Customer Discussions > religion discussion forum

Evidence for a Creator - the support will surprise you...


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 226-250 of 8728 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on 3 Jun 2011 20:47:34 BDT
I love that cartoon ;-)

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Jun 2011 20:57:08 BDT
Yep. Always worth another look.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Jun 2011 21:21:10 BDT
AJ Murray says:
Anita,

Evolution happens. Get over it.

'http://myxo.css.msu.edu/ecoli/overview.html'

-"I now respond:..."

Please do.

-"...Yeah, in a pigs eye! What is your point on the "Bacteria" experiment?"

It's an example of '3. Laboratory observation of evolution' of which you said there was none. Lenski's long term Escherichia coli experiment was to observe populations of bacteria as they reproduced. Every 75 days the populations are saved, by freezing. So we have a genetic record of every step taken as these bacteria have evolved. Its been running now for 23 years.

Posted on 3 Jun 2011 21:24:57 BDT
Anita Meyer says:
I've read numerous books that stress evolution. They don't sit well with me. All they do is serve to protect us from the painful job of thinking.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Jun 2011 21:26:51 BDT
AJ Murray says:
Oh Anita..!

-"Please find me a true transitional/intermediate form?"

Look at your parents. They are the transition from your grandparents to you. If you have children, you are the transition from your parents to your children. You are a link. In a chain. Called evolution.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Jun 2011 21:27:11 BDT
Anita Meyer says:
AJ Murray said: Anita, Evolution happens. Get over it.
'http://myxo.css.msu.edu/ecoli/overview.html'
It's an example of '3. Laboratory observation of evolution' of which you said there was none. Lenski's long term Escherichia coli experiment was to observe populations of bacteria as they reproduced. Every 75 days the populations are saved, by freezing. So we have a genetic record of every step taken as these bacteria have evolved. Its been running now for 23 years.

I now respond: Yes, and its still bacteria isnt it! :)

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Jun 2011 21:28:06 BDT
AJ Murray says:
..i don't think that you are in any danger of pain Anita.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Jun 2011 21:29:59 BDT
Anita Meyer says:
AJ Murray says:
Oh Anita..!

-"Please find me a true transitional/intermediate form?"

Look at your parents. They are the transition from your grandparents to you. If you have children, you are the transition from your parents to your children. You are a link. In a chain. Called evolution.

I now respond: Hmmm, the last time I checked they were/are still human and so am I. Humans have always been human, and your point is?

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Jun 2011 21:37:43 BDT
Anita Meyer says:
John Rawlinson said: Anita, That isn't what you said however. I agree the Universe is moving to a state of high entropy, but with regard to the Earth, entropy is not increasing because it is receiving energy from the Sun (which is increasing in entropy).

I now respond: Is it really increasing in entropy, or is it an illusion?

Life on earth is a temporary blip in the process of universal down winding. It is an ILLUSION that things in life are "increasing" and can temporarily produce small areas of increased energy or organization. 

Let me touch base on a implication that the evolutionist throw forth about the law of "entropy and thermodynamics". The evolutionists say this law is quickly coming to an end because we witness examples of natural order from disorder constantly occurring in every time it snows, whereupon billions upon billions of beautiful examples of "reverse entropy" spring into existence and are blown about by the wind which are highly structured crystalline patterns of simple molecules and each one unique.  Additionally, salt crystals and deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is another molecular form of crystal even more complex than that of water crystallizing into ice. The evolutionists even make the case of water running upstream, metabolism, growth, digestion, condensation, and also using the example of a seed and an embryo as reverse entropy.

In addition, they use the example that energy is being transferred from one location to another and conclude that overall, entropy must increase and this energy transfer can reverse "local entropy" without any violation of thermodynamic principles whatsoever. However, these types of things such as "growth" is not an example of improvement or defeating entropy. This is because everything that's needed for the entire life of an organism is present in the genes. Growth is not an improvement of any sort since it requires outside fuel, thus the provider undergoes entropy.

So lets get this straight! What the laws of entropy and thermodynamics prove is that evolution is absurdly impossible because it claims that we have evolved progressively. We are not evolving, we are actually de-volving! The very notion opposites what evolution says. Evolution is in the position of assuming that random mutations somehow reverse the tendency of destruction inherent in the 2nd law as well as the mutations themselves, but they do not! Something just does not make sense here... how can evolutionists believe that the very same processes that have been observed only to cause decay, death, and destruction caused NOTHING to create something, and then that something to make itself come alive and then to evolve into something more complex as a human?
Your reply to Anita Meyer's post:
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
 

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Jun 2011 21:41:24 BDT
"They don't sit well with me"

Clearly, but as they say - the truth hurts sometimes. I take it from that that you haven't read it then. The way you repeatedly show a complete lack of understanding of what evolution says (whether or not you agree with it), tells me that either:

1) You haven't read any of it at all
2) You don't understand it
3) You are willfully misinterpretting it
4) All of the above

Posted on 3 Jun 2011 21:41:38 BDT
Charlieost says:
Oh dear Anita. I read your comments, I read the comments of those who respond and I can't help thinking back to one afternoon a few years ago on Anglesey when a Jehovas Witness friend of mine told me that she was bringing a senior member of the local clergy to set me right in my thinking because she did not feel able to do so since she was new to it and surely I would believe if given the facts.
To my surprise it was a woman and when I questioned this (knowing that all senior members are men) it turned out that she was a Witness from birth and had volunteered for the task.
So I asked this and I asked that and she dived into her Bible to supply answers until I asked her to put down the Bible and tell me what she thought.
To the continued questioning she started looking quite disturbed and her hands kept twitching in the direction on the book. There seemed to be nothing else she could reference.
So I wonder how many hundreds of thousands of books there are to support evolution and how many (all based on this same one) in support of creationism.
Most of us have grown up or some might say evolved since the middle ages Anita. Some of us that is.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Jun 2011 21:42:43 BDT
Last edited by the author on 3 Jun 2011 22:50:29 BDT
Anita,

I know that this has been said a number of times now, but you *really* need to learn about evolution if you're going to write about it.

You say that your parents are still human. Well of course they are. Evolution happens in tiny stages and over large timescales*. Speciation occurs when groups of the same species are separated first physically and then over time. If you looked at the two groups at the branching point of speciation, they would both still be the same. It's only over time that they go in different evolutionary directions until they reach and go beyond the point where they can no longer interbreed. Thereafter, where once there was one species, now there are two.

Why Evolution is True. Buy it. Read it.

* For organisms with relatively slow reproductive cycles. Those with fast reproductive turnaround can evolve quickly. This is why Lenski's experiment could yield such amazing results within a human lifespan.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Jun 2011 21:42:53 BDT
"If you have children"

From her publisher biog, she has two, and I have serious concerns for their education.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Jun 2011 21:44:51 BDT
Pumpkin Head says:
Anita

"I've read numerous books that stress evolution. They don't sit well with me."

Whether evolution sits well with you or not makes no difference to its validity as an explanation as to how life develops. I don't like cooked carrots, but avoiding them doesn't make them disappear.

I think you've got to the stage where you feel you can't concede to anything if it isn't in the bible, which is a pity. There are scientists who are christian, hindu, sikh or whatever. They have no problem seeing science as an endeavour to further our knowledge, yet have a faith that is relevant to other areas of their lives. Trying to shoehorn one into the other at all costs is to blind yourself as to how the universe works.

Posted on 3 Jun 2011 21:50:42 BDT
Pumpkin Head says:
Anita

I know you don't think evolution is true. Can you provide the definition *you* use to describe evolution, because your conception of it in your posts has no bearing on the term as used by scientists.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Jun 2011 21:54:09 BDT
Anita,

Increasing entropy is decreasing order - you haven't even grasped that much have you? In a closed system (i.e. one that is not receiving energy (e.g. the universe) will move from a state of order to disorder. However, as Sam and I pointed out to you, localised decrease in entropy (increase in order) can occur (the Earth receiving energy from the Sun).

What you have said here makes no sense - I repeat, get a basic science education before you try to use science to support your ridiculous ideas.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Jun 2011 23:03:36 BDT
HotFXMan says:
Drivel, cr4p, utter twaddle . Etc. Etc.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Jun 2011 23:07:31 BDT
HotFXMan says:
The ignorance you parade is shameful. You should be embarrassed at yourself.

In reply to an earlier post on 4 Jun 2011 00:57:14 BDT
From Oz says:
John,

Respectfully, you are way too polite ... religion is a blight of our neurological function, and there is currently no cure, one cannot reason with a disease.

In reply to an earlier post on 4 Jun 2011 08:39:03 BDT
Thanks (I think), but I doubt Anita would agree with you. I (and many of the others posting here) sparred with her on another thread a couple of months ago - she eventually said we all being too nasty (or something like that) and dropped off for a while (but not before saying a prayer for us first).

In reply to an earlier post on 4 Jun 2011 14:52:56 BDT
Isobel Ayres says:
"Charles Darwin . . . married his cousin and reared children with weak immunity symptoms. We can clearly see here that Darwin's denial of G-d had exposed his children to hereditary sickness"

You really do know absolutely nothing about what you are talking about, do you? Marrying cousins was common and accepted, and carried out by everyone (including the very religious). Darwin's marrying his cousin in no way leads to us being able to 'clearly see that [his] denial of G-d had exposed his children to hereditary sickness'. Darwin's opinion regarding god had nothing whatsoever to do with his marrying his cousin; his marrying his cousin was a product of the (religious) society in which he lived.

In reply to an earlier post on 4 Jun 2011 15:56:08 BDT
Anita,

" The Bible tells us that trees and plants were created before ocean life to witness to us that they did not come about from any kind of evolutionary process and that they were implicitly created by the real author of the Bible (G-d)."

How were these trees and plants pollinated then? Must be by the wind. There were no insects or animals according to your version. How then do you account for trees and plants that are now exclusively pollinated by insects or animals? They must have evolved to do so or God made them sometime after the original creation?
Please explain this as it doesn't make sense even with your theory unless the plants/trees adapted as well as the insects and animals to use each other.

In reply to an earlier post on 4 Jun 2011 16:23:28 BDT
Isobel,

I hadn't spotted that little gem - Anita has to be one one the most stupid people I have come across - how does this sort of ad hominem attack help her argument; completely barmy.

In reply to an earlier post on 4 Jun 2011 17:08:40 BDT
Anita Meyer says:
Why is it always the same oppressing people posting, and mind you imbibed with hatred.

I've had personal emails come to me form people on the Amazon forum and they told me that they flat out refuse to post here anymore on account of people like you guys. So they rather read what I have to post and converse with me through personal email. That it really a shame guys!

John Rawlinson said: Anita, Interesting that you now bring up criminality and atheism. We can both come up with examples of religious and non-religious criminals- that's going to get us no where. Dahmer was a psychopath - I've no doubt he would have been a psychopath regardless of his religiosity. I could of course cite Jonestown, the Inquisition, Catholic Priest child abuse scandal et al. An interesting statistic on atheism in US Federal prisons: Only 0.2% of the prison population is atheist (compared with 10-15% of the US population). http://www.freethoughtpedia.com/wiki/Percentage_of_atheists
There are some interesting statistics on http://hubpages.com/hub/Religion-Atheism-and-Crime regarding correlation between criminality in the US by state and in secular countries. Of course, there may well be other factors such as education, poverty etc (it would then beg the question of are there correlation factors between those factors and religiosity). Anyway, I think you're on dodgy ground trying to link atheism with criminality (doesn't usually stop you though). Can't wait for your response on this one ;-)

I now respond: John my field of study is Criminology. One of the objectives in Criminology is to understand human psychology on the criminal level, and to analyze why people commit crimes. I've had one-on-one experiences in this field and I will tell you that almost in every instance it was because of the downfall of religion and religious values and morals. This can also include religious people who fall short of truly understanding what scripture teaches. However all people are tempted since we constantly live in a world of sin and evil that runs rampant.

The Bible also tells us this. 1 John 5:19 - We know that we are children of G-d, and that the whole world is under the control of the evil one.

In reply to an earlier post on 4 Jun 2011 17:09:33 BDT
Anita Meyer says:
John Rawlinson said: Anita, Increasing entropy is decreasing order - you haven't even grasped that much have you? In a closed system (i.e. one that is not receiving energy (e.g. the universe) will move from a state of order to disorder. However, as Sam and I pointed out to you, localised decrease in entropy (increase in order) can occur (the Earth receiving energy from the Sun). What you have said here makes no sense - I repeat, get a basic science education before you try to use science to support your ridiculous ideas.

I now respond: Is that a conclusion or simply the place where you got tired of thinking? :(
‹ Previous 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... 350 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the religion discussion forum

Discussion Replies Latest Post
Announcement
Important Announcement from Amazon
151 25 Mar 2014
Is this the most pointless discussion on the forum? 383 8 minutes ago
bring more fun to your posts instead of the same stuff over and over 670 18 minutes ago
Nobody born gay --mygenes.co.nz (Harvard backs up this webpage) 706 36 minutes ago
Women Bishops; A new era for the Church? 15 1 hour ago
The evidence for God is overwhelming, those who perish misinterpret it 5253 3 hours ago
Richard Dawkins has auto biography to promote 419 4 hours ago
religion and the world cup 915 6 hours ago
Where and how do you seek God? Or are you an idol worshiper? 39 6 hours ago
SEX: Why are you guys so obessessed about it? 25 6 hours ago
What is the nature of 'Forgiveness'? 85 8 hours ago
A Challenge to Atheists: What is your Coherent View or Vision of Reality... without Almighty God? (2) 674 19 hours ago
 

This discussion

Discussion in:  religion discussion forum
Participants:  170
Total posts:  8728
Initial post:  29 May 2011
Latest post:  31 May 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 12 customers

Search Customer Discussions