Genesis Creation vs. Darwin's Macroevolution Myth

[Alter2Ego]

The claim by Charles Darwin and his modern-day disciples, including those in academia, is that all organic beings throughout history were the descendants of a single common organic ancestor. And that this organic ancestor came from NON-LIFE to LIFE by itself aka abiogenesis theory. Credible scientific evidence proves that organic life cannot result from non-life.


According to the atheists, there is no Almighty God Jehovah who created all life forms. So the question is this: If there is no Jehovah and therefore no Creator, how did evolution's supposed "common organic ancestor" come to life by itself so that evolution could proceed?


The Genesis Creation account speaks about the creation of living things by Jehovah, each uniquely different and each CREATED AS-IS, but with the ability to produce variations of themselves—up to a set point.


Credible science supports the Genesis Creation account and contradicts Darwin's macroevolution myth. Fake science, meanwhile, relies on abiogenesis theory (organic life coming to life by itself) but fails to provide any credible explanation for this impossible feat.


QUESTION 1: How did evolution's common ancestor come to life by itself (abiogenesis) so that evolution could then proceed?


QUESTION 2: Humans are supposedly primates, and they supposedly came from the same common primate ancestor as did apes, chimpanzees, and gorillas. How is it that there is not one single fossil showing the transitions among humans, apes, chimpanzees, and gorillas from this supposed common primate ancestor?


QUESTION 3: If every single organic being that has ever existed came from a common ancestor (macroevolution), how is it that there is no evidence within the fossils record to support this claim?



Alter2Ego

 

[AProudLefty]

Darwin theory does not claim that.

 

[Hume]

I guess it is Sunday so the Christians are out.

 

[Hume]

The claim by Charles Darwin and his modern-day disciples, including those in academia, is that all organic beings throughout history were the descendants of a single common organic ancestor. And that this organic ancestor came from NON-LIFE to LIFE by itself aka abiogenesis theory. Credible scientific evidence proves that organic life cannot result from non-life.


According to the atheists, there is no Almighty God Jehovah who created all life forms. So the question is this: If there is no Jehovah and therefore no Creator, how did evolution's supposed "common organic ancestor" come to life by itself so that evolution could proceed?


The Genesis Creation account speaks about the creation of living things by Jehovah, each uniquely different and each CREATED AS-IS, but with the ability to produce variations of themselves—up to a set point.


Credible science supports the Genesis Creation account and contradicts Darwin's macroevolution myth. Fake science, meanwhile, relies on abiogenesis theory (organic life coming to life by itself) but fails to provide any credible explanation for this impossible feat.


QUESTION 1: How did evolution's common ancestor come to life by itself (abiogenesis) so that evolution could then proceed?


QUESTION 2: Humans are supposedly primates, and they supposedly came from the same common primate ancestor as did apes, chimpanzees, and gorillas. How is it that there is not one single fossil showing the transitions among humans, apes, chimpanzees, and gorillas from this supposed common primate ancestor?


QUESTION 3: If every single organic being that has ever existed came from a common ancestor (macroevolution), how is it that there is no evidence within the fossils record to support this claim?



Alter2Ego

Thank you. I just converted to your religion.

 

[Alter2Ego]

Darwin theory does not claim that.

AProudLefty:

Of course he did. So does modern-day evolution theory. Remember, without the supposed common organic/biological ancestor, there could be no evolution, period.

 

[AProudLefty]

AProudLefty:

Of course he did. So does modern-day evolution theory. Remember, without the supposed common organic/biological ancestor, there could be no evolution, period.

Abiogensis is a hypothesis right now. Nobody knows how life arose from non life.

 

[Alter2Ego]

Abiogensis is a hypothesis right now. Nobody knows how life arose from non life.

AProudLefty:

Abiogenesis theory was debunked by Louis Pasteur more than 150 years ago, so I don't know why you think it's still a valid hypothesis.

 

[AProudLefty]

AProudLefty:

Abiogenesis theory was debunked by Louis Pasteur more than 150 years ago, so I don't know why you think it's still a valid hypothesis.

Creation is not a valid theory.

 

[Alter2Ego]

Creation is not a valid theory.

AProudLefty:

The Genesis creation account was never theory. It is a FACT that was unwittingly confirmed by true by science.

 

[Cypress]

The claim by Charles Darwin and his modern-day disciples, including those in academia, is that all organic beings throughout history were the descendants of a single common organic ancestor. And that this organic ancestor came from NON-LIFE to LIFE by itself aka abiogenesis theory. Credible scientific evidence proves that organic life cannot result from non-life.


According to the atheists, there is no Almighty God Jehovah who created all life forms. So the question is this: If there is no Jehovah and therefore no Creator, how did evolution's supposed "common organic ancestor" come to life by itself so that evolution could proceed?


The Genesis Creation account speaks about the creation of living things by Jehovah, each uniquely different and each CREATED AS-IS, but with the ability to produce variations of themselves—up to a set point.


Credible science supports the Genesis Creation account and contradicts Darwin's macroevolution myth. Fake science, meanwhile, relies on abiogenesis theory (organic life coming to life by itself) but fails to provide any credible explanation for this impossible feat.


QUESTION 1: How did evolution's common ancestor come to life by itself (abiogenesis) so that evolution could then proceed?


QUESTION 2: Humans are supposedly primates, and they supposedly came from the same common primate ancestor as did apes, chimpanzees, and gorillas. How is it that there is not one single fossil showing the transitions among humans, apes, chimpanzees, and gorillas from this supposed common primate ancestor?


QUESTION 3: If every single organic being that has ever existed came from a common ancestor (macroevolution), how is it that there is no evidence within the fossils record to support this claim?



Alter2Ego

Dumb . It's equivalent to whining that science hasn't answered every single question we can possibly ask, and made us omniscient.


Evolution by natural selection has nothing to do with the origin of life, which is still an open question.

There are transitional fossils between archaic primates of the Miocene, and modern homo sapiens. Australopithecenes, Homo Habilis, Homo Erectus all show anatomical traits which progressively transition from more ape-like to more human-like through time.

There isn't any fossil evidence of the last common ancestor of all life, because it was a single celled prokaryote and single cells almost never leave a fossil record because they are fragile. There are also almost no rocks that survive from the time period of the last common ancestor. Genetic evidence is what establishes a link between extant life and a last common ancestor that lived around 3.5 billion years ago.

 

[Commander Dutch]

AProudLefty:

Of course he did. So does modern-day evolution theory. Remember, without the supposed common organic/biological ancestor, there could be no evolution, period.

Are you saying God couldn't have created the Universe 13.5B years ago and knew that, like a farmer casting out seed into a field, what would happen? Are you limiting God to what is written by man in a book?

Do you believe the Universe is only 6000 years old?

 

[Commander Dutch]

AProudLefty:

The Genesis creation account was never theory. It is a FACT that was unwittingly confirmed by true by science.

Please post the facts so that I may learn them. TIA.

 

[Concart]

The claim by Charles Darwin and his modern-day disciples, including those in academia, is that all organic beings throughout history were the descendants of a single common organic ancestor. And that this organic ancestor came from NON-LIFE to LIFE by itself aka abiogenesis theory. Credible scientific evidence proves that organic life cannot result from non-life.


According to the atheists, there is no Almighty God Jehovah who created all life forms. So the question is this: If there is no Jehovah and therefore no Creator, how did evolution's supposed "common organic ancestor" come to life by itself so that evolution could proceed?


The Genesis Creation account speaks about the creation of living things by Jehovah, each uniquely different and each CREATED AS-IS, but with the ability to produce variations of themselves—up to a set point.


Credible science supports the Genesis Creation account and contradicts Darwin's macroevolution myth. Fake science, meanwhile, relies on abiogenesis theory (organic life coming to life by itself) but fails to provide any credible explanation for this impossible feat.


QUESTION 1: How did evolution's common ancestor come to life by itself (abiogenesis) so that evolution could then proceed?


QUESTION 2: Humans are supposedly primates, and they supposedly came from the same common primate ancestor as did apes, chimpanzees, and gorillas. How is it that there is not one single fossil showing the transitions among humans, apes, chimpanzees, and gorillas from this supposed common primate ancestor?


QUESTION 3: If every single organic being that has ever existed came from a common ancestor (macroevolution), how is it that there is no evidence within the fossils record to support this claim?



Alter2Ego

Completely wrong. Creationism is not a scientific theory. Quit trying to steal science to prop up your magic sky daddy bullshit.

 

[IBDaMann]

The claim by Charles Darwin and his modern-day disciples, including those in academia, is that all organic beings throughout history were the descendants of a single common organic ancestor.

Incorrect.

And that this organic ancestor came from NON-LIFE to LIFE by itself aka abiogenesis theory.

Incorrect.

Credible scientific evidence proves that organic life cannot result from non-life.

Nope. There is no such thing as "scientific evidence." You should also learn what a proof is.

According to the atheists, there is no Almighty God Jehovah who created all life forms.

Incorrect. Atheists don't know whether there is or not. Atheists simply don't believe that there is, as we have no such theism, but we could be wrong. We don't think so, but we don't know so.

I recommend learning the difference between "to know" and "to believe."

So the question is this: If there is no Jehovah and therefore no Creator, how did evolution's supposed "common organic ancestor" come to life by itself so that evolution could proceed?

Immaterial to Darwin's theory of evolution. If you find that question to be of significance, you can ask how Jehova came to be. Don't you have credible scientific evidence that Jehova's don't just result from non-deities? btw, I'm happy with whatever answer you determine.

The Genesis Creation account speaks about the creation of living things by Jehovah, each uniquely different and each CREATED AS-IS, but with the ability to produce variations of themselves—up to a set point.

Of course. I remember that part about "up to a set point" being prominently featured in Genesis. Jehova told Adam the full, unambiguous limit of evolution, and declared that it shall be called "microevolution" and that no idols or books to macroevolution shall be fashioned. I forget which exact chapter and verse in Genesis covers this but I know exactly what you're talking about.

Credible science supports the Genesis Creation account and contradicts Darwin's macroevolution myth.

But it's the amazing, incredible science that supports Darwin's macroevolution account and contradicts the Genesis account.

Actually, there is no science of either.

Fake science, meanwhile, relies on abiogenesis theory (organic life coming to life by itself) but fails to provide any credible explanation for this impossible feat.

There is no science of abiogenesis, however there are several very credible theories.

QUESTION 1: How did evolution's common ancestor come to life by itself (abiogenesis) so that evolution could then proceed?

QUESTION 1: How did Jehova come into existence by itself (adeigenesis) so that miracles and creation could then proceed?

QUESTION 2: Humans are supposedly primates, and they supposedly came from the same common primate ancestor as did apes, chimpanzees, and gorillas. How is it that there is not one single fossil showing the transitions among humans, apes, chimpanzees, and gorillas from this supposed common primate ancestor?

All fossils show transitions. There are many fossils.

QUESTION 3: If every single organic being that has ever existed came from a common ancestor (macroevolution), how is it that there is no evidence within the fossils record to support this claim?

Don't you think you could have saved yourself a lot of time, effort and confusion by simply reading Darwin's theory of evolution yourself instead of regurgitating the complete mischaracterizations you have been ordered to believe by others?

 

[IBDaMann]

Creation is not a valid theory.

Creationism is entirely valid. You'll notice that it contains no internal inconsistencies.

 

[IBDaMann]

Abiogensis is a hypothesis right now. Nobody knows how life arose from non life.

One possibility is that Jehova got life started. That's one form of abiogenesis.

 

[ZenMode]

The claim by Charles Darwin and his modern-day disciples, including those in academia, is that all organic beings throughout history were the descendants of a single common organic ancestor. And that this organic ancestor came from NON-LIFE to LIFE by itself aka abiogenesis theory. Credible scientific evidence proves that organic life cannot result from non-life.


According to the atheists, there is no Almighty God Jehovah who created all life forms. So the question is this: If there is no Jehovah and therefore no Creator, how did evolution's supposed "common organic ancestor" come to life by itself so that evolution could proceed?


The Genesis Creation account speaks about the creation of living things by Jehovah, each uniquely different and each CREATED AS-IS, but with the ability to produce variations of themselves—up to a set point.


Credible science supports the Genesis Creation account and contradicts Darwin's macroevolution myth. Fake science, meanwhile, relies on abiogenesis theory (organic life coming to life by itself) but fails to provide any credible explanation for this impossible feat.


QUESTION 1: How did evolution's common ancestor come to life by itself (abiogenesis) so that evolution could then proceed?


QUESTION 2: Humans are supposedly primates, and they supposedly came from the same common primate ancestor as did apes, chimpanzees, and gorillas. How is it that there is not one single fossil showing the transitions among humans, apes, chimpanzees, and gorillas from this supposed common primate ancestor?


QUESTION 3: If every single organic being that has ever existed came from a common ancestor (macroevolution), how is it that there is no evidence within the fossils record to support this claim?

Alter2Ego

"Credible science supports the Genesis Creation account and contradicts Darwin's macroevolution myth. "

Yep, the Sky Wizard zapped two white people into existence. Then they had kids and those kids had sex with their parents and siblings to populate where ever the Garden of Eden existed. Then, those white people swam across the oceans and populated Africa with black people, Asia with Chinese, etc.

Or maybe Noah transported people across the world on the cruise ship he built with no power tools.

Seems legit to me.

 

[Commander Dutch]

"Credible science supports the Genesis Creation account and contradicts Darwin's macroevolution myth. "

Yep, the Sky Wizard zapped two white people into existence. Then they had kids and those kids had sex with their parents and siblings to populate where ever the Garden of Eden existed. Then, those white people swam across the oceans and populated Africa with black people, Asia with Chinese, etc.

Or maybe Noah transported people across the world on the cruise ship he built with no power tools.

Seems legit to me.

The Bible has a lot of incest in it. Isn’t it banned in Florida public schools?

 

[ZenMode]

The Bible has a lot of incest in it. Isn’t it banned in Florida public schools?

I would be shocked if Fla banned the bible in schools

 

[domer76]

The claim by Charles Darwin and his modern-day disciples, including those in academia, is that all organic beings throughout history were the descendants of a single common organic ancestor. And that this organic ancestor came from NON-LIFE to LIFE by itself aka abiogenesis theory. Credible scientific evidence proves that organic life cannot result from non-life.


According to the atheists, there is no Almighty God Jehovah who created all life forms. So the question is this: If there is no Jehovah and therefore no Creator, how did evolution's supposed "common organic ancestor" come to life by itself so that evolution could proceed?


The Genesis Creation account speaks about the creation of living things by Jehovah, each uniquely different and each CREATED AS-IS, but with the ability to produce variations of themselves—up to a set point.


Credible science supports the Genesis Creation account and contradicts Darwin's macroevolution myth. Fake science, meanwhile, relies on abiogenesis theory (organic life coming to life by itself) but fails to provide any credible explanation for this impossible feat.


QUESTION 1: How did evolution's common ancestor come to life by itself (abiogenesis) so that evolution could then proceed?


QUESTION 2: Humans are supposedly primates, and they supposedly came from the same common primate ancestor as did apes, chimpanzees, and gorillas. How is it that there is not one single fossil showing the transitions among humans, apes, chimpanzees, and gorillas from this supposed common primate ancestor?


QUESTION 3: If every single organic being that has ever existed came from a common ancestor (macroevolution), how is it that there is no evidence within the fossils record to support this claim?



Alter2Ego

Darwin said no such thing.

Jehovah. That’s Yahweh. Yahweh was a minor storm god in the pantheon of gods. Somehow, morphed into the main god of the pantheon. That’s why Genesis has the reference to plural gods.

Nobody knows how the most primitive life began. Not you. Not scientists.

The fossil record of humans is there, except for deniers. The DNA evidence is also there

The fossil record is clear.

Lastly, your world is older than 6000 years. There was no flood, no ark, no animal pairs on that boat.