The Bible Inspired by God? NO WAY!

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.

ThaG

Sicc OG
Jun 30, 2005
9,597
1,687
113
#23
LOL

These are the facts, there is no evolution or "theory" here, just what we observe. I didn't show any phylogenetic trees...

You're so dumb that you can't even get the difference between an observation and a theory that explains it. Observations are the geological column and the order of appearance of plants and animals in this column illustrated on the pictures. These do not at all fit the creation HYPOTHESIS (and even this designation is too generous) so the theory of evolution was developed. The links, especially the first one, explain in great detail why the Bible is hopelessly wrong about geology

But I doubt you read the whole thing....
 
Nov 10, 2004
993
0
0
#24
No other book could prove the bible wrong cuz it is written by god, your hypothesis and observations do not prove the bible wrong nor will they ever, but keep coming with your non sense.
 
Nov 10, 2004
993
0
0
#25
The bible says that Jehovah drove adam and eve out of the garden of eden in a fury. DOES THIS MEAN HE GOT INTO HIS PLYMOUTH FURY AND DROVE THEM? LOL All your science idiots take the most irrelevent scriptures and compare with something that doesn't even mean the same thing and call it a contradiction. This is done. I'm fin to talk about rap and women. You are like talking like a broken record and repeating the same bs.
 

ThaG

Sicc OG
Jun 30, 2005
9,597
1,687
113
#26
No other book could prove the bible wrong cuz it is written by god, your hypothesis and observations do not prove the bible wrong nor will they ever, but keep coming with your non sense.
it's not funny anymore, if you have something reasonable to say do it
 
Nov 10, 2004
993
0
0
#27
yeah it is funny because no matter how hard you try, nothing as far as evolution is anymore than a theory and you say genesis is wrong. It's not wrong because it is impossible for god to lie.
 
Jul 9, 2007
81
0
0
40
#32
28 reasons why evolution cant be

1. The evolution of one kind into another kind is not happening in a
measurable way in the present, nor can it be proven to have occurred in the
past.

2. No new kinds of organisms are being observed coming from previously
existing organisms. (We "discover" new kinds that we have never cataloged
before, but this only shows our ignorance of their existence.)

3. No new structures or organs have been observed coming into existence.
All observed structures or organs are fully formed when first observed.
(The only observed changes to current structures or organs come from their
decay and degradation.)

4. There are distinct gaps between the known kinds of organisms. One kind
is not observed to change into another kind. We do not observe the "missing
links" because they are missing, not there, don't exist.

5. Life only comes from life and reproduces after its own kind. Life does
not come from nonliving material. Life does not spontaneously generate
itself.

6. Mutations, the supposed driving mechanisms of evolution, are random in
nature and are neutral or harmful. They do not accumulate beneficially.
Mutations produce the wrong kind of change and will not provide for the
"upward" progressive increase in intelligence or complexity required by
evolutionists.

7. We observe stasis, not change, in nature. Extinction is a proof of
creation. We do not find change in the fossil record nor can we measure it
in the present. Animal and plant kinds that exist today retain the same
appearance but are smaller in size than their known predecessors.

8. The fossil layers are not found in the ground in the nice neat clean
order that evolutionists illustrate them to be in their textbooks. There
is not one place on the surface of the earth where you may dig straight
down and pass through the fossil layers in the order shown in the
textbooks. The neat order of one layer upon another does not exist in
nature. The fossil bearing layers are actually found out of order, upside
down (backwards according to evolutionary theory), missing (from where
evolutionists would expect them to be) or interlaced ("younger" and "older"
layers found in repeating sequences). "Out of place" fossils are the rule
and not the exception throughout the fossil record.

9. Polystrate fossils, fossils which penetrate two or more layers of the
fossil record (most often trees), are common throughout the fossil record.
In rare cases even large animal skeletons have been found in vertical
position rather than in a horizontal position.

10. Life forms are found to be complex even in the "oldest" layers of the
fossil record. For example, various species of Trilobites are found to have
very sophisticated eyesight. Yet evolutionists say that these creatures
supposedly evolved into existence when the first multiple celled life forms
began to evolve some 620 million supposed years ago.

11. Nature does not provide us with the proof for the "Tree of Life" so
glibly talked about by evolutionists. We do not find life starting as
simple and then branching upward and outward as it becomes more and more
complex. We do not find that life forms follow the pattern of a single tree
trunk with many branches. The physical evidence provided by nature gives a
picture of an extremely large orchard with all plant and animal types
represented from the beginning with their own
individual trunks and branches producing the variations within kinds that
we have today, but no new kinds progressing from previous kinds.

12. There are no transitional forms found in the fossil record. In spite of
all the reports people may have heard, we have never found the fossil of a
plant or an animal which is a true intermediate form. The "missing links"
are missing because they are missing.

13. Be wary of artists renderings. An artist's depiction, conception or
illustration is imaginary. Simply because we see an artist's illustration
of a cow becoming a whale doesn't make it so. Human desire and imagination
are not evidence.

14. Ancient man was not primitive. Ancient human cultures had more complex
languages than we do today. The engineering feasts of the past cultures are
well recognized and in some cases have not been duplicated in modern times.
There never was a Stone Age, Bronze Age or Iron Age. Man has used stone,
bronze and iron tools in all "ages" of past human activity. Indeed, there
is nothing new under the sun.

The observed Laws of Science contradict the various theories of evolution.

15. The law of Cause and Effect not only describes that for every effect
there must have been a cause, it also tells us that the cause must be
greater than the effect. No one can create anything greater than
themselves. You do not get an increase in intelligence or complexity
without the input from a greater intelligence.

16. The First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics work contrary to
evolutionary belief. The First Law of Thermodynamics (The Law of Energy
Conservation) proves that the universe cannot be the reason for its own
existence. According to the First Law the universe cannot have been
anything less than it is, and if it cannot have been anything less than it
is, it had to come into existence whole and complete. If the universe came
into existence whole and complete, then it had to be created. Simply adding
energy to a system will not cause an increase in intelligence or
complexity. The addition of undirected energy to a system accomplishes
nothing, except possibly for the destruction of that system.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics (The Law of Entropy) proves that evolution
cannot happen. The Second Law stipulates (a poor attempt by scientists to
describe The Curse of Genesis Chapter 3 and Revelation) that in all
activities some of the energy becomes unavailable for further useful work.
The universe is running down, not up.

17. The concept of a "Big Bang" producing the universe is absolutely
illogical. Explosions do not produce ever increasing order and structure.
Explosions produce disorder and chaos. Explosions break things down or
destroy what was previously ordered.

18. There is no substantiated method in nature which would allow stars to
be "born." The Gas Laws prove that the pressure of hot gases expanding
outward from a center is far greater than the gravitational force drawing
them towards a center. Stars could not evolve into existence.

19. The Law of Biogenesis (the Law of Life Beginnings) accurately states
that life only comes from life, and that life only reproduces after its own
kind. Life cannot spontaneously generate and life forms do not change from
one kind into another kind.

20. The input of undirected energy accomplishes nothing. The input of
undirected energy will destroy a system, not build it up. Only the input
from a greater intelligence will cause a beneficial increase in order
and/or complexity.

21. Not only must there be the input from a greater intelligence in order
to produce an increase in complexity and/or intelligence, that
intelligence must have a preconceived plan of action. No master craftsman
would start to build without first having a plan, a blueprint.

22. In order for evolution to be true atoms must form useful molecules such
as enzymes, amino acids and proteins by random chance. It is mathematically
impossible for these molecules, much less the far larger DNA molecule, to
form by random action in nature. It cannot happen!

23. Natural selection and survival of the fittest are supposed to be the
driving forces of progressive upward evolution. There are no selective
benefits for a supposed transitional form. There would be no advantage for
a creature to have a half-evolved eye or a half-evolved wing. Indeed, the
existence of such structures would be detrimental and serve only to
eliminate, not perpetuate, such disfigured organisms from a given
population.

24. The presumed intermediates required by evolution do not exist. The
missing links are missing because they are missing. Reptilian scales do
not/cannot become feathers. These structures originate from different cells
within the skin tissue. Reptilian lungs do not/cannot change to become
avian (bird) lungs. Air flows in and out of reptilian lungs just as in
humans. Bird lungs have a flow through design.

25. Living organisms are incredibly complex and have specific design
features. In order to make this point please consider the following partial
list: woodpecker tongue, Bombardier Beetle chemistry, insect metamorphosis,
Giraffe heart and arterial system, Gecko feet and human eyes (or human
brains for that matter).

26. Single-celled organisms such as bacteria, amoeba and algae have the
same degree of complexity within them that multiple-celled organisms have
within them. Single-celled organisms have a skeleton, respiratory system,
digestion and elimination systems, circulatory system, reproductive system,
command and communi- cation system.

27. Life forms are irreducibly complex. To code for RNA production within a
cell you must already have whole and complete DNA. To make DNA you must
already have whole and complete RNA. In addition, it requires about 70
proteins to fabricate a DNA molecule, but you must have whole and complete
DNA to fabricate those proteins.

28. When we see design we know that there is/was a designer. The human mind
intrinsically knows the difference between randomness and design. When we
see a plastic hair comb, one of the simplest structures ever designed and
consisting of only one part, we know that it was designed and made through
intelligent effort. A plastic hair comb does not come into existence by
random chance.
 
Dec 8, 2005
669
0
36
#33
thag why do you bother, these people can offer you nothing. they already believe the bible was written by god based on nothing, yet you try to speak logic to them. when they do try to offer evidence they appeal to science and historical facts, both of which already prove the bible is full of shit. let them be.
 

ThaG

Sicc OG
Jun 30, 2005
9,597
1,687
113
#34
28 reasons why evolution cant be

1. The evolution of one kind into another kind is not happening in a
measurable way in the present, nor can it be proven to have occurred in the
past.
wrong

2. No new kinds of organisms are being observed coming from previously
existing organisms. (We "discover" new kinds that we have never cataloged
before, but this only shows our ignorance of their existence.) .
wrong

3. No new structures or organs have been observed coming into existence.
All observed structures or organs are fully formed when first observed.
(The only observed changes to current structures or organs come from their
decay and degradation.)
wrong

4. There are distinct gaps between the known kinds of organisms. One kind
is not observed to change into another kind. We do not observe the "missing
links" because they are missing, not there, don't exist.
wrong

5. Life only comes from life and reproduces after its own kind. Life does
not come from nonliving material. Life does not spontaneously generate
itself.
true, but only under modern conditions, abiogenesis is possible under the conditions present on the early Earth

6. Mutations, the supposed driving mechanisms of evolution, are random in
nature and are neutral or harmful. They do not accumulate beneficially.
Mutations produce the wrong kind of change and will not provide for the
"upward" progressive increase in intelligence or complexity required by
evolutionists.
wrong

7. We observe stasis, not change, in nature. Extinction is a proof of
creation. We do not find change in the fossil record nor can we measure it
in the present. Animal and plant kinds that exist today retain the same
appearance but are smaller in size than their known predecessors.
totally wrong

8. The fossil layers are not found in the ground in the nice neat clean
order that evolutionists illustrate them to be in their textbooks. There
is not one place on the surface of the earth where you may dig straight
down and pass through the fossil layers in the order shown in the
textbooks. The neat order of one layer upon another does not exist in
nature. The fossil bearing layers are actually found out of order, upside
down (backwards according to evolutionary theory), missing (from where
evolutionists would expect them to be) or interlaced ("younger" and "older"
layers found in repeating sequences). "Out of place" fossils are the rule
and not the exception throughout the fossil record.
wrong and irrelevant, you can not expect fossil bearing strata to form everywhere because they do need special conditions to form

9. Polystrate fossils, fossils which penetrate two or more layers of the
fossil record (most often trees), are common throughout the fossil record.
In rare cases even large animal skeletons have been found in vertical
position rather than in a horizontal position.
wrong, and refuted long ago

10. Life forms are found to be complex even in the "oldest" layers of the
fossil record. For example, various species of Trilobites are found to have
very sophisticated eyesight. Yet evolutionists say that these creatures
supposedly evolved into existence when the first multiple celled life forms
began to evolve some 620 million supposed years ago.
In the "Oldest layers" you do not find anything but single celled organisms. This is for the first 3.5 BILLION years.

As about trilobites - so what? They evolved 620 Mya, that's it

11. Nature does not provide us with the proof for the "Tree of Life" so
glibly talked about by evolutionists. We do not find life starting as
simple and then branching upward and outward as it becomes more and more
complex. We do not find that life forms follow the pattern of a single tree
trunk with many branches. The physical evidence provided by nature gives a
picture of an extremely large orchard with all plant and animal types
represented from the beginning with their own
individual trunks and branches producing the variations within kinds that
we have today, but no new kinds progressing from previous kinds.
a Tree of Life is precisely what we see

12. There are no transitional forms found in the fossil record. In spite of
all the reports people may have heard, we have never found the fossil of a
plant or an animal which is a true intermediate form. The "missing links"
are missing because they are missing.
wrong

13. Be wary of artists renderings. An artist's depiction, conception or
illustration is imaginary. Simply because we see an artist's illustration
of a cow becoming a whale doesn't make it so. Human desire and imagination
are not evidence.
wrong, cows did not evolve into whales and whale evolution is one of the best documented

14. Ancient man was not primitive. Ancient human cultures had more complex
languages than we do today. The engineering feasts of the past cultures are
well recognized and in some cases have not been duplicated in modern times.
There never was a Stone Age, Bronze Age or Iron Age. Man has used stone,
bronze and iron tools in all "ages" of past human activity. Indeed, there
is nothing new under the sun.
LMAO

The observed Laws of Science contradict the various theories of evolution.

15. The law of Cause and Effect not only describes that for every effect
there must have been a cause, it also tells us that the cause must be
greater than the effect. No one can create anything greater than
themselves. You do not get an increase in intelligence or complexity
without the input from a greater intelligence.
wrong

16. The First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics work contrary to
evolutionary belief. The First Law of Thermodynamics (The Law of Energy
Conservation) proves that the universe cannot be the reason for its own
existence. According to the First Law the universe cannot have been
anything less than it is, and if it cannot have been anything less than it
is, it had to come into existence whole and complete. If the universe came
into existence whole and complete, then it had to be created. Simply adding
energy to a system will not cause an increase in intelligence or
complexity. The addition of undirected energy to a system accomplishes
nothing, except possibly for the destruction of that system.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics (The Law of Entropy) proves that evolution
cannot happen. The Second Law stipulates (a poor attempt by scientists to
describe The Curse of Genesis Chapter 3 and Revelation) that in all
activities some of the energy becomes unavailable for further useful work.
The universe is running down, not up.
not again....

when are your little creationist brains going to understand that the Earth is not a closed system and those laws apply only to closed systems????

My advice is the following: stay away from things you do not understand, otherwise you risk revealing your stupidity

17. The concept of a "Big Bang" producing the universe is absolutely
illogical. Explosions do not produce ever increasing order and structure.
Explosions produce disorder and chaos. Explosions break things down or
destroy what was previously ordered.
LOL, my brain is frying...

18. There is no substantiated method in nature which would allow stars to
be "born." The Gas Laws prove that the pressure of hot gases expanding
outward from a center is far greater than the gravitational force drawing
them towards a center. Stars could not evolve into existence.
wrong

19. The Law of Biogenesis (the Law of Life Beginnings) accurately states
that life only comes from life, and that life only reproduces after its own
kind. Life cannot spontaneously generate and life forms do not change from
one kind into another kind.
see above

20. The input of undirected energy accomplishes nothing. The input of
undirected energy will destroy a system, not build it up. Only the input
from a greater intelligence will cause a beneficial increase in order
and/or complexity.
photosynthesis

21. Not only must there be the input from a greater intelligence in order
to produce an increase in complexity and/or intelligence, that
intelligence must have a preconceived plan of action. No master craftsman
would start to build without first having a plan, a blueprint.
more idiocy...

22. In order for evolution to be true atoms must form useful molecules such
as enzymes, amino acids and proteins by random chance. It is mathematically
impossible for these molecules, much less the far larger DNA molecule, to
form by random action in nature. It cannot happen!
wrong, it does happen in the lab

23. Natural selection and survival of the fittest are supposed to be the
driving forces of progressive upward evolution. There are no selective
benefits for a supposed transitional form. There would be no advantage for
a creature to have a half-evolved eye or a half-evolved wing. Indeed, the
existence of such structures would be detrimental and serve only to
eliminate, not perpetuate, such disfigured organisms from a given
population.
wrong, there is no such thing as "half-evolved" whatever; evolution is not directed towards a specific goal, creationists brains are directed towards a very specific one - having as little gray substance as possible

24. The presumed intermediates required by evolution do not exist. The
missing links are missing because they are missing. Reptilian scales do
not/cannot become feathers. These structures originate from different cells
within the skin tissue. Reptilian lungs do not/cannot change to become
avian (bird) lungs. Air flows in and out of reptilian lungs just as in
humans. Bird lungs have a flow through design.
wrong

25. Living organisms are incredibly complex and have specific design
features. In order to make this point please consider the following partial
list: woodpecker tongue, Bombardier Beetle chemistry, insect metamorphosis,
Giraffe heart and arterial system, Gecko feet and human eyes (or human
brains for that matter).
wrong and long refuted

26. Single-celled organisms such as bacteria, amoeba and algae have the
same degree of complexity within them that multiple-celled organisms have
within them. Single-celled organisms have a skeleton, respiratory system,
digestion and elimination systems, circulatory system, reproductive system,
command and communi- cation system.
this is 17th century level of understanding!!

27. Life forms are irreducibly complex. To code for RNA production within a
cell you must already have whole and complete DNA. To make DNA you must
already have whole and complete RNA. In addition, it requires about 70
proteins to fabricate a DNA molecule, but you must have whole and complete
DNA to fabricate those proteins.
same old discredited and refuted arguments...

28. When we see design we know that there is/was a designer. The human mind
intrinsically knows the difference between randomness and design. When we
see a plastic hair comb, one of the simplest structures ever designed and
consisting of only one part, we know that it was designed and made through
intelligent effort. A plastic hair comb does not come into existence by
random chance.
Paley was a good old man... not very knowledgeable unfortunately
 

ThaG

Sicc OG
Jun 30, 2005
9,597
1,687
113
#35
thag why do you bother, these people can offer you nothing. they already believe the bible was written by god based on nothing, yet you try to speak logic to them. when they do try to offer evidence they appeal to science and historical facts, both of which already prove the bible is full of shit. let them be.
why do I bother - the key word is procrastination:cool: