Ancient ALIEN Creationism - science or new age RELIGION?

Irish said:
I haven't heard of the creationist alien theories, but the fact that ancients in south america didn't have the laser or weight lifting technology to create some of their fine cut stones, could lead one to believe they had extra terrestrial help.

Or perhaps they had ancient tech we aren't yet aware of.
Click to expand...


Well, PiMPle thinks a guy built a huge boat 47000 years before that so yeah maybe ET showed the Mayans how to call the interstellar Home Depot? Sounds like a reasonable hypothesis. LOL
 
Creationists goalposts have rollers.

First they say you can't prove evolution. It's proven by observing changes within a species.

So they say you can't prove evolution beyond the level of a species. It is proven through the observation of speciation events.

Now they are demanding proof of evolution beyond "kind" but they cannot specify what level of variation "kind" represents or how one would test that variation. The only test imaginable is one comparing dna.

I guess, you could specify what level of change in dna kind represents and then demand observation of those changes from a parent to an ancestral species. Of course, evolution does not predict those sorts of changes in a short time period. So it might buy you some time but you are just going to kick the can again and God will shrink a little to fit into the remaining gap.

But you will never explain why there should be any hard limit on variation at any level.
 
Dick from the Internet said:
they cannot specify what level of variation "kind" represents or how one would test that variation.
Click to expand...

???....see?.....they deny there are goalposts.......simple enough.....provide me with scientific evidence that proves humans and algae are related......how you test it is your problem, you're the one who claims its scientifically proven......
 
if you want a simpler task, provide me with scientific evidence proving that butterflies evolved from a creature that was a caterpillar that never turned into a butterfly, or a creature that was a butterfly that never turned into a caterpillar.......tiny little goal posts on the football field of macro-evolution......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
the scientific method isn't intended for religious beliefs.......that's why its irrelevant to my beliefs or yours......I difference is I don't pretend my beliefs are science like you do........
Click to expand...

The scientific method is intended and works well for claims about evolution.

What you call science is often religion but science is not religion.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
if you want a simpler task, provide me with scientific evidence proving that butterflies evolved from a creature that was a caterpillar that never turned into a butterfly, or a creature that was a butterfly that never turned into a caterpillar.......tiny little goal posts on the football field of macro-evolution......
Click to expand...

Butterflies evolved from Moths, which evolved from kaddis flies, which all have a larva stage (you know.. caterpillars, maggots). You don't get to decide how evolution works. Tiny variations are made to a species over time to adapt to their environment. I know it's hard to understand how this could work in your worldview, but with billions of years to work with, those tiny variations add up.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
???....see?.....they deny there are goalposts.......simple enough.....provide me with scientific evidence that proves humans and algae are related......how you test it is your problem, you're the one who claims its scientifically proven......
Click to expand...

I deny there are goalposts? There are no clear ones represented by "kind." You'd have to define what "kind" is and what degree of variation separates one kind from another and how that variation might be measured.

So what are the limits to your theory of evolution. It can't explain the differences above the level of kingdom but everything below? LOL

I guess we are making progress.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
if you want a simpler task, provide me with scientific evidence proving that butterflies evolved from a creature that was a caterpillar that never turned into a butterfly, or a creature that was a butterfly that never turned into a caterpillar.......tiny little goal posts on the football field of macro-evolution......
Click to expand...


Why? You are the only one who has suggested that happened.

I am not going to bother answering your every question when you guys can't seem to figure out what would prove the "macroevolution" (see the rapidly evolving creationist dictionary but it seems to mean evolutionary changes that span kingdoms at this moment) you claim is impossible.
 
Last edited:
Magic Monkey had a blind baby boy and named him Adam. Adam was no Neanderthal, he was the first human. Magic Monkey was really pissed he had a blind baby so he kept him blind so he can't see his ugliness. He still wanted to continue on his lineage though, she Magic Monkey took his rib, cast a spell, and made a human girl which he named Eve. Magic Monkey wasn't a very good parent and let his children hang out with bad influences like a talking snake. Talking snake boy convinced Eve to do the most heinous and evil thing, eat a fuckin' apple. The magic apple made them no longer blind and they saw each other's genitals and they panicked. Magic Monkey was really pissed at all of them, he made them blind for a reason! No lookie at the genitals! Magic Monkey told the snake, "You little douche, I'm gonna make you slither on your belly forever", and he cursed the two humans with sin. The end! This is how evolution and PMP's worldview merge.
 
PiMPle's old fallback shows how little he understands about evolution as he confuses it with metamorphosis. Metamorphosis does not involve a change in dna sequence. Coincidentally, the epigenetics that upset TheDonald so explain the changes in gene expression that control metamorphosis.
 
Last edited:
Dick from the Internet said:
Why? You are the only one who has suggested that happened.

I am not going to bother answering your every question when you guys can't seem to figure out what would prove the "macroevolution" (see the rapidly evolving creationist dictionary but it seems to mean evolutionary changes that span kingdoms at this moment) you claim is impossible.
Click to expand...

Look Dickie, we all know by now that you can not answer any question without seriously mocking yourself................

The fact is that evolution happens because of the billions of lines of DNA code that creates it. Not even one simple gene was created from nothing, and there is no evidence that this ever happened. Now even if it did happen, saying that this is a scientific fact without any substantiated or even unsubstantiated proof is ignorant, like the God haters that spew it.
 
Dick from the Internet said:
I deny there are goalposts? There are no clear ones represented by "kind."
Click to expand...

obviously you just did....

You'd have to define what "kind" is
Click to expand...

no I don't.....I didn't use the word at all in my posts....

provide me with scientific evidence that proves humans and algae are related
Click to expand...

stop asking questions and answer one......simple question...... no need to create a new vocabulary about "levels"........just a need to answer it...
 
Dick from the Internet said:
Why? You are the only one who has suggested that happened.
Click to expand...

so you don't think butterflies evolved?......me either.....

I am not going to bother answering your every question
Click to expand...

lol, dude.....you never answer ANY questions......this conversation goes no further till you answer my only one, which IS my understanding of macro-evolution...." scientific evidence that proves humans and algae are related"........one fucking goalpost that isn't moving.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top