Replies

Were/are prokaryotes "designed?"

Of course they were. That is why the atheist/materialist/evolutionists insult me. Because they cannot respond to the question of how life could have arisen from inert matter. Mind you, I am only asking for a theoretical explanation of how it could have happened according to what we scientifically know about life and what it requires. So yes, abiogenesis is impossible and the first life, likely bacteria (prokariotes as you call them in order to seem knowledgeable to lurkers, but really just an attempt to confuse the issue) was designed by our Creator.

Of course they [prokaryotes] were. [designed by the Christian god.]

I will disregard your millionth allusion to abiogenesis, which, of course, has nothing to do with evolution.

Ok, now that that's settled, I should be more specific. You said yes, bacteria was specially created. Bacteria are only a part of Kingdom Monera or Kingdom Archaea, depending on your taxonomy preference. What about Archaebacteria? What about Mycoplasmas? What about Crenarchaeota? Some of these things may not even be considered "life" by creationists, I'd suppose.

And, dear creation "scientist," where do viruses figure in? These are important questions, since you still have to come up with a competing theory to evolution, before you displace it. There has been much study into these things by actual scientists, while the creationists have conveniently disregarded this entire Kingdom. Why is that? Too difficult? ICR can't spring for the necessary equipment?

Methinks it's because a freaking .5 micron filament crenarchaeota that lives in boiling sulphurous water doesn't exactly fit the description of Noah's floating zoo, nor does it fit in with "ID" or "creation."

Very convenient, Gore.

Of course they were. That is why the atheist/materialist/evolutionists insult me.

No, we insult you because you make stupid statements, Mr. "1⁷²⁰ is a really big number." We insult you because you post before you think. We insult you because we know that 30 seconds on Google would save you hours of embarrasment, but you never quite figure that out. And finally, we insult you because you start out as a blank slate on every one of these threads; you make the same tired, stupid, already-refuted arguments that the other creationists have abandoned (except for the one or two newbies to these threads, and they quickly either disappear or update their repetoire). You don't learn. Everyone of us, creationist or evolutionist, has expanded our knowledge via these threads -- except for you. You haven't figured out that you don't "win" debates by being obtuse, by posting the same tired crap over and over again until the opposition just ignores you. You win by presenting the better argument. Unfortunately, you are so far behind the power curve when it comes to this that you are forced to rely on the former method; you have nothing new or interesting (except as entertainment value) to add to these discourses. We now only read your posts to find the bloopers, as that is becoming something of a sport on the threads you post upon. And, fortunately, you seldom fail to deliver.

So, go on thinking you're winning. Hubris brings out the idiot in you. Eventually, however, your one or two die-hard fans will even start denying you speak for the creationist side.