"law" of evolution?

Out of context: Reply #15

  • Started
  • Last post
  • 90 Responses
  • designbot0

    It's the missing link....all they needed was one Lemur fossil.

    Evolution is now proven fact!

    designbot 0Permalink
    UpvoteDownvote
    Flag
    • if you're being sarcastic, you obviously don't know shit about evolutionmonospaced
    • you obviously choose to ignore the enormous absence of transitional fossils.designbot
    • "transitional fossils" is a good band nameharlequino
    • lol at "transitional fossils". Sounds all scientific, like you know what you're talking about.TheBlueOne
    • hahahahaha, your ignorance is astonishingmonospaced
    • hey monospace ANY time you want to have a real discussion, hit me up.designbot
    • anytimemonospaced
    • and TBO, yes I know exactly what I am talking about. Transitional fossils or transitional forms is a living or fossilized organism that is believed to be an evolutionary link between two groups of organismdesignbot
    • organism that is believed to be an evolutionary link between two groups of organism. And as I said there is an enormous absence of these.designbot
    • absence of these fossils.designbot
    • But, the presence of some is actual evidence for evolution. The God theory still has zero evidence backing it up.monospaced
    • I know exactly what you THINK you're talking about, but you'd be wrong. http://www.scientifi…TheBlueOne
    • But doesn't matter, not going to convince each other anyway. TTFNTheBlueOne
    • mono, what type of evidence do you suppose could prove the supernatural events that took place in the Bible?designbot
    • And don't forget science has no facts to prove anything about the origins of the universe. Evolution attempts to answer man's origins, but fails to answer the bigger question.designbot
    • man's origins, but fails to answer the bigger question (how anything came to be in the first place)designbot
    • Interesting article TBO, I think my question to mono holds true in regards to this as well. When the claim is made there is "zero fact" to back up the "creationist" claim.designbot
    • to back up the "creationist" Christian claim, what do you suppose would be evidence or "fact" to prove the supernatural?designbot
    • don't get all sciencey about the bibble dude.DrBombay
    • lol @ scienceydesignbot
    • seriously, there isn't any science involved in that book. believe your faith and realize it is faithDrBombay
    • It's faith, but not blind faith. I look at the evidences (historical, archeological and otherwise) and it's my faith in those evidences along with personal experiences that I arrive at my beliefs.designbot
    • along with personal experiences that I arrive at my beliefs. Dr.B, I can assure you that you exercise faith everyday.designbot
    • what does a monkey fossil have to do with it to make you get all jumpy about it?DrBombay
    • Well you can see for yourself in this very thread, people often make a direct connection with evolution in disproving God or disproving Christianity.designbot
    • disproving Christianity.designbot
    • At the end of the day it really is a side issue to me, I just feel passionate that the things purported on evolution are often vastly skewed.designbot
    • skewed and sensationalized. So you have this supposed "fact v.s. fiction" aka: science v.s. religion which is simply not true.designbot
    • Curious what is your stance then Dr.B? No God whatsoever?designbot
    Show [[ numHiddenNotes ]] more notesAdd Note
    SaveCancel

View thread