Atheists and theists alike, can you pose a successful argument against the Redubyican Theory of Creativity?

Question

We were actually created as a resulted of an interplanetary bet. The top scientists of Jupiter,Mars and Saturn- Jup-Jup ,Marza and Satuacia-decided to have a contest to see who could make the dominant species. Jup-Jup invented the reptiles, Marza invented the mammals, and Satuacia invented plants and microorganisms. As part of the agreement, they had to stay on a new planet, a planet who's environment could give all these creatures equal chances. On the rocket pods (what you incorrectly refer to as comets), there were some technical difficulties. Jup-Jup and Satuacia's pods worked, but Marza's failed. Rather than quit working, she said she would continue. When she finished, she launched her rocket pod (what should be the proper term for comet) and it crashed into the planet. Since she just fixed the engine, there was plenty of smoke. This smoke killed off the dinosaurs, but allowed the plants to thrive. The hatch inexplicably jammed trapping the mammals. By the time it had opened, the

smoke had subsided, thus allowing the mammals to gain a foothold in the circle of life. Our interplanetary creators sometimes check up on us. They frequently visit Roswell to check on the Reptiles and the Mammals, and they sometimes check up on the life of the location-which is the crux of UFO conspiracy theories. They also "cheat" by sending extraterrestrial emissaries who perform works to help and hurt varying species-which is the dawn of religion.

The smaller rocket pods are Uranus' attempt to gain a foothold in the space race. You see, they don't have the experience to build successful rocket pods.

You see, it was all about location. They just happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. The members of the species that survived could not find mating partners in time and died.

DNA is similar because the interplanetary scientist coincidentally figured out that they need components to survive which were similar-like the spawn of the jet engine. America, Germany, and Italy all developed seperate prototypes independently, but they shared similar characteristics.

Depending on their traits, they can be classified to determine which rocket pod they came in. You see, they made species to conquer the land see and air. The reptile could not conquer the air, because they were immediately exposed to the smoke and killed, so i was split between the mammals and the microorganisms. The land reptiles were almost completely killed, so they lost to the mammals. In the water, the reptiles and the microorganism reign because they could hide from the smoke and gobble up the mammal fish. The mammal fish had to form mutual relationships with other creatures to survive, unlike the reptile fish that could survive on their own. The insects were sent along with the reptiles. The insects just hid in small crevasces as the rocket pods were approaching, so they were able to hold onto the sky and the land.

Answer 1

What have they been trying to send on the smaller "rocket pods" that continuously hit earth or burn up in earth's atmosphere?

Edit: OK How did some of the smaller more "fragile" reptiles survive and the dinosaurs became extinct?

Edit: OK Who sent the fish, the insects, the birds...etc etc?

Edit: Oh I see you're really a creationist, you spout off some bizarre unbelievable and unprovable theory and then when questioned try to incorporate it with evolution to help give it some scientific weight. You'll be telling us you have a phd next haha.

Answer 2

Given the genetics and shared characteristic across the time periods (both in plant and animals), and the lack of evidence for any breaks or substitutions at any time period, I'd say that there is no reason to entertain this hypothesis without any evidence to back it. As with all hypothesis and logic arguments, the burden of proof is on the claimant. In other words we do not disprove, it is up to you to prove - or at least present reasonable evidence to warrant investigation.
(This is one of the major problems with ID, reasonable evidence was never presented, in fact the "hypothesis" was never presented either.)

Answer 3

Well, you certainly make it easy to deny that man evolves into higher life forms

Answer 4

I would agree, but it's too jenuis for me to actually understand.

Answer 5

Yes. It is a simple, one word answer..."strategery"

Answer 6

This atheist will tell you ... "You should ask these scientists to come down to earth themselves".

Answer 7

that actually sounds like one of the more believable theories.

Answer 8

No....this Atheist can't.....and wouldn't if she could.

Answer 9

clever. but i'm already a pastafarian. :(

Answer 10

what are you on cra.ck ?