Evolution is now A FACT OF LIFE

[kebotDiNaMute]

---

basaha kebs o para mahimasmasan ka...

Walt Brown

Walt brown refuses to debate.

Over 160 Professors Refuse to Debate Creationist!

YouTube - Over 160 Professors Refuse to Debate Creationist!

By the way thats UC-Berkeley hometown of the evolution fanatics.

debate ba Malic?

[Sinyalan]

--- No! is it a handicap match? hmmm... trip you still trying your best but your are fighting in shadows... what i am fighting is not to prove my creation theory... but to prove your evolution theory is very wrong... I wont contest on my creation theory... again its useless for a clueless... get? but if you want to contest your EVOLUTION... PST me... i will ask you answer... simple... agree on these terms?

You want me to start asking? So what your great evolutionist have to say to a simple question.

CAN YOU GIVE AN EXAMPLE OF GENETIC MUTATION OR AN EVOLUTIONARY PROCESS WHICH CAN BE SEEN TO INCREASE THE INFORMATION IN THE GENOME?

Dawkins: Stop blah! blah blah!

take2: there's a POPULAR MISUNDERSTANDING OF EVOLUTION WHICH SAYS FISH TURNED INTO REPTILES AND REPTILES TURNED INTO MAMMALS... (so whos right? i guess all wrong.. hahaha)
they are descended from ancient animals... which we do not see today...

kebot: hahaha, fail. Simple question... error becomes misunderstanding... too bad... lies become excuse... epic fail. So trip do you have answer to the BOLD QUESTION? I hope you are way better than dawkins this time...

YouTube - Richard Dawkins Is Stumped For 19 Seconds on Question- And Still Failed To Answer The Question!

hahaha.. pagkadakung dimal nimo kebot... lihay man ka's challenge ni ms. tripwire. You're only delaying your excuse that you don't have answers to her questions.

I can understand why you guys [creationists] roll your ball within the playgrounds of science because you have nothing to offer... that's just plain truth.

hahaha... ayaw likay kebot... you've been asked a fair challenge and yet you stumble and high-tailed by using science to prove your theories. tsk... tsk... wai ayu.

[Malic]

What do you think are their motives of creationists to oppose evolution when they (from the Institute of Creationist Research) themselves even admit that creationism is not scientific.

Henry M. Morris, the Father of Modern Creation affirmed in his book that "The the biblical idea of creation can never be called "scientific," and why "scientific creationism" will always be a contradiction in terms." (Source: Henry D. Morris, The Genesis Record, p. 58. N. F. Gier, God, Reason, and the Evangelicals (University Press of American, 1987), Chapter 13).

It kinda hard to tell but let me give my best guess. Fear?

let me also add something to this...and tnx BP for the link.

Maintaining Creationist Integrity
A response to Kent Hovind
by Carl Wieland, Ken Ham and Jonathan Sarfati
11 October 2002
updated 16 December 2002 and 2 August 2006

Where no counsel is, the people fall: but in the multitude of counsellors there is safety (Proverbs 11:14).

Iron sharpens iron; so a man sharpens the countenance of his friend (Proverbs 27:17).

For anyone coming ‘fresh’ to the creation/evolution issue, it must be confusing to note the variety of arguments that are used by various creation groups and speakers. One speaker enthusiastically uses an argument which another frowns on, or plainly says is wrong. So which ones are trustworthy? How should we tell?

And then there is the fact that an argument used by a particular creation ministry some years ago has now been discarded by that organization itself. Isn’t that a black mark against that organization for using it in the first place?

Actually, we need to realize that:

a) all humans are fallen and fallible;

b) science itself is a wonderful, but fallible human tool;

c) all the hypotheses and speculations which one uses to explain things within the framework of Biblical history can only be tentative, since humanity will never have all knowledge, and new data is constantly becoming available. For the same reason, hypotheses and submodels within evolutionary theory are constantly changing. So the same thing will inevitably be true in the creationist scientific world.

maybe in the future Evolution will find its way home in the heart of Creationists. for after all they were never meant to opposed each other.

[kebotDiNaMute]

ngano man diay ug motu-o ug evolution part? unsay problema nimo?

oi hala, c nasyo gi hay blad... hahaha! Boom shakala nani... nano pod diay dili mo 2o unsa diay problema? hmmm.... libog lang ko unsay stand...

[kebotDiNaMute]

hahaha.. pagkadakung dimal nimo kebot... lihay man ka's challenge ni ms. tripwire. You're only delaying your excuse that you don't have answers to her questions.

I can understand why you guys [creationists] roll your ball within the playgrounds of science because you have nothing to offer... that's just plain truth.

hahaha... ayaw likay kebot... you've been asked a fair challenge and yet you stumble and high-tailed by using science to prove your theories. tsk... tsk... wai ayu.

You're only delaying your excuse that you don't have answers to her questions.
--- YES I DONT HAVE... thats the main reason why i will not contest...
--- KAMO NAA PERO BAKAK
--- so which is better? batoytoya jud.

I can understand why you guys [creationists] roll your ball within the playgrounds of science because you have nothing to offer... that's just plain truth.
--- You are well correct... as much as our dogma will offer, WE OFFER NO LIES. if we don't have it we are honest to say its by FAITH. ka alegre.

you've been asked a fair challenge and yet you stumble and high-tailed by using science to prove your theories
--- brad if a boxer will say d cya mo sukol... nano imo man pugson? Well i don't put myself in a position that I will be lieing... kasabot ka? So, if wala koy ma prove sa ako creation, bsin kamo maka prove sa evolution... STILL INSISTING? lets try.

Brad ayaw reklamo, i already warned you I wont contest. Mamugos man oi kalain... yay! hahaha

[Malic]

Over 160 Professors Refuse to Debate Creationist!

YouTube - Over 160 Professors Refuse to Debate Creationist!

By the way thats UC-Berkeley hometown of the evolution fanatics.

debate ba Malic?

we had a discussion about this already kebs.

[kebotDiNaMute]

It kinda hard to tell but let me give my best guess. Fear?

let me also add something to this...and tnx BP for the link.

Maintaining Creationist Integrity
A response to Kent Hovind
by Carl Wieland, Ken Ham and Jonathan Sarfati
11 October 2002
updated 16 December 2002 and 2 August 2006

Where no counsel is, the people fall: but in the multitude of counsellors there is safety (Proverbs 11:14).

Iron sharpens iron; so a man sharpens the countenance of his friend (Proverbs 27:17).

For anyone coming ‘fresh’ to the creation/evolution issue, it must be confusing to note the variety of arguments that are used by various creation groups and speakers. One speaker enthusiastically uses an argument which another frowns on, or plainly says is wrong. So which ones are trustworthy? How should we tell?

And then there is the fact that an argument used by a particular creation ministry some years ago has now been discarded by that organization itself. Isn’t that a black mark against that organization for using it in the first place?

Actually, we need to realize that:

a) all humans are fallen and fallible;

b) science itself is a wonderful, but fallible human tool;

c) all the hypotheses and speculations which one uses to explain things within the framework of Biblical history can only be tentative, since humanity will never have all knowledge, and new data is constantly becoming available. For the same reason, hypotheses and submodels within evolutionary theory are constantly changing. So the same thing will inevitably be true in the creationist scientific world.

maybe in the future Evolution will find its way home in the heart of Creationists. for after all they were never meant to opposed each other.

backslider diay ka malic? hahaha! You must have realized something is not right. Yea i want to hear it from you also malic, how your religion believe in Evolution. Its a conflict of belief. Lies after lies kung baga... hmmm.

[Pein]

ngano man jud kaha noh nga ipugos man nila ang Evolution diri nga Spirituality and Occult mani nga lugar? kung gusto mong ipugos jud nang inyong pagtuo, adto mo sa Science and Technology ayaw diri kay lugar ni sa mga tawo nga mutuo ug spiritual matters.

hahay mamugos baya oi...

[kebotDiNaMute]

we had a discussion about this already kebs.

so whats the conclusion? You open up dabates story, yet the best there is have nothing to say... hmmm i wonder why they cannot rectify those errors... tsk tsk tsk... anyways malic, don't talk about debate, i have never found a good debate that evolutionists answered... they usually make up a fairy tale story... justified over time they have never observed.

[Pein]

backslider diay ka malic? hahaha! You must have realized something is not right. Yea i want to hear it from you also malic, how your religion believe in Evolution. Its a conflict of belief. Lies after lies kung baga... hmmm.

mao jud. nangutana lang ko ba kung mutuo na ba ug evolution ang Muslim kay evolutionist naman si Malic. pero dili siya mutubag hadlok pangutan on kung unsa ang iyang stand. igo ra jud siya nisakay sa uso...