with this brush, you will have to live with the results.

    If ToE pretends to explain speciation, then at what species does it start the story? Frogs? Lizards? Trilobites? Algae? Funny you guys massage this theory to AVOID and EVADE the evidence of the discoveries of science since Darwin.

    This theory was only credible for about 30 or 40 years. And it is YOU guys that have to invent incredible variations of this theory to account for the real evidience of the fossil record which (against all your protests) still indicates the sudden appearance (creation?) of species. And no transitory species that are not simply labeling games by the devout.
  • Does evolution contradict creationism?

    01/04/2005 6:33:58 AM PST · 1,031 of 1,048
    Jehu to Jehu
    "My concept of God is based on a study of the Bible and fact."

    The Pharisees could say the same. Great rock throwers at God also. Your intellect is darkened, you will never come to a knowledge of God though study. It is why you are enraptured by ToE. It massages a fallen intellect but does nothing for your faith. Ask Darwin's wife.
  • Does evolution contradict creationism?

    01/04/2005 6:28:59 AM PST · 1,030 of 1,048
    Jehu to shubi
    Your TOE is as divorced from reality as you are in your worship of a conveniently distant creator
  • Does evolution contradict creationism?

    01/04/2005 6:26:58 AM PST · 1,028 of 1,048
    Jehu to Thatcherite
    My humor and invective are BOTH better than your understanding of physical processes, or you science. Something like a human city has everything to do with biology, evolutionary or not. A city is built by us, (biological beings). A city is designed (although most very badly)

    A single cell within any of us is far more complex, purposeful, and DESIGNED than any human city. It does things beyond its own capabilities, or in organization with other cells beyond its own capacity to know what, or why, it would do such a thing.

    A single cell in the eye knows nothing of quantum waves, or photons, but in concert with various other cells, working synchronously at amazing speeds and with the human brain it assimilates billions of photons per second, adjusts for color, contrast, brightness, depth, flips the image 180 degrees and constructs them into a real-time video of the external world, and this without a conscious thought all day long.

    That anyone in this day and age could pretend that this SYSTEM is NOT designed is a fool. You can call that invective, but I think it is an OBVIOUS truth only lost on devotees to the temple of evolution.

    Why should I be easy on any of you? You have accepted a lie, (for you own reasons). Fine...but you proselyte others into your doctrines and do not allow the truth to be taught, and you pervert and limit the biological sciences. You are the false prophets of this age.
  • Does evolution contradict creationism?

    01/04/2005 6:10:12 AM PST · 1,026 of 1,048
    Jehu to shubi
    Read Romans...see what the Scripture says about those that WORSHIP the creature and creation rather than the creator. YOU are throwing rocks at God, even though subconsciously, or do you think sin is all a conscious act?

    My concept of God is based on Scripture, experiences, and observation of nature and life, and a knowledge of human history.

    If we are created in the image of God, then our emotions, feelings, desires, are some reflection of His, even though debased at this point. God does get mad...just like us (but in righteousness).

    And imagine this: You go to a lot of effort to build a beautiful house, invest a lot of time, money, resources, sweat and tears. You built this house specifically for somebody that you actually love...you did it as an act and showing of that love.

    They move in and not only do they trash your house, but they pretend that either the house always existed, or somebody else built it. They look right at you and while you show them the deed of ownership, and you pretend to not see or hear them. Maybe you are a far more elevated being, but if somebody did that to me, I would kick their ass, and kick them out of my house.
  • Does evolution contradict creationism?

    01/04/2005 5:57:22 AM PST · 1,025 of 1,048
    Jehu to shubi
    Yep we have...incredible isn't it? Tell me which came first the cell nucleus with its controlled water environment, controlled temperature range all built out of proteins, or the DNA, which specifies the proteins? And remember DNA is a very delicate substance, it has to have this controlled environment to function. Not to mention transcription processes and little factories to build the proteins...a process far more complex than any human factory...evolution has some splaing to due!
  • Does evolution contradict creationism?

    01/04/2005 5:51:57 AM PST · 1,024 of 1,048
    Jehu to shubi

    zip it!

  • Does evolution contradict creationism?

    01/04/2005 5:51:14 AM PST · 1,023 of 1,048
    Jehu to shubi
    And besides ENTIRELY missing my point...you point is?

    Like I was saying...cells within human organs produce proteins that are used by other cells they know nothing about, unless you want to speculate that cells have an extensive memory and actually know (are conscious) of what they are doing?

    Either way you have the problem in the evolutionary paradigm. If cells are conscious of what they are doing, and why they are doing it, and where to send the manufactured proteins, then where does that intelligence reside? From where did that come? It only speaks of purposeful design. If cells do not know why they are manufacturing proteins for other cells, then why (according to evolution) would they be doing something they have no way of knowing how, or if it benefits them?

    Either way you have intelligence on a cellular level that is beyond incredible, not to mention a communication and feedback system that would be more mysterious than God.

    Or you have a designed system that was fit together by a master designer for a purpose that it accomplishes far better than my example of Manhattan, which does know why it exists, what it manufactures, and where it sends the products. (Which was my orginal point...get it?) And that ONLY because it is inhabited and built and designed by intelligent beings...excepting the liberals and lawyers who basically fulfill the role of parasites.
  • Does evolution contradict creationism?

    01/03/2005 2:46:16 PM PST · 1,017 of 1,048
    Jehu to Thatcherite
    Yep! Went to NYC. I was contemplating the Island of Manhattan, which took human beings with all their industry and intelligencer and the resources of a great nation about 200 years to build. I had to keep jumping out of the way as new (little buildings) spontaneously erupted out of the sidewalk.

    And consider that Manhattan is FAR LESS COMPLEX than a single living cell, cannot self-replicate, nor repair itself. And does not produce products for distant cities it knows nothing about.
  • Does evolution contradict creationism?

    01/03/2005 9:25:30 AM PST · 1,015 of 1,048
    Jehu to Thatcherite
    If you guys can believe a blind stupid "force" allowed US to come about with our several trillion cells working in complete sychronicity, producing millions of proteins, duplicating themselves with an error rate of 1 gene error in 10 million copies. That "evolution developed the human brain, the five senses.

    That evolution dictated we loose our fur (to what evolutionary advantage?). And that we became upright with the loss of land speed due to the loss of two legs for locomotion. That all the specifics of every organ is contained within the genetic code in each and every cell...except the sex cells which only have half the genes of the individual. And that all the specific cells for every organ KNOW where to go to form the human body while still in the womb. That the human brain has more connections than all the telephone systems in the world put together, and those connections pre-wired in the genetic code.

    Well I guess I can EASILY believe the pre-flood earth existed in different physical circumstances than today, including an atmosphere that contained no dust or salt crystals so that moisture could precipitate as rain...never before seen until some change in the atmosphere, including the possible introduction of inter-stellar masses of water, earthquakes (look what one did under the Indian Ocean!) Water is still not drained from the land that was flooded!

    Also the Bible does not indicate if the flood was local or global, arguments are made for both viewpoints. The best arguments are for a flood, ONLY where man existed, since it was his sin that was being judged.

    Now you guys postulate a mechanism for all of speciation that nobody has ever observed, the fossil evidence is in direct contradiction to this theory...and yet you still believe in THIS theory, contrary to all the evidence, modern science, information theory, irreducible complexity, and just plain common sense that no natural processes can produce something as incredible as consciousness, or self-awareness. A quality that is obviously transcendental to sheer matter.

    And you base this belief, starting from a mediocre scientist from the 19th century who knew hardly anything about cells, nothing about DNA, who's own words about the fossil record have been falsified, and who believed in Lamarckian inheritance. Hardly a credible source to invest so much time and effort to prop up this rickety and moth-eaten theory. It's days are numbered, so is the hiding place for your unbelief. Agnostics and atheists will have to find a new way to throw rocks at God. Meanwhile many of us will give honor to God for the wonders of HIS creation. And we will marvel at the stupidity that unbelief can generate.
  • The Religious Cult of Evolution Fights Back

    12/23/2004 9:02:41 AM PST · 484 of 1,419
    Jehu to Admin Moderator

    They can dish it out.

  • The Religious Cult of Evolution Fights Back

    12/23/2004 9:01:36 AM PST · 483 of 1,419
    Jehu to js1138

    4 or five billion, probably. Try again.

  • The Religious Cult of Evolution Fights Back

    12/23/2004 8:57:54 AM PST · 479 of 1,419
    Jehu to js1138

    Baloney and Salami! Evolution DOES tread the ground theological, by denying teleology to explain impossibilities! That is why your's is the ONLY "so called" scientific discipline that has this fight with believers. Nobody has a problem with physics, or chemistry (actual real science). Science was birthed from Christianity, it belongs to believers, we are just taking it back now.

    Sorry we were asleep for 150 years and gave you the false impression that atheists could hijack what belongs to us. Without faith science is blind. It becomes nothing more than a holding pen for those that are enthralled by the lust of debate over process and tedium.

  • The Religious Cult of Evolution Fights Back

    12/23/2004 8:50:10 AM PST · 473 of 1,419
    Jehu to VadeRetro
    Can't you do your OWN research? I was just linking intellectual perversion with sexual perversion, in case you didn't get the point. I love aggravating you guys, you seem to love getting aggravated. All pompous in your faux outrage.
  • The Religious Cult of Evolution Fights Back

    12/23/2004 8:46:47 AM PST · 472 of 1,419
    Jehu to Shryke

    You guys throw rocks at MY God with every breathe and you're complaining about my Christianity? Come teach me something else that you know nothing about.

  • The Religious Cult of Evolution Fights Back

    12/23/2004 8:44:58 AM PST · 469 of 1,419
    Jehu to Shryke
    Problem is that if life is created evolution may be unnecessary and evolutionary biologists would have to work at Burger King.
  • The Religious Cult of Evolution Fights Back

    12/23/2004 8:42:06 AM PST · 467 of 1,419
    Jehu to Ichneumon

    Your point is....?

  • The Religious Cult of Evolution Fights Back

    12/23/2004 8:41:36 AM PST · 466 of 1,419
    Jehu to Ichneumon
    Nice word game, you ever try Scrabble?
  • The Religious Cult of Evolution Fights Back

    12/23/2004 8:37:20 AM PST · 463 of 1,419
    Jehu to VadeRetro
    Awwwwggg, Help, caught in a blizzard of gnats while swallowing camels!
  • The Religious Cult of Evolution Fights Back

    12/23/2004 8:34:41 AM PST · 460 of 1,419
    Jehu to Shryke
    Rotten, liberal, NEA, God-hating types. You can never trust anything they teach, I would agree.
  • The Religious Cult of Evolution Fights Back

    12/23/2004 8:26:08 AM PST · 456 of 1,419
    Jehu to Michael_Michaelangelo

    I once saw a list of comparisons of Evolutionists and evolution to the Medieval Church and its Priests.

    It starts out:

    1. They both practice their arts in big mostly empty buildings (Cathedrals, Museums)

    2. They both worship old bones and relics (Bones and artifacts of the Saints. Bones and artifacts of Dinosaurs.)

    3. They both talk to the uninitiated in arcane and confusing language.

    4. They both will not allow dissent.

    The list goes on but alas...time presses.

    You have a Merry Christmas.

  • The Religious Cult of Evolution Fights Back

    12/23/2004 8:17:04 AM PST · 453 of 1,419
    Jehu to js1138

    Actually all Western Civilization realizes he value of the Reformation. You might even say Western Civilation would be a lot like the Middle East right now without it.

    Modern day evolutionists are like the cartoon character that happily saws off the branch of the tree...while standing on the branch. Mock the Judeo/Christian tradition to your own peril. It is the tree that gave you shelter to formulate your ridiculous theory in the first place.

  • The Religious Cult of Evolution Fights Back

    12/23/2004 8:12:42 AM PST · 451 of 1,419
    Jehu to js1138
    I notice a lot of people are willing to discuss the attributes and behavior of God without explaining his origin.

    The smarter of the species recognize mathematical infinity, transcendental numbers, the creation of the whole universe out of nothing we can measure, see, understand, or even theorize about.

    I have no difficulty in believing there is somebody out there that is beyond my little finite mind. If I could imagine Him, test Him, theorize Him. He could not have been the First Cause, my mind would be.

    That is why you are an evolutionist. You cannot admit, nor bear the thought, of a mind greater than yours and incomprehensible to you.

    Note how much evolutionists adore all the trappings of intellect, they even pretend to worship the intellect of other men, of whom they approve, while secretly believing there is none so smart as they.

    So you believe in a man-invented comically preposterous theory of consciousness produced by unawareness. Order from Chaos. Life from unlife. Purpose from negation. The universe is hard on the arrogant.
  • The Religious Cult of Evolution Fights Back

    12/23/2004 7:59:39 AM PST · 444 of 1,419
    Jehu to BibChr
    I sort of like the fact that he was the greatest killer of false prophets in history. Love what he did to Hillary, er Jezebel.
  • The Religious Cult of Evolution Fights Back

    12/23/2004 7:57:54 AM PST · 442 of 1,419
    Jehu to RadioAstronomer

    Course most people can observe gravity in action daily. Nobody can observe evolution (except God, who is the only one that lives long enough to percieve such slow magic).

  • The Religious Cult of Evolution Fights Back

    12/23/2004 7:55:09 AM PST · 441 of 1,419
    Jehu to Shryke
    You mean ToE makes no inferences? So why did my own teachers tell me stories about the primordial slime? Sure wasn't coming from a bunch of creationists. And I don't lie, I am not a liberal, Clinton supporter, or evolutionist.
  • The Religious Cult of Evolution Fights Back

    12/23/2004 7:52:09 AM PST · 440 of 1,419
    Jehu to js1138

    The head of the snake has been cut off by irreducible complexity and information theory, we're just watching it squirm right now.

  • The Religious Cult of Evolution Fights Back

    12/23/2004 7:49:27 AM PST · 439 of 1,419
    Jehu to Right Wing Professor

    You must have not read my link on Shubi's thread. But then you just believe what you want to believe...why, just almost like me!

  • The Religious Cult of Evolution Fights Back

    12/23/2004 7:08:44 AM PST · 426 of 1,419
    Jehu to Alacarte
    Funny and ignorant at the same time. I guess you missed the Reformation as just one example of self-correction by religion. (Read Christianity) I could also point out that your beloved science was only able to develop based on the long history and tradition of Judaism and Christianity.

    Only after several thousand years tutelage in monotheism could mankind scratch his collective little head and figure out the universe was a creation. (Duh!)

    If created...it must be sustained by principle and law. If laws...those laws could be found out, tested and retested by man. Man could then build technologies based on those laws.

    For verification see who all the founders of modern science were...O, darn it, most of them were Christians, even devout Christians. Not until you get to the apostate Darwin does science veer off into mumbo-jumbo and superstition.

    Almost back to the belief that life spontaneously arises from dirt. That rotting meat turns into worms. (But those clever evolutionists are pretty sly about that claim. They disguise the life from dirt fable by cloaking it in the magician's scarf of lots of time...lots and lots of time.)

    Too bad evolution cannot be tested, and no discernible laws or principles appear on the horizon to describe the (forces? force? Gaia? Tinkerbelle? Magical inherent properties of insensate matter?)

    We do have everything from very slow changes over gazillions of years to produce species. (Ops!!!) This is not confirmed by the fossil record.

    OK, ok, then species must have arisen SUDDENLY (you know, kind of like created) but not really created, wink, wink. They just sort of punctuated themselves into existence.

    Unfortunately right now we are in an unpunctuated state of evolution since we are deprived of witnessing species appearing all at once (sigh).
  • The Religious Cult of Evolution Fights Back

    12/23/2004 6:46:58 AM PST · 415 of 1,419
    Jehu to Long Cut
    OK, where does ToE begin? Single cell? Amino Acids? Frog? You guys propose a process and talk endlessly of the process, but you never EXPLICITLY state where that process begins? It is like someone talking about Fords and Chevys and how they run and their horsepower but never mentioning Detroit.

    Sorry but ToE infers that life ultimately came from the inorganic by natural processes. Even current textbooks in secondary education still show pictures, or give the hypothesis of life climbing heriocially out of the muck.

    You evolutionists started this game, you don't get to change the definitions and the rules in the 4th quarter.
  • The Religious Cult of Evolution Fights Back

    12/23/2004 6:37:05 AM PST · 411 of 1,419
    Jehu to ItCanHappenToYou
    Not that you guys use evolution more than a blind man uses his cane is a windstorm. It was evolutionists that built an entire caveman family display out of the tooth of a pig.

    At least Biblical stories are verified time after time by archeology, while the evidence for evolution grows weaker as more REAL scientists have the guts to speak up in the repressive Darwin church.
  • The Religious Cult of Evolution Fights Back

    12/23/2004 6:27:16 AM PST · 408 of 1,419
    Jehu to Right Wing Professor

    Or what, you'll tell mommy? I will call you the vilest thing I know..."Liberal!"

  • Does evolution contradict creationism?

    12/22/2004 3:55:36 PM PST · 927 of 1,048
    Jehu to Thatcherite

    I see you are impressed by degrees, pretensions and the Peacock like preening of so many of our psuedo intellectuals, an not truth. Same thing could be said of the Pharisees. If I'm ever sick I would first pick a small town doctor (not that Simmons is one) before some Ivory Tower jerk that could not diagnose a pregnancy in the 3rd trimester.

  • Does evolution contradict creationism?

    12/22/2004 3:50:15 PM PST · 926 of 1,048
    Jehu to bigdakine
    Here is the link: Evolution Sucks When you're done reading it you can kiss my created ass.
  • Does evolution contradict creationism?

    12/22/2004 3:39:38 PM PST · 925 of 1,048
    Jehu to bigdakine
    What you cannot get into your wooden head is you are trying to disprove I.D. by a computer program that was designed by someone intelligent...unless it was written by you, which would then make me believe that random meaningless noise could produce something worthwhile.

    Far as math goes, you give me something like Maxwell's equations which describe the electromagnetic force with sheer elegance...that describe the force? field? particles? great sucking sound? great pumpkin? of evolution, kay?

    None of this population statistics and the other nonsense that explains NOTHING, that evolutionary biologists trot out as meaning anything. Some equations that can be worked with specific inputs and produce SPECIES! Or what? Maybe it is all too complex for that? What would that be called?...a process that is too complex to be described mathematically, what could we call that? Something Special? Hmmmm ( cue tone of SNL Church Lady)

    I am glad most of you idiots don't design bridges or anything useful.
  • Does evolution contradict creationism?

    12/22/2004 3:27:32 PM PST · 924 of 1,048
    Jehu to Thatcherite
    None of you could polish Behe or Dembski's shoes...but you knew that. I don't really envy you your belief in this worthless theory since it does seem to feed your shriveled up little souls that are incapable of wonder. You want to turn the wonders of life and creation into a circle-jerk of process that is your right and wish. Enjoy.
  • Does evolution contradict creationism?

    12/22/2004 3:19:44 PM PST · 923 of 1,048
    Jehu to shubi
    I understood you perfectly. You have no clue of the doctrine of original sin. It is not some optional piece of equipment for the believer.

    You dilute that doctrine and it will pervade everything you think about redemption and the real work of Christ, even if it is an unconscious rot of spirit it works away. Little foxes spoil the vine.

    The redemptive work of Christ is not some religious exercise it is a pure scientific function of spiritual laws. Or why do you think God started the education of humanity via law? It is our tutor to Christ where the actual thing...is real, the law is a template of the real. And law is exact not vague.

    What Christ did is only real and effective for each one of us if we inherited sin from Adam. Not some mishmash of descent through lines of species. If it were not an issue then God would not have spent most of human history to winnow out the line of descent to Mary who birthed Christ. The whole Old Testament is the story of God narrowing down the search for the line that produces Christ.

    If God had not set this up by laws and definite (equation like principles) then He could just wave his hand and all would be forgiven. You are in error, and worse you are a minister and are leading others into error.
  • Does evolution contradict creationism?

    12/22/2004 3:08:06 PM PST · 921 of 1,048
    Jehu to Thatcherite

    My arguments are my own unless otherwise stated. Noah's Ark is another issue which we can take up if you wish.

  • The Religious Cult of Evolution Fights Back

    12/22/2004 3:03:27 PM PST · 335 of 1,419
    Jehu to superskunk

    Or dentistry, or woman's fashions, or books, or good ski resorts...I could go on...

  • The Religious Cult of Evolution Fights Back

    12/22/2004 2:57:48 PM PST · 333 of 1,419
    Jehu to superskunk

    "Muslims are devout creationists."

    Not very good at creating a democracy :-)

  • The Religious Cult of Evolution Fights Back

    12/22/2004 2:51:42 PM PST · 331 of 1,419
    Jehu to PatrickHenry
    Did you actually READ what they said in your link about RING species?

    These conclusions were based on broad patterns in the distribution and relationships of many species. But determining how speciation occurs in any particular case can be difficult, (NO SHIT?) because we are usually only presented with the outcome (all ToE ever gives us is the outcome, and speculation of that outcome!)

    of the process (two species) and we often have no (NEVER is rendered OFTEN by dishonest evolutionists)

    record of their common ancestor or (NO SHIT!) the intermediate forms that occurred during speciation. Ring species acquire new traits as they move away from the ancestral home.

    Ring species provide unusual and valuable situations in which we can observe two species and the intermediate forms connecting them. In a ring species: A ring of populations encircles an area of unsuitable habitat. At one location in the ring of populations, two distinct forms coexist without interbreeding,
    (remember this folks!) and hence are different species. Around the rest of the ring, the traits of one of these species change gradually, through intermediate populations, into the traits of the second species.

    California salamanders exhibit ring species traits. Ensatina salamanders One well-studied ring species consists of salamanders in the Ensatina eschscholtzii group, distributed in mountains along the west coast of North America. In 1949, Robert Stebbins5 described a fascinating pattern of geographical variation in these salamanders: Two distinct forms of Ensatina salamanders, differing dramatically in color, coexist in southern California and interbreed there only rarely.
    (This must mean they are humping continuously!)

    These two forms are connected by a chain of populations to the north that encircles the Central Valley of California, and through this ring of populations the color patterns of the salamanders change gradually.

    DNA analysis supports a common ancestor for these salamanders. Stebbins thought that this situation arose when an ancestral population of salamanders, in northern California, expanded southward along two fronts, one down the Sierra Nevada mountains, and the other down the coastal mountains. The two groups gradually became different as they moved south. When they met again in southern California, the two expanding fronts were so different that they rarely interbred, and were therefore different species.


    So we see that they are TWO different species that RARELY interbred...you know like Saint Bernard's and Cocker Spaniels are TWO different species. LOL! And notice how evolutionists are short on facts, mathematical descriptions, but love to tell these grand stories of life and what MUST have happened...EXCEPT it Didn't Not even in their own story, the two species they depict are still interbreeding! Incredible! Probably these Salamanders are producing turtles or something...that will be the next article! And they never even observe that the Salamander populations may exhibit different color changes cause the rocks may be of different hues? Even human beings have different shades of skin based on geographical location. Lame! This is always used in evolutionary tautologies. Variation (well established and observed) in species, is suddenly NEW species!
  • Does evolution contradict creationism?

    12/21/2004 3:48:02 PM PST · 903 of 1,048
    Jehu to bigdakine

    You don't even know I am talking about rotational positions in birth along the long axis of the human body, not about butt first, or head first! Awww..never mind!

  • Does evolution contradict creationism?

    12/21/2004 3:43:38 PM PST · 899 of 1,048
    Jehu to Thatcherite

    Actually I don't care what Theobald says, a quick perusal assures me it is just another in the enless semantic tricks of evolutionists, and if the pre-Cambrian explosion of life is NOT enough falsification of this theory, then what possibly could be?

  • Does evolution contradict creationism?

    12/21/2004 3:38:36 PM PST · 896 of 1,048
    Jehu to shubi
    You are in error about original sin. I agree we are in spiritual warfare between two natures. However we are doomed without outside help. Nothing God does is vague. It is all very specific. Jesus is not a magic wand. He came to fulfill law, and execute a new covenant with man.

    The Bible makes no mistake in mentioning original sin. To deny that central tenet is to deny most of the Bible, and all most all of Paul's writings. He could only take away sin from us ALL, (as one man himself), if that sin came into ALL of humanity through one man. The account of Genesis stands as is. There cannot be common descent from another species, we must all have only a common parent!

    I am not a young earth believer. I do believe the Gap between Gen 1:1 and Gen 1:2. Unless I can be dissuaded about original sin I will view evolutionary teaching as a direct attack upon the central tenet of original sin.

    I really personally could care less if God did things by evolution, or fiat. But the revelation of original sin, the teachings of the Bible, and my own experience and observation, and the writings of hundreds of Christian scholars persuade me that this is correct.

    Evolution, (as taught now) is in contradiction to original sin, and is my basis to oppose this theory vehemently, until either it, or Christianity is vanquished! You are fighting the wrong battle on the wrong side.

    I have not even touched upon the utter disaster evolutionary theory has wrecked upon humanity from a sociological viewpoint. It turns loose a nihilism upon man we cannot afford. For that reason alone it should be rejected.
  • Does evolution contradict creationism?

    12/21/2004 3:20:05 PM PST · 888 of 1,048
    Jehu to bigdakine
    The same proof in the fossil record that you use to claim Archeopteryx is a transitory species. So modern man began 65 million years ago?

    And go find out what it takes for human speech, no ape or monkey has the equipment. And if we descended from apes? Why the difference in birth positions? What is the advantage being bequeathed by "natural selection?"

    You're the expert, you tell me. Certainly you have an idea? Or do you need time to Google and find some professor that can tell you, and you can cut and paste HIS idea.

    NONE of you can propose anything on your own. You lack the ability to use this theory you so lovingly clasp to your breasts, to account for all the specificity in species. From the woodpeckers beak, to the angler fish spitting a stream of water at low branches to knock off insects that he feeds on. And that fish had to figure out the air/water interface bending of light to come up with this circus act! But all a happy accident. Believing in evolution, you have lost the ability to think, mistaking arguments over process as understanding and knowledge, puffed up by mutual admiration societies of the arrogant, leading the proud to their frontal lobotomies. Cause there is only chance, or design, nobody has ever been able to propose a third way, although evolutionists pretend "natural selection," is a new animal, not chance...but not design either. Sort of a hybrid, like maybe rap/disco sung by a Country Western artist.
  • Does evolution contradict creationism?

    12/21/2004 3:00:03 PM PST · 877 of 1,048
    Jehu to Thatcherite
    Go back and read some of his cut and paste drivel then. He deserved the slap upside the head. I am an accomplished engineer and for someone to lecture me about the Law of Conservation of Mass/Energy is ludicrous, but what is worse he was in error in his little lecture, there is no "per se," in proved physical law. I will reserve "per se" for evolution, since it has the most rickety mathematical scaffolding of any scientific theory. And some of the better critics and growing enemies of this "theory," are mathematicians! Who demand accuracy and specifics. Not the unbelievable evolutionist's practice of throwing shit on the blackboard and seeing what sticks "Punctuated Equilibrium indeed!"
  • Does evolution contradict creationism?

    12/21/2004 2:46:41 PM PST · 873 of 1,048
    Jehu to bigdakine
    Give me the steps from scales to feathers. YOU propose how that came about. Archeopteryx is a bird. Or if you prefer call it a reptile. You don't even know if it was cold blooded or warm.

    Or a thousand other things that would identify it as one or the other, or as something in between...it was lost with the DNA! So my bird expert is just as good as any of your LABEL game experts, no matter how much they stamp their evolved little hoofs and say, "it is settled!"


    All you have are fossils, no DNA, you can only SAY it is a transitory species. It cannot be proven. Once again the ability of ToE to have the only evidence in science that cannot be falsified is a marvelous mechanism to keep this circular logic machine alive.
  • Does evolution contradict creationism?

    12/21/2004 2:37:02 PM PST · 871 of 1,048
    Jehu to shubi
    Being a minister, how do you tell your congregates the necessity of Christ's sacrifice for original sin? We either descended from Adam...who sinned or we descended from apes. If the Genesis account is allegorical only, then what part of the Bible is not? How do you tell? If allegorical, how do you know the story of Christ is not allegorical also? If your faith is not specific then what is it based upon? Why actually bother?