I've become a new born Christian; evolution is lies - Political Forum

Santa_Claus · #1 (**permalink**) 03-05-2008, 12:31 PM

And I've known for 3 years now that evolution is lies but only had the guts to tell a small few but now I'm going to let everyone I know, know that its all lies with no scientific basis. Read all the evidence and decide for yourself. I post this because I want the truth to get out and don't want any of you to go to Hell. Jesus died on the cross to give us the gift of eternal life so you would not have to go to Hell. Thats not something to take lightly. And if you go to Hell, you do so by our own choice. God gave us free will, the right to choose him or reject him. The choice is yours my friend. Here the is evidence totally proving evolution to be the fraud that it is
Top Evidences Against the Theory of Evolution

George Berkely · #2 (**permalink**) 03-05-2008, 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Santa_Claus

And I've known for 3 years now that evolution is lies but only had the guts to tell a small few but now I'm going to let everyone I know, know that its all lies with no scientific basis. Read all the evidence and decide for yourself. I post this because I want the truth to get out and don't want any of you to go to Hell. Jesus died on the cross to give us the gift of eternal life so you would not have to go to Hell. Thats not something to take lightly. And if you go to Hell, you do so by our own choice. God gave us free will, the right to choose him or reject him. The choice is yours my friend. Here the is evidence totally proving evolution to be the fraud that it is
Top Evidences Against the Theory of Evolution

Thank you for your concern, from one primate to another have a good day

W.E.B. Du Bois · #3 (**permalink**) 03-05-2008, 12:40 PM

Evolution is not a fraud, creationism is. If you look at fossils, you can see a steady progression from fish to amphibian to reptile to bird to man. Those are just facts.

You should go to the New York Museum of Natural History sometime. They have a great exhibit on the different kinds of upright bipeds that have existed in the planet's history.

Santa_Claus · #4 (**permalink**) 03-05-2008, 12:53 PM

Evolution is lies, broad on by fraud and public education. Heres just a sample of one of the many reasons its a fraud

Quote:

EVIDENCE #1

There are no transitional links and intermediate forms in either the fossil record or the modern world. Therefore, there is no actual evidence that evolution has occurred either in the past or the present.

Absolutely no transitional forms either in the fossil record or in modern animal and plant life have been found. All appear fully formed and complete. The fossil record amply supplies us with representation of almost all species of animals and plants but none of the supposed links of plant to animal, fish to amphibian, amphibian to reptile, or reptile to birds and mammals are represented nor any transitional forms at all. There are essentially the same gaps between all the basic kinds in the fossil record as exists in plant and animal life today. There are literally a host of missing links in the fossil record and the modern world.

1. "There is no evidence in the fossil record of one kind of creature becoming another kind. No transitional links or intermediate forms between various kinds of creatures have ever been found." For example, "the evolutionist claims that it took perhaps fifty million years for a fish to evolve into an amphibian. But, again, there are no transitional forms. For example, not a single fossil with part fins...part feet has been found. And this is true between every major plant and animal kind." ([22], p.19)
2. "Nowhere do we see animals with partially evolved legs, eyes, brains, or various other tissues, organs, and biological structures." ([22], p.19-20)
3. "If continuous evolution is a universal law of nature, as the evolutionist claims, then there should be an abundance of evidences of continuity and transition between all the kinds of organisms involved in the process, both in the present world and in the fossil record. Instead we find great gaps between all the basic kinds, and essentially the same gaps in the fossil record that exist in the modern world." ([18], p.34)
4. There are no links of plant to animal, fish to amphibian, amphibian to reptile, reptile to birds and mammals. There are no links whatsoever.
5. "All of the present orders, classes, and phyla appear quite suddenly in the fossil record, without indications of the evolving lines from which they developed. The same is largely true even for most families and genera. There are literally an innumerable host of `missing links' in the record." ([18] , p.33)
6. "There is simply no evidence of partially evolved animals or plants in the fossil record to indicate that evolution has occurred in the past, and certainly no evidence of partially evolved animals and plants existing today to indicate that evolution is occurring at the present." ([22], p.20)
7. "...the outstanding characteristics of the fossil record is the absence of evidence for evolution." ([11], p.50)
8. If there were links then they would have been found since the fossil record is "...quite ample to represent the true state of the ancient world. Most individual species of fossil plants and animals have been collected in considerable numbers, but the hypothetical intermediate species have never been represented at all!" ([18], p.33)
9. Darwin stated, "Why, if species have descended from other species by insensibly fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms? Why is not all nature in confusion instead of the species being, as we see them, well defined?" ([11], p.46)
10. Darwin admitted that the number of transitional links "must have been conceivably great." The fact that there are none prompted him to conclude that this fact is "the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory."
11. "The occasional suggested examples of missing links (such as the famous archaeopteryx - supposedly linking the birds and reptiles) can usually be recognized on closer study to represent merely another type of one of the basic kinds it supposedly links (the archaeopteryx was a true bird, by any reasonable definition, with feathers and warm blood)." ([18], p.33-34)
12. "Even if a creature shared characteristics belonging to two separate groups, however, this would not necessarily make it a transitional link as long as each of the characteristics themselves is complete and not in the process of transition from one type of structure or function into another type of structure or function." ([22], p.25)
13. "Because of the lack of evidence for gradual evolution in the fossil record, more and more evolutionists are adopting a new theory of evolution known as macroevolution. The theory of macroevolution teaches that animals and plants changed suddenly from one kind to another without going through any gradual or transitional process."
14. Other evolutionists claim that the links are missing only because the changes are so small that they are not noticed. The problem here is that they are assuming that at every point in the evolution process the being would appear as complete or whole. Actually, they would appear as in transition as when a house is being built.
15. "The point to remember...is that the fossil problem for Darwinism is getting worse all the time." ([11], p.57)

W.E.B. Du Bois · #5 (**permalink**) 03-05-2008, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Santa_Claus

Evolution is lies, broad on by fraud and public education. Heres just a sample of one of the many reasons its a fraud

No, creationism is lies created by religious people with no scientific background and a religious agenda. There's no reason to take the word of a preacher over a scientist on the issue of science. The mere suggestion is absurd. The stuff you listed has as much credibility as the usual 9/11, Illuminati, Skull & Bones, Area 51 conspiracy theories.

W.E.B. Du Bois · #6 (**permalink**) 03-05-2008, 04:19 PM

Look, I found a website that talks about the Illuminati, therefore it MUST be true.

Thirst for Justice — The Illuminati

Quote:

A one world government

In the final phases of the conspiracy, the one world government is to consist of a key dictator - the head of the United Nations, the Council on Foreign Relations (the Illuminati group in the U.S.), a few billionaires, the Communists, and scientists who have proven their devotion to the great conspiracy. All others are to be integrated into a vast conglomeration of monopolized humanity, becoming total slaves of the conspiracy.

In the United States, immediately after World War I, the Illuminati set up what they called the Council on Foreign Relations, commonly referred to as the CFR. This CFR is actually the Illuminati now operating in the U.S. Its hierarchy, the mastermind control of the CFR, to a very great extent, are descendants of the original Illuminati conspirators, even though many of them have changed their names to conceal this fact.

There is a similar establishment of the Illuminati in England, operating under the name of the British Institute of International Affairs. There are similar secret Illuminati organizations in France, Germany, and other nations operating under different names. All of these organizations, including the CFR, continuously set up numerous subsidiary or front organizations that are infiltrated into every phase of the various nations affairs. But at all times, the operation of these organizations were and are masterminded and controlled by the Illuminati.

Myron F.agan

Zero · #7 (**permalink**) 03-05-2008, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by W.E.B. Du Bois

Look, I found a website that talks about the Illuminati, therefore it MUST be true.

Thirst for Justice — The Illuminati

id believe that over creationism

Kazikli Bey · #8 (**permalink**) 03-05-2008, 04:47 PM

I think this comes under the whole 'Micro evolution has been proven but macro evolution has not' (but it is a pretty solid theory). I think the main reason for this is that it is hard to replicate macro evolution because it takes an extremely long time and is a long process.

Caltex · #9 (**permalink**) 03-05-2008, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kazikli Bey

I think this comes under the whole 'Micro evolution has been proven but macro evolution has not' (but it is a pretty solid theory). I think the main reason for this is that it is hard to replicate macro evolution because it takes an extremely long time and is a long process.

It is hard to see macro evolution in higher organisms because of the massive time scales, but we see it in lower orders of life where evolution is much faster, such as bacteria, and virus's.

I believe that combined with fossil evidence, is more than conclusive.

Slartibartfas · #10 (**permalink**) 03-05-2008, 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kazikli Bey

I think this comes under the whole 'Micro evolution has been proven but macro evolution has not' (but it is a pretty solid theory). I think the main reason for this is that it is hard to replicate macro evolution because it takes an extremely long time and is a long process.

As far as I have read, also major cases of macro evolution have been reconstructed as well and with the new fascinating of molecular biology it is possible to compare different DNAs, comparing them to each other and setting them into an evolutional relation to each other.

Btw, do you know this nice mouse trap example of the Intelligent design guys? They say the mouse trap has only a few parts it is made of, but constructed in such a way that no matter which part of it you take out, it won't work anymore. So it can't have evolved, only been designed.

And you know the counter argument? Its that if you take out one part, it can still be useful, for something entire else. In terms of the trap for example as tie pin or paper holder. Of course there exist proven examples of biology where something equivalent happened just.