Thread: message to lucifers followers

Originally Posted by Alric

If you go to google scholar which searches for scholarly work and search evolution you get 3,960,000 results. You search for creationism and you get 30,000. The reason there is 132 times more work on evolution than creationism, is because evolution is actual science and creationism is junk science. You will find similar results no matter where you search, in fact if you were to search for only peer review articles the number of stuff written about creationism would probably drop to almost nothing.

ok lets look at google scholar. You search google scholar for evolutionist, and it comes up around 30,000. So that's about the same. Intelligent design and evolutionary design actually have an equal amount of results. The term evolutionist is way different to the term 'evolution' which often discusses different topics that are completely different to the evolutionist debate. There is like 1,970,000 for the search term 'intelligent design' and 30,000 for creationism. That's jst in google scholar, but you should actually be looking in peer reviewed journals about it all.

So this is a good example how you distort things to make out that your view is more prominent than it really is. Your view is also more specific than the evolutionary perspective, because you are claiming something that goes a beyond it, for example saying that we have evolved from monkeys, rather than just speaking in an evolutionary perspective or context, which is completely different. I could write about the evolutionary perspective but that's not to say I am claiming how we evolved. you have to make distinctions.

In summary, you are flat out lying. You know lying is a sin in the christian religion right? Pretty much all scientists in the field of biology agree with evolution, and all text books have evolution in it and it has been taught for the last 50 years. No scientist takes creationism seriously at all.

Do you realize how many christian's have degree's that are contributing to the scientific literature? Tones. Knowledge about Biology is not the same as evolutionist beliefs and many are quite skeptical because they have nothing to go on that says we evolved from monkeys.

Also you do realize that all dna is repeating don't you? DNA is made up of the chemicals adenine, guanine, cytosine, and thymine. The difference between a simplest possible DNA structure and the most complex is the difference of the order and combination of those four chemicals. When you say that adding a new sequence to DNA isn't making it more complex, because you are just repeating something already there, you are showing you have no idea what you are talking about.

Dna is specific genetic patterns but it's the nature of the genetics I'm talking about, it's design. A extra chromosome it's a mistaken repetition not more complex detail. It's not just chemicals that you need to be concerned about. The structure of a cell. Like the actual working of a cell in a body, go look it up. DNA just gives some information on the pattern of the genetics, it doesn't tell us biologically what everything does, we haven't even figured that out about that but they are getting more detailed in their analysis which is allowing them to genetically engineer more. We don't even fully know the details of what dna structure does. It's not as simple as things repeating.

It is like computer code that is all 1's and 0's. If you add more 1's and 0's that isn't anything new but the result is more complex.

But like computer code, it can't write itself. Computers don't write their own code do they? Someone has to code it. There needs to be intelligence enough in the genetics to modify more complexity, mutations or genetic errors don't achieve that anymore than computer errors can write coding. A computer doesn't have the ability to re-program itself without assistance. A computer can't come up with a HTML code for a website without a programmer knowing what they are doing. Likewise bacteria doesn't understand how to become more complex into a human, and it will never understand it in a trillion years because it can't do it. The structure of our cells that makes us a living being enough to be able to write and discuss this, is so complex that it couldn't arrange itself on it's own. Some other intelligence has to code it just like you have to code your software program before it will run. Once the software is designed, then yes it can perform the functions it was designed to perform, but it can't go beyond what it was created to do without a designer that can assist with that. The entire universe is so specifically tuned to life, that it makes your argument look ridiculous!

I mean just because a computer reads in 1's and 0's, doesn't mean that it's coding is simple or repeating because there is infinite number of ways 1's and 0's can be applied. The same goes for DNA programming.

The raging debate between evolutionist theory and common sense has now spawned something called the multiple words theory. And this is where it gets funny, because it leads back to what creationist are saying all along anyway. This multiple words theory is something evolutionist have thought up to try and increase their odds that their theory could possibly have some probability to it. The only problem is the introduction of multiple worlds apart from proving their existence, is that it include's a world where god exists as ruler. So it's just leading back to intelligent design like it always does.