OLAADEGBU:

These "Darwinian bulldogs" are not interested in answering any questions if they were really sincere they would try to answer the ones they can and wait for a response but they would rather try to use diversionary tactics to gain attention.

I started this thread by throwing out a challenge to those who call themselves evolutionists and atheists regarding their theory of evolution, for them to convince us that it is based on a solid foundation and not on shaky grounds. Even though they accused me of ignorance of the evolution theory but the best they can do is to answer what they feel they can. Only wirinet attempted to answer the first question which was "Where did the space come from?" and his response was: "The answer is nobody really knows, and the question is really unknowable" and he went on to explain the big bang that came out of a "singularity"(post #13). He further admitted (in post #45) that they don't know how life started.

I was very suprised when you said that we evolutionists do not know how life started, so i had to go back and read the post #45, and there was no such assertions by me.

I know perfectly how life started on earth, It started from simple inorganic gasses like O2, N2, CO2 and NH3 combining to form the primordial soup, from which aminio acid formed, which went on to form proteins. It life started when a combination of amino acids was able to duplicate it self (the double Helix structure). This is just a simplistic summery. As i proposed earlier, if you pay me I will give you detailed lecture on the whole process.

I am impressed by your tenacity, on this subject. I believe you are constrained by your
1 . Lack of scientific knowledge
2. Age long belief system that you are afraid to break from

I encorage you to seek more knowledge and compare them to the divine assertions you have been taught. You will see the light someday

Bastage:

I don't care how much Huxley copies and pastes. I'm debating you not him.

Is it a matter of convenience that you can see my cut and paste and not that of huxley's?

Bastage:

There are many theories and much speculation. But I will give you my own theory.

Thanks for this sincere admission, that evolution and the big bang theories are theories and speculations and not scientific facts or laws.  There are hypothesis, theories and scientific facts or laws but the big bang theory will always remain a theory because it is illogical, irrational, unreasonable and unscientific.  This theory has been scientifically disproved, it is just like saying that a boeing 747 plane was a product of a hurricane hitting a scrap-yard.  There is no such thing as the Big bang theory.

Bastage:

The matter for the Big Bang came from a previous Universe. I believe that the Universe inflates and deflates, rather like a living, breathing organism. Continually expanding and then decreasing until it creates another Big Bang. We have evidence of it expanding and so I believe it is entirely logical to speculate that it will decrease at some time. Then there will be a Big Crunch and then another Big Bang. Therefore it wasn't original matter in the sense that your question means.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Crunch

The highlighted sentence is the evidence that evolution and the big bang theories are all a matter of faith, thus the evolutionary religious faith qualifies as a religion but the question is does the assumptions, presuppositions and beliefs have a solid foundation or are they based on shifting sands?  Evolution theory is based on materialism, it is the ideology that believes that there is no Creator God.  If we are to follow your theory that the present determines what happened in the past and therefore speculate that the universe was as a result of a previous big bang what you are saying is that the universe is infinite or eternal which contradicts the belief system of the evolutionists that says all things are materialistic and not eternal.

Bastage:

But that posits another question to 2. Was there a Universe right at the beginning that took that first exhalation and then inhalation? Original matter? That question is open to belief. It's possible that there never was a first Universe, never original matter, never a first breath - just infinite breathing or it's possible that God created that first Universe. That is not a Creationist theory. Merely a statement that God may have created the Universe back in time immemorial or that he created the infinite. It is not a Creationist advocation of the Earth and everyone on it being created 4000 years ago.

For your own purpose in debating, remember that I am not an atheist. I do believe in God. I am simply not a Creationist.

edit. The Big Bounce Theory probably describes my theory better.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bounce

Evolutionists don't believe in the supernatural neither do they believe in miracles but do they?  You have done well to admit that the part highlighted above that it is open to belief and I will support this with a quote from Paul Davies, who is a physicist and evolutionist, in The Edge of infinity,1995.  He wrote: "The [big bang] represents the instantaneous suspension of physical laws, the sudden abrupt flash of lawlessness that allowed something to come out of nothing.  It represents a true miracle . . ."   You can now see that evolution requires miracles but they do not require a miracle maker which qualifies it as a blind faith.

In the Discover magazine, Guth's Grand Guess , vol. 23, Apr. 2002, p.35.  "The universe burst into something from absolutely nothing - zero, nada.  And as it got bigger, it became filled with even more stuff that came from absolutely nowhere".  Joseph Silk (Ph.D.  Astronomy and professor of Astronomy at the University of Oxford), in The big bang, 2001, p.xv.  States that:  "It is only fair to say that we still have a theory without a beginning". At least he was fair enough to admit that evolutionist have no beginning for what they believe.  Sten Odenwald, (Ph.D. Astrophysics and Chief scientist with Raytheon STX Corp. at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Centre), in The Astronomy Cafe, 1998, p. 120.  " . . . astronomers have not the slightest evidence for the supposed quantum production of the universe out of a primordial nothingness."  You see, they had no clue from where the whole idea came from.  What do evolutionists mean by Quantum fluctuations?  Is that not another name for magic?  That there was nothing and then there was something.  I thought evolutionists don't believe in the supernatural, or in miracles, why the backroom admission that something can now come from nothing due to quantum fluctuations.  It is said that ex nihilo, nihil fit, that is, from nothing, nothing comes, how come you are now admitting that the material world came from nothing.

There can only be three possibilities of the origin of the universe:
1.  That the universe created itself;
2.  That the universe has always existed and;
3.  That the universe was created.

The universe cannot create itself based on the laws of science, it is not possible.  The second law of Thermodynamics teaches that the whole universe is losing its available energy for doing usable work, this means that the usable energy in this universe is wearing down, that molecules as a whole is slowing down.  And this means that if the universe was eternal we will be in what is called a virtual heat death which means that there will be no molecular movement.  Therefore, the universe cannot be eternal, it must have had a beginning which rules out the second option which I believe you are suggesting.

Based on science there can only be one possibility, which is the third option, the universe was created.  And this brings us to the solid foundation which is written in God's Word and in His creation.  The Bible in the book of Genesis says: "At the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."   The principle of certainty comes into play here.  Evolutionists may have some evidence as you have claimed but they tell fairytales around it as you have done by predicting what happened in the past due to what you see happen in the present, and it therefore qualifies as a religion because they don't know all the facts.  But Christianity is an evidence based faith, our faith is not a substitute for evidence but I believe it because I don't know all the facts.  The difference between a creationist and an evolutionist is that I know the One who knows it all and Who was there when He created all things.  I have a personal relationship with the One who knows it all and who is absolutely certain.  Now tell me which is the superior faith, evolution based on uncertainty or Christianity based on creation and absolute certainty?  Your guess is as good as mine.

If evolution is unable to explain the origin of matter and energy through naturalistic means, then it is a faith without a foundation.  Why should I accept evolution or the big bang theory when you cannot produce the evidence?  I already have a faith.  Tell me about your faith and I will tell you about my faith and by the way would you tell me what your faith has to offer me and I will tell you what my faith in Jesus Christ will offer you.

So therefore, it is logical, rational and reasonable to believe that God, not unknown magical events, created the universe.  QED

Olaadegbu is wasting his time. Athiests have their minds made up, please dont confuse them with facts.

@DavidDylan,
I know that their minds are already made up and their heads buried in the sand but they will have no choice than to face the facts sooner or later because evolutionary and the big bang theory is running out of fashion and the sooner they wake up and smell the coffee the better it would be for them.

Shalom.

huxley:


There is a big difference between the way I use cut&paste and the way you do. I paste article that I find interesting and want to share with members of NL. Rare do I use this as my line of debates and I don't use other people's articles as a means to fob off or avoid answering questions put to me.

Go take a look, all my threads soliciting debates are usually started off with my own words.

The only difference I see is the difference between half a dozen and six.  Somebody must have told you that if you live in a glass house you don't throw stones and if you sow to the wind you will reap the whirlwind, nowadays you reap the hurricane or the tornado  .  So before you accuse others of cut and pasting check your own backyard first.

OLAADEGBU:

Is it a matter of convenience that you can see my cut and paste and not that of huxley's?

Thanks for this sincere admission, that evolution and the big bang theories are theories and speculations and not scientific facts or laws.  There are hypothesis, theories and scientific facts or laws but the big bang theory will always remain a theory because it is illogical, irrational, unreasonable and unscientific.  This theory has been scientifically disproved, it is just like saying that a boeing 747 plane was a product of a hurricane hitting a scrap-yard.  There is no such thing as the Big bang theory.

The highlighted sentence is the evidence that evolution and the big bang theories are all a matter of faith, thus the evolutionary religious faith qualifies as a religion but the question is does the assumptions, presuppositions and beliefs have a solid foundation or are they based on shifting sands?  Evolution theory is based on materialism, it is the ideology that believes that there is no Creator God.  If we are to follow your theory that the present determines what happened in the past and therefore speculate that the universe was as a result of a previous big bang what you are saying is that the universe is infinite or eternal which contradicts the belief system of the evolutionists that says all things are materialistic and not eternal.

Evolutionists don't believe in the supernatural neither do they believe in miracles but do they?  You have done well to admit that the part highlighted above that it is open to belief and I will support this with a quote from Paul Davies, who is a physicist and evolutionist, in The Edge of infinity,1995.  He wrote: "The [big bang] represents the instantaneous suspension of physical laws, the sudden abrupt flash of lawlessness that allowed something to come out of nothing.  It represents a true miracle . . ."  You can now see that evolution requires miracles but they do not require a miracle maker which qualifies it as a blind faith.

In the Discover magazine, Guth's Grand Guess , vol. 23, Apr. 2002, p.35.  "The universe burst into something from absolutely nothing - zero, nada.  And as it got bigger, it became filled with even more stuff that came from absolutely nowhere".  Joseph Silk (Ph.D.  Astronomy and professor of Astronomy at the University of Oxford), in The big bang, 2001, p.xv.  States that:  "It is only fair to say that we still have a theory without a beginning". At least he was fair enough to admit that evolutionist have no beginning for what they believe.  Sten Odenwald, (Ph.D. Astrophysics and Chief scientist with Raytheon STX Corp. at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Centre), in The Astronomy Cafe, 1998, p. 120.  " . . . astronomers have not the slightest evidence for the supposed quantum production of the universe out of a primordial nothingness."  You see, they had no clue from where the whole idea came from.  What do evolutionists mean by Quantum fluctuations?  Is that not another name for magic?  That there was nothing and then there was something.  I thought evolutionists don't believe in the supernatural, or in miracles, why the backroom admission that something can now come from nothing due to quantum fluctuations.  It is said that ex nihilo, nihil fit, that is, from nothing, nothing comes, how come you are now admitting that the material world came from nothing.

There can only be three possibilities of the origin of the universe:
1.  That the universe created itself;
2.  That the universe has always existed and;
3.  That the universe was created.

The universe cannot create itself based on the laws of science, it is not possible.  The second law of Thermodynamics teaches that the whole universe is losing its available energy for doing usable work, this means that the usable energy in this universe is wearing down, that molecules as a whole is slowing down.  And this means that if the universe was eternal we will be in what is called a virtual heat death which means that there will be no molecular movement.  Therefore, the universe cannot be eternal, it must have had a beginning which rules out the second option which I believe you are suggesting.

Based on science there can only be one possibility, which is the third option, the universe was created.  And this brings us to the solid foundation which is written in God's Word and in His creation.  The Bible in the book of Genesis says: "At the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."  The principle of certainty comes into play here.  Evolutionists may have some evidence as you have claimed but they tell fairytales around it as you have done by predicting what happened in the past due to what you see happen in the present, and it therefore qualifies as a religion because they don't know all the facts.  But Christianity is an evidence based faith, our faith is not a substitute for evidence but I believe it because I don't know all the facts.  The difference between a creationist and an evolutionist is that I know the One who knows it all and Who was there when He created all things.  I have a personal relationship with the One who knows it all and who is absolutely certain.  Now tell me which is the superior faith, evolution based on uncertainty or Christianity based on creation and absolute certainty?  Your guess is as good as mine.

If evolution is unable to explain the origin of matter and energy through naturalistic means, then it is a faith without a foundation.  Why should I accept evolution or the big bang theory when you cannot produce the evidence?  I already have a faith.  Tell me about your faith and I will tell you about my faith and by the way would you tell me what your faith has to offer me and I will tell you what my faith in Jesus Christ will offer you.

So therefore, it is logical, rational and reasonable to believe that God, not unknown magical events, created the universe.  QED

If there is  a god who gave you a brain, then you are clearly not using you own, having lobotomised by religion.

First,  biological evolution  is NOT the same thing as the Big Bang Theory.  The Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection explains the diversity of life on earth.  It does NOT explain the origin of life NOR does it explain the state of the universe/cosmos.   If you critic TTE from any other standpoint other than insofar as it accounts for diversity of life, then you are NOT critiquing TTE but a straw man.

Can you show any reputed and established scientist who does say that evolution is NOT what I defined above. Most of the leading biological evolutionist are in fact theists - Dr Francis Collins,  Kenneth Miller,  Daniel Fairbanks, to name but a few.  

I did ask you a series of questions earlier on this thread, but as is typical of the dishonesty of creationists, you evaded them.  I ask again:

1)  Why are there no rabbit (or horses, or elephant) fossils in the Pre-cambrian?

2)  What is petroleum made from and how long does it take to make?


Big Bang is the theory that explains the expansion of the universe.  You can falsify BB in one second if you are able to demonstrate that the universe is static.  That is how easy it is.  Can you do that?   How would you explain Cosmic Microwave Background.


Your ignorance shines through like a beacon on a hill.  Looks like you have been accompanied on that hill by your friend  DavidDylan whose ignorance verges on the obsessional.  The world is really a dangerous place with such ignorant zealotry around.

wirinet:

I was very suprised when you said that we evolutionists do not know how life started, so i had to go back and read the post #45, and there was no such assertions by me.

I know perfectly how life started on earth, It started from simple inorganic gasses like O2, N2, CO2 and NH3 combining to form the primordial soup, from which aminio acid formed, which went on to form proteins. It life started when a combination of amino acids was able to duplicate it self (the double Helix structure). This is just a simplistic summery. As i proposed earlier, if you pay me I will give you detailed lecture on the whole process.

I am impressed by your tenacity, on this subject. I believe you are constrained by your
1 . Lack of scientific knowledge
2. Age long belief system that you are afraid to break from

I encorage you to seek more knowledge and compare them to the divine assertions you have been taught. You will see the light someday

I apologise if I misunderstood what you were insinuating in the quote highlighted below as meaning otherwise.  But then you are still wrong scientifically because your fellow evolutionists do not believe that life originated in the presence of oxygen and to make things worse they do not believe that life can originate without the presence of oxygen, which leaves them in a dilema as to how life originally came to be.

wirinet:

OLAADEGBU,

Honestly i do not know what you are trying to achieve, I do not even understand what your postulations are. You said Charles Darwin had no clue as to how life started and his students today still don't know where the information in the DNA came from, Which is a complete farse.

We (evolutionists) have a good idea of how life started and understand how the information in the DNA is stored, so much so that we can alter deliberately properties of an organism by altering the matching protein in its DNA strand. ( i hope you are not munching on Genetically modified crops right now)

If you want me to explain what DNA is, i would gladly do, but i doubt you will understand. You will only parrot ad infinitum the primitive man's creed of "Where did it come from or how did that start" until i say i do not know, then you will jump in and say all you people are wrong and stupid all along, because you and your likes have a special knowledge that all things are created and designed by God. So you are the intelligent ones, while we including charles Darwins are the fools for refusing to see reason.

The words highlighted above gives a clue on how your surmisation will end up as you had rightly predicted but there can only be two possible origins for life, and these are:

1.  Life evolved by natural processes as you have stated above; or
2.  Life was created by an intellectual source, who I believe is God, the uncreated Creator.

The first option comes from your evolutionary theory that believes the earth was formed about 4.6 billion years ago and after many million of years chemicals formed in a "primordial soup", and after many more million of years chemicals bonded together to form molecules and after millions of years molecules bonded together to make a living cell.  What a well thought out fairytale.  which means time and chance combined to form life.  That is, something exploded, formed a full pool of chemicals, and duala!! here you are.  The theory of the goo to zoo to you

They even tried to similulate the building blocks of life billions of years ago (just as they tried to do to the big bang machine that went Kaput recently) by the Miller experiment in the 1950's but what the textbooks did'nt tell you was that Miller did not use oxygen and that he got the wrong type of amino acids for life and that the whole process was not left to chance it benefitted from his wealth of scientific knowledge.

Miller left oxygen out of the experiment because he knew that in the presence of oxygen life cannot start.  He knew that oxygen was necessary to sustain life but is detrimental to the origin of life.  But there is overwhelming evidence that this planet always had free standing oxygen in the atmosphere.  The quote taken from The Mystery of Life's Origin, 1992, p.80. by Thaxton (Ph.D. Chemistry), Bradley (Ph.D. Materials Science), Olsen (Ph.D. Geochemistry), states that:  "The only trend in the recent literature is the suggestion of far more oxygen in the early atmosphere than anyone imagined".  Since life cannot start on land due to oxygen neither can it start in the ocean because of hydrolysis can you explain how life started?

There are about 2,000 different types of amino acids out there but only 20 types are used in life.  This means that life is very selective.  Amino acids come in two shapes:  the right handed amino acids and the left handed amino acids this is so because they are mirror images of each other.  Just as you have your right and left hands(fingers), they are similar but different.  There are no right handed amino acids in our bodies, in every amino acids and in every protein in your body you will only find the left handed type of amino acids, this fact has been left out of the textbooks in schools just because they want to promote this evolution propaganda and this is what I call the half truth and half false philosophy that has been used to deceive the masses.

The probability that life could have originated by chance

[list]
[li]The Law of Probability is 10^-50 (anything more than this would be considered mathematically impossible)

The probability of the origin of protein is:  10^-191

The probability of a cell is:  10^-40,000[/li]
[/list]

Let’s listen to what seasoned scientists say about probability and life:

- Bernard Lovell (Ph.D.  Astronomy), In the Centre of Immensities – “effectively zero”
- Francis Crick, Life Itself:  Its Origin and Nature – “can never have been synthesized at all, at any time”
- Robert Gange, Ph.D. (research in the field of cryophysics and information systems.), Origins and Destiny – “Zero”

What have they got to say on origin of Life:

Johnjoe McFadden (Evolutionist & Professor of Molecular Biology and Quantum Physics), Quantum Evolution, 200, pg. 85.

"The simplest living cells could not have arisen by chance.  Just like the eye, the proto-cell must have evolved from simpler ancestral cells, presumably by a process of “natural selection”.  But this is where the first big problem with the origin of life arises.  What were those simpler entities?"

Franklin M. Harold, Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Colo. State University, The Way of the Cell, 2001, pg, 235.
“The origin of life is also a stubborn problem, with no solution in sight…, ”

With all these answers from evolutionist scientists themselves we can then conclude that :  If evolution is unable to explain  the origin of life through naturalistic means, then it is without a foundation.  Now that we have an understanding of the foundation of evolution.  Why is evolution without a foundation? Because there is no natural process that can cause life to originate.

Why should I accept evolution when you cannot produce the evidence? 
I already have a faith.  Tell me about your faith and I will tell you about my faith.

Therefore, it is not only rational but also reasonable to believe that God, not unknown magical events, created life.  QED

The Bible which is the solid foundation declares:

“For by Him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones or dominions or principalities or powers:  all things were created by Him, and for him.”
                                                                                                                    Colossians 1:16

God created all life.  God created all things by Jesus Christ. Gen.1:1; Colossians1:15-18, 20; John 1:3; Ephesians 3:9; Heb.1:1-2; 11:3;

DavidDylan:

Olaadegbu is wasting his time. Athiests have their minds made up, please don't confuse them with facts.

what are the facts? snakes eating dust all their lives, or jonah surviving inside a snake for 3 days? what are the facts? heaven, hell or the biblical god? allah is the only true god show me as a matter of fact that he is not. . . . . .

OLAADEGBU:

The first option comes from your evolutionary theory that believes the earth was formed about 4.6 billion years ago and after many million of years chemicals formed in a "primordial soup", and after many more million of years chemicals bonded together to form molecules and after millions of years molecules bonded together to make a living cell. What a well thought out fairytale. which means time and chance combined to form life. That is, something exploded, formed a full pool of chemicals, and duala!! here you are. The theory of the goo to zoo to you

The Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection DOES NOT say this. Get this right, slowpoke.

huxley:


If there is  a god who gave you a brain, then you are clearly not using you own, having lobotomised by religion.

You have not learnt the lesson I taught you earlier that if you point an accusing finger at someone, guess where the remaining fingers are pointing.   You have forgotten that your evolutionary standpoint is a faith based worldview which has no scientific backing.  It is a religion that you have to believe in blindly despite the lack of foundational facts.  And the fact that you chose this religion of convenience because you want to "create God in your own image".  You reckon that if there is no law there will be no law giver and you proceeded to establish your own laws, but the dilema you have is that you have a conscience, a conscience is what enables you to instantaneously recognise right from wrong, and this conscience troubles you when you break your own law that you have formulated, then you will rewrite the law so as to silence your conscience, hence you have different theories or conjectures that have no scientific backing.   The fact that you do not appeal to the moral laws of God is natural to you since we are all born sinners that is why I am not surprised by the vile that comes out of your mouth, it is as natural to you as water is to fish.

We both have religious beliefs because we do not know all the facts but the difference of my faith is that I know the One who knows all the facts and my faith is an evidence based faith, because the One (The Uncreated, Eternal, Infinite Creator) was there at the beginning to observe what He had created and has left us a witness in His Word as well as in His creation.  So until you stop burying your head in the sand and begin to face reality you will continue to be prolonging the inevitable until the judgment day.  Therefore, my advise to you is to wake up and smell the coffee.

huxley:

First,  biological evolution  is NOT the same thing as the Big Bang Theory.  The Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection explains the diversity of life on earth.  It does NOT explain the origin of life NOR does it explain the state of the universe/cosmos.   If you critic TTE from any other standpoint other than insofar as it accounts for diversity of life, then you are NOT critiquing TTE but a straw man.

Here you go again with your diversionary tactics.  The questions at hand are what are the origins of the universe and of life respectively?  If evolution is not a fact or a theory, then what is it?  Based on the scientific method it qualifies as a model or a hypothesis.

Let us not divert the questions from the origins of both the universe and of life, if you can answer them well and good but don't come here to change the subject.  If you insist on your diversionary questions check the answers that I have given earlier in the post.

OLAADEGBU:

You have not learnt the lesson I taught you earlier that if you point an accusing finger at someone, guess where the remaining fingers are pointing.   You have forgotten that your evolutionary standpoint is a faith based worldview which has no scientific backing.  It is a religion that you have to belief in blindly despite the lack of foundational facts.  And the fact that you chose this religion of convenience because you want to "create God in your own image".  You reckon that if there is no law there is will be no law giver and you proceeded to establish your own laws but the dilema you have is that you have a conscience, a conscience is what enables you to instantaneously recognise right from wrong, and this conscience troubles you when you break your own law that you have formulated, then you will rewrite the law so as to silence your conscience, hence you have different theories or conjectures that have no scientific backing.   The fact that you do not appeal to the moral laws of God is natural to you since we are all born sinners that is why I am not surprised by the vile that comes out of your mouth, it is as natural to you as water is to fish.

We both have religious beliefs because we do not know all the facts but the difference of my faith is that I know the One who knows all the facts and my faith is an evidence based faith, because the One (The Uncreated, Eternal, Infinite Creator) was there at the beginning to observe what He had created and has left us a witness in His Word as well as in His creation.  So until you stop burying your head in the sand and begin to face reality you will continue to be prolonging the inevitable until the judgment day.  Therefore, my advise to you is to wake up and smell the coffee.

Here you go again with your diversionary tactics.  The questions at hand are what are the origins of the universe and of life respectively?

Macroevolution is the concept that over time one species can evolve into a new species (invertebrate into vertebrate, fish into amphibian, amphibian into reptile, reptile into bird,…) This has never been observed nor is there any evidence it ever happened, therefore it is not a fact or a theory. In order to have macroevolution take place there must be a mechanism that can add beneficial information to an organisms DNA. The mechanism commonly stated to perform this task is mutations. However, there are no known mutations that have been both beneficial and added new information to the DNA. This means macroevolution is an unverified hypothesis.

Microevolution is not evolution.  It is used in two different contexts.  First, it is often used to mean random errors in the DNA.  Random errors do not cause beneficial information to be added to an organisms DNA.  Second, it is often confused with natural selection and genetic variability.  Both of these work with existing information and do not add any new morphological structures necessary for evolution.

If evolution is not a fact or a theory, then what is it?  Based on the scientific method it qualifies as a model or a hypothesis.

Let us not divert the questions from the origins of both the universe and of life, if you can answer them well and good but don't come here to change the subject.  If you insist on your diversionary questions check the answers that I have given earlier in the post.

You are a VERY dishonest man, in spite of you proclaimed "superior" moral instinct resulting from your belief in god.  Myself and many others have advised you numerous times to adhere to some reasonable protocol of scholarly discuss, but you have not wished to.  You have been asked simple and direct question. And what do you do?   You just avoid them of cut&paste stuff from the internet as if that answers the questions.  Let me try again;



1)  Why are there no rabbit (or horses, or elephant) fossils in the Pre-cambrian?

2)  What is petroleum made from and how long does it take to make?

3)  What is the speed of light and how long does it take the light from the Andromeda Galaxy to reach the earth?

4)  What is Cosmic Microwave Background and how would you account for the measured expansion of the universe?

Are these questions too difficult for Christians to answer?

@ olaa,

please leave this thread to people who are ready to share their knowledge without any bias, havn gon tru ur posts, i concluded you are just another religion fanatic who is hell bent in selling wht he thinks is right no matter the opinion or facts from the other side.

huxley:


You are a VERY dishonest man, in spite of you proclaimed "superior" moral instinct resulting from your belief in god. Myself and many others have advised you numerous times to adhere to some reasonable protocol of scholarly discuss, but you have not wished to. You have been asked simple and direct question. And what do you do? You just avoid them of cut&paste stuff from the internet as if that answers the questions. Let me try again;

Ai tete mole ole mu oloko: Because the farm owner was not quick enough to catch the thief, the thief immediately accused the farm owner of theft. Since I posted the questions from the beginning of this thread you and other bandits have never attempted to answer anyone of them all you did was to divert the attention of the few who took the challenge to answer the questions as much as they could. Wirinet, m_nwankwo, bastage have all tried to answer some of the questions and lately the questions have been trimmed down to two simple ones, the origins of the universe and of life respectively. Instead of you to contribute what you know about the subjects all you kept on doing was answering your own questions which I have attempted to answer even though they were to divert away from the issues at hand and to accuse (like the accuser of the brethren) of dishonesty. You are the culprit of what you are accusing me of, because you refuse to see the light of day. I am quite aware of the fact that you are seeing through the evolutionary worldview and this makes it impossible for you to see through my worldview because the god of this world has blinded your eyes from seeing the glorious light of the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.

The honest thing for you to do is to answer the questions posted and if you cannot answer them try the last ones I asked recently otherwise allow those who want to participate to communicate while you post your questions elsewhere.

netsurf:

@ olaa,

please leave this thread to people who are ready to share their knowledge without any bias, havn gon tru ur posts, i concluded you are just another religion fanatic who is hell bent in selling wht he thinks is right no matter the opinion or facts from the other side.

Since you claimed to have gone through my posts, have you come across the questions posted? If you have nothing to contribute I suggest that you standby you might learn from those who are willing to share their points from another worldview different from that which you have been indoctrinated.

For your information, Science was actually developed by Christians who believed that God created an orderly universe. Many of the founders of the principle scientific fields, such as Bacon, Galileo, Kepler and Newton, were believers in a recently created earth. The idea that science cannot accept a creationist perspective is a denial of scientific history.

I will start from the father of the scientific method, Sir Francis Bacon (1561-1626). He was the lord chancellor of England and was considered to be the man primarily responsible for the formulation and establishment of the so called “Scientific Method” in science, stressing experimentation and induction from data rather than philosophical deduction in the tradition of Aristotle. Bacon’s writing was also credited with the leading to the founding of the Royal Society of London. Sir Bacon was a devout believer in the Bible. He wrote the following phrase: “There are two books laid before us to study, to prevent our falling into error; first, the volume of the scriptures, which reveal the will of God; then the volume of the creatures, which express His Power”.

Johannes Kepler (1571-1642). He discovered Scientific astronomy, three laws of planetary motion among others. He strongly believed that “the world of nature, the world of man, the world of God” all fit together. He reasoned that because the universe was designed by an intelligent Creator, it should function according to some logical pattern. To him the idea of a chaotic universe was inconsistent with God’s wisdom. Kepler’s law of planetary motion were his greatest contribution to science. These laws had an enormous impact on scientific thinking, providing the groundwork for Sir Isaac Newton’s later work on universal gravitation. He discovered a new star (supernova); he analysed how the human eye works; he made improvements to the telescope and made other contributions in the field of optics. He published accurate data on the positions of stars and planets which were of immense importance to navigators. As a mathematician, he discovered faster methods of calculation and investigated the volume of many solid bodies.

Do I need to mention Isaac Newton (1642-1727). Who was a co inventor of Calculus. He also formulated the laws of motion and gravity. He computed the nature of planetary orbits, invented the reflecting telescope, and made a number of discoveries in optics. Newton had a profound knowledge of, and faith in, the Bible. Time and space will prevent me from mentioning the likes of Carl Linnaeus, the Swedish botanist who developed the double Latin name system for taxonomic classification of plants and animals, he also believed in the Genesis account of creation.

Other notable scientists like the Dutch geologist Nicholaus Steno (1631-1686), who developed the basic principles of stratigraphy. Bible believing English scientists in the early 19th century when the idea of millions of years was developed, such as chemist Andrew Ure (1778-1857) and John Murray around (1786-1851), entomologist William Kirby (1759-1850), and geologist George Young (1777-1848). James Clerk Maxwell (1831-1879) discovered the four fundamental equations that light and all forms of electromagnetic radiation obey. Maxwell’s equations are what make radio transmissions possible. He was a deep student of Scripture and was firmly opposed to evolution. These and many other great scientists have believed the Bible as the infallible Word of God, and it was their Christian faith that was the driving motivation and intellectual foundation of their excellent scientific work.

I must not fail to mention the father of Microbiology, Louis Pasteur (1822-1895), who was an outstanding scientist and opponent of evolution. Each time you go to the refrigerator and take out a bottle of milk, you should be reminded of the work of the outstanding French scientist, Louis Pasteur. He discovered Bacteriology, Biochemistry, Sterilization, Immunization etc. He also proved the scientific law that life came from life, He said that: “Microscopic beings must come into the world from parents similar to themselves”. This was a kick in the teeth to the evolutionists that have been peddling the fallacy of spontaneous generation and they still teach this in textbooks and schools inspite of the fact that it is unscientific, illogical, irrational and unreasonable. Despite all the efforts of the evolutionary scientists, not one observable case of spontaneous generation has ever been found, hence it remains a theory and not a fact.

Today there are many other PhD scientists such as I have mentioned in my earlier posts and also in the link suggested who reject evolution and believe that God created in 6 days a few thousand years ago, just as recorded in Scriptures. Russ Humphreys (PhD Physics), has developed among many other things, a model to compute the present strength of planetary magnetic fields, which enabled him to accurately predict the fields strengths of the outer planets. He was able to make these predictions precisely because he started from the principles of Scriptures.

John Baumgardner (PhD Geophysics and biblical creationist), has a sophisticated computer model of Catastrophic plate tectonics, which was reported in the journal Nature; the assumptions for this model are based on the global flood recorded in the book of Genesis. A biblical creationist Dr. Raymond V. Damadian, developed the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan that has benefited a lot of people. Georgia Purdon (PhD Molecular Genetics) and Andrew Snelling (PhD Geology) both biblical creationists and authors in Answers in Genesis. They certainly understand their fields and are yet convinced that they do not support evolutionary biology and geology but rather confirm biblical creation.

Jason Lisle (PhD Astrophysics), He made a number of discoveries about the nature of near-surface solar flows, including the detection of a never-before-seen polar alignment of super granules, as well as patterns indicative of giant overturning cells. He said that it was because a logical God created and ordered the universe that made him and other creation scientists expect to be able to understand aspects of that universe through logic, careful observation and experimentation.

The very basis for scientific research is biblical creation. This is not to say that noncreationists cannot be scientists, but in a way an evolutionist is not being consistent when they do science. The big bang supporters claim the universe is a random chance event and yet they study it as if it were logical and orderly. The evolutionist is thus, forced to borrow certain creationist principles in order to do science. The universe is logical and orderly because its Creator is logical and has imposed order on the universe. God created our minds and gave us the ability and curiosity to study the universe. We can also trust that the universe will obey the same physics tomorrow as it does today because God is consistent. This why science is possible. On the contrary, if the universe is just an accidental product of a big bang, why should it be orderly? Why should there be laws of nature if there is no law giver? If our brains are the by products of random chance, why should we trust that their conclusions are accurate? But if our minds have been designed, and if the universe has been constructed by God, as the Bible teaches, then of course we should be able to study nature. Science is possible because the Bible is true.

For more information on what constitutes science and how it has always confirmed the Bible's account check the weblink below:


http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/ee/what-is-science

William Provine's quote sums up all the modern evolutionary biology.  "Let me summarize my views on what modern evolutionary biology tells us loud and clear . . .  There are no gods, no purpose, no goal-directed forces of any kind."  
William Provine(Professor, Cornell University), Origins Research, Vol.16:1/2(1994),p.9, quoted in Technical Journal, vol.10:1(1996),p.22.

This shows that the foundation of the religion of evolutionary theory is based on materialism, and thereby it is the ideology that there is no creator God.  This is so because they want to counter Christian beliefs and to escape from accountability to a creator God, they reckon that if there is no law there will be no law giver that they will be accountable to, so they thereby go on to form their own theories that has no scientific backing and this explains why their theory has remained a theory, conjecture or hypothesis and have not been able to be made into a scientific law because it is unworkable, irrational, unreasonable, illogical and unscientific.

God who has all the answers because He was there to observe has given us the answers not only in creation but in His Holy Word, The Bible.  The answers as to who created, what was created, how it was created, when it was created and how long it took for Him to create, and these you can see below:

1.  Who created?------------God
2.  What was created?  ----All things
3.  How was it created?--- By His Power
4.  When was it created?—In the beginning
5.  How long did it take to
    Create?------------------- 6 days

Some top and highly qualified Hebrew scolars, who are called lexigraphers wrote in the most widely recognised Hebrew lexicons and dictionaries, published in the 20th century says that the creation days written in the book of Genesis are literal days.

Below is a partial list of scientists who believe in the Bible's account of creation as is recorded in the Bible and through their professional fields have come to the scientific conclusion that confirms the Bible's account:

Danny Faulkner         Ph.D.  Astronomy
John Byl                     Ph.D.  Astronomy
Tom Greene               Ph.D.  Astronomy
James Dire                 Ph.D.  Astrophysics
Dave Harrison            Ph.D. Astrophysics
Steven Boyd               Ph.D. Hebraic and Cognitive Studies
Floyd Nolen Jones     Th.D., Ph.D.  Author of Chronology of the Old Testament
Herb Hirt                    Ph.D.  Biblical Exposition
Robert Cole                Ph.D.  Semitic languages
Brown-Driver-Briggs Lexicon
Georgia Purdon          Ph.D. Molecular Genetics
Duane Gish                Ph.D. Biochemistry
David Menton            Ph.D. Cell Biology
Donald Chittick          Ph.D.  Physical Chemistry
Tom Greene              Ph.D.  Astronomy
Jason Lisle                Ph.D.  Astrophysics
Russell Humphreys   Ph.D  Physics
Don DeYoung            Ph.D.  Physics
Terry Mortenson       Ph.D. History of Geology
John baumgardner   Ph.D. Geophysics
Bob Compton            Ph.D. Physiology, DVM
Andy McIntosh         Ph.D.  Combustion Theory
John Johnson           Ph.D. Mathematics
Tommy Mitchel          M.D.
Andrew Snelling       Ph.D. Geology
Emil Silvestre           Ph.D. Geology
Esther Su                 Ph.D. Biochemistry
David DeWitt           Ph.D. Neuroscience

And above all is the One who knows it all with absolute certainty and has recorded it with His own caligraphy:

God Almighty  The Ten Commandments(Exodus 20:11;God created all things by Jesus Christ. Gen.1:1; Colossians1:15-18,20; John 1:3; Ephesians 3:9; Heb.1:1-2; 11:3)

"For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it." Exodus 20:11

“For by Him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones or dominions or principalities or powers:  all things were created by Him, and for him.”  Colossians 1:16

Which is the strong foundation that makes our faith based on rock solid evidence.

Question #3.

Considering the fact that from the simplest to the most complex organisms contains the DNA molecule.

Where did the information in the DNA come from?

OLAADEGBU:

Ai tete mole ole mu oloko: Because the farm owner was not quick enough to catch the thief, the thief immediately accused the farm owner of theft. Since I posted the questions from the beginning of this thread you and other bandits have never attempted to answer anyone of them all you did was to divert the attention of the few who took the challenge to answer the questions as much as they could. Wirinet, m_nwankwo, bastage have all tried to answer some of the questions and lately the questions have been trimmed down to two simple ones, the origins of the universe and of life respectively. Instead of you to contribute what you know about the subjects all you kept on doing was answering your own questions which I have attempted to answer even though they were to divert away from the issues at hand and to accuse (like the accuser of the brethren) of dishonesty. You are the culprit of what you are accusing me of, because you refuse to see the light of day. I am quite aware of the fact that you are seeing through the evolutionary worldview and this makes it impossible for you to see through my worldview because the god of this world has blinded your eyes from seeing the glorious light of the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.

The honest thing for you to do is to answer the questions posted and if you cannot answer them try the last ones I asked recently otherwise allow those who want to participate to communicate while you post your questions elsewhere.

That is precisely what I have been trying to do all along (that is answer your question) by trying to get some focus and baseline to the discussion.  If we do not establish this baseline, how could we every agree about anything.

I did ask the following questions, which you have refused to address.  You do not have to give detailed scientific answers, but I am trying to establish whether you understand and adhere to the general premise of the scientific method.

1)  Why are there no rabbit (or horses, or elephant) fossils in the Pre-cambrian?

2)  What is petroleum made from and how long does it take to make?

3)  What is the speed of light and how long does it take the light from the Andromeda Galaxy to reach the earth?

4)  What is Cosmic Microwave Background and how would you account for the measured expansion of the universe?

The questions you asked are essentially scientific question, or at least can be explicated in scientific terms.  What if I were to add address you question, not in scientific terms, but in terms of the metaphysics and mythologies of the Piraha people of the Amazon, of the Bamileke people of Cameroon, of the Igbo people of Nigeria?  Which of these mythologies or metaphysics have the tools to correctly address your questions?


Let me take another approach.  Apart  from questions relating to the origin of life, evolution of life and Big Bang Cosmology, are there any other disciplines of science with which you fundamentally disagree?

1)  Do you disagree with the Theory of General Relativity?

2)  Do you disagree with the Atomic Theory?

3)  Do you disgree with the Germ Theory Disease?

4)  Do you disagree with the Theory of Plate Tectonics?

I could go on, but you get my drift.  I would like to know which of the primary scientific theories in existence you fundamentally disagree with and why you do.

We have establsihed that your favourite method of argumentation and debate is to cut & paste, as in the below.

OLAADEGBU:

William Provine's quote sums up all the modern evolutionary biology.  "Let me summarize my views on what modern evolutionary biology tells us loud and clear . . .  There are no gods, no purpose, no goal-directed forces of any kind." 
William Provine(Professor, Cornell University), Origins Research, Vol.16:1/2(1994),p.9, quoted in Technical Journal, vol.10:1(1996),p.22.

This shows that the foundation of the religion of evolutionary theory is based on materialism, and thereby it is the ideology that there is no creator God.  This is so because they want to counter Christian beliefs and to escape from accountability to a creator God, they reckon that if there is no law there will be no law giver that they will be accountable to, so they thereby go on to form their own theories that has no scientific backing and this explains why their theory has remained a theory, conjecture or hypothesis and have not been able to be made into a scientific law because it is unworkable, irrational, unreasonable, illogical and unscientific.

God who has all the answers because He was there to observe has given us the answers not only in creation but in His Holy Word, The Bible.  The answers as to who created, what was created, how it was created, when it was created and how long it took for Him to create, and these you can see below:

1.  Who created?------------God
2.  What was created?  ----All things
3.  How was it created?--- By His Power
4.  When was it created?—In the beginning
5.  How long did it take to
     Create?------------------- 6 days

Some top and highly qualified Hebrew scolars, who are called lexigraphers wrote in the most widely recognised Hebrew lexicons and dictionaries, published in the 20th century says that the creation days written in the book of Genesis are literal days.

Below is a partial list of scientists who believe in the Bible's account of creation as is recorded in the Bible and through their professional fields have come to the scientific conclusion that confirms the Bible's account:

Danny Faulkner         Ph.D.  Astronomy
John Byl                     Ph.D.  Astronomy
Tom Greene               Ph.D.  Astronomy
James Dire                 Ph.D.  Astrophysics
Dave Harrison            Ph.D. Astrophysics
Steven Boyd               Ph.D. Hebraic and Cognitive Studies
Floyd Nolen Jones     Th.D., Ph.D.  Author of Chronology of the Old Testament
Herb Hirt                    Ph.D.  Biblical Exposition
Robert Cole                Ph.D.  Semitic languages
Brown-Driver-Briggs Lexicon
Georgia Purdon          Ph.D. Molecular Genetics
Duane Gish                Ph.D. Biochemistry
David Menton            Ph.D. Cell Biology
Donald Chittick          Ph.D.  Physical Chemistry
Tom Greene              Ph.D.  Astronomy
Jason Lisle                Ph.D.  Astrophysics
Russell Humphreys   Ph.D  Physics
Don DeYoung            Ph.D.  Physics
Terry Mortenson       Ph.D. History of Geology
John baumgardner   Ph.D. Geophysics
Bob Compton            Ph.D. Physiology, DVM
Andy McIntosh         Ph.D.  Combustion Theory
John Johnson           Ph.D. Mathematics
Tommy Mitchel          M.D.
Andrew Snelling       Ph.D. Geology
Emil Silvestre           Ph.D. Geology
Esther Su                 Ph.D. Biochemistry
David DeWitt           Ph.D. Neuroscience

And above all is the One who knows it all with absolute certainty and has recorded it with His own caligraphy:

God Almighty   The Ten Commandments(Exodus 20:11;God created all things by Jesus Christ. Gen.1:1; Colossians1:15-18,20; John 1:3; Ephesians 3:9; Heb.1:1-2; 11:3)

"For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it." Exodus 20:11

“For by Him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones or dominions or principalities or powers:  all things were created by Him, and for him.”  Colossians 1:16

Which is the strong foundation that makes our faith based on rock solid evidence.

Why do you think that by presenting people who hold the same views as you represents an argument.  Can you present the scientific arguments from these people?  CAn you present the scientific arguments of the following people, rather than just splashing their names about?

John baumgardner   Ph.D. Geophysics
Andy McIntosh         Ph.D.  Combustion Theory
John Johnson           Ph.D. Mathematics
Danny Faulkner         Ph.D.  Astronomy
John Byl                     Ph.D.  Astronomy

Win $10,000 for Scientific Proof of Evolution.

This is a challenge to all those who passionately believe in biological evolution as facts to win a little bit of money for your troubles. Click on the weblinks for details and to see the debates on both sides.  No more excuses this time around :

The Argument For Creation: "Just as a building is absolute proof there was a builder (no building ever built itself), creation is absolute proof there is a Creator. The Bible says that God made all things then caused every animal to bring forth "after its own kind" (dogs don't have kittens, fish don't turn into sheep, etc., no matter how long they are left). The Bible also says, 'Whoever looks upon a woman to lust after her has committed adultery already with her in his heart,' and that no liar or thief will inherit the Kingdom of God, warning 'All liars will have their part in the lake of fire.' However, we are told how to be forgiven: 'God commended His love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.' Because of the death and resurrection of Jesus, all who repent and trust in Him receive the gift of everlasting life. Creationists maintain that the Bible proves its credibility because it is filled with scientific and medical facts written hundreds and even thousands of years before man discovered them, showing divine inspiration, and therefore confirming its warning of Hell and offer of Heaven." www.IntelligentDesignVersusEvolution.com

The Argument For Evolution: "Biological evolution, simply put, is descent with modification. This definition encompasses small-scale evolution (changes in gene frequency in a population from one generation to the next) and large-scale evolution (the descent of different species from a common ancestor over many generations). Evolution helps us to understand the history of life. The central idea of biological evolution is that all life on Earth shares a common ancestor, just as you and your cousins share a common grandmother. Through the process of descent with modification, the common ancestor of life on Earth gave rise to the fantastic diversity that we see documented in the fossil record and around us today. Evolution means that we're all distant cousins: humans and oak trees, hummingbirds and whales. Frogs, birds, rabbits and lizards all have different forelimbs, reflecting their different lifestyles. But those different forelimbs all share the same set of bones - the humerus, the radius, and the ulna." http://evolution.berkeley.edu To enter the $10,000 contest go to: www.IntelligentDesignVersusEvolution.com

The opportunity for you evolutionists and atheists to make your statement and settle this long overdue debate.  This is a free entry to win $10,000 for the scientific proof of Evolution.  Guys this is your chance to make a couple of nikels if you are really serious about your claims.

http://www.intelligentdesignversusevolution.com/

OLAADEGBU:

The opportunity for you evolutionists and atheists to make your statement and settle this long overdue debate.  This is a free entry to win $10,000 for the scientic proof of Evolution.  Guys this is your chance to make a couple of nikels if you are really serious about your claims.

http://www.intelligentdesignversusevolution.com/

Money is not the arbiter of truth. If you think truth is on your side, why don't you answer the questions I asked before instead of hding behind such scam. These are the questions again:

1) Why are there no rabbit (or horses, or elephant) fossils in the Pre-cambrian?

2) What is petroleum made from and how long does it take to make?

3) What is the speed of light and how long does it take the light from the Andromeda Galaxy to reach the earth?

4) What is Cosmic Microwave Background and how would you account for the measured expansion of the universe?



I guess you will NOT as religion has roasted the couple brain cells you had.

OLAADEGBU:

The opportunity for you evolutionists and atheists to make your statement and settle this long overdue debate. This is a free entry to win $10,000 for the scientic proof of Evolution. Guys this is your chance to make a couple of nikels if you are really serious about your claims.

http://www.intelligentdesignversusevolution.com/

I will give 1 million $$$ to any christian that can display how the Jacob's genetic engneering model works. I want to have a white baby so I hung a picture of a white baby while having sex with my girlfriend both she and I all kept our eyes on the picture through out the entire process but she just give birth to a black child, any christain that can demonstrate how that process of genetic engineering works will get 1 million dollars in cash.

huxley:

Money is not the arbiter of truth. If you think truth is on your side, why don't you answer the questions I asked before instead of hding behind such scam. These are the questions again:

1) Why are there no rabbit (or horses, or elephant) fossils in the Pre-cambrian?

2) What is petroleum made from and how long does it take to make?

3) What is the speed of light and how long does it take the light from the Andromeda Galaxy to reach the earth?

4) What is Cosmic Microwave Background and how would you account for the measured expansion of the universe?



I guess you will NOT as religion has roasted the couple brain cells you had.

Money is not the arbiter of truth? I am sure if you could prove beyond any doubt that your theories and conjectures were true you or any of the Darwinian bulldogs would have jumped to the offer, talk is cheap. Why don't you or any of your propaganists throw the same challenge at creationists and see who will win the debate?

Your hypocrisy knows no bounds as your (evolutionists and atheists) tactics of diverting issues or challenges that you have no answer to by asking questions that are designed to distract or divert instead of answering them. The opening post has thrown myriads of questions for you to answer, up till now you have failed to answer a single one of them. If you want answers to your questions (even though I have answered some of them) open another thread and ask your questions. This thread was opened for you guys to answer the challenges posed to you if you are sure of your religious beliefs which is in the evolution, which you need blind faith to be able to justify your claims. I even made it easier for you by asking one question at a time, only a few sincere evolutionists such as Bastage and wirinet made attempts to answer them but you would rather beat about the bush by asking your own diverting and dodgy questions.

bindex:

I will give 1 million $$$ to any christian that can display how the Jacob's genetic engneering model works. I want to have a white baby so I hung a picture of a white baby while having sex with my girlfriend both she and I all kept our eyes on the picture through out the entire process but she just give birth to a black child, any christain that can demonstrate how that process of genetic engineering works will get 1 million dollars in cash.

Talk is cheap. Anyone can talk and not many of you have any moral responsibility to admit the truth. Again take your question to another thread and come back here to give your candid opinion about what you think would be the answer to the challenges posed on this thread, and if you feel you are really sure about yourself don't just blow hot air take the bold step and win some money for yourself instead of showing your frustration about the God you do not believe exists. I may not know all the answers but I know the One who is certain about all the answers, and I can communicate with Him if I am not sure about any question. But you have no hope since you don't believe that He exists so all your questions would remain a mystery and that explains all the frustrations and confusion that you display on this forum.

OLAADEGBU:

Talk is cheap. Anyone can talk and not many of you have any moral responsibility to admit the truth. Again take your question to another thread and come back here to give your candid opinion about what you think would be the answer to the challenges posed on this thread, and if you feel you are really sure about yourself don't just blow hot air take the bold step and win some money for yourself instead of showing your frustration about the God you do not believe exists. I may not know all the answers but I know the One who is certain about all the answers, and I can communicate with Him if I am not sure about any question. But you have no hope since you don't believe that He exists so all your questions would remain a mystery and that explains all the frustrations and confusion that you display on this forum.

Bla bla bla bla bla bla bla, go ahead and tell your imaginary God who you believe knows everything to explain the Jacob genetic engineering model to you, come and demonstrate it and win I million dollars. Its as simple and that.

bindex:

Bla bla bla bla bla bla bla, go ahead and tell your imaginary God who you believe knows everything to explain the Jacob genetic engineering model to you, come and demonstrate it and win I million dollars. Its as simple and that.

Since you believe that my God is imaginary why then do want me to ask Him to give answers to your questions? The similiarity between us is that we don't know all the facts, hence we have to have faith. I have faith in the existence of God and If I have any question in life I go to Him and seek His face diligently and He will answer me. But you have faith that God does not exists, you only have faith in what you can see, hence your humanistic and naturalistic religion; take your questions to these people and if you come stuck, its your choice. I believe in the One who is absolutely certain about the answers to our questions, therefore, my faith is based on absolute certainty. My faith is based on rock solid evidences, which is the Word of God and His creation. His Spirit is in me to guide me into the right path. That is the difference between faith based on solid evidence and blind faith which is a myth.

OLAADEGBU:

Since you believe that my God is imaginary why then do want me to ask Him to give answers to your questions? The similiarity between us is that we don't know all the facts, hence we have to have faith. I have faith in the existence of God and If I have any question in life I go to Him and seek His face diligently and He will answer me. But you have faith that God does not exists, you only have faith in what you can see, hence your humanistic and naturalistic religion; take your questions to these people and if you come stuck, its your choice. I believe in the One who is absolutely certain about the answers to our questions, therefore, my faith is based on absolute certainty. My faith is based on rock solid evidences, which is the Word of God and His creation. His Spirit is in me to guide me into the right path. That is the difference between faith based on solid evidence and blind faith which is a myth.

Bla bla bla bla bla demonstrate the Jocob's genetic enginerring model and win 1 million dollars. By the way why dont we have people running faster than horses, manna falling from heaven, people surviving inside a fish for 3 days, talking donkeys, talking snakes, people dividing rivers into two, people feeding 5000 people with 5 fish and 2 loafs of bread and all the other outlandish lies in the bible happening in todays world any more? I am yet to see the bibleGod kill off the enemies of Christain the way he used to in the bible.

Having seen that most evolutionists wouldn't, couldn't or hadn't answered the questions about how the universe and particularly life on earth came to be but has mainly tried to divert from the topic by the use of extrapolation, bluffing, ad hominems and asking irrelevant questions and even refusing to rise to the challenge of the prize of $10,000 on a debate to proof evolution has the answers I will have to proceed to give not only bible answers, as I have already given but I will now present answers from scientists that have studied the facts of God's Word and world to explain God's created world.

Creationists Develop Models Like these . . .

Starting with the facts of God’s Word and world, creation scientists, that are Christians fashion models to know God and see His truth.

In the beginning, the everlasting God spoke both time and the universe into existence.  At first, the earth was without form and unfilled.  Over three days, God gave form to the sky, sea, and land.  Then, on the following three days, God filled these voids with abundant reminders of His glory.

Included in the original material of creation was water, out of which God created the earth.  This unique planet had just the right mix of chemicals and the right mass to hold a life-sustaining atmosphere.

God then raised a landmass, similar to Rodinia.  As the water rushed off the just-created continent, they scoured the surface and dumped trillions of tons of dirt at the edges of the continent, up to thirty miles deep.

God created all sorts of bacteria to convert chemicals into useable forms and make them available to plants and animals.  He stationed these bacteria in every corner of the globe, from the deepest parts of the crust to the sea and sky.

God then filled the land with billions of energy factories, known as plants.  From the first day of their existence, these plants were fully functional.  In each plant hundreds of chemical processes ran in perfect symphony, harnessing the sun’s energy to provide food for living things.

A bewildering variety of plants made up niches all over the earth.  In the DNA of each “kind” of plant was a rich storehouse of instructions to produce a variety of offspring.  For example, within the first grasses was information to produce wheat, rye, rice, bamboo and fescue.  By God’s command, the earth was bursting with ripe fruit and grains, ready to satisfy the needs of living things.

On day Four, God began the process of “filling” the universe.  By His command a vast variety of astronomical objects burst into being, including comets, moons, planets and stars.  Each object was unique, beautiful and fully functional.

God placed the sun at just the right distance from earth to keep our planet warm.  He set a moon in earth’s orbit with the right mass and distance for tides to cleanse the seas.  As the earth spins, the sun and stars rise with clockwork precision, marking the passage of time for living things.

At last, God was ready to introduce life into creation.  He filled the ocean, sky, and land.  Despite their differences, living things share many things in common – chemicals, genetic codes, and cell structures – to help them coexist in the same world.  Such design shows the hand of a wise Designer.

Like plants, animals were divided into “kinds” that can generate incredible variety.  For example, the ancestors of the camel kind produced offspring as diverse as Ilamas, alpacas, and one-humped and two humped camels.

No living thing was alone.  God placed them all into an astonishing array of fully functional communities, probably more diverse, beautiful and integrated than anything we see today.  Whether T. rex tromping through a cycad forest or trilobites swimming in shallow seas, each exotic environment reminds us how much living things depend on each other-and the Creator.

God capped off this week by making humans in His likeness and giving us dominion over the earth.  By the end, a beautiful tapestry of forms, colours, sounds and tastes filled the earth.  Communities lived in harmony, and all was “very good”.  The stage was set for God’s most glorious work.

Dr. Andrew Snelling holds a PhD in geology from the University of Sydney and has worked as a consultant research geologist to organizations in both Australia and the U.S.  Author of numerous scientific articles.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n4/created-world

OLAADEGBU:

Creationists Develop Models Like these . . .

Starting with the facts of God’s Word and world, creation scientists, that are Christians fashion models to know God and see His truth.

In the beginning, the everlasting God spoke both time and the universe into existence. At first, the earth was without form and unfilled. Over three days, God gave form to the sky, sea, and land. Then, on the following three days, God filled these voids with abundant reminders of His glory.

Included in the original material of creation was water, out of which God created the earth. This unique planet had just the right mix of chemicals and the right mass to hold a life-sustaining atmosphere.

God then raised a landmass, similar to Rodinia. As the water rushed off the just-created continent, they scoured the surface and dumped trillions of tons of dirt at the edges of the continent, up to thirty miles deep.

God created all sorts of bacteria to convert chemicals into useable forms and make them available to plants and animals. He stationed these bacteria in every corner of the globe, from the deepest parts of the crust to the sea and sky.

God then filled the land with billions of energy factories, known as plants. From the first day of their existence, these plants were fully functional. In each plant hundreds of chemical processes ran in perfect symphony, harnessing the sun’s energy to provide food for living things.

A bewildering variety of plants made up niches all over the earth. In the DNA of each “kind” of plant was a rich storehouse of instructions to produce a variety of offspring. For example, within the first grasses was information to produce wheat, rye, rice, bamboo and fescue. By God’s command, the earth was bursting with ripe fruit and grains, ready to satisfy the needs of living things.

On day Four, God began the process of “filling” the universe. By His command a vast variety of astronomical objects burst into being, including comets, moons, planets and stars. Each object was unique, beautiful and fully functional.

God placed the sun at just the right distance from earth to keep our planet warm. He set a moon in earth’s orbit with the right mass and distance for tides to cleanse the seas. As the earth spins, the sun and stars rise with clockwork precision, marking the passage of time for living things.

At last, God was ready to introduce life into creation. He filled the ocean, sky, and land. Despite their differences, living things share many things in common – chemicals, genetic codes, and cell structures – to help them coexist in the same world. Such design shows the hand of a wise Designer.

Like plants, animals were divided into “kinds” that can generate incredible variety. For example, the ancestors of the camel kind produced offspring as diverse as Ilamas, alpacas, and one-humped and two humped camels.

No living thing was alone. God placed them all into an astonishing array of fully functional communities, probably more diverse, beautiful and integrated than anything we see today. Whether T. rex tromping through a cycad forest or trilobites swimming in shallow seas, each exotic environment reminds us how much living things depend on each other-and the Creator.

God capped off this week by making humans in His likeness and giving us dominion over the earth. By the end, a beautiful tapestry of forms, colours, sounds and tastes filled the earth. Communities lived in harmony, and all was “very good”. The set was set for God’s most glorious work.

Dr. Andrew Snelling holds a PhD in geology from the University of Sydney and has worked as a consultant research geologist to organizations in both Australia and the U.S. Author of numerous scientific articles.

This is not what the two creation stories in genesis say at all but the writers own point of view.

By the way did the bibleGod really create all animals as vegetarians? Lions, tigers, hyenas, polar bears,

Gen 1:30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein [there is] life, [I have given] every green herb for meat: and it was so.

At last, God was ready to introduce life into creation.  He filled the ocean, sky, and land.  Despite their differences, living things share many things in common – chemicals, genetic codes, and cell structures – to help them coexist in the same world.  Such design shows the hand of a wise Designer.

There is nothing like genetic code in the bible if the writers knew about genetics they wouldn't have written about the outlandish Jacobs genetic engineering model.

God placed the sun at just the right distance from earth to keep our planet warm.  He set a moon in earth’s orbit with the right mass and distance for tides to cleanse the seas.  As the earth spins, the sun and stars rise with clockwork precision, marking the passage of time for living things.

The same bible erroneously said that the earth is the center of the universe. Just just goes to show you that the people that wrote it have no knowledge of science at all.

God then filled the land with billions of energy factories, known as plants.  From the first day of their existence, these plants were fully functional.  In each plant hundreds of chemical processes ran in perfect symphony, harnessing the sun’s energy to provide food for living things

When did the bibleGod create the plants? was it on the 3rd day of creation or after creation(in the 2nd version of the creation story). The writers seem to be confused about it all.

ike plants, animals were divided into “kinds” that can generate incredible variety.  For example, the ancestors of the camel kind produced offspring as diverse as Ilamas, alpacas, and one-humped and two humped camels.

Did the bible God really create animals? Do the writers of the bible know anything about other animals that were not found in their region? do you believe that the bibleGod really created lions and made them to feed on defenseless animals like the antelope? why must an antelope suffer excruciating pains in the jaws of a lion? what kind of merciful God will create such a system or behavior of eating? Why must an eagle feed on an innocent mice? why must a baby buffalo suffer excruciating pain in the mouth of a tiger? what kind of merciful God will create animals that must kill other animals before they eat? what must a snake kill and eat its food alive, did the bibleGod create that system or eating habit too? did the bibleGod really create hawks to feed in defenseless chicks? is a bears like better than that of a fish? why must a bear kill a fish and eat it alive? did the bibleGod really create all animals to live and feed like that? remember he gave all animals green plants as meat in genesis.

God capped off this week by making humans in His likeness and giving us dominion over the earth.  By the end, a beautiful tapestry of forms, colours, sounds and tastes filled the earth.  C[b]ommunities lived in harmony, and all was “very good”.[/b]  The set was set for God’s most glorious work

Like the old testament communities that were promised other peoples land by the bibleGod right? thats  if you take away all the slavery and unprovoked wars that the bibleGod urged his "chosen people" to fight against other nations because they refuse to worship him. Yeah that must be very good to a God that accepts human sacrifice, tells people to stone to death somebody for picking stone on a sabbath, and kills people just because they looked into a man made wooden ark that he was hiding inside. By the way what is a God that is supposed to be everywhere doing inside a man made ark?

I know that this is what you guys specialise at doing, spoiling and destroying any good invention.  Satan has not been able to create anything good, he has always been destroying what has been created for good.  Jesus said "The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy", that is what Satan specialises in doing and no doubt his children will definitely follow their master.  Jesus also said "I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly".  God created this universe and this earth but Satan has come to sow lies and half truths like he did to Adam and Eve and he is still doing it to those who have permitted him to use them today. 

Jesus said again to those who have been deceived that "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. he was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it."  Satan has sold the lies of evolution and big bang theories to his children who have swallowed it hook, line and sinker and since they have refused to believe the truth, God has given them over to a reprobate mind because they did not like to retain God in their knowledge.

Since you have refused to obey and believe the truth of the Word of God refusing to reason or even answer questions that have been put forward, you can go on and attack the truth as you have been doing I do not have to waste precious pearls on the swines but know for sure that you are going to be accountable to God.  Every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, it is up to you where you prefer to do it, in heaven or hell, the choice is yours.

Dr. Hovind has a standing offer to pay $250,000 to anyone who can prove by scientific analysis that evolution - as it applies to the origin of the species - is a scientific fact.  That is, giving examples of it that are observable, demonstrable and repeatable.  This offer has been on the table for several years now - why have the champions of evolution not claimed the prize and silenced us ignorant "funnymentalists"?  The gauntlet has been thrown and that camp ought to put up or shut up!

OLAADEGBU:

Questions for Evolutionists
by Dr. Kent Hovind

The test of any theory is whether or not it provides answers to basic questions.  Some well-meaning but misguided people think evolution is a reasonable theory to explain man’s questions about the universe.  Evolution is not a good theory—it is just a pagan religion masquerading as science.

1. Where did the space for the universe come from?

2. Where did matter come from?

3. Where did the laws of the universe come from (gravity, inertia, etc.)?

4. How did matter get so perfectly organized?

5. Where did the energy come from to do all the organizing?

6. When, where, why, and how did life come from dead matter?

7. When, where, why, and how did life learn to reproduce itself?

8. With what did the first cell capable of sexual reproduction reproduce?

9. Why would any plant or animal want to reproduce more of its kind since this would only make more mouths to feed and decrease the chances of survival? (Does the individual have a drive to survive, or the species? How do you explain this?)

10. How can mutations (recombining of the genetic code) create any new, improved varieties? (Recombining English letters will never produce Chinese books.)

11. Is it possible that similarities in design between different animals prove a common Creator instead of a common ancestor?

12. Natural selection only works with the genetic information available and tends only to keep a species stable.  How would you explain the increasing complexity in the genetic code that must have occurred if evolution were true?

13. When, where, why, and how did:

a) Single-celled plants become multicelled? (Where are the two- and threecelled intermediates?)
b) Single-celled animals evolve?
c) Fish change to amphibians?
d) Amphibians change to reptiles?
e) Reptiles change to birds? (The lungs, bones, eyes, reproductive organs, heart, method of locomotion, body covering, etc., are all very different!) How did the intermediate forms live?

14. When, where, why, how, and from what did:
a) Whales evolve? b) Sea horses evolve? c) Bats evolve? d) Eyes evolve? e) Ears evolve? f) Hair, skin, feathers, scales, nails, claws, etc., evolve?

15. Which evolved first (how, and how long, did it work without the others)

a) The digestive system, the food to be digested, the appetite, the ability to find and eat the food, the digestive juices, or the body’s resistance to its own digestive juice (stomach, intestines, etc.)?
b) The drive to reproduce or the ability to reproduce?
c) The lungs, the mucus lining to protect them, the throat, or the perfect mixture of gases to be breathed into the lungs?
d) DNA or RNA to carry the DNA message to cell parts?
e) The termite or the flagella in its intestines that actually digest the cellulose?
f) The plants or the insects that live on and pollinate the plants?
g) The bones, ligaments, tendons, blood supply, or muscles to move the bones?
h) The nervous system, repair system, or hormone system?
i) The immune system or the need for it?

http://www.cuttingedge.org/articles/p253.htm