Originally posted by sonhouse
Gee, who would have known man did not evolve from apes. WOW, SUCH a revelation.

Have you ever considered just how we could have evolved from apes SINCE WE ARE BOTH SPECIES HERE ON EARTH AT THE SAME TIME?

BOTH man and apes evolved from some hominid form even more primitive way back in the past so stop using that asssinine argument already.

I believe man was created and began devolving once he stopped obeying the instructions of God and was banned from the garden in Eden.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I am not going to go into details, but briefly, the evolution of life from non-life to the evolution of vertebrates from invertebrates to the evolution of man from the ape has all been modified in some way over time. Because of the Law of Biogenesis, most evolutionists don't even consider the origin of life or species as part of the evolution theory anymore ...[text shortened]... ory. Richard Dawkins has admitted that man did not descend from any modern ape we know of today.

So, no specifics then? How dissapointing. It would be interesting to actually discuss a specific point of contention. There's a reason we don't talk about abiogenesis in the same breath as we talk about evolution, and you know this reason, I've explained it many times now: they're two different topics of discussion. It's like having a discussion on gravity and then someone says, gravity isn't real because you can't explain exactly how it works nor how it started. You see how foolish such a person would look?

As for the discovery of the "sudden" appearance of vertebrates, the theory itself remains the same. I honestly don't know what you're getting at. If you mean that because phylogenies sometimes needs to be corrected as new evidence comes in, that therefore evolutionary theory itself needs to be modified, you clearly don't get the distinction between a theory and the data that supports it.

And evolutionary theory never suggested that man descended from modern apes. Man is a modern ape who share a distant ancestor with other modern apes, plants and (if we move far enough back in time) single-celled organisms. This fact has not changed in the 150+ years worth of evidence since Darwin's time.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I believe man was created and began devolving once he stopped obeying the instructions of God and was banned from the garden in Eden.

So we devolved into Apes? Why are Apes then on the endangered species list? With billions of people in the world I would expect also at least millions of Apes if that were the case.

You really need to tie up the loose ends of your logic trail. But of course being illogical bothers you not in the least.

Originally posted by C Hess
So, no specifics then? How dissapointing. It would be interesting to actually discuss a specific point of contention. There's a reason we don't talk about abiogenesis in the same breath as we talk about evolution, and you know this reason, I've explained it many times now: they're two different topics of discussion. It's like having a discussion on gravity an ...[text shortened]... ed organisms. This fact has not changed in the 150+ years worth of evidence since Darwin's time.

You must have never heard of Neo-Darwinism.

Originally posted by sonhouse
So we devolved into Apes? Why are Apes then on the endangered species list? With billions of people in the world I would expect also at least millions of Apes if that were the case.

You really need to tie up the loose ends of your logic trail. But of course being illogical bothers you not in the least.

No apes were created by God too. All of God's creations are devolving.

Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.

(Romans 8:21 KJV)

Originally posted by RJHinds
You must have never heard of Neo-Darwinism.

Do you even read what I write? We talked about Neo-Darwinism and Lamarckism just weeks ago. You know, when you copy-pasted quotes you didn't fully understand? Neo-Darwinism is not a radical game-changer from the original theory.

Originally posted by C Hess
So, no specifics then? How dissapointing. It would be interesting to actually discuss a specific point of contention. There's a reason we don't talk about abiogenesis in the same breath as we talk about evolution, and you know this reason, I've explained it many times now: they're two different topics of discussion. It's like having a discussion on gravity an ...[text shortened]... ed organisms. This fact has not changed in the 150+ years worth of evidence since Darwin's time.

Yes, I know, abiogenesis conflicts with the Law of Biogenesis. The discovery of the "sudden" appearance of vertebrates showed there was no gradual evolutionary change from invertebrates to vertebrates. This resulted in the idea of Punctuated Equilibrium.

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/VIIA1bPunctuated.shtml

It was once believed that chimpanzees could evolve into humans. One guy even suggested that chimpanzees and pigs cross-breeded to produce humans.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Yes, I know, abiogenesis conflicts with the Law of Biogenesis. The discovery of the "sudden" appearance of vertebrates showed there was no gradual evolutionary change from invertebrates to vertebrates. This resulted in the idea of Punctuated Equilibrium.

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/VIIA1bPunctuated.shtml

It was once believed that chi ...[text shortened]... into humans. One guy even suggested that chimpanzees and pigs cross-breeded to produce humans.

😲 😵 🙄

Originally posted by RJHinds
It was once believed that chimpanzees could evolve into humans. One guy even suggested that chimpanzees and pigs cross-breeded to produce humans.

Reading these forums, it's often not difficult to believe this. 😵

Originally posted by Suzianne
Reading these forums, it's often not difficult to believe this. 😵

I hope by reading these forums that you learn that creation and intelligent design is not evolution.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I hope by reading these forums that you learn that creation and intelligent design is not evolution.

We agree on one thing anyway.

Originally posted by sonhouse
We agree on one thing anyway.

You need to learn the "evolution" is just a magic word for atheists, who need a substitute for creation.

Originally posted by RJHinds
You need to learn the "evolution" is just a magic word for atheists, who need a substitute for creation.

Funny how literally millions of christians believe evolution is true.

we looked at your links. Take a look at this one, pick a heading and link to it.

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html

Originally posted by sonhouse
Funny how literally millions of christians believe evolution is true.

we looked at your links. Take a look at this one, pick a heading and link to it.

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html

It is not funny. It is tragic that anyone should be deceived by any lie of Satan. Your reference is more lies from Satan.

Proof evolution is an evil lie from satan. (The Devil)

YouTube

Originally posted by RJHinds
It is not funny. It is tragic that anyone should be deceived by any lie of Satan. Your reference is more lies from Satan.

Proof evolution is an evil lie from satan. (The Devil)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQ4iORFL_Jk

"Why do young children put their fingers in their ears, or shout over us, ignore our questions, or say to us, “I’m not going to tell you.” Why do they so often refuse to listen to what we have to say?

Most often, your child’s silence is an instinctive self-protective behavior, evoked by the anticipation of painful feelings. Children do not want to talk to us when they feel angry or ashamed; or when they’re afraid that we’ll be critical; or when they believe that talking will just make them feel bad all over again, or feel worse. If we would just leave him alone, he believes, his bad feelings will go away."

http://kennethbarish.com/2013/05/how-to-get-your-child-to-talk-to-you/