zIFBoards - Free Forum Hosting
zIFBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community.

Learn More · Sign-up for Free
Welcome to Haven Of Wiidom. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Name:   Password:


Pages: (10) [1] 2 3 ... Last » ( Go to first unread post )

 Serious Debate Topic, Debate here
Judge Death
Posted: Apr 21 2009, 08:54 PM


Busy with other things


Group: Members
Posts: 731
Member No.: 243
Joined: 3-April 09



I decided to open it up here. I'm laying... half my cards on the table, and there are a few up my sleeve.

Before getting into the debate, I would like to quote Professor D.M.S. Watson:
QUOTE
Evolution is a theory universally accepted not because it can be proven by logically coherent evidence to be true, but because the only alternative, special creation, is clearly incredible

and also like to correct anyone who says God used evolution.
If there is a God, as described in my Bible, the following is true:
When Adam and Eve were in the garden, they ate of the tree, and since they sinned, everyone after them will sin, and because they sinned, they will die.
So: From man came death

If evolution is true, as told in the textbooks:
A tiny microbe started us all, but he wasn't as mighty as the generations that came before him, so the weak had to die off. And with all the weak dying off, eventually, came man.
So: From death came man

There is a great difference between "Evolution" and "Adaptation."
Evolution= Going from a rock, to a single-celled being, to a fish, to a frog, to an ape, to a man.
Adaptation= The atmosphere having less oxygen, so man's body learns to deal with it, and use less air.

If you want an illustration of adaption (also known as micro-evolution); Take a man who lives near ground level (+/- 200') and see how far he can run. Then have him go up a mountain, a high mountain where the air is thinner, and see how far he can run. You'll find the distance is much shorter and he is heavily exhausted. But, anyone living there can usually run as far as the man originally came from. They have used 'adaption' to live. And animals can be bred to adapt to the job the job their owner requires of them (all dogs today have been selectively bred to adapt to the job that is needed of them.) This paragraph is about micro-evolution which we see every day.

One commonly given "evidence" for evolution is "Darwin's finches". It is said that these 13 birds evolved wider beaks to be able to crack the harder nuts that come about in drought season (year) (with thinner shelled nuts available in the rest of the decade). Here's a more likely possibility:
There are many different breeds of finches with many different beaks on that island. The year of drought comes along, and those with thinner beaks cannot eat, so they either migrate, or die off. Leaving: big beaked finches.

So this theory supports both evolution and creation

Also the geologic columns are supposed "evidences" for evolution. But this also supports creation. One major catastrophe could answer several questions; the great flood. Look at it this way:
If it starts to rain, and a flood is evident, where are plants going to go? So, obviously, plants will be near the bottom. Then, sea creatures will be able to go higher, because they would be in the water, which is why you find them all through the "columns." Amphibians will be all over as well, due to their ability to survive for a lengthened amount of time in the water, but will start heading up. Reptilians will go higher, but not very high. Larger, smarter beings would be able to fend for themselves, so they would make it even higher. (And also, beings of each category were found in each column) The great flood would also be a way for the animals to
1: be rapidly buried (to avoid predators and being eaten)
2: being buried in something that keeps them from deterioration (by creating a cement like mud mixture)

So if anything, this supports creation.

According to evolutionists, it takes millions of years to fossilize items, but look at the following picture:
user posted image

It shows a fossilized fish giving birth. My mother, and everyone I know, know (and thank, well whoever you want to thank) that it doesn't take millions of years to give birth.

Look at the following changes just the reproductive system would need to go through in order to change from reptilian to mammal.
The shell of the egg
The two new membranes; the amnion and the allantois
Excretion of water-insoluble uric acid, rather than urea (urea would poison the embryo)
Albumen together with a special acid to yield its water
Yolk for food
A change in the genital system allowing the fertilization of the egg before it hardens.

Other things are:
Mammals have a different circulatory system, including red blood cells without nuclei, a heart with four chamber, instead of three, and one aorta instead of two, and a fundamentally different system of blood supply to the eye.
Mammals produce milk to feed their young
Mammalian skin has two extra layers
Mammals have a diaphragm, vital to our breathing. Reptiles breathe much differently
Mammals keeps their blood temperature at a constant (more or less)
The mammalian ear has a very complex organ called the corti, absent from all reptilians
The mammalian kidneys are very different than that of reptilians

Now, what happens when you get in the middle of any of these?

What about the archaeoptryx, you say? Well, further analysis (by scientists, of both parties) has proven the archaeoptryx to have no reptilian features (unless you include the teeth, which can be found on any modern day chicken, look at its beak soon after it hatches.)
"Feathers" found on fossilized reptiles have proven not to be so, but just parallel arrays of fibers (probably collagen).
The latest findings of protarchaeoptryx robusta and caudipteryx zoui (may have misspelled) are claimed to be the immediate ancestors of modern day birds. But where "dated at 120 MYA to 136 MYA, while the earliest findings of archaeoptryx were "dated" at 140 to 150 MYA. The two "ancestors" had many similarities to the ostritch, and were flightless, and even had gizzards. Look at the differences between the avian lung and the reptilian lung:
user posted image
The poor animal wouldn't be able to breathe.

There are also vast problems in the cosmos. One is:
"Supposedly, stars condensed out of vast clouds of gasses, and it has long been recognized that the clouds don't spontaneously collapse and form stars. They need to be pushed somehow to be started. There have been a number of suggestions of how to get the process started, and all of them require having stars to start with (e.g. a shockwave from another star can condense the gasses enough) It's the old 'chicken or the egg?' question"

So, another score for creation.


--------------------
Quit being an @$$ SS
Top
IonKidMax
  Posted: Apr 21 2009, 08:56 PM


Join the Green Side


Group: Members
Posts: 1,980
Member No.: 40
Joined: 12-June 08



QUOTE (Judge Death @ Apr 21 2009, 08:54 PM)
I decided to open it up here. I'm laying... half my cards on the table, and there are a few up my sleeve.

Before getting into the debate, I would like to quote Professor D.M.S. Watson:

and also like to correct anyone who says God used evolution.
If there is a God, as described in my Bible, the following is true:
When Adam and Eve were in the garden, they ate of the tree, and since they sinned, everyone after them will sin, and because they sinned, they will die.
So: From man came death

If evolution is true, as told in the textbooks:
A tiny microbe started us all, but he wasn't as mighty as the generations that came before him, so the weak had to die off. And with all the weak dying off, eventually, came man.
So: From death came man

There is a great difference between "Evolution" and "Adaptation."
Evolution= Going from a rock, to a single-celled being, to a fish, to a frog, to an ape, to a man.
Adaptation= The atmosphere having less oxygen, so man's body learns to deal with it, and use less air.

If you want an illustration of adaption (also known as micro-evolution); Take a man who lives near ground level (+/- 200') and see how far he can run. Then have him go up a mountain, a high mountain where the air is thinner, and see how far he can run. You'll find the distance is much shorter and he is heavily exhausted. But, anyone living there can usually run as far as the man originally came from. They have used 'adaption' to live. And animals can be bred to adapt to the job the job their owner requires of them (all dogs today have been selectively bred to adapt to the job that is needed of them.) This paragraph is about micro-evolution which we see every day.

One commonly given "evidence" for evolution is "Darwin's finches". It is said that these 13 birds evolved wider beaks to be able to crack the harder nuts that come about in drought season (year) (with thinner shelled nuts available in the rest of the decade). Here's a more likely possibility:
There are many different breeds of finches with many different beaks on that island. The year of drought comes along, and those with thinner beaks cannot eat, so they either migrate, or die off. Leaving: big beaked finches.

So this theory supports both evolution and creation

Also the geologic columns are supposed "evidences" for evolution. But this also supports creation. One major catastrophe could answer several questions; the great flood. Look at it this way:
If it starts to rain, and a flood is evident, where are plants going to go? So, obviously, plants will be near the bottom. Then, sea creatures will be able to go higher, because they would be in the water, which is why you find them all through the "columns." Amphibians will be all over as well, due to their ability to survive for a lengthened amount of time in the water, but will start heading up. Reptilians will go higher, but not very high. Larger, smarter beings would be able to fend for themselves, so they would make it even higher. (And also, beings of each category were found in each column) The great flood would also be a way for the animals to
1: be rapidly buried (to avoid predators and being eaten)
2: being buried in something that keeps them from deterioration (by creating a cement like mud mixture)

So if anything, this supports creation.

According to evolutionists, it takes millions of years to fossilize items, but look at the following picture:
user posted image

It shows a fossilized fish giving birth. My mother, and everyone I know, know (and thank, well whoever you want to thank) that it doesn't take millions of years to give birth.

Look at the following changes just the reproductive system would need to go through in order to change from reptilian to mammal.
The shell of the egg
The two new membranes; the amnion and the allantois
Excretion of water-insoluble uric acid, rather than urea (urea would poison the embryo)
Albumen together with a special acid to yield its water
Yolk for food
A change in the genital system allowing the fertilization of the egg before it hardens.

Other things are:
Mammals have a different circulatory system, including red blood cells without nuclei, a heart with four chamber, instead of three, and one aorta instead of two, and a fundamentally different system of blood supply to the eye.
Mammals produce milk to feed their young
Mammalian skin has two extra layers
Mammals have a diaphragm, vital to our breathing. Reptiles breathe much differently
Mammals keeps their blood temperature at a constant (more or less)
The mammalian ear has a very complex organ called the corti, absent from all reptilians
The mammalian kidneys are very different than that of reptilians

Now, what happens when you get in the middle of any of these?

What about the archaeoptryx, you say? Well, further analysis (by scientists, of both parties) has proven the archaeoptryx to have no reptilian features (unless you include the teeth, which can be found on any modern day chicken, look at its beak soon after it hatches.)
"Feathers" found on fossilized reptiles have proven not to be so, but just parallel arrays of fibers (probably collagen).
The latest findings of protarchaeoptryx robusta and caudipteryx zoui (may have misspelled) are claimed to be the immediate ancestors of modern day birds. But where "dated at 120 MYA to 136 MYA, while the earliest findings of archaeoptryx were "dated" at 140 to 150 MYA. The two "ancestors" had many similarities to the ostritch, and were flightless, and even had gizzards. Look at the differences between the avian lung and the reptilian lung:
user posted image
The poor animal wouldn't be able to breathe.

There are also vast problems in the cosmos. One is:
"Supposedly, stars condensed out of vast clouds of gasses, and it has long been recognized that the clouds don't spontaneously collapse and form stars. They need to be pushed somehow to be started. There have been a number of suggestions of how to get the process started, and all of them require having stars to start with (e.g. a shockwave from another star can condense the gasses enough) It's the old 'chicken or the egg?' question"

So, another score for creation.

Please don't start this thred! angry.gif


--------------------
Points:


user posted image
Top
Judge Death
Posted: Apr 21 2009, 09:08 PM


Busy with other things


Group: Members
Posts: 731
Member No.: 243
Joined: 3-April 09



QUOTE (IonKidMax @ Apr 21 2009, 08:56 PM)
QUOTE (Judge Death @ Apr 21 2009, 08:54 PM)
I decided to open it up here. I'm laying... half my cards on the table, and there are a few up my sleeve.

Before getting into the debate, I would like to quote Professor D.M.S. Watson:

and also like to correct anyone who says God used evolution.
If there is a God, as described in my Bible, the following is true:
When Adam and Eve were in the garden, they ate of the tree, and since they sinned, everyone after them will sin, and because they sinned, they will die.
So: From man came death

If evolution is true, as told in the textbooks:
A tiny microbe started us all, but he wasn't as mighty as the generations that came before him, so the weak had to die off. And with all the weak dying off, eventually, came man.
So: From death came man

There is a great difference between "Evolution" and "Adaptation."
Evolution=    Going from a rock, to a single-celled being, to a fish, to a frog, to an ape, to a man.
Adaptation=  The atmosphere having less oxygen, so man's body learns to deal with it, and use less air.

If you want an illustration of adaption (also known as micro-evolution); Take a man who lives near ground level (+/- 200') and see how far he can run. Then have him go up a mountain, a high mountain where the air is thinner, and see how far he can run. You'll find the distance is much shorter and he is heavily exhausted. But, anyone living there can usually run as far as the man originally came from. They have used 'adaption' to live. And animals can be bred to adapt to the job the job their owner requires of them (all dogs today have been selectively bred to adapt to the job that is needed of them.) This paragraph is about micro-evolution which we see every day.

One commonly given "evidence" for evolution is "Darwin's finches". It is said that these 13 birds evolved wider beaks to be able to crack the harder nuts that come about in drought season (year) (with thinner shelled nuts available in the rest of the decade). Here's a more likely possibility:
There are many different breeds of finches with many different beaks on that island. The year of drought comes along, and those with thinner beaks cannot eat, so they either migrate, or die off. Leaving: big beaked finches.

So this theory supports both evolution and creation

Also the geologic columns are supposed "evidences" for evolution. But this also supports creation. One major catastrophe could answer several questions; the great flood. Look at it this way:
If it starts to rain, and a flood is evident, where are plants going to go? So, obviously, plants will be near the bottom. Then, sea creatures will be able to go higher, because they would be in the water, which is why you find them all through the "columns." Amphibians will be all over as well, due to their ability to survive for a lengthened amount of time in the water, but will start heading up. Reptilians will go higher, but not very high. Larger, smarter beings would be able to fend for themselves, so they would make it even higher. (And also, beings of each category were found in each column) The great flood would also be a way for the animals to
1: be rapidly buried (to avoid predators and being eaten)
2: being buried in something that keeps them from deterioration (by creating a cement like mud mixture)

So if anything, this supports creation.

According to evolutionists, it takes millions of years to fossilize items, but look at the following picture:
user posted image

It shows a fossilized fish giving birth. My mother, and everyone I know, know (and thank, well whoever you want to thank) that it doesn't take millions of years to give birth.

Look at the following changes just the reproductive system would need to go through in order to change from reptilian to mammal.
The shell of the egg
The two new membranes; the amnion and the allantois
Excretion of water-insoluble uric acid, rather than urea (urea would poison the embryo)
Albumen together with a special acid to yield its water
Yolk for food
A change in the genital system allowing the fertilization of the egg before it hardens.

Other things are:
Mammals have a different circulatory system, including red blood cells without nuclei, a heart with four chamber, instead of three, and one aorta instead of two, and a fundamentally different system of blood supply to the eye.
Mammals produce milk to feed their young
Mammalian skin has two extra layers
Mammals have a diaphragm, vital to our breathing. Reptiles breathe much differently
Mammals keeps their blood temperature at a constant (more or less)
The mammalian ear has a very complex organ called the corti, absent from all reptilians
The mammalian kidneys are very different than that of reptilians

Now, what happens when you get in the middle of any of these?

What about the archaeoptryx, you say? Well, further analysis (by scientists, of both parties) has proven the archaeoptryx to have no reptilian features (unless you include the teeth, which can be found on any modern day chicken, look at its beak soon after it hatches.)
"Feathers" found on fossilized reptiles have proven not to be so, but just parallel arrays of fibers (probably collagen).
The latest findings of protarchaeoptryx robusta and caudipteryx zoui (may have misspelled) are claimed to be the immediate ancestors of modern day birds. But where "dated at 120 MYA to 136 MYA, while the earliest findings of archaeoptryx were "dated" at 140 to 150 MYA. The two "ancestors" had many similarities to the ostritch, and were flightless, and even had gizzards. Look at the differences between the avian lung and the reptilian lung:
user posted image
The poor animal wouldn't be able to breathe.

There are also vast problems in the cosmos. One is:
"Supposedly, stars condensed out of vast clouds of gasses, and it has long been recognized that the clouds don't spontaneously collapse and form stars. They need to be pushed somehow to be started. There have been a number of suggestions of how to get the process started, and all of them require having stars to start with (e.g. a shockwave from another star can condense the gasses enough) It's the old 'chicken or the egg?' question"

So, another score for creation.

Please don't start this thred! angry.gif

Sorry, can't stop it.


--------------------
Quit being an @$$ SS
Top
SilverSurfer092
Posted: Apr 21 2009, 09:58 PM


IT'S OVER 9000!!!!!!


Group: Admin
Posts: 9,072
Member No.: 67
Joined: 31-July 08



Changed the name so that it isn't restricted to one Debate topic.


--------------------
Points: OVER 9000!!!!!!
Top
M Bison
Posted: Apr 21 2009, 10:04 PM


Leader of Shadaloo, Soon ruler of the world


Group: Admin
Posts: 2,168
Member No.: 62
Joined: 30-July 08



QUOTE
It shows a fossilized fish giving birth. My mother, and everyone I know, know (and thank, well whoever you want to thank) that it doesn't take millions of years to give birth.

You just called the Ichthyosaurus a fish. Fail. And it didn't take millions of years to give birth, it merely died during the process.

More in depth response, with other points addressed to come. I'm going to see the other updated threads first though.


--------------------
Points: More than you


user posted image
"You know you're like the A-bomb? Everybody is laughing and having a good time, then you show up and BAM!"
http://hamish-campbell.mybrute.com
Top
Judge Death
Posted: Apr 21 2009, 10:19 PM


Busy with other things


Group: Members
Posts: 731
Member No.: 243
Joined: 3-April 09



QUOTE (M Bison @ Apr 21 2009, 10:04 PM)
You just called the Ichthyosaurus a fish. Fail. And it didn't take millions of years to give birth, it merely died during the process.

More in depth response, with other points addressed to come. I'm going to see the other updated threads first though.

It's a fish, not a reptile, whatever you may say. It has no reptilian qualities to it, including the organs


--------------------
Quit being an @$$ SS
Top
M Bison
Posted: Apr 21 2009, 10:34 PM


Leader of Shadaloo, Soon ruler of the world


Group: Admin
Posts: 2,168
Member No.: 62
Joined: 30-July 08



QUOTE
There is a great difference between "Evolution" and "Adaptation."
Evolution=    Going from a rock, to a single-celled being, to a fish, to a frog, to an ape, to a man.
Adaptation=  The atmosphere having less oxygen, so man's body learns to deal with it, and use less air.

Evolution is a form of adaptation. You can adapt without evolving, but evolution is a form of adaptation.

QUOTE
One commonly given "evidence" for evolution is "Darwin's finches". It is said that these 13 birds evolved wider beaks to be able to crack the harder nuts that come about in drought season (year) (with thinner shelled nuts available in the rest of the decade). Here's a more likely possibility:
There are many different breeds of finches with many different beaks on that island. The year of drought comes along, and those with thinner beaks cannot eat, so they either migrate, or die off. Leaving: big beaked finches.


So... explain how many animals seen PEFECTLY capable of eating food in the environment around them, and why animals in different parts of the world are all different.

Heck, it's pretty much impossible to explain Australia without evolution, the animal life their is so unique because it was cut off from the rest of the world for a huge amount of time, and animals evolved differently.

QUOTE
Also the geologic columns are supposed "evidences" for evolution. But this also supports creation. One major catastrophe could answer several questions; the great flood. Look at it this way:
If it starts to rain, and a flood is evident, where are plants going to go? So, obviously, plants will be near the bottom. Then, sea creatures will be able to go higher, because they would be in the water, which is why you find them all through the "columns." Amphibians will be all over as well, due to their ability to survive for a lengthened amount of time in the water, but will start heading up. Reptilians will go higher, but not very high. Larger, smarter beings would be able to fend for themselves, so they would make it even higher. (And also, beings of each category were found in each column) The great flood would also be a way for the animals to
1: be rapidly buried (to avoid predators and being eaten)
2: being buried in something that keeps them from deterioration (by creating a cement like mud mixture)

So why are plants on all levels? Why aren't weaker mammals drowning at the bottom? What of insects, being as they are on all levels? Why are the majority of those on lower levels all extinct, with those n higher levels less likely to be so (with, granted, a few exceptions, such as living fossil-type animals).

QUOTE
It shows a fossilized fish giving birth. My mother, and everyone I know, know (and thank, well whoever you want to thank) that it doesn't take millions of years to give birth.

As I already said, the creature died in that position, during childbirth. It was a reptile, not a fish.

QUOTE
Look at the following changes just the reproductive system would need to go through in order to change from reptilian to mammal.
The shell of the egg
The two new membranes; the amnion and the allantois
Excretion of water-insoluble uric acid, rather than urea (urea would poison the embryo)
Albumen together with a special acid to yield its water
Yolk for food
A change in the genital system allowing the fertilization of the egg before it hardens.

Other things are:
Mammals have a different circulatory system, including red blood cells without nuclei, a heart with four chamber, instead of three, and one aorta instead of two, and a fundamentally different system of blood supply to the eye.
Mammals produce milk to feed their young
Mammalian skin has two extra layers
Mammals have a diaphragm, vital to our breathing. Reptiles breathe much differently
Mammals keeps their blood temperature at a constant (more or less)
The mammalian ear has a very complex organ called the corti, absent from all reptilians
The mammalian kidneys are very different than that of reptilians

user posted image
Egg laying mammal right there.

QUOTE
Now, what happens when you get in the middle of any of these?

Instead of "something that does neither", how about "something that does both, but lost one ability over time as it fell out of use." Look at our appendix. Useless now, it was used by our ancestors to digest grass. In our evolutionary future, we will most likely lose it.

QUOTE
What about the archaeoptryx, you say? Well, further analysis (by scientists, of both parties) has proven the archaeoptryx to have no reptilian features (unless you include the teeth, which can be found on any modern day chicken, look at its beak soon after it hatches.)

Erm, no. It has a repletion tail, for example.

QUOTE
"Feathers" found on fossilized reptiles have proven not to be so, but just parallel arrays of fibers (probably collagen).
The latest findings of protarchaeoptryx robusta and caudipteryx zoui (may have misspelled) are claimed to be the immediate ancestors of modern day birds. But where "dated at 120 MYA to 136 MYA, while the earliest findings of archaeoptryx were "dated" at 140 to 150 MYA. The two "ancestors" had many similarities to the ostritch, and were flightless, and even had gizzards. Look at the differences between the avian lung and the reptilian lung:
user posted image
The poor animal wouldn't be able to breathe.

Yeah. The Archeopterix is the ancestor of the protarchaeoptryx robusta and caudipteryx zoui.

Obviously, it's lung was one of the other. Random change is what drives evolution after all.

QUOTE
There are also vast problems in the cosmos. One is:
"Supposedly, stars condensed out of vast clouds of gasses, and it has long been recognized that the clouds don't spontaneously collapse and form stars. They need to be pushed somehow to be started. There have been a number of suggestions of how to get the process started, and all of them require having stars to start with (e.g. a shockwave from another star can condense the gasses enough) It's the old 'chicken or the egg?' question"

I told you I've no need to debate this to debate evolution.


--------------------
Points: More than you


user posted image
"You know you're like the A-bomb? Everybody is laughing and having a good time, then you show up and BAM!"
http://hamish-campbell.mybrute.com
Top
M Bison
Posted: Apr 21 2009, 10:36 PM


Leader of Shadaloo, Soon ruler of the world


Group: Admin
Posts: 2,168
Member No.: 62
Joined: 30-July 08



QUOTE (Judge Death @ Apr 21 2009, 10:19 PM)
QUOTE (M Bison @ Apr 21 2009, 10:04 PM)
You just called the Ichthyosaurus a fish. Fail. And it didn't take millions of years to give birth, it merely died during the process.

More in depth response, with other points addressed to come. I'm going to see the other updated threads first though.

It's a fish, not a reptile, whatever you may say. It has no reptilian qualities to it, including the organs


--------------------
Points: More than you


user posted image
"You know you're like the A-bomb? Everybody is laughing and having a good time, then you show up and BAM!"
http://hamish-campbell.mybrute.com
Top
Pseudonym
Posted: Apr 21 2009, 10:40 PM


FPL Failure


Group: Members
Posts: 1,219
Member No.: 203
Joined: 26-January 09



Organs? On the "fishyosaur"

It's a fossil, we don't know jack about its organs.


--------------------
Points: More than Bison


Give me half.
Top
MarvelFan15
Posted: Apr 21 2009, 10:45 PM


A God Among Heroes


Group: Members
Posts: 1,013
Member No.: 232
Joined: 19-February 09



mellow.gif
Oh, wow!


--------------------
Points Hmm....


To All of Those who don't know me....


I am the thief in the night...watching in the shadows...waiting...
I am the Godslayer!
I am the Demon Tamer!
I am the World-Conqurer!

And for those of you who don't respect me...
You will...
user posted image
Top
Judge Death
Posted: Apr 21 2009, 11:02 PM


Busy with other things


Group: Members
Posts: 731
Member No.: 243
Joined: 3-April 09



QUOTE (Pseudonym @ Apr 21 2009, 10:40 PM)
Organs? On the "fishyosaur"

It's a fossil, we don't know jack about its organs.

Yeah, you can tell by looking at some of the things that were fossilized


--------------------
Quit being an @$$ SS
Top
SilverSurfer092
Posted: Apr 21 2009, 11:07 PM


IT'S OVER 9000!!!!!!


Group: Admin
Posts: 9,072
Member No.: 67
Joined: 31-July 08



That platypus is one of the cutest things ever.


--------------------
Points: OVER 9000!!!!!!
Top
MarvelFan15
Posted: Apr 21 2009, 11:48 PM


A God Among Heroes


Group: Members
Posts: 1,013
Member No.: 232
Joined: 19-February 09



QUOTE (SilverSurfer092 @ Apr 21 2009, 11:07 PM)
That platypus is one of the cutest things ever.

unsure.gif


--------------------
Points Hmm....


To All of Those who don't know me....


I am the thief in the night...watching in the shadows...waiting...
I am the Godslayer!
I am the Demon Tamer!
I am the World-Conqurer!

And for those of you who don't respect me...
You will...
user posted image
Top
Bandit
Posted: Apr 22 2009, 12:19 AM


Monkey King of Haven


Group: Members
Posts: 3,116
Member No.: 42
Joined: 16-June 08



TROLL IN THE DUNGEON!

Thought you ought to know....

faints.


--------------------
Never give up! 08-05-92

user posted image

Points:
Top
Granobulax
Posted: Apr 22 2009, 01:15 AM


He's even got his hand over where I live...


Group: Admin
Posts: 7,880
Member No.: 35
Joined: 31-May 08



There's so much "proof" into reasons why there's evolution.

There's so much "faith" into the reasons for creationism.

It all depends on what your perspective is. I personally believe in both the proof and the faith.

It is said that on an evolutionary scale, the likelyhood that a DNA strand would spontaneously form on the ocean shores of the world billions of years ago without creation from god would be stagering.

According to scientists, the earth is 4.6 billion years old. According to these same scientists, first single celled life came at around 3.8 billion years ago. That means that life supposedly was created within the first 800 million years.

The chances of that to occur is said to be the same as if a tornado tore through a junk yard and completely assemble a jumbo 747 airplane. Not likely to happen.

But, on the other hand, if god had created the world, I believe it to be equally unlikely that he would have created it without making all of the creatures capable of adapting throughout the ages.

See? it is possible to believe in both aspects of this debate.


--------------------
Points:


I scare little kids.
user posted image

QUOTE (treacherous @ Aug 16 2008, 12:12 PM)
RRRAOAAOAOAORRARRAA!!...  Blue lights and sirens rang through the night!! Yeah, they all wanna kill each other... HERE ME CITY!! THE STREETS BELONG TO THE GANGS NOW!! THIS IS THE NEW ORDER!! PREPARE FOR CHAOS!!

Solomon and I may be gangsta, but treach is the gangsta of the year!
Top
« Next Oldest | Chit-Chat | Next Newest »
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you

Topic OptionsPages: (10) [1] 2 3 ... Last »



Hosted for free by zIFBoards* (Terms of Use: Updated 2/10/2010) | Powered by Invision Power Board v1.3 Final © 2003 IPS, Inc.
Page creation time: 0.0489 seconds · Archive