Evolution Disproven.

While reading the posts I sensed an overall misunderstanding of how the Big Bang is really understood, so I thought I'd post a few words.The universe began with all matter concentrated in a space smaller than an atom at an inconceivably high temperature, and it immediately began a rapid expansion. The laws of physics at such high densities and temperatures are not well understood, but it is thought that the everyday particles we're familiar with, the proton, the neutron and the electron, as well as a host of less familiar particles, did not exist at that point. Matter in these very early stages consisted solely of quarks. There are different types of quarks, and the various types combine in different ways to create the more familiar particles.After a short period of expansion the universe cooled to the point where quarks could condense into protons, neutrons, electrons and other particles. At this point in time the universe was still fairly homogenous, just a huge extremely hot cloud of elementary particles which still hadn't combnied to form any elements. For example, the simplest and most common element in the universe is hydrogen, comprised of a single electron orbiting a single proton, but temperatures were still too high for hydrogen to form and remain stable.After another period of expansion the universe cooled some more and hydrogen, helium and a very few other elements condensed out of the cloud. At this point we still have just a fairly homogenous cloud of simple elements. I'm going from memory, but I think scientists believe the universe was about 300,000 years old at this point.I'm skipping a lot of issues to keep this simple, but the important point to note is that there were no solid bodies in existence at the time of the Big Bang or for a long time thereafter on which to impart any type of spin or motion. Stars and planets didn't begin forming until much later.--Percy

RvX writes:

---

Charles Darwin even admitted that he was randomly throwing out theories and that evolution "could not be true..."

---

Actually, this is true. Charles Darwin's entire life was a fraud. When he was supposedly on the HMS Beagle sailing around the world gathering geological and biological specimens and observations, he was actually a derelict on the London wharves, too ashamed to admit he'd missed embarkation due to an extended nighttime escapade.When the Beagle finally returned, and fortunately members of the ship's crew had gathered specimen's here and there on the journey, Darwin bribed everyone to say that he'd actually been aboard, including Captain Fitzroy. In fact, over the ensuing years as Fitzroy watched Darwin advance his career through lies and fabrications he became distraught and desperate because of his role in the cover-up and eventually committed suicide.Darwin faked his death because he could see no other way out of an unhappy marriage, and he also found it convenient to disappear because of fears that his enemies were finally catching on to his duplicitous schemes. Who is actually buried beneath Darwin's stone in Westminster Abbey is a mystery, but no doubt it is someone Darwin himself murdered, adding one more to the list of his crimes.Darwin finished his days in anonymity on the streets of London, except for one occasion when he marched into Westminster Abbey, and jumping up and down on his own grave denounced evolution as a fraud and himself as worse than the devil, and this is the origin of the information RvX has kindly provided. When Darwin finally died he was buried in a pauper's grave, the actual whereabouts unknown to this day.Moral: Anyone can make up stories.Lesson: Have evidence for what you believe.--Percy

"#1 What are TOE and YEC... sorry, not familiar with these terms, lol..."
--As compmage pointed out, the ToE is an abbreviation for the Theory of Evolution, and a YEC is a Young Earth Creationist. As well as an OEC is an Old Earth Creationist, a.k.a. a Theistic Evolutionist."#2 Retrograde motion has everything to do with the Big Bang. In the "Big Bang," everything went spinning in the same direction. This proves that wrong."
--Again, the Big Bang has nothing to do with the rotational patterns of planets or anything else. To make your assertion seem at least slightly logical (even though it is still an illogical question), you may be searching for the origin of the solar system, rather than the origin of the universe. So instead of the Big Bang theory, you'll be looking at the Nebula hypothesis. Even still, retrograde 'rotation' is well explained by this theory.
--In conventional mainstream theory on planet formation, planetismals (proto-planets) formed by colliding and condensing with surrounding materials. With the cataclysmic alterations in orbit and rotation patterns of masses, retrograde rotation comes at no surprise.
--BTW, as Joz pointed out, You are incorrect in saying that it is 'retrograde rotation', you (as well as Kent Hovind?) may be looking for retrograde 'rotation'. Vocabulary is very important in scientific study, though some slack is usually given in the forums. Hovind of course runs right over that fine line.--Here is a good example of retrograde 'motion'
Planets occasionally stop their eastward drift through the stars and for a brief period shift westward, undergoing retrograde motion. This "backward" drift is caused by the Earth passing the planet and does not mean the planet has reversed its orbital motion^[1]. - Recreated - pg. 19; Fig 0V1.10This normal drift of the planets may sometimes reverse, so that a given planet shifts westward through the constelations. This is not the result of the planet changing its direction in its orbit; rather, it is caused by the Earth's motion. Just as a car may breifly look like it is moving backward when you pass it, so too a planet appears to reverse its direction as the Earth swings by it in our yearly journey around the Sun.¹--As well as Uranus, Venus, & Pluto are examples of retrograde rotation.Rotational axis of planets:
-Inner planets
Mercury 0^o
Venus 177.4^o
Earth 23.5^o
Mars 25.2^o-Outer Planets
Jupiter 3.1^o
Saturn 26.7^o
Uranus 97.9^o
Naptune 28.3^o
Pluto 122.5^o--Some suggested introductory studies for the astronomical field:
-[1] - Explorations - An introduction to Astronomy. Second Edition, 2000 Update; Thomas T. Arny--For the Mathematically minded:-[2] - White Dwarfs Black holes - An Introduction to Relativistic Astrophysics; Roman & Hannelore Sexl"#3 What's wrong with Kent Hovind? OK, maybe his theory may and may not be correct, but he sure does know what he's talking about... "
--That's just it, he doesn't know what he is talking about. Either that or you have a couple choices: Extreme Arrogance, Ignorance, abundant ill-informities, misunderstanding, misrepresentation, or deceit. You could argue for all of them, I'm sure, pick your fill.
--Hovind is actually the person who got me into the EvC debate, I did however find more and more reason to see him as an arrogant ill-informed parroter. Keep your thoughts on the science and have an open mind and you may see this as well. You are looking for veracity right?"I didn't use much from Kent Hovind anyway, basically just the retrograde motion point..."
--Believe me, Hovind would most likely defend you for all of them, they are also in his 'seminars'."TrueCreation: do you believe in Theistic Evolution or something?"
--No, I am a Young Earth Creationist."And guys, doesn't it really put you down to be this rude and insulting to a new member of this forum? Just be cool and tell me what's wrong... thanks."
--Sorry about the hostility, it just irritates me how Hovind and his ilk brain-wash his followers and plagueing the YEC community in corrupting their logic. You may yet come to this realization.------------------

​

[This message has been edited by TrueCreation, 06-06-2002]

​

[This message has been edited by TrueCreation, 06-06-2002]

Not that I know much about it, or even care, but the term "retrograde motion" was used in the initial message. Seemingly it was possibly referring to either revolution or rotation directions.In some of the replys, the difference between revolution and rotation seems to have been muddied.Revolution is the circling of the planets etc. around the sun. I believe they all revolve in the same direction, although apparent retrograde motion (as discussed by TC) does happen.Rotation is the spinning of the planets on their axies.Of course, there are considerable differences in the orientations of the various planets rotational axies, and the planes of their revolving around the sun.Just my two cents worth, and probably worth no more.Moose------------------
BS degree, geology, '83
Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U
Old Earth evolution - Yes
Godly creation - Maybe

quote:

---

To the evolutionists: Is it really any fun hitting home runs off a little leaguer?

---

It is - for the first two or three times, after which it gets boring. Also, the only way we can show these little leaguers that they are indeed unfit to compete is by hitting these proverbial homeruns. It is an unfortunate necessity.

K... this really is laughable, it's just so funny to see how you guys actually believe this lie (evolution)1. I made a big mistake by saying "living organism." What I meant to say is, "No species can become superior to itself."
Ex: A dog can't make or become a human... etc, you get the point...2. Do you really think that an extremely small dot of nothing exploded and created all this intelligence, this whole universe? I mean, think about it!3. There is nothing wrong with Kent Hovind... fake PHD? Gimme a break.. just cause he's smart doesn't mean you evolutionists can insult him...4. Evolution is a hypothesis, NOT the theory they claim it to be.5. An evolutionist (I believe his last name was Haecker or something) made a big book about evolution, years ago... he was showing the similarities of different species by their embryos... it turns out he actually faked the pics of the embryos... he finally figured out how idiotic evolution is.6. Do you really believe that we came from something so small and dumb to something so big and intelligent? I mean, come on guys, you have brains, think about it... evolution CAN NOT be true, and is not true.7. Charles Darwin admitted this about his evolution hypothesis... I read about it in some book, can't remember its name...8. If you get the Philadelphia Trumpet, read their article of the EVOLUTION OF FRAUD... it just came out.9. There is evidence of a huge catastrophe (the Flood).. for example, there are fish in places where water has never flowed... there is real evidence of this.10. How dare you compare God with earthly things? Duh, thats why he's called God... of course he can create anything from nothing... thus the name God!Evolution = Trash.FINALLY: it is a huge mistake to even call evolution science. It is neither observable or reproducabe (or recreatable, whatever )Thanks.

​

[This message has been edited by RvX, 06-06-2002]

[QUOTE][b]#2 Retrograde motion has everything to do with the Big Bang. In the "Big Bang," everything went spinning in the same direction. This proves that wrong.[/QUOTE][/b]Others have pointed out that this is moot because the Big Bang was at least ten billion years prior to the origin of the Solar System but I just want to point out that the concept that "everything went spinning in the same direction" is not so. The BB was an expansion, think of it as matter/energy/space-time expanding in all directions from a point. Consider the material from the expansion forming clumps from their own gravity as they travel out from the point of origin. Some clumps are larger than others and the smaller clumps are drawn gravitationally to the large ones. Consider one large one about to encounter two smaller ones. Our viewing perspective is from above and I will explain the encounters in a two-dimensional perspective for simplicity. The first small clump encounters the large clump from behind and to our left. It enters an orbit about the large clump, which is clockwise from our perspective. The second small clump encounters the large clump from behind and a little to our right. Its new orbit is counterclockwise, retrograde to the first. So in our model one explosion produced two orbits in opposite directions.Congratulations to TC for a great post.

Any evolutionists who thinks this level of discussion is worth your time, well (shaking his head)...But tons of brownie points to anyone who makes actual progress. For a minute it looked like RvX was going to listen to TC, but I guess not.I'll watch from the sidelines. --Percy

quote:

---

Originally posted by Daydreamer:
It is - for the first two or three times, after which it gets boring. Also, the only way we can show these little leaguers that they are indeed unfit to compete is by hitting these proverbial homeruns. It is an unfortunate necessity.

​

---

Unfortunately, most of the time the little leagueers will rarely admit that they are still in little league.They just say that the big leaguers are all biased or Atheists or Jesus haters and storm away.

[QUOTE][b]I made a big mistake by saying "living organism." What I meant to say is, "No species can become superior to itself."[/QUOTE][/b]And that's scientific law right? In what textbook might I look that one up? [QUOTE][b]Ex: A dog can't make or become a human... etc, you get the point...[/QUOTE][/b]The ToE allows that that could happen given enough time. Your job is to convince us that it can't, not just to repeat what you believe without showing us any evidence. [QUOTE][b]2. Do you really think that an extremely small dot of nothing exploded and created all this intelligence[/QUOTE][/b]Of course not, the BB didn't create anything, it just was a movement of matter, just as a river is a movement of water or a gust of wind is a movement of air. [QUOTE][b]3. There is nothing wrong with Kent Hovind... fake PHD? Gimme a break..[/QUOTE][/b]Eventually someone will probably post a link to a picture of the house in Colorado where his "Ph.D." came from...or actually the split-level home where that great institution is now. It was somewhere else when he "earned" his "doctorate" via the mail. [QUOTE][b]just cause he's smart[/QUOTE][/b]We've really spent too much time making fun of Hovind here. We've discussed his mail-order degree, we've talked about his tax problems, and we have talked about that apparently non-existant panel of scientists that is supposed to judge entries to his 250k reward for proof of evolution. Some of us have even mentioned their attempts to arrange a debate with him. I would recommend finding another Creationist to get your material from and getting as far from him as possible. But that's just my advice, I'm sure you won't listen. [QUOTE][b]doesn't mean you evolutionists can insult him...[/QUOTE][/b]But we can and do because he's just such a funny character. But you can't really say much about our insulting people, eh?As for Haekel:Actually he drew the embryos, and it is impossible to 'fake' a drawing. He did exaggerate certain features to help support his own special version of evolution, that "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny", in other words, that every evolution step occurs in embryonic development (for example, that human embryos have gills in one step of development, an amphibian heart in the next step, etc.)The idea never really caught on because Haekel was not the only biologist that could draw embryos and other embryologists caught him at what he was doing. But it never hurt the theory of evolution itself, just the idea that *all* evolutionary change occurs in development. [QUOTE][b]6. Do you really believe that we came from something so small and dumb to something so big and intelligent?[/QUOTE][/b]Where did you come from? I came from a fertilized egg, a single cell that had no brain, no nerves, no circulatory system. It was "small" and "dumb", about as "small" and "dumb" as it gets in fact. But that's just where *I* came from. Maybe your parent divided down the middle into two clones. [QUOTE][b]I read about it in some book, can't remember its name...[/QUOTE][/b]One time a little English girl fell down a rabbit hole and was chased by a giant playing card. I know that this happened because I read in a book...can't remember the name right now... [QUOTE][b]9. There is evidence of a huge catastrophe (the Flood).. for example, there are fish in places where water has never flowed [/QUOTE][/b]How did the fish get to a place where water never flowed? Did it fall from the sky during the Flood? [QUOTE][b]there is real evidence of this.[/QUOTE][/b]Quite a few people believe that aliens are landing on this planet and giving people medical probings in strange places. They say that there is real evidence of this but never seem to provide it. [QUOTE][b]How dare you compare God with earthly things? Duh, thats why he's called God... of course he can create anything from nothing... thus the name God![/QUOTE][/b]If God can create things from nothing, God can also evolve things from nothing. [QUOTE][b]FINALLY: it is a huge mistake to even call evolution science. It is neither observable or reproducabe (or recreatable, whatever[/QUOTE][/b]The evidence it left is observable (ex: HERVs, genetic phylogeny, fossil hierarchy). Also evolutionary change is observable in the lab (ex: antibiotic resistance) and in nature (ex: the speciation of Porto Santo rabbits).But of course, you must also consider Creationism unscientific because the Creation Week and the Flood cannot be observed or reproduced.

​

[This message has been edited by gene90, 06-06-2002]

​

[This message has been edited by gene90, 06-06-2002]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RvX:
[B]K... this really is laughable, it's just so funny to see how you guys actually believe this lie (evolution)1. I made a big mistake by saying "living organism." What I meant to say is, "No species can become superior to itself."
Ex: A dog can't make or become a human... etc, you get the point...[/QUOTE]So much wrong with this...There is no such thing as "superior" or "inferior" in evolution. Evolution results only in change.I suggest that you read up on basic Evolutionary Biology because it's clear that you have not ever done so. Here is a good start: http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-mustread.htmlSince I strongly suspect you are a rather young person, I will also include a website geared towards people who haven't been through high school yet: http://biology4kids.com/files/studies_evolution.html

quote:

---

2. Do you really think that an extremely small dot of nothing exploded and created all this intelligence, this whole universe? I mean, think about it!

---

Many, many many more people much more intelligent and much better educated than you or I HAVE thought about it, dear."Golly gee, I cain't imagine how that happened, so it's stoopit, and I ain't beleevin' it" is not a very intelligent nor compelling argument.

quote:

---

3. There is nothing wrong with Kent Hovind... fake PHD? Gimme a break.. just cause he's smart doesn't mean you evolutionists can insult him...

---

Hovind got his diploma from a documented diploma mill that is run out of a suburban split level house. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/credentials.html"Hovind claims to possess a masters degree and a doctorate in education from Patriot University in Colorado. According to Hovind, his 250-page dissertation was on the topic of the dangers of teaching evolution in the public schools. Formerly affiliated with Hilltop Baptist Church in Colorado Springs, Colorado, Patriot University is accredited only by the American Accrediting Association of Theological Institutions, an accreditation mill that provides accreditation for a $100 charge. Patriot University has moved to Alamosa, Colorado and continues to offer correspondence courses for $15 to $32 per credit. The school's catalog contains course descriptions but no listing of the school's faculty or their credentials. Name It and Frame It lists Patriot University as a degree mill [3]."Also, here is a link to a picture of Patriot University, that split level: http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Temple/9917/hovind/wild_hovind.html

quote:

---

4. Evolution is a hypothesis, NOT the theory they claim it to be.

---

Um, wrong. Read, educate yourself.Also, nobody is going to take you seriously unless you back up what you say.

quote:

---

5. An evolutionist (I believe his last name was Haecker or something) made a big book about evolution, years ago... he was showing the similarities of different species by their embryos... it turns out he actually faked the pics of the embryos... he finally figured out how idiotic evolution is.

---

Um, no, it was just wrong. Science corrected itself. Happens all the time. Big whoop.

quote:

---

6. Do you really believe that we came from something so small and dumb to something so big and intelligent? I mean, come on guys, you have brains, think about it... evolution CAN NOT be true, and is not true.

---

Golly gee, that's an amazing compelling argument! (this kid dun'n believe sumpin', so I rekin I'll fergit aller my edgeekayshun and beleevim, just kuz!)

quote:

---

7. Charles Darwin admitted this about his evolution hypothesis... I read about it in some book, can't remember its name...

---

That is a myth. Read about it here: http://www.ediacara.org/hope.html

quote:

---

8. If you get the Philadelphia Trumpet, read their article of the EVOLUTION OF FRAUD... it just came out.

---

It's a load of typical Creationist crap.You need to read some real science.

quote:

---

9. There is evidence of a huge catastrophe (the Flood).. for example, there are fish in places where water has never flowed... there is real evidence of this.

---

If water has never flowed there, then that would be evidence AGAINST a flood covering the whole planet, now wouldn't it?OTOH, perhaps you would like to present some of this evidnece for the flood instead of just vaguely assering that it exists. What specific evidence from the flood, compared to all the evidence you have studied which points away from the flood, convinced you?

quote:

---

10. How dare you compare God with earthly things? Duh, thats why he's called God... of course he can create anything from nothing... thus the name God!

---

This is so circluar I am getting dizzy!

quote:

---

Evolution = Trash.

---

I certainly hope you are unter 12 years old.

quote:

---

FINALLY: it is a huge mistake to even call evolution science. It is neither observable or reproducabe (or recreatable, whatever )

---

Wrong.Observations of evolution: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/speciation.htmlLastly, I suggest that you read my sig quote and think about what you so flippantly reject when you say "evolution doesn't happen".------------------
"We will still have perfect freedom to hold contrary views of our own, but to simply
close our minds to the knowledge painstakingly accumulated by hundreds of thousands
of scientists over long centuries is to deliberately decide to be ignorant and narrow-
minded."-Steve Allen, from "Dumbth"

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RvX:
[B]K... this really is laughable, it's just so funny to see how you guys actually believe this lie (evolution) [/QUOTE]Right... you've found us out. We are all part of a decades long conspiracy of tens of thousands of scientists, philosophers and other thinker types to promote and promulgate a patent untruth. We manipulate the data in practically every field of science in order to hide and/or support our deception. We've even managed to exert our diabolical influence backwards into time to effect the development of theories which would eventually support our cause.Please....

quote:

---

1. I made a big mistake by saying "living organism." What I meant to say is, "No species can become superior to itself."
Ex: A dog can't make or become a human... etc, you get the point...

---

Right, except on the X-files. But evolution posits no such thing. It is true, however that certain body parts can become whole creatures. For example, a rib can become Annabel Chong.

quote:

---

2. Do you really think that an extremely small dot of nothing exploded and created all this intelligence, this whole universe? I mean, think about it!

---

... someone already pointed this out. Nobody said nothin about nothin.Besides, all this intelligence is equally balanced by not-intelligence, so it all works out in the end. 1 plus -1 equals 0.

quote:

---

4. Evolution is a hypothesis, NOT the theory they claim it to be.

---

oh boy... not much difference between the two really. What's your point? That evolution is a working model- and a good one- but that it isn't logically a fact in that it hasn't been applied to every circumstance from the beginning of time until the end of time? hmmm...if that is the case you may as well chuck the whole of human endeavor.

quote:

---

6. Do you really believe that we came from something so small and dumb to something so big and intelligent? I mean, come on guys, you have brains, think about it... evolution CAN NOT be true, and is not true.

---

well... yeah. Why the focus on size and intelligence? Do you need the pat on the back?

quote:

---

9. There is evidence of a huge catastrophe (the Flood).. for example, there are fish in places where water has never flowed... there is real evidence of this.

---

What evidence? That there are fossils on top of some mountains? Have you ever heard of plate tectonics?

quote:

---

10. How dare you compare God with earthly things? Duh, thats why he's called God... of course he can create anything from nothing... thus the name God!

---

I second that dizziness.

quote:

---

FINALLY: it is a huge mistake to even call evolution science. It is neither observable or reproducabe (or recreatable, whatever )

---

that's neither... nor, but that neither here nor there. I have a chihuahua and I have a rottweiler. I'd argue that the two are on the verge of being separate species in that without human assistance mating between the two wouldn't happen. Can't get much closer to speciation than that.Take care------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com

Ok, I'm really disgusted, I can't believe what the world has come to...*No offense to anyone, just the truth*
It's mainly filled with a bunch of ignorant, insulting evolutionists who haven't even thought of how impossible evolution is and just continue to slag any newcomers... pssh, how nice of you...There's too many things to quote and reply to here, and it's not going to get anywhere, because you evolutionists will just continue to deny and deny the truth... you have been brainwashed too much to realize the truth.I have already provided the proof for you... evolution has been disproven...I care nothing of what your opinion of me is... you can call me a "little-leaguer" all you want, because I'm a new poster here or whatever... and I don't really care... what matters is if you understand true science or not.Evolution is NOT science.
Did you observe evolution or the Big Bang happen? Is it recreatable?
NO! Thats all I need to know... it's not science, it's just a bunch of lies compiled together.Tell me... if "apes evolved to humans", why are there apes still left?Really... this is pretty sick... I just cannot believe what the world has come to... rejecting God and developing a bunch of lies to explain how the world was created.Thanks.

​

[This message has been edited by RvX, 06-07-2002]

I think I understand what Percy was getting at....and I thought I was in the little league...

quote:

---

Originally posted by RvX:
Ok, I'm really disgusted, I can't believe what the world has come to...

---

Nor can I. I had thought that with all the information available people would see that creationist is not science. I underestimated religion and its ability to cling to dogma.

quote:

---

Originally posted by RvX:

*No offense to anyone, just the truth*
It's mainly filled with a bunch of ignorant, insulting evolutionists who haven't even thought of how impossible evolution is and just continue to slag any newcomers... pssh, how nice of you...

---

Care to provide evidence that evolution is impossible? Maybe I should just give up, I just know that you are going to sidestep the question.

quote:

---

Originally posted by RvX:

There's too many things to quote and reply to here, and it's not going to get anywhere, because you evolutionists will just continue to deny and deny the truth... you have been brainwashed too much to realize the truth.

---

The pot calling the kettle black.

quote:

---

Originally posted by RvX:

I have already provided the proof for you... evolution has been disproven...

---

You have provided no 'proof' (that should read evidence). All you have done is assert that you are right and we are wrong. Should I hope for some evidence anytime soon?

quote:

---

Originally posted by RvX:

I care nothing of what your opinion of me is... you can call me a "little-leaguer" all you want, because I'm a new poster here or whatever... and I don't really care... what matters is if you understand true science or not.

---

How would you know what true science is since you clearly don't understand it?

quote:

---

Originally posted by RvX:

Evolution is NOT science.
Did you observe evolution or the Big Bang happen? Is it recreatable?
NO! Thats all I need to know... it's not science, it's just a bunch of lies compiled together.

---

Did you see God creating the universe? Is it recreateable? NO! Thats all I need to know...it's not science, it's just a bunch of lies compiled together.Do you see the flaws in your logic yet?

quote:

---

Originally posted by RvX:

Tell me... if "apes evolved to humans", why are there apes still left?

---

You really like your strawman. Humans are apes. All apes evolved from a common ancestor.

quote:

---

Originally posted by RvX:

Really... this is pretty sick... I just cannot believe what the world has come to... rejecting God and developing a bunch of lies to explain how the world was created.

---

I agree. This is sick. Ever since people rejected the true god Zeus and started believing those lies about the Father, Son and Holy Ghost the world has gone down the tubes.------------------
compmage

--Hopefully, this age of mutationalism will pass on, like the paradigm-fad that it really is (despite the emperor's new cloths).--Hey, evo's; RvX's logic is a bit comical, but his conscience is right, and you know it!--You evo's are 'played' by subconscious forces you don't understand: Like ‘frolic’, ‘research grants’, ‘arrogance’ and/or ‘power’ (even as YECs like myself are equally guilty of). Face it or defraud the public. All of us are guilty of scientifically theorizing the impossible, period! That’s why we ‘discuss’.--The Haitian Voodoo (a.k.a. Haitian Devil worship) may even logically replace this paradigm-fad, at least for some here, whose subtle motives are not actually 'science inquiry' (as I’m discovering), but ‘sodomy’ or ‘frolic’, as is becoming the Haitian Voodoo. Note, these Haitian Devil worshippers never believe in the ToE (A.K.A. mutationalism), just the Devil.--I hear a mutationalist scorn: human’s don’t have a ‘heart’, let alone a ‘soul’, ‘mind’, or ‘power’ because such and such aren’t measurable empirically? Go tell that to our own children (if we haven’t aborted them all)!--Someone here just stated that man’s APERCEPTIVE ‘mind’ and ‘affections’ evolved from slime! -- That’s fraud in all cultures but an evo’s, and its cursing our nation’s integrity. We indeed state the impossible when we state these 2 supernatural aperceptive phenomenons evolved. Hear him out. He’s right in his own conscience. Encourage his scheme. Have you ever converted a YEC to the ToE? Has a YEC ever converted an Evo? Conversions are rare. Both camps have innumerable serious gaps in their ‘science’ discussions. Why do we want to convert or sooth our own consciences anyway? (Hint: see ‘subconscious forces you don’t understand’, above)--If we ‘doctors’ (A.K.A., scorning idiots) continue to blow this RvX off, whose young heart is enlarged to engage our seared consciences, we really are sick, indeed! Some of us could descend back into that ‘talkorigins tomb’ where scornful evo-atheists are too condemning. I for one strongly respect this site and all its members, young and old. Judging from our unsympathetic jests, our IQ’s seem lower than RvX’s.

​

[This message has been edited by Philip, 06-07-2002]