Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8960 total)
248 online now:
DrJones*, kjsimons, Percy (Admin), RAZD (4 members, 244 visitors)
Newest Member: Mikee
Post Volume: Total: 869,835 Year: 1,583/23,288 Month: 1,583/1,851 Week: 223/484 Day: 41/105 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why Darwinism is wrong
Mr. Creationist
Inactive Member


Message 235 of 305 (226627)
07-27-2005 12:00 AM


Randomness, does it create?
Ok, the main reasons that I think that the Darwin model is wrong are this;

1. Mathematics has proved that evolution cannot happen

2. The fossil record does not at all show evolution

3. Humans have always been aware of the existance of the supernatural realm: miracles(only through the power of the Biblical God, not wicca or anything else) prophecy(words direct from God), ect.

I don't have time to say more right now, so, to be continued...


Replies to this message:
 Message 236 by futzman, posted 07-27-2005 12:31 AM Mr. Creationist has not yet responded
 Message 237 by Wounded King, posted 07-27-2005 5:02 AM Mr. Creationist has not yet responded
 Message 238 by Parasomnium, posted 07-27-2005 5:40 AM Mr. Creationist has responded

Mr. Creationist
Inactive Member


Message 239 of 305 (226756)
07-27-2005 12:15 PM
Reply to: Message 238 by Parasomnium
07-27-2005 5:40 AM


Re: Randomness, does it create?
Well, I think I might start a new thread then. But I don't have a ton of time to read alot of posts, and there are alot! Maybe I don't have a good understanding of the way evolution works, if I don't then tell me.

On to the randomness thing, the chances of a human evolving have been calculated to be 1 in 10 to the two millionth power! Yes, you heard right, that is a huge number. It is well known that any chance above 1 in 10 to the 42 will never happen(or so they say) but certainly the chance of every kind of creature evolving by randomness and natural selection is way above that. The odds of just one single protien needed for life evolving are also above zero, not by much, but they are above it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 238 by Parasomnium, posted 07-27-2005 5:40 AM Parasomnium has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 240 by PaulK, posted 07-27-2005 12:24 PM Mr. Creationist has not yet responded
 Message 241 by Wounded King, posted 07-27-2005 12:35 PM Mr. Creationist has not yet responded
 Message 243 by bobbins, posted 07-27-2005 1:27 PM Mr. Creationist has not yet responded
 Message 244 by AdminNosy, posted 07-27-2005 1:36 PM Mr. Creationist has not yet responded
 Message 245 by Arkansas Banana Boy, posted 07-27-2005 2:37 PM Mr. Creationist has not yet responded
 Message 248 by mark24, posted 07-27-2005 3:55 PM Mr. Creationist has not yet responded
 Message 249 by Parasomnium, posted 07-27-2005 4:25 PM Mr. Creationist has not yet responded

Mr. Creationist
Inactive Member


Message 253 of 305 (227224)
07-29-2005 12:43 AM


Ok, I'm supposed to back up those numbers, but I don't know exactly where I heard them, I know I have read or heard them at least two places. One might be the PhD. Carl Baugh( I think). I'm sorry I don't know exactly where I got those numbers.

Also, if evolution happend, why are there not trans forms that are alive today? As far as I know, there are no incomplete species in the fossil record, or alive today. How does evolutionary theory explain this?


Replies to this message:
 Message 254 by AdminNosy, posted 07-29-2005 1:07 AM Mr. Creationist has not yet responded
 Message 255 by Arkansas Banana Boy, posted 07-29-2005 1:11 AM Mr. Creationist has not yet responded
 Message 256 by Arkansas Banana Boy, posted 07-29-2005 1:14 AM Mr. Creationist has not yet responded
 Message 257 by Arkansas Banana Boy, posted 07-29-2005 1:24 AM Mr. Creationist has not yet responded
 Message 258 by mark24, posted 07-29-2005 3:36 AM Mr. Creationist has not yet responded

Mr. Creationist
Inactive Member


Message 259 of 305 (227256)
07-29-2005 7:44 AM


I'm sorry for my bad posts, I just didn't want to go searching through lots of other posts. I take back those big numbers that I brought up, and if I find where I read them, then I will tell you.

I'm done talking for now, cause I don't have time to do my research before I post, sorry.

This message has been edited by Mr. Creationist, 07-29-2005 07:45 AM


Replies to this message:
 Message 260 by CK, posted 07-29-2005 7:49 AM Mr. Creationist has not yet responded
 Message 261 by Mr. Creationist, posted 07-29-2005 7:57 AM Mr. Creationist has not yet responded
 Message 265 by randman, posted 07-29-2005 1:41 PM Mr. Creationist has not yet responded

Mr. Creationist
Inactive Member


Message 261 of 305 (227262)
07-29-2005 7:57 AM
Reply to: Message 259 by Mr. Creationist
07-29-2005 7:44 AM


No, I don't think we evolved, and I still think that creation has much better evidence for it than evolution. I'm appearantly not a good debater at the moment, you guys need a PhD that really knows his stuff(Kent Hovind, Carl baugh, Ken Ham, ect.), one of those guys will give you a run for your money. I am just unprepared for serious debates, and so am not likley to be back for a while(I'll be back however!).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 259 by Mr. Creationist, posted 07-29-2005 7:44 AM Mr. Creationist has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 262 by PaulK, posted 07-29-2005 8:02 AM Mr. Creationist has not yet responded
 Message 263 by mark24, posted 07-29-2005 9:46 AM Mr. Creationist has not yet responded
 Message 264 by Chiroptera, posted 07-29-2005 10:48 AM Mr. Creationist has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020