Creation Vs Evolution

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:i say eveolution not creation

And, you want to elaborate? I mean, lot's of people have said Evolution and not Creation. And lot's of people have looked like total idiots. So DF?

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:i say eveolution not creation

And, you want to elaborate? I mean, lot's of people have said Evolution and not Creation. And lot's of people have looked like total idiots. So DF?

sympol i belive in science and that everything came from somewhere not like they were just there

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:i say eveolution not creation

And, you want to elaborate? I mean, lot's of people have said Evolution and not Creation. And lot's of people have looked like total idiots. So DF?

sympol i belive in science and that everything came from somewhere not like they were just there

Well this will be easy. Intelligent Design is science. It has proven itself to be most adequately.

There has never been a case where Science has disproven Intelligent Design, and Intelligent Designers have repetively destroyed Evolutionist arguments. This thread can attest to that.

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:i say eveolution not creation

And, you want to elaborate? I mean, lot's of people have said Evolution and not Creation. And lot's of people have looked like total idiots. So DF?

sympol i belive in science and that everything came from somewhere not like they were just there

Well this will be easy. Intelligent Design is science. It has proven itself to be most adequately.

There has never been a case where Science has disproven Intelligent Design, and Intelligent Designers have repetively destroyed Evolutionist arguments. This thread can attest to that.

well we all have our own belifes

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:i say eveolution not creation

And, you want to elaborate? I mean, lot's of people have said Evolution and not Creation. And lot's of people have looked like total idiots. So DF?

sympol i belive in science and that everything came from somewhere not like they were just there

Well this will be easy. Intelligent Design is science. It has proven itself to be most adequately.

There has never been a case where Science has disproven Intelligent Design, and Intelligent Designers have repetively destroyed Evolutionist arguments. This thread can attest to that.

well we all have our own belifes

Wow, I figured for a guy like you you would be a much better debator. You're not even gonna try though.

I'll continue to believe in Science then, and you can believe in fairy tales for grown ups.

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:i say eveolution not creation

And, you want to elaborate? I mean, lot's of people have said Evolution and not Creation. And lot's of people have looked like total idiots. So DF?

sympol i belive in science and that everything came from somewhere not like they were just there

Well this will be easy. Intelligent Design is science. It has proven itself to be most adequately.

There has never been a case where Science has disproven Intelligent Design, and Intelligent Designers have repetively destroyed Evolutionist arguments. This thread can attest to that.

well we all have our own belifes

Wow, I figured for a guy like you you would be a much better debator. You're not even gonna try though.

I'll continue to believe in Science then, and you can believe in fairy tales for grown ups.

i just said that i belive in science lol

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:i say eveolution not creation

And, you want to elaborate? I mean, lot's of people have said Evolution and not Creation. And lot's of people have looked like total idiots. So DF?

sympol i belive in science and that everything came from somewhere not like they were just there

Well this will be easy. Intelligent Design is science. It has proven itself to be most adequately.

There has never been a case where Science has disproven Intelligent Design, and Intelligent Designers have repetively destroyed Evolutionist arguments. This thread can attest to that.

well we all have our own belifes

Wow, I figured for a guy like you you would be a much better debator. You're not even gonna try though.

I'll continue to believe in Science then, and you can believe in fairy tales for grown ups.

i just said that i belive in science lol

So why do you believe in Evolution ^_^

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:i say eveolution not creation

And, you want to elaborate? I mean, lot's of people have said Evolution and not Creation. And lot's of people have looked like total idiots. So DF?

sympol i belive in science and that everything came from somewhere not like they were just there

Well this will be easy. Intelligent Design is science. It has proven itself to be most adequately.

There has never been a case where Science has disproven Intelligent Design, and Intelligent Designers have repetively destroyed Evolutionist arguments. This thread can attest to that.

well we all have our own belifes

Wow, I figured for a guy like you you would be a much better debator. You're not even gonna try though.

I'll continue to believe in Science then, and you can believe in fairy tales for grown ups.

i just said that i belive in science lol

So why do you believe in Evolution ^_^

i say the creation is a fariy tale and evolution is science

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:i say eveolution not creation

And, you want to elaborate? I mean, lot's of people have said Evolution and not Creation. And lot's of people have looked like total idiots. So DF?

sympol i belive in science and that everything came from somewhere not like they were just there

Well this will be easy. Intelligent Design is science. It has proven itself to be most adequately.

There has never been a case where Science has disproven Intelligent Design, and Intelligent Designers have repetively destroyed Evolutionist arguments. This thread can attest to that.

well we all have our own belifes

Wow, I figured for a guy like you you would be a much better debator. You're not even gonna try though.

I'll continue to believe in Science then, and you can believe in fairy tales for grown ups.

i just said that i belive in science lol

So why do you believe in Evolution ^_^

i say the creation is a fariy tale and evolution is science

But here is my point.

Can you back this up with facts?

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:i say eveolution not creation

And, you want to elaborate? I mean, lot's of people have said Evolution and not Creation. And lot's of people have looked like total idiots. So DF?

sympol i belive in science and that everything came from somewhere not like they were just there

Well this will be easy. Intelligent Design is science. It has proven itself to be most adequately.

There has never been a case where Science has disproven Intelligent Design, and Intelligent Designers have repetively destroyed Evolutionist arguments. This thread can attest to that.

well we all have our own belifes

Wow, I figured for a guy like you you would be a much better debator. You're not even gonna try though.

I'll continue to believe in Science then, and you can believe in fairy tales for grown ups.

i just said that i belive in science lol

So why do you believe in Evolution ^_^

i say the creation is a fariy tale and evolution is science

But here is my point.

Can you back this up with facts?

sympol i saw on the discovery cannal lol

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:i say eveolution not creation

And, you want to elaborate? I mean, lot's of people have said Evolution and not Creation. And lot's of people have looked like total idiots. So DF?

sympol i belive in science and that everything came from somewhere not like they were just there

Well this will be easy. Intelligent Design is science. It has proven itself to be most adequately.

There has never been a case where Science has disproven Intelligent Design, and Intelligent Designers have repetively destroyed Evolutionist arguments. This thread can attest to that.

well we all have our own belifes

Wow, I figured for a guy like you you would be a much better debator. You're not even gonna try though.

I'll continue to believe in Science then, and you can believe in fairy tales for grown ups.

i just said that i belive in science lol

So why do you believe in Evolution ^_^

i say the creation is a fariy tale and evolution is science

But here is my point.

Can you back this up with facts?

sympol i saw on the discovery cannal lol

Are you serious.

Wow. To be honest Darkflame I am losing a bit of respect here.

Ok, I disagree because I read 3 books on Creation.

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:i say eveolution not creation

And, you want to elaborate? I mean, lot's of people have said Evolution and not Creation. And lot's of people have looked like total idiots. So DF?

sympol i belive in science and that everything came from somewhere not like they were just there

Well this will be easy. Intelligent Design is science. It has proven itself to be most adequately.

There has never been a case where Science has disproven Intelligent Design, and Intelligent Designers have repetively destroyed Evolutionist arguments. This thread can attest to that.

well we all have our own belifes

Wow, I figured for a guy like you you would be a much better debator. You're not even gonna try though.

I'll continue to believe in Science then, and you can believe in fairy tales for grown ups.

i just said that i belive in science lol

So why do you believe in Evolution ^_^

i say the creation is a fariy tale and evolution is science

But here is my point.

Can you back this up with facts?

sympol i saw on the discovery cannal lol

Are you serious.

Wow. To be honest Darkflame I am losing a bit of respect here.

Ok, I disagree because I read 3 books on Creation.

wow mine is just as stupid as urs

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:

quater wrote:

darkflame5019 wrote:i say eveolution not creation

And, you want to elaborate? I mean, lot's of people have said Evolution and not Creation. And lot's of people have looked like total idiots. So DF?

sympol i belive in science and that everything came from somewhere not like they were just there

Well this will be easy. Intelligent Design is science. It has proven itself to be most adequately.

There has never been a case where Science has disproven Intelligent Design, and Intelligent Designers have repetively destroyed Evolutionist arguments. This thread can attest to that.

well we all have our own belifes

Wow, I figured for a guy like you you would be a much better debator. You're not even gonna try though.

I'll continue to believe in Science then, and you can believe in fairy tales for grown ups.

i just said that i belive in science lol

So why do you believe in Evolution ^_^

i say the creation is a fariy tale and evolution is science

But here is my point.

Can you back this up with facts?

sympol i saw on the discovery cannal lol

Are you serious.

Wow. To be honest Darkflame I am losing a bit of respect here.

Ok, I disagree because I read 3 books on Creation.

wow mine is just as stupid as urs

Not really. Discovery Channel is run by typical media, and the typical media promotes Evolution. The books I read were written by scientists who used to be evolutionists. Pretty different.

But since you refuse to bring me facts let me ask you a question.

How did the first cell have intelligence?

Amaterasu wrote:

Titaniumxvx wrote:

Amaterasu wrote:

sabaku no ketsueki wrote:

quater wrote:

sabaku no ketsueki wrote:

quater wrote:

Amaterasu wrote:

quater wrote:

Amaterasu wrote:i was gonna answer one of these, but Q seems to be able to handle this all by himself.
SO i'll just say this. The theory of evolution has proven to contradict itself with its own science.
the theory of evolution says that we became better, stronger, more adapt, and universally smarter and so on.
Well the law of thermodinamics (ok, i think its this one, but correct me if i'm wrong with the name k?) states that all matter decomposes over time/ And we can see this law in action over many years, thiungs break down not build up.

No actually Amaterasu I'd love to get some back up from someone it gets lonely sitting out as the creationist by himself from time to time. And like you just did, you can whip out things that I forget to mention or didn't know to help stabilize my argument.

Well look whose back. Hey kurokumo calmed down some? ^_^

oh, ok then
i'll try and help out more often then

Sweet ^_^

Plus you get better the more you get in there.

And to you Sabaku: I said Creationist, as in a 6 day creation of the Universe by God. And you are, in fact an evolutionist. You're a Theistic Evolutionist.

Theistic Evolutionist, which takes the creation side more than the evolution....i think
I still lack a lot of information on that, but what I've heard so far makes sense
BUT if I had to choose one or the other, no in between,it'd be creation

There isn't a lot of information on Theistic Evolution. Basically in the old days there was no creation science, just like today there isn't much, because the Government refuses to give money to Intelligent Designers. So they had no way of studying it. So they made up Theistic Evolution so as to keep their faith solid in the light of Evolution.

But today, we can prove Creationism because Scientists are uniting and Evolution is starting to fumble. We are in the second half of the game with a ready team and Evolution is getting weary. So a 7 day Creation no longer needs to be "A metaphor" but we can take our Lord seriously and believe what he said.

is it a metaphor? is it literal? who knows?
7 days? 4 million years? I just say what i think
but doesn't the majority of the bible have a deeper meaning?

um sabaku
do you get a book thats too hard to understand?
something that has lots of metaphors?
isn't it hard to get the message?
well the bible is the total opposite. The message it has is certainly clear and easy to understand. Meaning that metaphors were not used.

On behalf of Sabaku, now you guys are just teaming up.

um, no not really,
its a debate.
Q and I are on the creation side and she is on the evolution side. Nothing more

Titaniumxvx wrote:

Amaterasu wrote:

Titaniumxvx wrote:

Amaterasu wrote:

sabaku no ketsueki wrote:

quater wrote:

sabaku no ketsueki wrote:

quater wrote:

Amaterasu wrote:

quater wrote:

Amaterasu wrote:i was gonna answer one of these, but Q seems to be able to handle this all by himself.
SO i'll just say this. The theory of evolution has proven to contradict itself with its own science.
the theory of evolution says that we became better, stronger, more adapt, and universally smarter and so on.
Well the law of thermodinamics (ok, i think its this one, but correct me if i'm wrong with the name k?) states that all matter decomposes over time/ And we can see this law in action over many years, thiungs break down not build up.

No actually Amaterasu I'd love to get some back up from someone it gets lonely sitting out as the creationist by himself from time to time. And like you just did, you can whip out things that I forget to mention or didn't know to help stabilize my argument.

Well look whose back. Hey kurokumo calmed down some? ^_^

oh, ok then
i'll try and help out more often then

Sweet ^_^

Plus you get better the more you get in there.

And to you Sabaku: I said Creationist, as in a 6 day creation of the Universe by God. And you are, in fact an evolutionist. You're a Theistic Evolutionist.

Theistic Evolutionist, which takes the creation side more than the evolution....i think
I still lack a lot of information on that, but what I've heard so far makes sense
BUT if I had to choose one or the other, no in between,it'd be creation

There isn't a lot of information on Theistic Evolution. Basically in the old days there was no creation science, just like today there isn't much, because the Government refuses to give money to Intelligent Designers. So they had no way of studying it. So they made up Theistic Evolution so as to keep their faith solid in the light of Evolution.

But today, we can prove Creationism because Scientists are uniting and Evolution is starting to fumble. We are in the second half of the game with a ready team and Evolution is getting weary. So a 7 day Creation no longer needs to be "A metaphor" but we can take our Lord seriously and believe what he said.

is it a metaphor? is it literal? who knows?
7 days? 4 million years? I just say what i think
but doesn't the majority of the bible have a deeper meaning?

um sabaku
do you get a book thats too hard to understand?
something that has lots of metaphors?
isn't it hard to get the message?
well the bible is the total opposite. The message it has is certainly clear and easy to understand. Meaning that metaphors were not used.

On behalf of Sabaku, now you guys are just teaming up.

um, no not really,
its a debate.
Q and I are on the creation side and she is on the evolution side. Nothing more

OkieDok.

Just curious, but if this is a science v. science thing, why do Q and Sabaku keep using allusions and references to the bible?

Amaterasu wrote:

Titaniumxvx wrote:

Amaterasu wrote:

Titaniumxvx wrote:

Amaterasu wrote:

sabaku no ketsueki wrote:

quater wrote:

sabaku no ketsueki wrote:

quater wrote:

Amaterasu wrote:

quater wrote:

Amaterasu wrote:i was gonna answer one of these, but Q seems to be able to handle this all by himself.
SO i'll just say this. The theory of evolution has proven to contradict itself with its own science.
the theory of evolution says that we became better, stronger, more adapt, and universally smarter and so on.
Well the law of thermodinamics (ok, i think its this one, but correct me if i'm wrong with the name k?) states that all matter decomposes over time/ And we can see this law in action over many years, thiungs break down not build up.

No actually Amaterasu I'd love to get some back up from someone it gets lonely sitting out as the creationist by himself from time to time. And like you just did, you can whip out things that I forget to mention or didn't know to help stabilize my argument.

Well look whose back. Hey kurokumo calmed down some? ^_^

oh, ok then
i'll try and help out more often then

Sweet ^_^

Plus you get better the more you get in there.

And to you Sabaku: I said Creationist, as in a 6 day creation of the Universe by God. And you are, in fact an evolutionist. You're a Theistic Evolutionist.

Theistic Evolutionist, which takes the creation side more than the evolution....i think
I still lack a lot of information on that, but what I've heard so far makes sense
BUT if I had to choose one or the other, no in between,it'd be creation

There isn't a lot of information on Theistic Evolution. Basically in the old days there was no creation science, just like today there isn't much, because the Government refuses to give money to Intelligent Designers. So they had no way of studying it. So they made up Theistic Evolution so as to keep their faith solid in the light of Evolution.

But today, we can prove Creationism because Scientists are uniting and Evolution is starting to fumble. We are in the second half of the game with a ready team and Evolution is getting weary. So a 7 day Creation no longer needs to be "A metaphor" but we can take our Lord seriously and believe what he said.

is it a metaphor? is it literal? who knows?
7 days? 4 million years? I just say what i think
but doesn't the majority of the bible have a deeper meaning?

um sabaku
do you get a book thats too hard to understand?
something that has lots of metaphors?
isn't it hard to get the message?
well the bible is the total opposite. The message it has is certainly clear and easy to understand. Meaning that metaphors were not used.

On behalf of Sabaku, now you guys are just teaming up.

um, no not really,
its a debate.
Q and I are on the creation side and she is on the evolution side. Nothing more

OkieDok.

Just curious, but if this is a science v. science thing, why do Q and Sabaku keep using allusions and references to the bible?

well sabaku says that the bible is full of metaphors
BUt since its not Q is proving that so

Titaniumxvx wrote:

Amaterasu wrote:

Titaniumxvx wrote:

Amaterasu wrote:

Titaniumxvx wrote:

Amaterasu wrote:

sabaku no ketsueki wrote:

quater wrote:

sabaku no ketsueki wrote:

quater wrote:

Amaterasu wrote:

quater wrote:

Amaterasu wrote:i was gonna answer one of these, but Q seems to be able to handle this all by himself.
SO i'll just say this. The theory of evolution has proven to contradict itself with its own science.
the theory of evolution says that we became better, stronger, more adapt, and universally smarter and so on.
Well the law of thermodinamics (ok, i think its this one, but correct me if i'm wrong with the name k?) states that all matter decomposes over time/ And we can see this law in action over many years, thiungs break down not build up.

No actually Amaterasu I'd love to get some back up from someone it gets lonely sitting out as the creationist by himself from time to time. And like you just did, you can whip out things that I forget to mention or didn't know to help stabilize my argument.

Well look whose back. Hey kurokumo calmed down some? ^_^

oh, ok then
i'll try and help out more often then

Sweet ^_^

Plus you get better the more you get in there.

And to you Sabaku: I said Creationist, as in a 6 day creation of the Universe by God. And you are, in fact an evolutionist. You're a Theistic Evolutionist.

Theistic Evolutionist, which takes the creation side more than the evolution....i think
I still lack a lot of information on that, but what I've heard so far makes sense
BUT if I had to choose one or the other, no in between,it'd be creation

There isn't a lot of information on Theistic Evolution. Basically in the old days there was no creation science, just like today there isn't much, because the Government refuses to give money to Intelligent Designers. So they had no way of studying it. So they made up Theistic Evolution so as to keep their faith solid in the light of Evolution.

But today, we can prove Creationism because Scientists are uniting and Evolution is starting to fumble. We are in the second half of the game with a ready team and Evolution is getting weary. So a 7 day Creation no longer needs to be "A metaphor" but we can take our Lord seriously and believe what he said.

is it a metaphor? is it literal? who knows?
7 days? 4 million years? I just say what i think
but doesn't the majority of the bible have a deeper meaning?

um sabaku
do you get a book thats too hard to understand?
something that has lots of metaphors?
isn't it hard to get the message?
well the bible is the total opposite. The message it has is certainly clear and easy to understand. Meaning that metaphors were not used.

On behalf of Sabaku, now you guys are just teaming up.

um, no not really,
its a debate.
Q and I are on the creation side and she is on the evolution side. Nothing more

OkieDok.

Just curious, but if this is a science v. science thing, why do Q and Sabaku keep using allusions and references to the bible?

well sabaku says that the bible is full of metaphors
BUt since its not Q is proving that so

How did that have anything to do with the topic at hand?

Amaterasu wrote:

Titaniumxvx wrote:

Amaterasu wrote:

Titaniumxvx wrote:

Amaterasu wrote:

Titaniumxvx wrote:

Amaterasu wrote:

sabaku no ketsueki wrote:

quater wrote:

sabaku no ketsueki wrote:

quater wrote:

Amaterasu wrote:

quater wrote:

Amaterasu wrote:i was gonna answer one of these, but Q seems to be able to handle this all by himself.
SO i'll just say this. The theory of evolution has proven to contradict itself with its own science.
the theory of evolution says that we became better, stronger, more adapt, and universally smarter and so on.
Well the law of thermodinamics (ok, i think its this one, but correct me if i'm wrong with the name k?) states that all matter decomposes over time/ And we can see this law in action over many years, thiungs break down not build up.

No actually Amaterasu I'd love to get some back up from someone it gets lonely sitting out as the creationist by himself from time to time. And like you just did, you can whip out things that I forget to mention or didn't know to help stabilize my argument.

Well look whose back. Hey kurokumo calmed down some? ^_^

oh, ok then
i'll try and help out more often then

Sweet ^_^

Plus you get better the more you get in there.

And to you Sabaku: I said Creationist, as in a 6 day creation of the Universe by God. And you are, in fact an evolutionist. You're a Theistic Evolutionist.

Theistic Evolutionist, which takes the creation side more than the evolution....i think
I still lack a lot of information on that, but what I've heard so far makes sense
BUT if I had to choose one or the other, no in between,it'd be creation

There isn't a lot of information on Theistic Evolution. Basically in the old days there was no creation science, just like today there isn't much, because the Government refuses to give money to Intelligent Designers. So they had no way of studying it. So they made up Theistic Evolution so as to keep their faith solid in the light of Evolution.

But today, we can prove Creationism because Scientists are uniting and Evolution is starting to fumble. We are in the second half of the game with a ready team and Evolution is getting weary. So a 7 day Creation no longer needs to be "A metaphor" but we can take our Lord seriously and believe what he said.

is it a metaphor? is it literal? who knows?
7 days? 4 million years? I just say what i think
but doesn't the majority of the bible have a deeper meaning?

um sabaku
do you get a book thats too hard to understand?
something that has lots of metaphors?
isn't it hard to get the message?
well the bible is the total opposite. The message it has is certainly clear and easy to understand. Meaning that metaphors were not used.

On behalf of Sabaku, now you guys are just teaming up.

um, no not really,
its a debate.
Q and I are on the creation side and she is on the evolution side. Nothing more

OkieDok.

Just curious, but if this is a science v. science thing, why do Q and Sabaku keep using allusions and references to the bible?

well sabaku says that the bible is full of metaphors
BUt since its not Q is proving that so

How did that have anything to do with the topic at hand?

it has everthing to do with it
Sabaku is sayiong something of a mix between evoilution and creationg by saying the bible has a lot of metaphors
however Q is argueing (and winning) against that by proving that those metaphors are not metaphors
and proving that creationg happened like the bible stats

TheFirstKnight wrote:i know the definition, but I'm asking you people.