Less than 2 minutes

Originally posted by KellyJay
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2NhTS1-QIc

Actually it is 2 minutes and 1 second 🙂

Cool video!

Originally posted by C Hess
Of course, the zygote in question needs nutrition from the mother to develop, but is any intelligent input required? That is, must your god step in and direct the cells to start forming a heart, and then a liver and so on, or will these cells form without outside intervention, so long as the DNA is good and nothing accidental happens?

As I pointed out once the process is in place I'd say if all the is required is
following it than that is all that is required. If in addition to following the
process you have to worry about it breaking down due to issues that creep
in then I would say yes, some input directing the universe to keep it all
going would require intelligence to stay on top of it all. After all things do
tend to break down, so with all processes while they may be very good at
one point could and would come to a halt without preventive maintenance.

This videos contains one of the most spiritual looking works of art
expressing faith in Darwinism.

Please look at that artistic depiction of Evolution at about 2.34

YouTube

Doesn't that look like a religious or spiritual work of art that one might see on a stain glass window in a cathedral ? Have you ever seen anything like that?

Originally posted by sonship
This videos contains one of the most spiritual looking works of art
expressing faith in Darwinism.

Please look at that artistic depiction of Evolution at about [b] 2.34

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2koWcJnuFY

Doesn't that look like a religious or spiritual work of art that one might see on a stain glass window in a cathedral ? Have you ever seen anything like that?[/b]

This video along with part 2 is a good example of proof that many evolutionists are liars. 😏

Originally posted by KellyJay
After all things do tend to break down,...

I know for a fact that we have proved you wrong on that claim in the past. It also goes against direct observation. If all things 'tend to break down' then why don't they?

Originally posted by twhitehead
I know for a fact that we have proved you wrong on that claim in the past. It also goes against direct observation. If all things 'tend to break down' then why don't they?

They do. However, you may not directly observe all of them because you will tend to break down first.

Originally posted by KellyJay
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2NhTS1-QIc

Actually it is 2 minutes and 1 second 🙂

You can show hundreds of presentations just like this one................but the atheist is dishonest and will simply reject them all.

The atheist lives in a dishonest bubble...............where honesty is refused entry.

Originally posted by Dasa
You can show hundreds of presentations just like this one................but the atheist is dishonest and will simply reject them all.

The atheist lives in a dishonest bubble...............where honesty is refused entry.

You know I have my issues with Atheist, but to tell you the truth we all
share that honestly issue. You are not different as I'm not either, don't
pump yourself up to be something better than a sinner like the rest of us.