It never fails. It seems I can't post anything on my facebook anymore without sparking some sort of debate. This time I post an interesting article about skink evolution and got attacked with anti evolution rhetoric. Just wondering how you all would respond to this? Also, feel free to discuss. Thanks.

Kyle Wilhelm This is so cool: Australian lizards on verge of evolutionary leap: From eggs to live birth?

  • Adam Cowan
    It's still a skink, and it is still laying eggs. Skinks in the mountain lay thinner shelled eggs compared to skinks on the coast. When scientists
    figure out how nothing became something, and something became life, then
    maybe I will put
    stock in evolution. If people approached evolution with same
    skepticism as they have with Christianity no one would believe in it.

    When it comes to the basic questions of life, how did we get here, why are
    here, what's the point of life, etc., I find no better answers than what
    is written in the Bible. God made us for his glory and we are to serve

    Evolution says we are here by chance, no more than a highly evolved animals, and the whole point of life is to survive and pass on
    our amazing good looks.

  • Anthony Clatts
    I will now defeat you until you cease to respond(I will return periodically for your ignorance if it notifies me)
    You are holding on to an notion... God made this God did that. There is absolutely no evidence for God and more importantly is no consistency in man's concept of God(too many religions and Gods).
    This is because, _Man made God_

    The modern study of Biology is ONLY based on evolutionary progression through genetic exchange and, you said it correctly, chance mutation.
    You are saying that you KNOW more than the entire foundation of the
    subject, Biology.

    If there is a creator(not the arbitrary word God which means anything you want it to) out there it is terribly
    unlikely that the Bible can tell us very much about that being. In fact
    the Bible says very little about what exactly God is supposed to be.

    If you researched it you would find astronomical amounts of inconsistency
    in the Bible with the study of reality. I can give you many examples but
    I'm running long here and you might not actually have the ambition to
    debate me.
  • Adam Cowan
    ‎@Anthony, no need to debate, I am right :)

    I don't claim to be more intelligent than the majority of the scientific field (there are many creation scientists who hold a biblical world
    view), in fact, they all have higher I.Q.'s than me. In... my opinion the Bible does a better job of answering the tough questions in life.

    You are right that there is no scientific evidence that there is a God,
    apart from this creation, the moral conscience found in every person,
    and of course the Bible. The existence of God cannot be proven or
    disproved. As far as who God is, I will limit myself to what the Bible
    says, and what I can learn from creation. I take the Bible at face
    value, no weird interpretations, just what it says on the page.

    Biology is not based on evolution, for evolution is a theory, a man made idea
    that tries to explain how everything got here. Like God, it cannot be
    observed, proven or disproved. I find evolution lacking for many
    reasons. For starters how many mutations are actually beneficial. A
    mutation is a loss of information not a gain. I have not come across a
    mutation that actually changes the organism into an entirely different
    kind of animal. I see many changes in species, but no leap from
    reptiles to birds, or wolves to whales. That brings me to the second
    major problem, no missing links, they are still missing. There should
    be an abundant amount of fossils and current transitional organisms, but
    few doubtful examples exist.

    I do disagree about the Bible being a reliable source of revelation. I believe it tells us all we need to
    know, and can handle, abut God. I will admit there are some hard
    questions about the Bible, and some apparent contradictions. If you are
    determined to see them, then there is no point explaining, but if you
    wish I will do my best to address any contradictions you find.

    I am a skeptic at heart, and don't like to accept the status quo.
    Becoming a Christian, and staying a Christian is only by the grace of
    God. Up to myself I would slander and put down Christians, but the more
    I study, and the more I read, and the more God works on me, I know what
    truth is.

  • Scott Steimling
    Adam, you poor ill-informed, brainwashed kid... the bible offers no answers to real questions, just fables and stories handed down amongst desert
    tribes until groups of people gathered bits and pieces together, and
    then haggled over what wa...s
    truth and what was not in fashion at that moment. How can you believe a
    story book assembled by committee, and reinterpreted time and time
    again until you can no longer know what the original said?
    If your god was so perfect, he wouldn't have left such a shoddy handbook that man could screw up so badly, now would he?
    And as for "When scientists figure out how nothing became something" -
    that's how your god came about... man created something (god) from
    See More

  • Anthony Clatts
    Nonsense, you said, "evolution... Like God, (it) cannot be observed, proven or disproved."
    "God" is an ambiguous term which is entirely up to an individual person's interpretation and thus their imagination. "Evolution" is a term for the
    which is observed in fossil records, genetics and has consistently been
    shown in practice to exist most obviously in the process which viruses
    and bacteria quickly adapt and survive despite our immune systems or
    antibiotics etc. You said the study of evolution is the opposite of the
    practice of observation and gathering evidence.

    Scott Steimling, "man created something (god) from nothing", nice one...
    I also want to address, "how nothing became something"... This is not the
    kind of argument I would posit... The universe appears to itself be
    eternal as matter can not be created nor destroy but only fluctuates in
    form. The very dynamic and relative chaos which fuels change and motion
    in the universe seems to have to last forever. the only assumption that
    can be made from the evidence is that the universe truly has infinite
    dimension. It is difficult to understand how the universe can fluctuate
    forever but it is even more difficult as you said to understand how
    "nothing became something". In fact your theory of a Christian God is
    exactly that nothing which became something.

    Here is where i think my trouble most directly lies so i will go directly to that,
    "I will limit myself to what the Bible says, and what I can learn from
    creation. I take the Bible at face value, no weird interpretations, just
    what it says on the page."
    If you take the bible at face value you aren't questioning it as much as you should. Much more than that, you
    are believing in God based on a book which was written by men not God
    himself. Most troubling is that you have not personally experienced God
    and God's decisive directive. I say, God is a desire not a direction.
    You enjoy the practice of believing in God but don't actually have real
    verification of it. You MUST go to the Bible to talk about Christianity
    and that book is a hoax dare I say a joke when seen from the perspective
    of how religion resides in the human social conscience.

  • Adam Cowan
    ‎@ Scott, You got me, I am brainwashed, biased, and I do have presuppositions, as does everyone. I have chosen to study to the Bible
    and use it as my lens through which I see life. Your history of the
    Bible sounds more like the history of...
    the Koran. I don't know if you've heard of the Dead Sea Scrolls or
    not, but google it. Many of the Hebrew texts from which the Old
    Testament is translated are copies dating from 900 to 1100 A.D. When
    the Dead Sea scrolls were found in the mid 1900's the age was determined
    to be around the time of Jesus, and earlier. That's a 1000 years of
    hand written copies in between these manuscripts. When the texts are
    compared it is striking how little variation exists between copies,
    despite a thousand years of history in between.

    As far as bits and pieces of stories handed down the textual evidence does not back up
    this theory. The many (almost 6000 Greek texts of the New Testament
    alone) are remarkably similar. I should know, I own a Greek NT equipped
    with a Textual Apparatus that shows what manuscripts were used, how old
    the manuscripts are, and how much of the NT is contained in the
    manuscript. I might concede that the Old Testament was oral tradition
    handed down, but once it hit print it did not change. As far as oral
    tradition for the NT, not likely at all. The NT was written over a span
    of 50 years, (the OT is roughly a 1000).

    As far as man's interpretation, well yes, that will vary, but not the words on the page.
    We can both read Moby Dick and the finer points of our literary
    analysis may differ, but we will most likely agree on the plot and main
    characters. Regardless of our interpretation the words remain.

    The Bible claims to be the Word of God in many places. True, men did write
    it, but under the influence of God. As such it takes on the
    characteristics of God, it is true, and reliable.

    As far as man creating god(s), look at Greek, Roman, Norse, Native American, etc,
    mythology. When men create god he turns out a whole lot like himself.

    My goal in all of this is not to argue about who is right, I already know I
    am :) , but to understand and remember how I use to think, and to
    present a defense of the Christian faith. In all seriousness these are
    questions of life and death. How we answer them determines how we live
    and how we understand this life. 

  • Adam Cowan
    ‎@Anthony, My apologies, we are knee deep in this topic and have not defined our terms well enough. When I use the name God I am referring to the God of
    the Bible. Though the Bible is not a complete picture of God is does
    give many attrib...utes of Him and tells us some of what he has done, what he is doing, and what he will do.

    When I speak of evolution I am usually referring to macro-evolution as the
    theoretical engine that creates new kinds of animals and originated in
    the first living cell. Variation within kinds of animals is also
    considered evolution, and with that type of evolution (micro-evolution),
    I have no problem. What I do not believe, due to lack of proof on many
    levels is one kind of animal changing into another. I do not see birds
    changing into mammals, or even transitional organisms whether living or
    preserved in the fossil record. I know evolutionists have a few
    favorite fossils, but if evolution is truly the process by which life
    comes about then would there not be hundreds, thousands, or more fossils
    that show the progression? The example of viruses and bacteria doesn't
    really prove evolution, unless those virus and bacteria mutate into a
    new kind animal all together. At this point you may say, "of course you
    can't see viruses and bacteria changing into new organisms, it takes
    millions millions of years for that to happen." To which I say, "you
    can't observe evolution then?" If you can't observe the actual process
    where it matters most, then is it really observable science? To me it
    is clear that evolution is in the same boat as God, neither can proved
    with science.

    As far as the universal being eternal matter I totally agree with your point about God. Yes God has no beginning or
    end, He is outside of time, and space. He is not creation as pantheism
    would teach, but he is outside of creation. So who created God? An
    eternal God doesn't really answer the question of origin, any more than
    more than an eternal universe. I am limited by time and space, so I
    won't begin to pretend to have a satisfying answer to this problem. For
    now I will exercise faith, I think I can wait the rest of my life and
    ask God when I see him how the whole eternal thing works. For now I
    will ask, which is more likely, an eternal purposeless universe giving
    birth to matter and life, or an intelligent being framing the universe?

    I will agree with you again on my lack of an actual experience with God.
    I will admit that it would be easier if God would just pull back the
    clouds and speak. It doesn't make sense that God would make us and then
    not communicate some how. He could reveal himself to us on an
    individual basis, or talk to us all at once, but he has chosen to use a
    written word instead. unlike conversations which are forgotten and
    remembered wrong, written words do not change. If God so choses to
    reveal himself directly to me, great. Would you believe if he had? How
    would I know it was God, and not my imagination, or an evil spirit? If
    two people have contradicting revelations who is right? There problems
    with a written word, but I think a spoken word would cause more. I do
    place a lot of stock in the Bible, but only because I have seen it prove
    true again and again. I no longer approach it doubting, but expecting
    to see harmony and truth. 

  • Scott Steimling
    ‎"use it as my lens through which I see life" - distorted as necessary to preserve the power over the ignorant masses

    "As far as man creating god(s), look at Greek, Roman, Norse, Native American, etc, mythology. When men create god he turns ...out a whole lot like himself." - and yet your god claims to be the blueprint for man... where is the difference from all the other gods?

    Your devotion is certainly strong... but I continually wonder how people
    that consider themselves educated can believe in such stories. Lots of
    writings? Perhaps, handed down over time. Over a wide time span? Yes,
    it takes a lot of work to create legend.

    If you are short on experience with god communicating directly, visit your local mental
    health inpatient facility. You will find many residents there who have
    been in daily communication. How can you prove that their experience is
    false while others are not? The symptoms are the same, just a matter
    of degrees

  • Anthony Clatts
    Alright you say evolution is not observable and yet God's creating everything is least observable of all. I am very likely going to major in a
    genetics field and have already studied the subject on several levels.
    Firstly we have to realize...
    that life is estimated to have existed around 3.8 billion years ago on
    Earth and possibly longer elsewhere in the universe... The original life
    forms which have been preserved in fossils for example show that these
    organisms where vastly different than the organisms which exist today.
    There have been vast periods with different kinds of animals inhabiting
    the Earth and in earlier times mammals didn't exist let alone anything
    like a human. there is no evidence that a God just came by every once in
    awhile to give Earth a new creature but evolution makes perfect sense
    out of this situation while also being backed up by genetic timeline
    figures and genetic similarities between certain species.
    I find not believing in evolution to be far more offensive than believing in God.
    For God there is little if conflicting evidence either way. With
    evolution you have to be a fool to disagree with it and not have studied
    how biology works and has been studied.

    "When I use the name God I am referring to the God of the Bible." and when other people refer to
    God they mean something totally different and yet believe it the same,
    fervently. How can you explain the difference in conviction and mystical
    experience when there is supposed to be only one God which speaks to
    all mankind? You can't answer that adequately I know...

    Also unanswerable,

    If God is infinitely powerful why does the Devil need to exist and do
    "evil" things? If God if infinitely knowing than why does it say in the
    Bible that God regretted making man and thus committed genocide against
    man except for one family which then had incest and repopulated the
    earth. If God is omnipresent than why do bad things have to happen at

    I also want to say I was raised Christian and grew up looking for God. My gigantic curiosity combined with the inexplicable
    lack of definition and destination associated with believing in god led
    me to philosophy, science and art. In the end it made me believe
    especially in myself because it wasn't really there.
  • Belinda Clatts Hang in there Adam-my son is awesome and intelligent- however, I too use the Bible as the lens through which I see life.

  • Adam Cowan
    ‎@Scott, I don't know if you are aware of the lens through which you see life. You rule out the supernatural and see Christians as insane. I do find
    that funny because some of the greatest, and most influential men and
    women of history
    been Christians. Even the fathers of modern science, like Newton, were
    Christians and based there science on an orderly world that follows

    In a nutshell here is the Biblical Worldview. God created everything perfect, including Adam and Eve, who were made in his image.
    He gave them the world and told them take care of it. There was only
    one thing they could not do, and they ended up doing it which sent the
    whole universe in a tail spin. Obviously the world is no longer
    perfect, including people. We broke it, but God promised to fix it.
    This promise is fulfilled in Jesus who became man (for it was man who
    messed up), and bore the consequences for us, which was death. Because
    he never broke God's laws, death had no power over him, and he rose
    again. Those who believe that Jesus was who he said he was and follow
    him begin to taste of the glory that is to come. Right now we only see
    of glimmer of the future kingdom. One day everything will be restored.

    You ask how I know God isn't talking to the insane people, well I don't,
    but if what they claim God is telling them doesn't match up with what he
    has already written, then keep the strait jacket on. That is the
    beauty of a written word as opposed to a spoken word. The Bible is the
    standard by which everything else is measured, that is how my mind
  • Adam Cowan
    ‎@Anthony, I stand by my statement that macro-evolution is not observable. I know of no one living who was present at creation of this world, save
    God, and he recored that bit of history is in Genesis.

    How do you know life began 3.8 billio...n years ago? Which dating method would like to put your trust in? They
    all come up with different answers, plus each dating method is built on
    assumptions. One has to assume the rate of decay is constant, one has
    to assume there was no lead in the rock to begin with. There are too
    many variables. Carbon 14 dating has the same problems as radiometric

    I do not know much about genetics or fossils. I don't think there is a vast difference between the animals in the fossil
    record and the animals of today. I would also disagree that there was a
    time with no mammals, but I need to do more research in this area.
    Just a thought here, how do fossils form? A rapid burial caused by
    catastrophic events? How about a huge flood covering the earth laying
    down tons of sediment burying large numbers of animals quickly? Maybe a
    flood in Noah's day really did happen.

    You ask some very tough questions. I am impressed. Many people put little thought into
    anti-god, anti-christian, and anti-bible mindset.

    There is only one God, and there is only one way to be right with him. Sincerity is
    nice, but doesn't help. God does not call us to be sincere, but to
    repent. I find it odd that we are so eager to paint man as just, and
    God as the villain, yet we all quickly admit how horrible men can be.
    The Bible describes man as completely depraved. We can do nothing good
    apart from his grace. Once we realize we have offended a holy God we
    have the right view of ourselves. Once we understand what God had to do
    in order to forgive us we have a right view of God.

    When you touch on the problem of evil you hit the nail on the head. To me this
    is by far the most difficult question facing Christians. You will find
    no answer that completely satisfies. God is in charge, and Satan is a
    dog on a leash. God has given him a measure of authority, but he can
    only go as far as his chain lets him. Satan choose to go against God,
    but will never win. How can he, he is not God. The best answer I can
    give to this problem is what God decided to do in order to conquer evil
    once and for all. He took the entire punishment upon himself at the
    cross. In order to forgive us it cost him his son. Here is the God of
    the universe coming to this earth, taking on flesh making himself lower
    than the angels he created, and dying?!? Does not make sense. God
    deserves to be served, but he served us as an example. When I struggle
    with the problem of death, suffering, and evil, I meditate on what God
    has done.

    I am surprised you didn't find glimpses of God in philosophy and science. Especially in Plato. Finding God is no easy
    task, but at least he has confined his written revelation to one book.
    It is true that over 2000 years, a totally different culture, and a dead
    language compound the problem, but I believe God made it as easy as
    possible. Some truths are only found through much digging and

    If you truly search for God, you will find him, but if you are anything like me, I doubt you will find God, he will find you.

Views: 367

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

even people who don't believe that humans have evolved HAVE to believe that most animals have evolved through natural selection. You cant misinterpret the facts.
most of the questions people have about life...the ones who look into the bible for the answers, are usually hopelessly lost and need to feel comfort.

For me, I don't need to worry about the meaning of life. I'm experiencing it right now. Life is filled with meaning. Love, friendship, making the world a better place. etc.

and I'm sorry, but the biblical meaning of life is just plain ignorant. I refuse to live my life to worship something. Why would a god give us our own lives if we are only meant to use them to worship him? what kind of sick sadistic shit is that? I guess there has to be a heaven....some place big enough for God's ego to reside.

I really don't see why people don't believe in this "crazy theory" of evolution, but yet they believe that we came from dust and magic.
Here, here, Jon, I couldnt have put it better.
The idea that animals, plants, and the other organisms of this world were simply "poofed" into existence requires an even greater leap of faith for me. Evolution simply makes more sense.

No. No god for me to serve. First you have to establish that the god is even worthy of following.

Yeah. Bright. Ignore mountains of evidence and hard science. Just trust in one book of fairy tales.
I prefer to say that I think evolution is the most correct answer we have to the question of why is there so much diversity in life.

Evolution has nothing to do with abiogenesis (study of how life on earth could have arisen from inanimate matter) and many theists would do well to know the difference between the two studies. Evolution along with genetics explains the diversity of life that we see on our planet. Evolution is for all intents and purposes a fact and has been proven true time and time again.

But of course none of this is going to convince a person who is firmly convinced by their own 'evidence' that something else is true.
"Evolution says we are here by chance, no more than a highly evolved animals, and the whole point of life is to survive and pass on our amazing good looks. "

Um, no. Evolution does not say that we are here by chance. Evolution isn't random. Sure, mutations are random, but the process of evolution most certainly is not. Natural selection is the driving force behind evolution. I am so sick of people who can't be bothered to do even the most rudimentary research on the matter before disregarding it as false.
Just updated the comments to new my post. I have yet to reply to Adam myself, but some of my new atheist friends have. Take a look.
My Reply To Adam:


I apologize that it has taken me so long to reply to your comments on my post. My life is really crazy at the moment and I haven't had the time nor the patients to sit, think, research, or reply. I realize a lot has been said on a variety of topics since my original posting, but I would actually like to return to my original topic which was evolution.

In your initial response you posted that the skink is still a skink, and yes I would agree with that, however it is no longer the same skink it originally was. This shows that evolution has taken place. You then wen on to say that it is still laying eggs which is not true. If you read the article it states that some are giving birth to the live skinks and they are no longer born in eggs. Yes it says they still have a thin membrane, but that is not the same thing as an egg. Most mammals are born with a similar membrane which the mother has to help the offspring out of. Would you call those eggs as well?

You then went on to asking how nothing became something and how something became life. Neither of those points have anything to do with evolution, the first deals with physics and cosmology and the second is abiogenisis. Neither one has anything to do with evolution, so it is extremely dishonest to equate them with it in any form. If you would like to see the leading explanation on how something could possibly come from nothing I suggest you watch this video: and for more information on the current evidence for abiogenisis, check out this video:

Now that I cleared up that those both have nothing to do with evolution, I would like to look at some of your claims about evolution. You went on to say "When it comes to the basic questions of life, how did we get here, why are here, what's the point of life, etc., I find no better answers than what is written in the Bible. God made us for his glory and we are to serve him." Thats nice, but evolution is a biological process which explains how the diversity of life came to be. It has nothing to do with the meaning of life, how life first started (abiogenisis), or anything else. Further more , evolution does not say that we are here by chance. Evolution isn't random. Sure, mutations are random, but the process of evolution most certainly is not. Natural selection is the driving force behind evolution.

You mention creation and creation scientists a few times, so before continuing I would like to remind you that the scientific community does not recognize creation or intelligent design as a science and neither do our courts. You also stated, "Biology is not based on evolution, for evolution is a theory, a man made idea that tries to explain how everything got here." This is so far from the truth that it shows how little you really know of what evolution actually is. Evolution is both a theory and a fact. Facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. In everyday speech, "theory" often means a hypothesis or even a mere speculation. But in science, "theory" means "a statement of what are held to be the general laws, principles, or causes of something known or observed." as the Oxford English Dictionary defines it. The theory of evolution is a body of interconnected statements about natural selection and the other processes that are thought to cause evolution, just as the atomic theory of chemistry and the Newtonian theory of mechanics are bodies of statements that describe causes of chemical and physical phenomena. In contrast, the statement that organisms have descended with modifications from common ancestors--the historical reality of evolution--is not a theory. It is a fact, as fully as the fact of the earth's revolution about the sun. Like the heliocentric solar system, evolution began as a hypothesis, and achieved "facthood" as the evidence in its favor became so strong that no knowledgeable and unbiased person could deny its reality.

As for some of the reasons you said you find evidence lacking, first, you asked how many mutations are beneficial? Every mutation that has helped an organism to survive . Let me give you 3 examples I can think of in humans. For example, there is a specific mutation in human DNA which confers HIV resistance delays AIDS onset. There is also a mutation in cultures of people who relied on cattle for centuries which prevents the natural shut of the body's production of lactase. Lactase aids in the breakdown of lactose in milk and without it, anyone ingesting milk suffers serious digestive consequences. Another example, is Sickle cell disease which is a blood disorder in which the body produces an abnormal type of the oxygen-carrying substance hemoglobin in the red blood cells. One-third of all indigenous inhabitants of Sub-Saharan Africa carry the gene, because in areas where malaria is common, there is a survival value in carrying only a single sickle-cell gene.

As for a "kind" of animal suddenly changing into another kind, this is not at all what evolution is. I also have issue with the use of the biblical word "kind". Please define what a kind is using scientific classifications. Is it at the level of Species? Genus? Family? Order? etc... For the sake of argument, I will assume you mean species and continue from there. Evolution is a gradual process of small changes over a long time. Eventually a species undergoes so many changes it could no longer reproduce with its original form and at this point it is now a new species. Give these small changes millions of years and you get the variety of life we have today.

As for transitional forms, you misunderstand what a transitional form is. Technically every form is a transitional form and yes we have lots of evidence of this. If you would like to see a comprehensive list of some of the more important transitional forms we have fossil records of, then please check out this site:

As for your use of macroevolution, you clearly do not understand what this even is. Firstly, macroevolution has indeed been observed multiple times under both controlled laboratory conditions and in nature. Also, The terms macroevolution and microevolution relate to the same processes operating at different scales, but creationist claims misuse the terms in a vaguely defined way which does not accurately reflect scientific usage, acknowledging well observed evolution as "microevolution" and denying that "macroevolution" takes place. The actual definition of macroevolution accepted by scientists is "any change at the species level or above" (phyla, group, etc.) and microevolution is "any change below the level of species.

Evolution is not in the same boat as god; not even close. Evolution is backed by fossil evidence, observable evidence, and genetic evidence. As for god, there is not one bit of scientific evidence proving his or her existence.

Yes some of the greatest scientific minds were christian, but so what. The majority of them were alive before evolution was even an idea. Also, don't foreget that Darwin himself was a christian who had attended seminary. It wasn't until he discovered evolution that he himself turned away from god. Just because somebody believed or disbelieved in god says nothing about the validity of scientific facts.

I am going to stop there for now. I really think that it is extremely dishonest of you to criticize evolution when you yourself don't know the facts. You continued to spew the same creationist propaganda that I did when I believed as you do. The truth is that none of it is accurate and it is really dishonest to attack something you don't fully understand or haven't fully studied. I would never attack an organization I haven't fully investigated or attack the core beliefs of a religion I haven't ever fully investigated. I suggest you read actual scientific journals and watch actual scientific videos to see what evolutionary biologist are actually saying and what evidence there actually is for evolution. Just as you wouldn't find somebody who never read the bible or any other christian texts to spread rumors and lies about christianity as if they were true, you should be sure you know what evolution really is and what evidence there is before you attack it with false information.

For more information on evolution I suggest the follow site:

And the following video series:

If you would like me to discuss my views on some of your other comments that are unrelated to evolution, then let me know. I would be glad to discuss them as well.
I have read of favism being a beneficial mutation or disorder as well as diabetes with a logical hypothesis.
To all those who think a mass of cells couldn't possibly change anatomy and struture and become increasingly complex but still retaining function. . . YOU did it in nine months!
Adam, how can you use the dead sea scrolls as evidence that your bible is inerrant if you dismiss radiometric dating methods? How the hell do you think we dated them? By checking the copyright?
They're quick to praise science when it suits their purposes.


© 2020   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service