CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
Well I'm not sure about that the question if there is a God, when do you want to know?
Satan is called the God of this world. Satan shirts and so does God.
It all comes down to these questions.
What is necessary for any world to exist?
What is necessary for any world to exist, and without this which is necessary then no possible world could exist?
What is necessary for any possible world to exist?
What is the 1st piece needed beyond the last known layer?
When we peel back every layer down the nucleus of the base core, the final layer out of which all things began, what is necessary for our actual world?
So if we peel back to 1st speck, back to evolutions 1st spark of energy that started the chain reaction of all creation would have to have every building block of our creation, with every particle ever to be necessary relevent to the complexity of our entire of our world. Complexity to the highest possible achievable Evolution. With every detail of Maximum Greatness contained in a speck the size of a mustard seed.
There is a limit to how much matter can be compacted. To believe it was all the size of a tiny dot before it exploded is silly. God created all things by His Word. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. All things were made by Him, and without Him was nothing made that was made. God willed things into existence and they came into existence in obedience to His Word.
Scientists can't even explain what holds matter together, let alone explain where it came from only by looking at it. That's because scientists cannot explain God, nobody can explain God, we can only know him personally through the Savior. The force which holds matter together is God's love, it's His love for His creation preventing it from all disintegrating from the effect of evil brought into the physical (governed by God's laws of physics) world. What you refer to as "Maximum Greatness is not contained in a speck. Maximum Greatness would be God, who is great beyond our imagination, He is not a speck. Don't you see how your big bang philosophy twists your faith, twists the word of God? God did not create a speck and then caused it to have a controlled explosion. Matter was created, it is not eternal, only God is eternal. The universe was not suffering entropy when it was created as implied by big bang theory, God created it stable. Sin is making it fall apart in entropy. It's the second law of thermodynamics destroying the beauty in the first law. The second law was non-existent in nature until sin entered in and now creation is under judgement, fallen to the prince of the power of the air.
Jesus Christ Himself holds matter together by His love,
" In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell; And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.
You're making an idol out of evolution and big bang belief. That's why you want to focus on it instead of on the Lord. You need to smash that idol.
Sorry, had to ban you because I don't want to go through your long stuff again......i hope you will read my long reply to your long post. I read yours...with a bit of agonizing, but I read it.
Well, in the minds of some. I have NO objection to anyone's belief. What I object to are people, like the one who posted this crap, deciding that everyone else MUST follow his belief or we are some sort of inferior individual that will be punished!
If YOU believe God lives, and hell's justice, more power to you. If you would only live by your belief and stay with your own kind, there would be less trouble in the world. That goes for Christians, Islamists, Jews, Catholics, and most of all......"saints"!
banned for not being able to write to interest me beyond your reference to toilet wording. Back to the toilet where you get your garbage, YOU LOST AGAIN.....ahhahahaHHAHAHahhhaahhhHHHHaaahahahah Ha Ha H!!!!+++
So you really think you have won all the arguments you have had here on the topic of Theology, eh, Mr. Saint?
Well then, allow me to ask you a simple question...........
In whose eyes have you won these debates?
Your own?
This is my answer. In your own eyes. Maybe.
Doubt me?
Find ONE other person to agree with you, and you win. I lose.
Fair enough?
Good.
Your argue for fictional characters and non-existent places like Heaven and Hell.
I could have spent (squandered?) all my time here on CD arguing for the existence of, say, DragonLand, where my Invisible Fire Breathing Garage Dragon hibernates when he is not living in my Garage.
And threatened all who doubt and mock him with a painful fiery death in DrgaonLand after they die.
And guess what?
I tto could say with just as much authority and conviction that I TOO have won all my arguments. That, like you, nobody could prove me wrong.
So if I could do this, on such a silly topic...then allow me another question?
There was one guy a while back who said he went from being an atheist to being a deist. I haven't seen anybody on here go the other way. Being a deist from an atheist is a step in the right direction, but not enough to be saved from Hell.
Actually you need to look no further than right here for an example of that, Mr. Saint! I myself, have traversed the Spiritual/Theological Pathway in the following manner...............
First, in my childhood, while being raised Catholic, I was a Believer like you. A theist. Of course this was due to indoctrination from the Church and from reading the Bible, while I was too young to know better.
Then as I grew older and wiser, I began questioning these beliefs and discovering some irreconcilable flaws in them, such as the Problem of Evil in a World Allegedly Governed by an Omniscient, Omnipotent, and Loving God. So I in time became an Atheist.
THEN! While in undergrad school and dabbling in Eastern Philosophy, I rather liked the idea of the Taoists. And in Biology and Physics I saw some signs of what I deemed to be Intelligence. I was uncomfortable with the materialists' view of our Minds, and of there being no soul--but rather just a collection of neurons in our brains firing chemicals back and forth.
Thus....I thought maybe there was a Supernatural and Intelligent, but, alas, an Impersonal and Uncaring Force that Governed the Cosmos. A force that can be tapped into, much the same as throwing a switch or turning on a transistor in a circuit, allowing the "current" (the Force) to flow into us.
These were my Deist Days.
But about four or five years ago I abandoned even that watered-down notion of a God--if I could ever even call my Deist force a god of sorts. I found that that view of a god really answered no questions nor explained anything. I even flirted briefly with Deistic Evolution. But this had many holes in it. Such as why have 99% of all species on the planet that ever lived became extinct? And what took so long? (since I believe that the Earth IS a bit over four billion years old, and that life has been around for some Three Billion years).
I asked: why would a Deist Force/God take so long? And why all the waste of the extinct species? Why not just "cut to the chase" and create lasting species? And why not do it a helluva lot quicker? I refuse to believe that all the hundreds of forms of radiometric and now, DNA dating, are wrong.
So.....OUT went my Deist beliefs. Leaving me now completely satisfied and assured of my Atheist beliefs. And reading the stories of accomplished scientists (like your Wanser and also of human genome co-founder Dr. Collins) helped sway me not a bit. For I found upon reading their books that they engaged in confirmation bias and cherry picking, and had agendas to re-prove the beliefs they once had but lost.
(you will note that none of your Believer Scientists, like Wanser & Collins, were atheists all along! No...they were all believers in their early years.)
So my path has gone from: Theist>>>Atheist>>>Deist>>>Atheist.
I am fairly confident that I will remain entrenched in my current ethos.
Though...if ANY modicum of proof or even evidence were to come along I would Happily revert to Theism or Deism once again. I AM interested in finding the Truth. I have no agenda other than to learn it.
But thus far, I have found no reason to abandon Atheism.
You were never a believe like me.....it's more like I was a believer like you used to be, a deist or a theist. That's where religion holds a person, in atheism you are your own deity. In Catholicism, the deist is trying to earn enough favor from God to not be held too long on the outside of Heaven, trying to earn passage into Heaven.
God is still in control, evil has not won the battle except over an atheist who has conceded total loss to death. One day God will corral all evil in the fire of Hell, all sinners will be there, nothing holy there except for the sound of the name of Jesus which will cause the knees of sinners to buckle as their tongues confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. God knew when He created multiple beings with powers of reason, mobility, and creativity (imagination) like His own that some of them would rebel. I suppose this is why He remained enjoying His own company as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit throughout eternity past before He created anything. God knew when His god-like creatures rebelled, He would have to either prove to them His right to keep them imprisoned in Hell or He would have to zap them out of existence....and what would then would keep other creatures from rebelling? If they get zapped out of existence and know nothing, who cares? God created Hell to show them they don't get out of existence and they don't go unpunished for turning against Him after He gave them life.
These things are simple common sense logic which a child can understand, but because of the pains of life you have complicated things, and trying to straighten you out is like opening a can of worms.
God is not limited by time. Evil is limited by time until it is placed where it cannot cause any more damage and corruption, in the consuming fire of Hell. God is indeed omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent. He's giving you time because if He ends your time now, you are lost forever. Saying He is not good for allowing evil to continue is the same as saying He should end your time now...and if you keep asking for it, He will honor your request because God gives everybody what they really want....the sad thing is they don't realize they are literally asking to be left in Hell's fire forever.
It is good that you abandoned the watered down notion of a god conducive to eastern philosophy. That god indeed is not God the Creator of all things, a heartless god who has no reason to care about you because it has no love. I too was deep into Eastern philosophy and religion, Americanized New Age Hinduism which was firmly built on the ancient Eastern philosophies and religions. I don't like to name the brand I was following, it's evil and it seems to be good to practitioners, I have known some Christians like myself who came out of it, and I have known some people who are so deep into it I think they will never get out. It's one of the strongest delusions in the world today, the thought processes and meditations open a door for a lot of experiences which encourage the person to believe they are being enlightened and progressing toward divinity or nirvana or whatever......so in all of your religious excursions, I was a deist or theist like you.
I never could believe that I would cease to exist in death, I never could believe there is no God. To believe either of those things is a decision based on your own personal desires. I honestly tried to believe both of those things, but to believe them I would have to believe that all of life and all of reality is complete and utter nonsense and futility.....I never could convince myself to believe such things. I was playing Pascal's Wager, which in a way you are still playing. You're far from the most evil person in the world, and if people must end up in Hell, it seems they would have to be much much more evil than you...like Stalin, Pol Pot, Hitler.....
Pascal's Wager is always a losing bet.
As for all the extinct species, that is evidence that nature is on the decline. And God is not taking so long. He's right on schedule, it's pretty obvious that the world is ready to explode with the tiny nation of Israel being the focal point exactly as God said would happen. Jesus will be back soon, to stop the evil before it wipes out all life on the planet.
There are volumes of scientific, hard science, evidence supporting one global flood and young earth Creation. You don't have to cherry pick, you just have to overcome the censorship of government supported or protected schools and the special interest media money machine that pushes anti-Christ ideas. Jesus is not going to allow the ungodly to rule the world forever. The Great Tribulation is coming, billions will be killed while the elites propped up by money, power, technology sit in their safe houses thinking they will inherit the Earth and establish their own self-serving Utopia...........
Again, look in the mirror. That is you. God has the hairs of your head numbered, you have no thoughts which can be hidden from Him. You are evidence of the Creator as you are made in His image, able to communicate, create, and reason like Him. God made you to be you because He wants to enjoy you forever, but you have to stop arguing against Him or what will He do with you? What more evidence can you ask for? If that's not enough, nothing will be enough.
God loves you so much He took on your form to suffer your death for you, plunged in to save you to pull you up out of it in His resurrection. If you won't believe it, there is nothing more He can do for you, and you might as well make yourself comfortable as long as you can.
Well you were doing fine with your opinions until you had to say this....
There are volumes of scientific, hard science, evidence supporting one global flood and young earth Creation.
I would ask you to give me some hard science that supports Y.E. Creation. I have never read or heard of anything that supports or even hints at it. And I remember I asked you this once before, and you cam at me with some half-baked ideas from Wanser. I pointed out to you, quite fairly and objectively as I recall, that his ideas of how some forms or dating might be skewed in light of variable decay rates were NO sort of proof. Merely one guy's total speculation. Ideas. Not even qualifying as a hypothesis.
So I hope you can do better this time. Though I know full well you cannot, as a Young Earth in the 6000 year area is just plane absurd. No better than Flat Earth, really. And with just as much possibility of it being true as a flat earth. I cannot take anybody seriously as knowing science if they ascribe to a Y.E. fable. Sorry. I CAN allow for somebody to not believe in materialistic/atheistic Evolution, and admit they can still be good and knowledgeable scientists; but a Young Earther? Nope--this is a deal breaker to me--as well as to the vast majority of scientists. Anybody who believes in that shit is simply deluded beyond reasonable doubt.
Before you furnish me with those "hard science" proofs of a young earth, I will humbly ask you to read my link here. Then I will read yours.
I presented you with fifty Ph.D scientist who each give many reasons based on scientific data they discuss as well as philosophical and moral issues. You settled on one, focused on his statements regarding radiometric dating which are absolutely true, insisted radiometric data is valid when it is not objective and can be interpreted in a number of ways, then claimed you debunked the man while apparently ignoring every other point he made and failed to disgrace him by "debunking" him as he is still working as a professor of physics and still owns near 10 US patents from his work in fiber optics. Radiometric dating ignores variables which it cannot account for, it's not true science for obtaining dates of anything. It is a method which employs scientific knowledge, but to say it is accurate in dating is not scientific....especially considering the variables which have obviously occurred on Earth, such as magnetic pole changes, the constantly degrading magnetic field of the earth, atmospheric changes and so forth.
Your whole argument against Wanser was nothing but an insult and very unprofessional for a scientist. The man is highly accomplished and actively teaching high level physics and deserves some respect. And again, you picked on one little point of the man's reasoning and then you get stuck on that like a fly on fly paper, clinging to your assertion that questioning the validity of radiometric dating is unreasonable when objective science demands it be questioned rather than held as accurate based on your beliefs, and fitting the data into your beliefs while ignoring variables........it't not scientific method. I'm not going to argue about this point any more, it's silly.
I have presented dozens of scientific facts in many fields of science and this is how you always respond. You pick one little thing you feel you can uphold a case in and then ignore contradictory facts and declare victory by insulting whatever source I use and "poof" you are gone. You have been taught to ignore things which do not fit in the evolutionary/big bang model, and following the Dawkins pattern you use insults as the strength of your arguments. And then you challenge me for more as if you answered my challenge ever. You try to take the lead by dragging your feet on the fly paper and demanding that I hang there with you. Now friend, I'm not saying these things to try to put you down or insult you. I know why you act this way, fighting against the primary focus of my work here which is to point at the Savior. You know that if you really believe on Jesus, that He is God and risen from the dead with all power and all authority in heaven and earth given to Him, if you receive Him as your Savior you'll have a whole new life with new desires, new hope, new direction, everything.......and you will be on the receiving end of all the personal attacks I have to deal with here. And you are living in your comfort zone and ok with dying as long as you can go with the flow and not have to stand up for the truth. It's easy to be a bully and insult Christians. Try being a Christian and putting up with bullies. Dawkins is just a bully, a coward hiding in the university, he's not even a scientist for crying out loud, he's a fraud. It's not worth it my friend, you get some sinful pleasures and then you test your belief in atheism in death. Why go down with Dawkins instead of up with Jesus in His resurrection? I'd rather be crucified, literally, than go down in sin with Dawkins. Jesus will raise me up as He is risen, Dawkins will pull you down as he is a dead man walking.
I read the site link provided, I have read other stuff from that site. I like to see how opposing opinions are framing their reasoning. It baffles me how the man at skeptoid can make so many statements clearly indicating his religious belief and claim it's science. Without going back to review, he gets into your old closed-system-reversed entropy argument, which can be demonstrated in things like a battery or snowflakes but to believe it caused life to emerge out of non-living things is a leap of faith with no bottom......you just have to run with it and fly claiming it's science and not religious in spite of the obvious that you are a supernatural entity in a natural body, your spirit gives life to your body. Skeptoid wants to believe he is nothing more than a hologram produced by chemical fizzes which ends when the battery wears down and entropy can no longer be denied. It's a religion, evolution, big bang, and atheism combine in the religion of naturalism in which a person believes nature gives life, so nature is the god equal to the mind of the believer, so immorality is excused by death. It's a religion of denying one's own life, self-destructive embracing death. God says in the Bible, "all them that hate me, love death", and it's true. How many atheists on this site have told me how they are at peace with death, they accept it without grudge or complaint as part of life rather than what it is, the enemy of life which separates loved ones.
You know that if you believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, you will look at sin a whole new way and find it repulsive and you'll have to trust God to provide things you indulge in to satisfy your cravings. The everlasting promises of God are better than a temporary license for sinful indulgence. Knowing the power of the resurrection of Jesus Christ changes a person forever and all things work together for good to those who love God. Nothing can really hurt me now, I'm on my way to Heaven. Death is swallowed up in victory, it's nothing more than a bee sting to me.....though it does hurt to be separated from loved ones who have passed. God is going to wipe away the tears from my eyes one day with His own hand, and I'll shine in heaven like the stars shouting praises to my Creator and enjoying all of His blessings far beyond what I can imagine.......
They're lying to you my friend, they only want you to be like them so they feel better about their own dirty sin. I've watched quite a bit of Dawkins on youtube, He's a dirty mouth pervert who I would be more than happy to ban until he learned to show a little respect for a Christian.
I often hear people say the same thing I would say to your dragons in dragon land.....if I have to go there, I'll go. They flatly state they would rather burn in Hell forever than bow to God. How stupid can a person be? But really, dragon land doesn't sound bad. Take away the dragons, have nothing but fire and eternal torment of flames where the worm never dies and the fire is never quenched....then it's no longer dragon land, it would be Hell and people in Hell would much rather be in dragon land.
Truth is not determined by popular vote. Dying sinners need to be saved. That's the truth. It doesn't matter how many say they don't need to be saved. They're still dying. When I see people dying, I say, "uh oh, they need to be saved, what will I do?" Then I'll dive in and try to get them to see the way out. From where I stand, I can see the people in need dying. I know the way out, I can show them the way and if they will believe and trust, they can get out of their dying. If they will only fight against being saved, I have to leave them in there and that's harder than diving in with them.........so here I am in the mud with a crowd of haters who like playing in the mud while they tell themselves it's not really quicksand but they are sure sinking down in it.
I was taking a shot at some other people with this little fun jab. No claim of victory over you, and as far as I know I have persuaded nobody on here to repent of their sin and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ......but really, I can only present the truth and it's God people have to respond to personally if they want His mercy.
Dadman, From Within, and Strom pretty much agree with me on the basics, and I've seen a few others.
And once again, who cares if there is a dragon in your garage? or is Dragon Land is a place I have to visit? if they are real, as long as it's not God you have to deal with and Hell you have to pay, dragons can be fun to play with, ask little Jackie Taylor. Your making straw men arguments and arguing against the straw men. That's what everybody does when the argue against God, they start by saying He is less than God like your straw men, then they argue against their imaginary god which is less than God and cannot be God.....and the same with Hell, you invent things that are less than Hell and argue against those things.
I could care less if dragons live in your garage or I have to go to dragon land. If I have to answer to God for my sins, and burn in Hell as a sinner forever, that's a different story.
See, you allude to "a painful fiery death in dragonland", so apparently there are dragons there not affected by the heat? That's not Hell, that would be a place could have pleasure watching the dragons play as you burn. In Hell there is no pleasure for anything, dragons, devils, or men......and it's eternal dying, not an event of a fiery death....it's neverending dying in fire.
If you're going to argue against Hell, then argue against Hell. Changing it into something less than Hell is a straw man argument.
Please read this whole thing as for a change I actually read your entire post.
They crucified Jesus, and He was perfect, never made a mistake, never said the wrong thing the wrong way at the wrong time to anybody, simply told them the truth, they were thieves, liars, hypocrites, white washed tombs full of dead men's bones, children of Hell, of their father the devil, vipers. Jesus called them all these names truthfully, and they hated Him for it and crucified Him. Jesus said if I follow Him I should not be surprised that people hate me the same as they hated Him.
You're a hater, bob......why don't you just go on your merry way? why do you have to try to crucify me? You hate the truth, and you think by arguing with me you can avoid the truth....keep trying, Bob, see is you can forever deny Hell is real.
You should have known it would be my pleasure to drive you out of this discussion when you come making stupid comments. I'm glad I can drive you away here. One day I won't be able to drive devil minded haters away, but for now I thank God I can give you the boot and tell you to not let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya!
tootles!!!
Thanks, I hope this helps! (Salutation plagiarized from Slapshot)
You sure lost this one, idiot, by getting yourself banned. Slap Shot is hanging in and I can't boast victory with him, but you....you lose, you're gone, I won this argument.
It's flattering that you envy me enough to imitate my screen name, but couldn't you have at least spelled it right? I'm "Saint", not "Satint". You might want to make up a new one and spell it right so you don't look quite as stupid.
Oh look, another loser, losing everything in death on his way to Hell loving his sin more than life. You lost the argument, loser, so there is no need for me to read your stuff.
Whatever LMAO means, knowing you it's probably profane. Congratulations on being the first one banned. Why don't you do yourself a favor and just kick yourself before you come to my discussions so I don't have to give you the boot and say don't let the door hit ya where the good Lord Split ya. You lost this discussion, idiot.
I suppose if you end up in Hell, sooner or later you will remember this debate and it will be in you as you are burning......and there probably will be some in Hell who were here and will take this debate with them. I think I'll forget about it after a while in Heaven. So, yeah, I'm pretty much in agreement with you except for a lot more than this debate will be burning in Hell forever.
This is a fishing expedition. I'm trying to put bait out there so people might taste it and see that the Lord is good and His mercy endures forever, so maybe they'll get hooked and saved out of their dying, saved from their sins, saved from Hell. I'm fishing for lost souls, hoping to see them pulled out of their polluted waters and given living waters that flow and spring up to eternal life.
And what you are saying is not an insult to me, and I'm wrong for banning you? I do not respond to everybody always with insults. I'm sure once or twice I actually tried to appeal to you with nothing but reason and logic. It's you who is always insulting toward me, and if you think I care to put up with it you have to be royally ......what's the word...detarted?
Most people will not admit what they actually believe. They'll change it as soon as they make a statement which is obviously dumb, irrational, or illogical and it's pointed out. "I didn't say that, or I didn't mean that, or I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what I said is not what I meant." I understand atheism better than most atheists. It's rare to find one who will actually flatly admit what they believe, and that is because atheism is as hopeless as hopeless can be.
They'll change it as soon as they make a statement which is obviously dumb, irrational, or illogical and it's pointed out.
Whereas you keep saying the same thing over and over even when people point out how dumb irrational or illogical it is. I am not sure which is better. You still keep saying the same thing about evolution even though I have told you how you are simply factually mistaken.
The fact is, you have never seen evolution and never will. The concept is not hard to understand, nor the supposed mechanisms which in reality are never seen in action causing evolution. It's a belief system, it's not science, and what am I supposed to say when people like you keep asserting it really happens? It only happens in cartoon animations, and that's the same a Looney Tunes.
What I am saying is entirely logical, explainable, and true. Jesus is the Savior who will save all who believe on Him and receive Him by faith. All who reject Him will be rejected by Him and remain in their sins, prisoners of death and end up in the Lake of Fire which is the second death. I'm being consistent and not wavering, always happy to explain the logic of the truth of God who is Jesus Christ. Take for example the argument you put up with me....I win. I can't lose, you are fighting against God and taking it out on me.
Just because your understanding is not clear does not make what I am saying illogical or irrational. It's only irrational because you think you are good and don't need to be saved now......so you're not saved, your lost, and on your way to Hell. It's justice, and saying it is illogical or irrational won't get you off death row.
You did say that yeah. But okay then you wont be using the argument that mutation doesn't change characteristics of creatures then? Well.. well done,honestly, if you are willing to change your stance on that. I didnt think you were capable of learning.
I have not changed my stance. Mutation does not add new information to the genome of any creature. If it did, that would be evolution, one animal changing into a different kind of animal.
Then some people presented a bunch of explanations of DNA as if it's new stuff. They try to imply mutation causes evolution. Mutation has never been seen to cause evolution. People who believe in evolution insert all sorts of beliefs and twisted meanings of words implying mutation equals evolution. It does not. Dogs are dogs no matter how they mutate or vary. The genome of a dog, any dog, is the same genome of all other dogs. Some dogs have a mutation of an extra ear, or backwards legs, or such. Their genome is still the genome of a dog, no new DNA has been added to the dog genome.
I have not changed my stance, and if you keep saying I did and insulting me as if I learned something so I changed my position, I'll ban you. Until you can literally show DNA added to the genome of any creature so it is no longer the same creature but rather something like a cat changing into a dog, and you argue that mutation adds DNA to the genome when it has never been seen to happen, I have won the argument.
I never said mutation does not change the characteristics of creatures. I have seen dogs with backwards legs, a mutation. The characteristic of that dog was changed by mutation, yet the genome of that dog is still the genome of a dog.
I did say mutation does not change reptiles into birds or fish into reptiles or amphibians into mammals. People invented this straw man argument implying I was unaware that variations in populations or mutations in individuals occur, then they uphold that straw man with the leap of faith to give it a heart and add evolution to the straw man. It was just plain stupid the way people acted like the more web pages they can post explaining mutations, the more they prove fish turned into reptiles or whatever evolutionist believe happened. I'm not going to allow that here, and I'm not going to allow you to insult me by saying I changed my position, implying I'm being dishonest.
I never said mutation does not change the characteristics of creatures. I have seen dogs with backwards legs, a mutation. The characteristic of that dog was changed by mutation, yet the genome of that dog is still the genome of a dog.
I gave you very specific examples of how mutation changes the characteristics AND GENES of an animal. Did you doubt them or do you not remember them? Shall I find them again for you? I cant believe you are incapable of learning. I understand that you believe something else but at least see the facts so you can form a more solid argument.
changing genes is a variation or a mutation, it's not evolution. It does not add DNA to the genome of the animal. I'm not going to allow this same straw man argument again here.
That would be what is necessary to cause evolution to happen. I cannot give an example of how that would work because it never happens. Evolutionists cannot give an example showing it happened or is happening or will happen. They say it's a trick questions designed to show that evolution cannot be observed. Well? what's the trick? the trick is to believe evolution happened when it cannot be seen to happen.
Banned for insulting my intelligence by saying I"m incapable of learning. Every day I look at new things to learn new things. You are trying to create a straw man, implying I deny observable science of mutations or variations in animals. The only thing I deny is that DNA is added to the genome by mutation. A mutation or a variation is not new DNA added to the genome of the creature. The genome allows for variations, and mutations are always from defects in the DNA. Neither of these things adds new DNA to the genome causing one animal to turn into a different kind of animal as would be required for evolution to occur. It never has been observed and never will be observed because it never happened and never will happen. It is not me who is not seeing facts, it is people who believe in evolution who imagine things they cannot see and proclaim them to be facts based on believing them true for no real reason.
You did better this time, but because of your history of rants, insults, and frantic hysteria in frustration attacking and insulting me every way you can dream up, I'm holding a tighter requirement asking you to be respectful with me. If you can't frame you arguments without insults which is the same as profanity, unanswerable, then don't ask me to answer you and don't expect me to tolerate you when I have the power to ban you from the discussion.
The question was not "does mutation change the characteristics of creatures?" that would be a dumb question since it's obvious a dog may be born with backwards legs, and a litter of puppies can be several different colors and sizes. The question was "Can you show me one example mutation or any process of evolution adding DNA to the genome of any creature". You cannot. Then, like you are trying to do now, some people made up a new question "mutation doesn't change characteristics of creatures then?" and posted all kinds of stuff to support what causes mutations, as if that was what I was arguing against...created a straw man and like broken records demand that I argue against the straw man while at the same time they imply their straw man proves evolution. We can observe mutations and study them scientifically, we can observe variations. We cannot observe evolution because it NEVER happens. New DNA is never seen to be added to the genome of any creature which would be required for evolution to occur.
New DNA is never seen to be added to the genome of any creature which would be required for evolution to occur.
That wasnt what you were arguing before. You said: The genome of a creature is programmed to respond to environmental changes within limits. That is not mutation, it is adaptation..
New DNA is never seen to be added to the genome of any creature which would be required for evolution to occur.
But okay.. here are yet more facts that you will just ignore.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11925567 - RNASE1, a gene for a pancreatic enzyme, was duplicated, and in langur monkeys one of the copies mutated into RNASE1B, which works better in the more acidic small intestine of the langur.
http://www.yeastgenome.org/reference/S000042300/overview Yeast was put in a medium with very little sugar. After 450 generations, hexose transport genes had duplicated several times, and some of the duplicated versions had mutated further.
These are just a couple of examples of new DNA in child creatures. Doubt them? I can give you even more if you want.
The monkeys in these experiments remained monkeys, no new DNA was added to the genome of the monkey. Variations are potentials in the genome, mutations are caused by defects. What you are calling a mutation in the monkeys was a variation which was in the potential of the genome, it did not add new DNA to the genome. The environment favored the change of genetic expression and the individuals in which it occurred became more successful in the challenging environment.......and they will die out if the new environmental factors are removed, and the genome remains unchanged.
The same with your yeast example. The yeast remained yeast. Variations are allowed for in the genome. Changes in characteristics caused by different expressions of the genes, variations, are not evolution. It's adaptation and variation and nothing more. New DNA is never added, the existing DNA may be triggered for previously unseen expression.
You are trying to change the argument. Variations and mutations are obvious and cannot be argued against. It is not evolution, it is not new DNA being added to the genome. The yeast never changes into algae or anything other than yeast. To change into something other than yeast, new DNA would have to be added to the genome of the yeast.
A wolf can change to a chihuahua, and every other example I have said so far, but yet you see this as not enough proof that it is likely that animals have evolved their traits and become different species. Yeah you're right that the total number of chromosomes wont change in the life time of any scientist. It happens over millions of years. If there were evidence that it didnt happen over millions of years then it would disprove evolution completely - we would have to come up with a better theory that fits such a fast change between species (maybe God!!!). As it is though what you're saying fits perfectly with our current understanding of evolution. Thanks.
"it happens over millions of years" is belief and not science. There is no real evidence that it ever happened.
You don't want the alternative which is God created all things, so you make up this evolution garbage and run with it even though it's stupid. There's no nice way to say it. Believing in evolution is dumb. If you think I'm saying anything that fits with evolution, you are dumb.....and because you are twisting my words, calling me a liar again, you are banned. Now you are banned in both genders and any variation you may believe you have.
I think you made it pretty clear that you hope your good points and beneficial and kind things you have done outweigh the bad so you won't be condemned, correct?
The problem is that God has no bad points, and you have broken His law and cannot possibly be good enough for God. If you could, you would not have to die. What you are doing is trying to justify yourself to live outside of Hell. Again, you can't or you would not have to die. That's why God became a man and died for you, He paid your price in full as He had nothing to pay for Himself so His payment of blood will be applied to you, you will be covered by His blood and justified by His life if you believe from your heart that He is God and is risen from the dead after He paid for your sins with His sinless blood. If you try to be good enough for God, you've already failed and are in danger of eternal condemnation in death with no hope of escaping the fire which burns against the goodness of God, while God remains good and justified to keep you in Hell.
I can accept the fact that you are a pretty good guy (or girl, can't tell for sure but you sure sound hysterical when you get mad) by societal standards and I have no problem with believing you adhere to a moral code and try to do right and avoid doing wrong. It is still our nature to do wrong, even if only for a moment in our imaginations...hatred or lust or envy in our hearts. And then, a person who lives a good moral life stands on their own goodness believing God must recognize their efforts to transcend their selfish tendencies, and in the sight of God who has no fault, no selfishness, never did wrong, it's nothing but arrogancy, pride, refusing to admit we deserve to be separated from God forever because we have sinned against Him, we deserve to burn in Hell forever as polluted trash not fit for being in Heaven.
I'm not trying to insult you or put you down, I'm only stating the facts. We have all sinned, all deserve to die, and all have the unbreakable chains of death in our genes because of our sin....but God Himself is offering you freedom, He breaks those chains for all who repent of their sin, including their pride, and believe from their heart that Jesus is God and He is risen from the dead, having conquered death to set people free from it.
It's official, you lost once more. I'm surprised you didn't cuss like the mad monkey you insist you are, but I'm sure you will go cuss somewhere else. Try not to let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya, and please don't wear out my boot.
You do seem to have cooled your attitude toward me and I appreciate that. I really am a nice guy, only act tough when people act tough with me.
As long as I am in agreement with God, I can't lose. You don't have to agree, it still looks like I win, God lives, and Hell is justice against sinners.
Actually I think you can lose. When you show too much Pride, when you 'soweth discord among brothers', your very actions disagree with God and you lose. Strutting around like you've won some imagined argument, even if it's just in your eyes, is the very action of vanity/hubris, something God has made quite clear is a sin. How would you like your Hell, sir? Extra crispy or remarkably uncomfortable?
What is that? making baseless accusations against my character proves I lose an argument? I'm a sinner who deserves to die and burn in Hell forever because I know there is nothing good in me. And you call that pride? It seems to me that you are the one obsessed with your own pride thinking you are above me looking down.
As for Hell, God did what I can't do, He paid my price in full with His own blood so I am His property, bought and paid for by His blood, justified by His life as He is risen from the dead offering forgiveness of sin to all who believe on Him. He saved me from Hell and will do the same for you if you trust Him, but you won't trust Him, will you? You won't believe Him, will you? You'll just sit there and try to prove you are as good or better than anybody else, won't you? What good are you when you can't stop yourself from dying and can't save yourself from Hell?
I won this argument. You need to be saved from Hell, you can be saved from Hell if you will repent and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.
Argument over, if you keep arguing the way you have hear, you'll only lose it all in Hell, sorry.
