generic image
Processing...
  • Games
  • Catalog
  • Develop
  • Robux
  • Search in Players
  • Search in Games
  • Search in Catalog
  • Search in Groups
  • Search in Library
  • Log In
  • Sign Up
  • Games
  • Catalog
  • Develop
  • Robux
   
ROBLOX Forum » Club Houses » Off Topic
Home Search
 

Re: Evolution is false

Previous Thread :: Next Thread 
superhero942 is not online. superhero942
Joined: 31 Mar 2011
Total Posts: 26893
18 Oct 2013 08:29 PM
I can give reasons as well.
Report Abuse
Flebale is not online. Flebale
Joined: 16 Jun 2012
Total Posts: 8454
18 Oct 2013 08:29 PM
but you don't give us reasons..... ok.....
Report Abuse
xxfirekiller is not online. xxfirekiller
Joined: 14 Aug 2013
Total Posts: 9052
18 Oct 2013 08:29 PM
Close minded loser
Report Abuse
nightdumo is not online. nightdumo
Joined: 01 Oct 2011
Total Posts: 18460
18 Oct 2013 08:29 PM
im not an atheist, but can you tell me your reasons? :^)
Report Abuse
shadow97 is not online. shadow97
Joined: 03 Sep 2007
Total Posts: 42693
18 Oct 2013 08:29 PM
here comes the edgies
Report Abuse
PhokiusV3 is not online. PhokiusV3
Joined: 07 May 2013
Total Posts: 805
18 Oct 2013 08:29 PM
We weren't classified as humanoids many years ago nor will our species remain humanoids many years later...
Report Abuse
superhero942 is not online. superhero942
Joined: 31 Mar 2011
Total Posts: 26893
18 Oct 2013 08:32 PM

1. MOON DUST

Meteoritic dust falls on the earth continuously, adding up to thousands, if not millions, of tons of dust per year. Realizing this, and knowing that the moon also had meteoritic dust piling up for what they thought was millions of years, N.A.S.A. scientists were worried that the first lunar ship that landed would sink into the many feet of dust which should have accumulated.

However, only about one-eight of an inch of dust was found, indicating a young moon.

Meteoritic material contributes nickel to the oceans. Taking the amount of nickel in the oceans and the supply from meteoritic dust yields an age figure for the earth of just several thousand years, not the millions (or billions) expressed by evolutionists. This, and the lack of meteoritic dust piles on the earth, lend to the belief in a young earth.


2. MAGNETIC FIELD

The earth's magnetic field is decaying rapidly, at a constant (if not decreasing) rate. At this rate, 8000 years ago the earth's magnetism would have equaled that of a magnetic star, a highly unlikely occurrence. Also, if electric currents in the earth's core are responsible for the earth's magnetism, the heat generated by these currents 20,000 years ago would have dissolved the earth.
Report Abuse
superhero942 is not online. superhero942
Joined: 31 Mar 2011
Total Posts: 26893
18 Oct 2013 08:35 PM
3. FOSSIL RECORD

Charles Darwin stated, in his Origin of Species, "The geological record is extremely imperfect and this fact will to a large extent explain why we do not find intermediate varieties, connecting together all the extinct and existing forms of life by the finest graduated steps. He who rejects these views on the nature of the geological record, will rightly reject my whole theory."

Now, 130 years and billions of fossils later, we can rightly reject the view of an incomplete fossil record or of one "connecting together all . . . forms of life by the finest graduated steps."

Out of the millions of fossils in the world, not one transitional form has been found. All known species show up abruptly in the fossil record, without intermediate forms, thus contributing to the fact of special creation. Let's take a look at Archeopteryx, a fossil that some evolutionists claim to be transitional between reptile and bird.

Archeopteryx is discussed in evolutionist Francis Hitching's book, The Neck of the Giraffe - Where Darwin Went Wrong. Hitching speaks on six aspects of Archeopteryx, following here.

(The following six points are quoted from Luther Sunderland's book, Darwin's Enigma: Fossils and Other Problems, pp. 74-75, the facts of which points he gathered from Hitching's book.)

1. It had a long bony tail, like a reptile's.

In the embryonic stage, some living birds have more tail vertebrae than Archeopteryx. They later fuse to become an upstanding bone called the pygostyle. The tail bone and feather arrangement on swans are very similar to those of Archeopteryx.

One authority claims that there is no basic difference between the ancient and modern forms: the difference lies only in the fact that the caudal vertebrae are greatly prolonged. But this does not make a reptile.

2. It had claws on its feet and on its feathered forelimbs.

However, many living birds such as the hoatzin in South America, the touraco in Africa and the ostrich also have claws. In 1983, the British Museum of Natural History displayed numerous species within nine families of birds with claws on the wings.

3. It had teeth.

Modern birds do not have teeth but many ancient birds did, particularly those in the Mesozoic. There is no suggestion that these birds were transitional. The teeth do not show the connection of Archeopteryx with any other animal since every subclass of vertebrates has some with teeth and some without.

4. It had a shallow breastbone.

Various modern flying birds such as the hoatzin have similarly shallow breastbones, and this does not disqualify them from being classified as birds. And there are, of course, many species of nonflying birds, both living and extinct.

Recent examination of Archeopteryx's feathers has shown that they are the same as the feathers of modern birds that are excellent fliers. Dr. Ostrom says that there is no question that they are the same as the feathers of modern birds. They are asymmetrical with a center shaft and parallel barbs like those of today's flying birds.

5. Its bones were solid, not hollow, like a bird's.

This idea has been refuted because the long bones of Archeopteryx are now known to be hollow.
Report Abuse
Flebale is not online. Flebale
Joined: 16 Jun 2012
Total Posts: 8454
18 Oct 2013 08:36 PM
There's so much tl;dr, I cringe.
Report Abuse
darren5996 is not online. darren5996
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Total Posts: 167
18 Oct 2013 08:37 PM
nice copypasta

now tell us in your own words

because i'm sure you have no idea what you just posted

add precisely 74,786 to my post count - also, yes i am theone23
Report Abuse
superhero942 is not online. superhero942
Joined: 31 Mar 2011
Total Posts: 26893
18 Oct 2013 08:37 PM
5. PROBABILITY
The science of probability has not been favorable to evolutionary theory, even with the theory's loose time restraints. Dr. James Coppedge, of the Center for Probability Research in Biology in California, made some amazing calculations. Dr. Coppedge

"applied all the laws of probability studies to the possibility of a single cell coming into existence by chance. He considered in the same way a single protein molecule, and even a single gene. His discoveries are revolutionary. He computed a world in which the entire crust of the earth - all the oceans, all the atoms, and the whole crust were available. He then had these amino acids bind at a rate one and one-half trillion times faster than they do in nature. In computing the possibilities, he found that to provide a single protein molecule by chance combination would take 10, to the 262nd power, years." (That is, the number 1 followed by 262 zeros.) "To get a single cell - the single smallest living cell known to mankind - which is called the mycroplasm hominis H39, would take 10, to the 119,841st power, years. That means that if you took thin pieces of paper and wrote 1 and then wrote zeros after (it), you would fill up the entire known universe with paper before you could ever even write that number. That is how many years it would take to make one living cell, smaller than any human cell!"

According to Emile Borel, a French scientist and expert in the area of probability, an event on the cosmic level with a probability of less than 1 out of 10, to the 50th power, will not happen. The probability of producing one human cell by chance is 10, to the 119,000 power.

Sir Fred Hoyle, British mathematician and astronomer, was quoted in Nature magazine, November 12, 1981, as saying "The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way (evolution) is comparable with the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein."

As one can readily see, here is yet one more test that evolution theory has flunked.


6. SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS

The second law of thermodynamics states that although the total amount of energy remains constant, the amount of usable energy is constantly decreasing. This law can be seen in most everything. Where work is done, energy is expelled. That energy can never again be used. As usable energy decreases, decay increases. Herein lies the problem for evolution. If the natural trend is toward degeneration, then evolution is impossible, for it demands the betterment of organisms through mutation.

Some try to sidestep this law by saying that it applies only to closed environments. They say the earth is an open environment, collecting energy from the sun. However, Dr. Duane Gish has put forth four conditions that must be met in order for complexity to be generated in an environment.

1. The system must be an open system.
2. An adequate external energy force must be available.
3. The system must possess energy conversion mechanisms.
4. A control mechanism must exist within the system for directing, maintaining and replicating these energy conversion mechanisms.
The second law clearly presents another insurmountable barrier to evolutionary idealism.

Report Abuse
chickenman212 is not online. chickenman212
Joined: 16 Nov 2010
Total Posts: 804
18 Oct 2013 08:38 PM
>Evolution thread on OT
>Actual 'Evidence' to prove your point
>Nobody will bother to read it.
>I cringed because I had to imagine myself greentexting this.
Report Abuse
superhero942 is not online. superhero942
Joined: 31 Mar 2011
Total Posts: 26893
18 Oct 2013 08:38 PM
Prove it wrong sonny
Report Abuse
darren5996 is not online. darren5996
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Total Posts: 167
18 Oct 2013 08:42 PM
do you even understand anything of which you just said

add precisely 74,786 to my post count - also, yes i am theone23
Report Abuse
nightdumo is not online. nightdumo
Joined: 01 Oct 2011
Total Posts: 18460
18 Oct 2013 08:42 PM
tl;dr
Report Abuse
superhero942 is not online. superhero942
Joined: 31 Mar 2011
Total Posts: 26893
18 Oct 2013 08:42 PM

7. VESTIGIAL ORGANS

Vestigial organs are supposed organs in the body which are useless, left over from evolutionary development. The following arguments for vestigial organs are based on those taken from the "Bible Science Newsletter," August 1989, p. 16.

1. Just because we don't yet know the role of an organ does not mean it is useless and left over from previous stages of evolution.

2. This view is plain false. In the 1800's, evolutionists listed 180 vestigial organs in the human body. The functions for all have now been found. Some of these were the pituitary gland (oversees skeletal growth), the thymus (an endocrine gland), the pineal gland, the tonsils, and appendix (both now known to fight disease.)

3. The fact that an organ must sometimes be removed does not make it vestigial.

4. The fact that one can live without an organ (appendix, tonsils) does not make it vestigial. You can survive without an arm or a kidney but these are not considered vestigial.

5. Organs are not vestigial based upon your need or use of them.

6. According to evolution, if an organ has lost its value, it should, over time, vanish completely. There has been enough time to lose these "vestigial" organs, but we still have them.

7. If organs do become useless, this would back up the second law of thermodynamics and the degenerative process, not evolution, which requires adaptation of organs for new purposes.

8. Vestigial organs prove loss, not evolutionary progression. Evolution theory requires new organs forming for useful purposes, not "old ones" dying out.

9. Evolutionists have, for the most part, given up the argument over vestigial organs.
Report Abuse
darren5996 is not online. darren5996
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Total Posts: 167
18 Oct 2013 08:43 PM
can you type a single thing in your own words

add precisely 74,786 to my post count - also, yes i am theone23
Report Abuse
OldEpicLolMan is not online. OldEpicLolMan
Joined: 20 Apr 2013
Total Posts: 50
18 Oct 2013 08:44 PM
So we have to believe a magical man in the sky created us all?
CHEKMATE

I said I was your friend, I never said I was a good friend.
Report Abuse
IcyTheHedgehog is not online. IcyTheHedgehog
Joined: 03 Feb 2009
Total Posts: 44314
18 Oct 2013 08:44 PM
this copy paste

i can't read

too much

no amaze, no originality

failure of a troll because no one cares to understand what he's saying
Report Abuse
Superme555 is not online. Superme555
Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Total Posts: 19007
18 Oct 2013 08:45 PM
tl;dr?
Report Abuse
superhero942 is not online. superhero942
Joined: 31 Mar 2011
Total Posts: 26893
18 Oct 2013 08:46 PM
@icy I understand all of these points, and they all decompose the theory of evolution substantially. You refuse to admit that evolution is an impossible standard of belief, as it lost its basis of fact entirely.
Report Abuse
superhero942 is not online. superhero942
Joined: 31 Mar 2011
Total Posts: 26893
18 Oct 2013 08:48 PM
The basis of the argument I am repeating absolutely crushes the thought of evolution. Prove it wrong.
Report Abuse
superhero942 is not online. superhero942
Joined: 31 Mar 2011
Total Posts: 26893
18 Oct 2013 08:55 PM
Hmm I see no combat. I also may include the fact that atoms cannot be created or destroyed by a mortal force, therefore, the Big Bang theory also cannot be true, as no physical force can exist by itself, nor create itself.
Report Abuse
superhero942 is not online. superhero942
Joined: 31 Mar 2011
Total Posts: 26893
18 Oct 2013 08:58 PM
Bump of lolucantprovethiswrongjusttry
Report Abuse
aleya8 is not online. aleya8
Joined: 10 Nov 2012
Total Posts: 156
18 Oct 2013 08:58 PM
Well First of all, there is evolution. Secound of all you are doing is copying and pasteing dumb words on a fourm post to make your point which you don't even know. We evolved from monkeys praticly. Thounds of Millions of years ago. The beginning of the Nomadic Age (Stone Age)!
Report Abuse
Previous Thread :: Next Thread 
Page 1 of 1
 
 
ROBLOX Forum » Club Houses » Off Topic
   
 
   
  • About Us
  • Jobs
  • Blog
  • Parents
  • Help
  • Terms
  • Privacy

©2017 Roblox Corporation. Roblox, the Roblox logo, Robux, Bloxy, and Powering Imagination are among our registered and unregistered trademarks in the U.S. and other countries.



Progress
Starting Roblox...
Connecting to Players...
R R

Roblox is now loading. Get ready to play!

R R

You're moments away from getting into the game!

Click here for help

Check Remember my choice and click Launch Application in the dialog box above to join games faster in the future!

Gameplay sponsored by:
Loading 0% - Starting game...
Get more with Builders Club! Join Builders Club
Choose Your Avatar
I have an account
generic image