Atheism
- Locked due to inactivity on Aug 4, '16 4:13pm
Thread Topic: Atheism
-
Yes you have. Whats your point..
-
I have sined
-
I want everybody to come to heaven, I think I was tired that day so my words probably didn't come out right. That's why I do try to tell people what I know about God and explain why I believe it, I just don't use fear to coax them, I use God's love and Word. My apologizes if I wasn't making much sense lol
-
ive completed 1 sin today
-
Stop talking of such things kirsteen, you'll anger the gods.
-
I've sinned, and I'm sorry for it.
-
ive sined and i liked it
-
sin is some dumb--- middle eastern word
-
heyy i just noticed that sin spelled backwards is nis and if u replace the s with a ''p'' it spells nip meaning nipples
-
yes i kno very random
-
@Kirsteen111
Afraid I still haven't seen one convincing argument for creationism. Most seem to completely misunderstand evolution, or quibble with one tiny detail that doesn't deal with evolution as a whole. -
Ok, here we go. When genes are passed on, they deteriate. They become smaller and smaller. Let me put it this way. Lets say two parents come together and have a child. That child will only have half of the moms dna and half of the dads. You begin to loose some of the traits that your mom or dad had. you are only part of half of them.
You have a child and the child has only half of what you have and your spouse. Keep going down and you will have lost a lot of dna. A lot of traits. This is why we can't have a child with a close relative. Or else, the mistakes of my traits and the close relatives traits will be 90% more likely to combine and make a LARGE mistake in the baby.
The point of this conversation is to show you how evolution is completely FALSE! how did the apes gain the genome to become a human?
Let me put it this way, scientists believe that a fish became a bird over millions of years. That couldn't have happened even if they adapted three billion times because birds have hallow bones. If fish had hallow bones, they would not have enough equal weight to swim.
Birds need wings to fly. Fish could not have adapted to flying! There is no genome for that, no amount of changing would have made that fish fly!
There is a lot more help as seeing scientists have found no "in between stage". they have found no bones that can prove to be the stages in between animals as evolution. there is no pre-human bones. There are only human bones and ape bones. There is no half fish half bird bones. Only bird and fish bones.
Evolution cannot be true because of these reasons. Genome is the main reason. -
Hikaru, there are no other gods. There is only ONE that truely exists.
-
Wow good job on crushing someone's thoughts
-
Oh crap...Kirsteen111, I am afraid you totally fail at understand both genetics and evolution. ):
Losing traits...? Parents habitually have multiple children, all with different combinations of genes from the mother and father. Besides, diversity comes from different combinations of genes. After generations of generations of mixing and swapping, there is plenty of variety and new information to go around.
And I'm sorry to say this, but it is clear you don't understand evolution at all. I mean...bird evolving from fish? And it wasn't just one magical moment that let apes transform into humans. There are PLENTY transitional fossils.
Here. Have some transitional fossils between fish and amphibians. (These come from the website Talk Origins)
Osteolepis (mid-Devonian) -- One of the earliest crossopterygian lobe-finned fishes, still sharing some characters with the lungfish (the other lobe-finned fishes). Had paired fins with a leg-like arrangement of major limb bones, capable of flexing at the "elbow", and had an early-amphibian-like skull and teeth.
Eusthenopteron, Sterropterygion (mid-late Devonian) -- Early rhipidistian lobe-finned fish roughly intermediate between early crossopterygian fish and the earliest amphibians. Eusthenopteron is best known, from an unusually complete fossil first found in 1881. Skull very amphibian-like. Strong amphibian- like backbone. Fins very like early amphibian feet in the overall layout of the major bones, muscle attachments, and bone processes, with tetrapod-like tetrahedral humerus, and tetrapod-like elbow and knee joints. But there are no perceptible "toes", just a set of identical fin rays. Body & skull proportions rather fishlike.
Panderichthys, Elpistostege (mid-late Devonian, about 370 Ma) -- These "panderichthyids" are very tetrapod-like lobe-finned fish. Unlike Eusthenopteron, these fish actually look like tetrapods in overall proportions (flattened bodies, dorsally placed orbits, frontal bones! in the skull, straight tails, etc.) and have remarkably foot-like fins.
Labyrinthodonts (eg Pholidogaster, Pteroplax) (late Dev./early Miss.) -- These larger amphibians still have some icthyostegid fish features, such as skull bone patterns, labyrinthine tooth dentine, presence & pattern of large palatal tusks, the fish skull hinge, pieces of gill structure between cheek & shoulder, and the vertebral structure. But they have lost several other fish features: the fin rays in the tail are gone, the vertebrae are stronger and interlocking, the nasal passage for air intake is well defined, etc.
This thread is locked, therefore no new posts can be made.
