The forbidden TRUTH

• Biochemistry is the studyof the basic chemistry and processes that occur in cells. The biochemistry of all living things on Earth is incredibly similar, showing that all of Earth’s organisms share a common ancestry.
  
  
• Comparative anatomy is the comparison of the structures of different living things. This figure compares the skeletons of humans, cats, whales, and bats, illustrating how similar they are even though these animals live unique lifestyles in very different environments. The best explanation for similarities like the ones among these skeletons is that the various species on Earth evolved from common ancestors.
  
  
  
  
  Credit: Illustration by Kathryn Born, M.A
  Comparative anatomy of the bones in the front limbs of humans, cats, whales, and bats.
• Biogeography, the study of living things around the globe, helps solidify Darwin’s theory of biological evolution. Basically, if evolution is real, you’d expect groups of organisms that are related to one another to be clustered near one another because related organisms come from the same common ancestor.
  
  On the other hand, if evolution isn’t real, there’s no reason for related groups of organisms to be found near one another. When biogeographers compare the distribution of organisms living today or those that lived in the past (from fossils), they find that species are distributed around Earth in a pattern that reflects their genetic relationships to one another.
  
  
• Comparative embryology compares the embryos of different organisms. The embryos of many animals, from fish to humans, show similarities that suggest a common ancestor.
  
  
• Molecular biology focuses on the structure and function of the molecules that make up cells. Molecular biologists have compared gene sequences among species, revealing similarities among even very different organisms.
  
  
• Paleontology is the study of prehistoric life through fossil evidence. The fossil record (all the fossils ever found and the information gained from them) shows detailed evidence of the changes in living things through time.
  
  
• Modern examples of biological evolution can be measured by studying the results of scientific experiments that measure evolutionary changes in the populations of organisms that are alive today. In fact, you need only look in the newspaper or hop online to see evidence of evolution in action in the form of the increase in the number of antibiotic-resistant bacteria.
  
  
• Radioisotope dating estimates the age of fossils and other rocks by examining the ratio of isotopes in rocks. Isotopes are different forms of the atoms that make up matter on Earth. Some isotopes, called radioactive isotopes, discard particles over time and change into other elements.
  
  Scientists know the rate at which this radioactive decayoccurs, so they can take rocks and analyze the elements within them. Radioisotope dating indicates that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, which is plenty old enough to allow for the many changes in Earth’s species due to biological evolution.
  

ghostdriver said:

The fact your trying to explain things without a creator and connect species claiming they are all one species, and some groups decided to "just do different things" so then there "Body's" became different making butterfly's, baboons, trout, elephants is such a extravagantly ignorant suggestion of "evidence" it's staggering. Your theory is to deny the existence of a omnipotent. I could gather random skeletons from extinct species and claim it's the same thing and there are billions and trillions missing links between the two. Does this make me sane?
I could say,
It's bones are made of same material
and it's skull is similar. So would I be right?
This isn't evidence.. And that's exactly what your'e doing.
This isn't even rational reasoning or suggesting.

Do you think if you and the rest of the darwin worshipers, got your family's together and started to live standing in the ocean standing up to your waist do you think after many generations you will become sea people?- Serious question

So besides dwelling on your suggestion of evidence as nothing, do you care that what your saying is impossible on every virtual level?
You really want to believe the impossible, world and matter came from nothing and people evolve from germs as well as everything.
Like my marijuana, you think this seed came from a germ. And it can appear from nothing. And it happens over time.
and light and water and man and women and you think these germs can do all these things and leave no evidence and just stop and not question how they could do this or where they came from, or why you are physically made the way you are.
And that these germs that have always been here somehow seem to have stopped transforming into things now. Because in reality things just decompose and die and people can't run into the water (us you claiming be the germs) and start to slowly grow gills over generations and become mermaids and be fish people and build Atlantis and have sharks as pets.
This is reality not something George Lucas or Steven Spielberg wrote.

You : "No, matter has always existed in some form or another. We have no reason to believe matter can be created or destroyed. "

Me:
- If matter is here it got created do you have proof that something is able to come from nothing? EXACTLY
--------------------------------------------------------speechless-------------------------------------------

Click to expand...

Ceepea said:

I think Ghost is a member of this group... lol

Click to expand...

Ceepea said:

It's not the only thing possible, nincompoop. lol

You toss the word impossible around like you actually understand what it means. It's cute.


You don't talk to god anymore than you talk with the man on the moon.

Click to expand...

ghostdriver said:

Everything you just posted states that the body of humans and creatures have the ability to be acclimated which was the starting point of darwins theory. There is no proof that human beings come from bacteria or any creature ever. I'm sure you got excited at this misleading presentation but read what you posted. Your'e saying that I said animals and human beings flesh are not similar, they are very similar in someways but our soul is nothing like theirs. I'm not asking you to prove survival of the fittest ether, which this mentions, or how animals belonging to the same gene pool can mate with other animals making adaptions to their body. All dogs and cats are mixed breeds, and different nationalities have different traits skin, eyes, face ect. That change based on your partner in your gene pool. Our skin and body also will become more resilient to sun, or weather the longer we endure it. GOD's creation is awesome. Darwins theory is that this proves his theory. I already knew this. I know what your religion believes, this is what you think of as holy scripture. Now where is the proof that
germs=Human beings
germs= made creation matter and light
germs made germs or germs have always been. Matter can't create mater unless it's THE ALMIGHTY OMNIPOTENT GOD
I will begin to ask you questions knowing the answer to prove your religion is wrong if you want me too. But you said you have proof I know what you think but I want your proof. This is like a islam man posting Qu'ran saying "this this is proof!" I would tell him the same thing i'm telling you this isn't proof this is your theory I already knew your blasphemous cult theory. I would then ask for proof again so where is all your proof you speak of? (asking knowing the answer because I am a witness of GOD) Then if you want I can begin to ask you questions ( knowing the answers) to have blatantly show you the irrational and obscure view your'e being tricked into.
- Post 804 answering your post 803
Response to your post not liking this post
And Claiming all creatures are built a certain way to swim, run, fly ect. is clearly proof of GOD not that bacteria are constantly trying to evolve into human beings with the ability also to be monkeys, elephants, giraffe, ect. lol this is a horrible blaspheme theory based on the noticing how animals are all built in a certain way to pertaining to how they live? So instead realizing GOD made everything the way it is for a reason stars, sun, earth temp, earth spin, all the animals and your fingers and toes, body ect. Your religion says "that's impossible you have never seen that happened so believe something else you have never seen that people and animals constantly evolve from bacteria and we don't know anything else but this is right we are positive, and even though there is no bacteria forming into creatures or humans or anything in which would EVER suggest this, we have no evidence at all for this idea, but because all the other options are wrong because we say science doesn't support that a being can create things, because we haven't seen it.? Well science says your'e wrong because batter can't create something from nothing, Only THE CREATOR GOD can.

Click to expand...

ghostdriver said:

Every marine Biologist knows what the Hen bone is and what it's used for it's not legs. It's a pelvic bone designed by GOD which helps in the mating. You saying it's a leg is ignorance.
http://creation.com/the-strange-tale-of-the-leg-on-the-whale
http://www.trueorigin.org/ng_whales01.asp Doesn't list speculation it's listing facts
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakicetus is very clear that some people THINK that, but that's not based off evidence.
Pakicetus is an extinct genus of amphibious cetacean of the family Pakicetidae which was endemic to the Eocene of Pakistan.[1]The vast majority of paleontologists regard it as the most basal whale.
-If this was fact with real evidence all paleontologist would agree.Pakicetus was originally described as being a mesonychid, but later research reclassified it as an early cetacean due to characteristic features of the inner ear found only incetaceans; namely, the large auditory bulla is formed from theectotympanicbone only. It was then believed to be descended from mesonychids, according to Gingerich & Russell 1981. However, the redescription of the primitive, semi-aquatic artiodactyl Indohyus, and the discovery of its cetacean-like inner ear simultaneously put an end to the idea that whales were descended from mesonychids, while demonstrating that Pakicetus, and all other cetaceans, are artiodactyls. Thus, Pakicetus represents a transitional taxon between extinct land mammals and modern cetaceans.[4]
- Gingerich again but then corrects himself when he finds what he calls "new evidence" LOL
-Gingerich also from the 2001 November issue on the walking whales LOL which
It was illustrated on the cover of Science as a semiaquatic, vaguely crocodilelike mammal, diving after fish.[5]
- LOL completely not what it looks like on wikipedia
Somewhat more complete skeletal remains were discovered in 2001, prompting the view that Pakicetus was primarily a land animal about the size of a wolf, and very similar in form to the related mesonychids. Thewissen et al. 2001 wrote that "Pakicetids were terrestrial mammals, no more amphibious than a tapir."[6]
However, Thewissen et al. 2009 argued that "the orbits ... of these cetaceans were located close together on top of the skull, as is common in aquatic animals that live in water but look at emerged objects. Just like Indohyus, limb bones of pakicetids areosteosclerotic, also suggestive of aquatic habitat"[7] (since heavy bones provide ballast). "This peculiarity could indicate thatPakicetus could stand in water, almost totally immersed, without losing visual contact with the air."[8]
The Pakicetus skeleton reveals several details regarding the creature's unique senses, and provides a newfound ancestral link between terrestrial and aquatic animals. As previously mentioned, the Pakicetus' upward-facing eye placement was a significant indication of its habitat. Even more so, however, was its auditory abilities. Like all other cetaceans, Pakicetus had a thickened skull bone known as the auditory bulla, which was specialized for underwater hearing.[9] Cetaceans also all categorically exhibit a large mandibular foramen within the lower jaw, which holds a fat pack and extends towards the ear, both of which are also associated with underwater hearing. "Pakicetus is the only cetacean in which the mandibular foramen is small, as is the case in all terrestrial animals. It thus lacked the fat pad, and sounds reached its eardrum following the external auditory meatus as in terrestrial mammals. Thus the hearing mechanism of Pakicetus is the only known intermediate between that of land mammals and aquatic cetaceans."[10]With both the auditory and visual senses in mind, as well as the typical diet of Pakicetus, one might assume the
- Your basically reading this and thinking because this creature isn't just like another one, it's got to be in the middle of it evolving phase LOL
None of the features in question are any evidence of an evolutionary relationship. Even evolutionists admit that most of the theoretical relationships built on the basis of anatomical similarities between animals are completely untrustworthy. If the marsupial Tasmanian wolf and the common placental wolf had both been extinct for a long time, then it is no doubt that evolutionists would picture them in the same taxon and define them as very close relatives. However, we know that these two different animals, although strikingly similar in their anatomy, are very far from each other in the supposed evolutionary tree of life. (In fact their similarity indicates common design—not common descent.) Pakicetus, which National Geographicdeclared to be a ‘walking whale,’ was a unique species harboring different features in its body. In fact, Carroll, an authority on vertebrate paleontology, describes the Mesonychid family, of whichPakicetus should be a member, as “exhibiting an odd combination of characters.”[3] Such prominent evolutionists as Gould accept that ‘mosaic creatures’ of this type cannot be considered as transitional forms.
Do you think the duck billed platypus turning into a complete duck?
So your'e saying GOD can't create creation and has always been? but the Universe can create and has always been? That's literally believing in something that you claim is impossible.
"You think because GOD ALMIGHTY is the beginning and the end, you can state that the universe can be the same because it's following the same principal? That's completely erroneous. The only reason GOD is before everything is because GOD is a living omnipotent being that you cannot fathom. Before the beginning GOD was."- page 43


I'm really bewildered how someone can ignore all evidence and revolve there existence based off from 6 skeletons that show no scientific evidence of mutation connecting the 6. Let alone the millions of others leading up to six, and all the other animals and contradictions of your darwin theory which is too broad to list.. This whole theory and religion around the skeletons of Pakicetus becoming a whale literally holds not factual evidence. Mere suggestion of thought. If wolverines were extinct no doubt you would claim that skeleton was leading to bears from the weasel family and was a early version of a bear. You would actually have a lot better case, but thankfully we know because they are both still around this would be a lie. Believe it or not animals species die off all the time, this doesn't mean they are some link in your evolutionary chain. The difference between the animals is beyond drastic, not a slow form evolution. Your saying these animals evolved like poke'mon over night, into a whole new complete species. You would have to have hundreds of slow evolving skeletons leading into these giant leaps of different creations which you compare to be the same. To suggest what you are saying as factual.


Praise THE ALMIGHTY GOD JUDGE over all things and HIS SON LORD JESUS CHRIST GOD over men's souls.

Click to expand...

ghostdriver said:

The fact your trying to explain things without a creator and connect species claiming they are all one species, and some groups decided to "just do different things" so then there "Body's" became different making butterfly's, baboons, trout, elephants is such a extravagantly ignorant suggestion of "evidence" it's staggering. Your theory is to deny the existence of a omnipotent. I could gather random skeletons from extinct species and claim it's the same thing and there are billions and trillions missing links between the two. Does this make me sane?
I could say,
It's bones are made of same material
and it's skull is similar. So would I be right?
This isn't evidence.. And that's exactly what your'e doing.
This isn't even rational reasoning or suggesting.

Do you think if you and the rest of the darwin worshipers, got your family's together and started to live standing in the ocean standing up to your waist do you think after many generations you will become sea people?- Serious question

So besides dwelling on your suggestion of evidence as nothing, do you care that what your saying is impossible on every virtual level?
You really want to believe the impossible, world and matter came from nothing and people evolve from germs as well as everything.
Like my marijuana, you think this seed came from a germ. And it can appear from nothing. And it happens over time.
and light and water and man and women and you think these germs can do all these things and leave no evidence and just stop and not question how they could do this or where they came from, or why you are physically made the way you are.
And that these germs that have always been here somehow seem to have stopped transforming into things now. Because in reality things just decompose and die and people can't run into the water (us you claiming be the germs) and start to slowly grow gills over generations and become mermaids and be fish people and build Atlantis and have sharks as pets.
This is reality not something George Lucas or Steven Spielberg wrote.

You : "No, matter has always existed in some form or another. We have no reason to believe matter can be created or destroyed. "

Me:
- If matter is here it got created do you have proof that something is able to come from nothing? EXACTLY
--------------------------------------------------------speechless-------------------------------------------

Click to expand...

ghostdriver said:

Creation is the only thing possible.

Click to expand...

Ceepea said:

That is a ridiculous question, that has nothing to do with evolution.

If people were forced to live in the water, people who were better adapted to swimming would have the advantage. If that advantage led to them mating more often than people who were less advantaged, over time, you would see peoples body structure steer more towards being adapted to swimming, but that doesn't mean you'd see gills or shark teeth on your grandkids. Which I know is what you were getting at.

Over millions and million of years in the water, you would see some more sever changes, but nothing like in the span of humanity. A mere 200,000 years.

Why do you keep posting the same things over and over again? Out of these 54 pages, most of your posts would fit onto one page without all the duplicated.

Click to expand...

MonkeyChimp said:

I can't wait until we evolve from needing to debate strangers with text.

Click to expand...