Replies

LOL! You mean like creationists patiently explaining to evolutionists why their so-called ‘tree of life’ is a figment of their imagination over and over and over? Or when creationists pointed out that the creator would not have created a genome that is almost entirely “junk” over and over and over and over? And let's not forget the endless number of times that creationists have demonstrated that the discontinuities in the fossil record falsifies Darwin's evo-atheist creation myth over and over and over and over. And don't get me started on how the evos close their eyes and cover their ears when creationists demonstrate that DNA is a complex, specified digital code, and that the only known empirically verified source for such a code is INTELLIGENT DESIGN!!!

But hey, thanks for the laugh :o)

There is nothing inherently atheistic about evolution or any other scientific theory.

Just because something disagrees with your particular Yabba Dabba Do Creationism, doesn't mean it is anti-God.

The tree of life, some want to call the shrub of life due to rampant gene transfer, especially early on; whatever.

Most of the genome has no known function. “Junk” is in the context of “junk you keep up in the attic”, not “garbage that you throw out”. From the beginning it was suggested that it was DNA of potential use; but STILL - NO KNOWN FUNCTION.

The fossil record is in no way consistent with dinosaurs and humans living contemporaneously all within the last six or so thousand years. That is fantasy.

How would a creationist go about demonstrating that DNA is a complex digital code, when creationists do not do any actual science with DNA? Biologists demonstrated that DNA is a complex digital code. Creationists don't create science, they create scientific “critique”.

And as a necessity, they need to misrepresent, and NOW I am beginning to understand, and NOT KNOW any biology.

Thus the reluctance of the ‘forces of Creation’ here on FR to actually LEARN anything AT ALL about the subject they discuss day after day after day.

Rather pitiful.

"...and that the only known empirically verified source for such a code is INTELLIGENT DESIGN!!!"

So you have further moderated you position to acknowledge that ID, and with it Theistic Evolution is now legitimate?