Posted by Damien [140.146.138.54 - ] on 29 September 2003 at 15.28.36 ZuluTime:

In Reply to: evolution posted by d k on 29 September 2003 at 06.16.33 ZuluTime:

evolution has been disproved

>Which evolution would you be talking about? The known fact of evolution, that life changes over time? Or one of the theories of evolution, which attempt to explain how it changes?

over 100 years ago. think about the missing links, they don't exsist.

>What missing links? Technically, every fossil can be considered a link, from the species it evolved from, to the species it would evolve to. Not to mention the fact that before you could consider a 'link' missing, you would have to know what it is first.

when they date the fossols they use the rock layers. When they date the rock layers they use the fossols.

>Actually, when they date the fossils and the rocks, they use radiometric dating, a process independent of both. The success of this method allows us to use 'rock layers' of already known age to date the fossils contained within them.

that is a fact you can not denigh,

>It is not a fact, so there is nothing to 'denigh'.

and that is called circular reasoning. which you have to be pretty dumb to beleive that crap.

>Yeah, if we believed the typical crappy creationist strawmen about evolution, we would be pretty 'dumb'.

there is no intelligents in that.

>Did you perhaps mean 'intelligence'?

as far as proof in God (the God of abramham, Isaac, and Jacob) there is a lot more proof of that then of evolution.

>Yeah, evolution only has a measly couple centuries of human science, thought, and technology behind it. That silly 'theory' of evolution only has the support of hundreds of thousands of people who devote their entire lives to studying how life ticks, how it continues, and how it overcomes the obstacles presented by a callous and uncaring universe. Yeah, evolution merely has the support of a millenia of structured and organized system of trial and error, observation, and experimentation behind it. While the current Gawd fad has...(drumroll please)...a poorly written, self-contradictory, 1500 year old book!

Did you know they found sodom and gomorrah,

>...with absolutely no evidence of any 'fire and brimstone'.

noah's ark,

>Yeah, multiple times, each time in a different location, with nothing to show for it except a couple grainy photos of some vaguely cubic rock formations.

the ark of the covenant,the real mt.sinia (where the top is all burnt).

>And this is causing the entire world to immediately convert to christianity...why? Possibly because their either fakes, misinterpretations, or examples of fanatical christians trying to make mountains out of molehills.

evolution is a religion that you have to take by faith.

>Let's see, evolution has: 1)No churches, 2)No ceremonies, 3)No prerequisite statements of faith, 4)No clergy, 5)No unquestionable rules, 6)No holy wars, 7)No groups dedicated to trying to force political parties to write their views into law, 8)No fanatic extremists bombing churches, 9)No Sunday School groups getting together and singing songs about how we all love Darwin, and Darwin loves us all. Need I go on?

You have to believe that it happened that way because there is no proof.

>http://www.talkorigins.org/

When i was young they taught me that a frog turning to a prince was a fairy tale. Now they try to say it's real.

>Who is this 'they'? 'They' are certainly not any of the biologists I know.

The media is bias against the bible because they don't want to believe in god because then they would have to change the way they report,

>The media: About 95% christian. Yeah, damned christian non-believers.

and live there lives.thats why you don't here about the proofs I listed above.

>Actually, all the 'proofs' (I use the word extremely loosely) you listed I can recall seeing many advertisements about TV specials on, promising 'previously unreleased information'. In fact, each 'proof' you listed above has been a media blitz. Otherwise, you would have never known about it.

I hopr you really think about what I said.

>As opposed to not 'really' thinking about what you said, only 'kind of' thinking about what you said? Either way, whether I 'really' think it, or 'kind of' think it, I'm thinking the same thing, get a spell-checker, and use the McDonald's money you earn to get an education.

Look at the truth and don't lie to yourself. It will only hurt you to believe a lie