I stand corrected on the 2nd Law of thermodynamics, but why are so many evolutionsts?

Question

arrogant and rude in their answers and have no clue about courtesy or common social graces. Are they all just a bunch of animals (monkeys)?

Answer 1

would you like some cheese with that whine?




You were wrong, and you admitted it.

I respect that.


But quit the "sour grapes" act.



*** additional comment:

Wait a second, you came on here and asserted with NO KNOWLEDGE that evolutionists don't understand the 2nd law.

Yet we found out that your accusation was not only false, but it was YOU who didn't understand the second law.

Maybe you should consider the idea that you DESERVED to be spoken to in a rude fashion.

Take some responsibility for your actions.

Answer 2

This is just the pot calling the kettle black. And since doing this, you managed to repeat your mistake with the "question" about the probability of the formation of a protein.

When you read bad arguments on creationist sites and then post them here without any effort to evaluate them first, you are yourself being arrogant, discourteous, and rude, and you deserve the response that you get.

The fact is that those creationist sites are simply collections of deliberate lies aimed at convincing people to put religion ahead of truth. No decent person would spread that kind of propaganda.

Answer 3

Maybe because evolution is science FACT, and its the braindead creationist that are rude. They (the Creationist) can't stand anyone challenging their little fairytale about Adam nad Eve, BTW: Adams 1st wife was named Lillith. In responce to St, John, I'll debate any creationist- anytime- any place. It'd take no more than 10 seconds to blow their fable out of the water.

Answer 4

What is an evolutionist? I assume you are referring to those that know how the world began because they have studied all the postulations put forward by various religious factions and have decided that the scientific explanation is the most credible. That does not mean these people do not pray and have no regard for spiritual needs.

Answer 5

WeLL aLL peopLe are animaLs, and we are reLated to monkeys, but the reason so many evoLutionists are rude is because so many peopLe in generaL are rude.

Answer 6

We only give what we have been given by your kind. Look at your own answers for a good example.

I have to go eat a bananna now.

Answer 7

rude people tend to act that way.

evolution is how people try to understand the earth's past. people observed, looked at a bunch of sh!t, and evolution is what they came up with.

pretty simple. we don't know a lot about our past though, so the theory is prone to criticism, but that's ok. i still think it happened that way because for the most part it makes sense.

Answer 8

I saw this in a pamplet... and it was cute and so true! It's by Ray Comfort.

"Billions of years ago, a big bang produced a large rock. As the rock cooled, sweet brown liquid formed on it's surface. As time passed, aluminum formed itself into a can, a lid, and a tab. Millions of years later, red and white paint fell from the sky and formed itself into the words "Coca Cola... 12 fluid ounces."

Of course my theory is an insult to your intellect, because you know that if the Coca Cola can is made, there must be a maker. If it is designed, there must be a designer. The alternative, that it happened by chance or accident is to move from the intellectual free zone.



Here is another:

"The Banana: The Atheist Nightmare"

Note that the banana...

1. is shaped for the human hand.

2. has a non-slip surface.

3. Has outward indicators of it's inward contents. Green - too early, yellow - just right, black - too late.

4. Has a tab for removal of it's wrapper.

5. Is perforated on wrapper.

6. Has a bio-degradable wrapper.

7. Is shaped for the human mouth.

8. Has a point at the top for ease of entry.

9. Is pleasing to the taste buds.

10. Is curved towards the face to make the eating process easy.

To write that the banana happened by accident is even more unintelligent than to write that no one designed the Coca Cola can.

Test 1.

The person who thinks the Coca Cola can has no designer is:

A. Intelligent

B. A fool

C. Has an ulterior motive for denying the obvious

Now the document that I am referring from states that the eye has 40,000,000 nerve endings and focuses it's muscles approximately 100,000 times a day. and that the eye has a retina that contains approximately 137,000,000 light sensitive cells.

The document continues and states that Charles Darwin stated:

"To suppose that the eye could have been formed by natural selection, seems I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree" Agreed... it does not have the reference recorded so I do not know if this statement is true or false. But let me get to the point at hand.

If man can not create the human eye then how can anyone in their right mind believe that it was created by chance? In fact... man can't create anything from nothing... we just do not know how to do it. We can re-create, reform, develop... but we can not create one grain of sand from nothing. Yet the human eye... is a mere tiny part of the most sophisticated part of creation - the human body.

Again... another statement which I would have to research and verify if this person actually made this comment:

"George Gallup; "If I could prove God statistically; take the human body alone; the chance that all the functions of the individual would just happen, is a statistical monstrosity."

Now this statement concerning Albert Einstein. This is confusing... why would this man contradict himself? If he stated this... then every other statement that has been quoted at this forum is invalid because the man appears to be speaking from both sides of his mouth. In this statement Einstein is quoted to have said:

"Everyone who is seriously interested in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe - a spirit vastly superior to man, and one in the face of our modest powers must feel humble."

Test 2:

1. Do you know any building that did not have a builder? Yes? No?

2. Do you know any painting that did not have a painter? Yes? No?

3. Do you know any car that did not have a maker? Yes? No?

If you answered "Yes" to any of those statements... please give details:______________________...



Third analogy:

Could I convince you that I dropped 50 oranges onto the ground and then by chance fell into ten rows of five oranges? Logically, anyone with an intelligent mind might conclude that someone put them there. The odds that ten oranges would fall into a straight line is mind boggling. Let alone ten rows of five.

Test 3

Yes or No 1. From the atom to the universe is there order?

Yes or No 2. Did it happen by accident or must there been an intelligent mind?

3. What are the odds of 50 oranges falling by chance into ten rows of five oranges? ______________________________...

To declare that there is no God is to make an absolute statement. And for an absolute statement to be true; one must have absolute knowledge. Here is another such statement: "There is no gold in China."

Test 4 What would I need to have for that statement to be true?

A. No knowledge of China?

B. Partial knowledge of China?

C. Absolute knowledge of China?

"C" is the correct answer. In order for the statement to be true, I must know that there is no gold in China.

Likewise; to state that there is no God and to be correct then you are stating that you are omniscient. You must have absolutely certain knowledge that there isn't one.

Let's say that a circle contains all the knowledge of the universe. And let's say that you have an incredible understanding of one percent of all that knowledge. Is it possible that the knowledge you haven't yet come across, that there might be ample evidence to prove that God does indeed exist?

If you are reasonable, you would have to admit, "Having the limited knowledge I have at present, I believe that there is no God." In other words, you don't know if God exists, so you are not an atheist. You are an "agnostic." You are like a person that looks at a building and doesn't seem to know if there is a builder.

Test 5 The man who sees a building and doesn't know if there is a builder is:

A. Intelligent

B. A fool

C. Has an ulterior motive

In summary: There are plenty of things that we have faith in that we do not fully understand. Most of us do not have a complete understanding that when you turned your computer on as to why it worked. You took a step of faith that turning it on... that somehow that it would work. You accept the unseen electrical waves that appear right in front of your eyes when you type your comments here. We do not see the reason for why the messages appear... because the powers that be are invisible to the naked eye. For them to be manifest, we need a monitor... so we can enjoy the experience of this forum.

God is not flesh and blood; He is an eternal Spirit. Immortal and invisible... like the computer waves. He can can not be experienced unless the monitor is turned on. One should approach the Bible in the same way as the monitor. If it works, enjoy it and if it doesn't, forget it.

Or do you have an ulterior motive? Could it be that the "atheist" can't find God... as a thief can't find the policeman? Could it be that your logic is clouding your good judgment?"

Answer 9

Probably because they answer your questions in the same tone you give them, and they are tired of uneducated fools asking thesame question over and over and over and over and over again, and expecting a different answer.

Answer 10

Hey, I just return what I get. Be nice, and I'll be nice. Be arrogant and rude, and I WILL return the favor.