Why are we so bad at this?

ZUC, you wrote:"Evidence?
​You keep going off on tangents about other stuff, stuff you
also don't provide evidence for."It's easy to find. Just Giggle:"Scientists who believe life leached from rocks."I didn't say that little men jumped out of rocks. Certainly you
did not entertain this thought.The chemicals that leached from the rock is what some have
suggested.They have to think of something, because it is impossible for
life to come from non-life.Your problem is the same problem that Dwise and others
have. This is simply that there is no known way that life can
create itself from nothing.Another problem is that there is no evidence, fossils or
otherwise, for molecules to man evolution.I believe in change. Change is observable, but the propaganda
that universities are spewing out is not observable. You can
have faith that they are right, but nothing more.

Dwise, you wrote:YOU MADE THE CLAIM SO IT IS Y*O*U*R RESPONSIBILITY
TO SUPPORT YOUR OWN CLAIM!"***You are the ones with the problems, not me. Both you and
Zuc have seen articles that suggest the chemicals that can l
lead to the formation of life leached from rocks into murky
pools of water.What I mean by this being your problem is that without
admitting God as the Creator you still must show how life
arose from non-life.This is a gigantic problem for atheists. And, I will not let it
go.The law of biogenesis states that life cannot come from
non-life. Do scientists ignore this law? Yes, they do when
it serves their purpose.To suggest that life came from non-life is laughable.
Evolutionists claim that it did happen though. A simple cell
was first to evolve, they say. But the problem is that even a
simple cell is complex.Also, there is no known observable process by which new
genetic information can be added to an organism's
genetic code.Without new information an organism cannot change into a
higher form or organism.Over time everything loses information.My problem is not that evolutionists believe in a molecule to
man evolution. It is that they claim it is a fact, when it is merely
a worldview that one must accept by faith only.

Zuc, your problem is to show how life arose from non-life.The low of biogenesis is firm and immovable.This is a monumental problem for atheists.However, they can get around this problem if they just
acknowledge the Creator.Do you acknowledge the Creator?

ZUC, have you ever thought about the specified complexity
of the kinesin motor protein.The job of the kinesin is to transport was cellular components
(cargo) alongs microtubules to designated parts of the cell.The KMP actually walks. It packs it cargo on its back. When a
load is too heavy for one, more can help. And when navigating
to another pathway, the kinesin gives its cargo to another
KMP.The kinesin can deliver its cargo to any part of the cell. It is
similar to a mailman, who sorts the mail, and then carries it
to its destination.Look up the KMP on YouTube and tell us how it created
itself. Where did it get the information required to do this?Or, how about the flagella motor that contains 40 parts,
consisting of gears, bushings, etc... it even has reverse.The flagella is a rotary engine, with whip-like tails, that
propels the bacterium. The rotary engine rotates at a
speed of nearly 300 revolutions per second. It is
powered by the flow of protons.It is more complicated than anything man can create. How
can simple bacterium possess such sophisticated machinery?Science has never observed anything close to this creating
itself.How did the flagella motor create itself? Look it up on
YouTube.

Percy, a flat earth has nothing to do with this.It is science that prevents me from believing in evolution.The simple cell is more complex than a space shuttle.If you believe that a space shuttle can design and build
itself, then you, Zuc, Dwise, and all atheists are total idiots.You know that the cell could not and did not design and
build itself. No one is that foolish.Atheists simply refuse to acknowledge God. They have this
mentality that if they deny Him that He will simply disappear.It doesn't work like thatDarwin thought the the cell consisted of nothing more than a
jelly like substance inside a membrane.Darwin also believed that little water bugs, sometimes seen
on small puddles, spontaneously sprang to life.Dinosaurs with soft tissue, blood cells, and C-14 are the
best proof against evolution.Observational science clearly proves that life can only
come from pre-existing life. Not one has life been observed
coming from non-lifeObservational science clearly proves that kind produces
kind. For example, a human will always produce a human.
A pig will always produce a pig. A chimp will always
produce a chimp. Never have we observed differently.You might not like observational science, but that's tough.
It is what it is.You might have faith in evolution, but you have no proof.My issue is not that people want to believe in evolution. It
is that they claim evolution is a fact. This is a lie.Natural selection is exactly what it says. It only selects from
the genes in pool. An ape can never be anything but an ape,
regardless of how many centuries pass.Infinite time can never do the impossible.Evolutionists are the ones who are deluded. They cannot
understand basic scientific principles. They believe that
eons of time can distort the laws of science.

Percy, you asked:"Remaining on topic, why do you think you’re not succeeding
in convincing anyone?"***It is really difficult to convince someone who already has
his mind made up.Percy, do you understand the complexity of the single cell?I stated that the simple cell is as selectively complicated as
a space shuttle. I might have understated this. I believe that
it is as complicated as the universe is.Even Dawkins has stated that the cell has the appearance of
design. If you are honest with yourself, you will also admit this
Is true, whether you believe it or not.I believe in creation because this is what I see. From symbiotic
relationships to extreme complexity, from organisms on the
highest mountains to those in the deepest depths of the oceans,
I see design.With all our current knowledge, from sending crafts outside
our solar system, to landing sophisticated machines on Mars,
we cannot duplicate the amazing machinery inside our bodiesThe info required to reproduce us is in our DNA. Mutations and
natural selection does not produce the info needed to upgrade
any organism.The knowledge required to create everything we see is amazing.
We can have access to the God of this knowledge. It makes
absolutely no sense to run from Him.But, I understand. The ability of Satan to deceive is also amazing

Dwise, you stated:"If you knew anything at all, you would realize that relying
on complexity arguments is a very stupid mistake to make."***Okay, I will be waiting for you, in your infinite wisdom, to
tell us step by step by step exactly how the first cell created
itself.If you can do this, I will be amazed. If you can recreate this
feat, I will deny the existence of God.Then you can tell us step by step by step how the flagella
motor created itself. I will be amazed.The truth is that you can't. You know you can't, and I know you
can't. The entire world knows you can't.You can believe that the impossible happened if you want, but
unless you can replicate what you assert, it amounts to
nothing but faith; in fact a blind faith.You run your mouth as though doing so makes you look really
intelligent. Let me tell you that it doesn't work.I used to do the same thing, but then I grew up.​

ZUC, you stated:"So can we convince hard core believers in something,
probably not, but anyone on the fringe, is generally open
to learning more."***Right back at you, buddy.

Dwise, you wrote:"All you're telling us is how dishonest you are and how false
your religion is."
​
"And how completely and stupidly ignorant you are that you are
completely incapable of answering a simple direct question."
​
"What the fuck is so completely wrong with you?"***I have already asked if you believe in theistic evolution.
It is a simple question. Yes or no.If you do believe in TE, then there is no need to continue
with the completion of the cell.If you do not believe in the Creator, then you must explain
how the first cell evolved, and how it grew more and more
complex.This is what is wrong with me.

Percy:"Why do you think you’re not succeeding in convincing anyone?"
​
Me: "It is really difficult to convince someone who already has
his mind made up."
​
Percy: "Isn't that true of everyone who has a firm opinion?
Including you?"Me: Then why did you suggest that I am the only one who
has an issue with convincing others?

ZUC, you wrote:"I'm sorry, I can't hear you over the fact that you won't
answer the SINGLE inquiry I did about something you said.
Do I need to repeat it again?"***Yes!

ZUC, just one example:The famous atheist and “materialist philosopher” Daniel Dennett.
These paragraphs come from a New Yorker profile on the man
and his thought, and specifically how life evolved:""Four billion years ago, Earth was a lifeless place.
Nothing struggled, thought, or wanted. Slowly, that changed.
Seawater leached chemicals from rocks; near thermal vents,
those chemicals jostled and combined. Some hit upon the
trick of making copies of themselves that, in turn, made
more copies. The replicating chains were caught in oily
bubbles, which protected them and made replication easier;
eventually, they began to venture out into the open sea.
A new level of order had been achieved on Earth.
Life had begun."***There are more. But, you were not concerned about this.
You are simply in over your head, because you cannot show
how the first cell created itself.You know that you don't know. I know that you don't know, and
you know that I know you don't know. But you have a lot of
company. There is not a person who can successfully answer
this question.Your persistence in this "chemicals from rocks to life
statement" is simply a way to keep you from admitting that
without a Creator, life is impossible.Life cannot come from non-life. You and all atheists are in
over your heads.

Percy, there is really nothing this forum can do to change
minds.If the specified complexity of the cell cannot alter one's
perception, nothing will. That individual is impervious to
change.

ZUC, you stated:"You realize that science is pretty exact right? If I say "You
were born from your mother" that's a statement easy to
check. But if I say "You leeched into existence from your
mother" that is an entirely different statement. Right?
You realize that that statement doesn't make sense, right?"***We can witness were babies are formed, and where they
come from. I was in the delivery room when both of them
were born. I observed their birth.There is historical science and there is observational/
operational science.Historical science is subjective. Our opinions are shaped by
our paradigm or world.Both atheists and creationists know that fossils exists. This is
a good example of historical science. How we interpret these
fossils are subjective.How the universe came into existence, and how all the
varieties of organisms and animals on earth is also
subjective. There is no way that we can go back in time
and observe either.True science is observable and/or operational. Operational
science is the process by which we sent men to the moon.
It is responsible for the creation of the telephone, microwave,
computer, etc...Operational science is the method but which surgeons
developed the knowledge and skill to perform open heart
surgery, and other highly sophisticated medical procedures.Historical science can lead men to ponder and speculate,
even to think deeply, but we cannot recreate what happened
in the past.It makes no difference how we believe that life came about,
we cannot recreate how it happened.Whether atheists/evolutionists or creationists historical
science requires faith.​

Dwise, you stated:"Specified complexity of the cell" is nothing but creationist bullshit, "
ID" bullshit in this case. WHY WOULD YOU EXPECT BULLSHIT TO
CHANGE ANYONE'S MIND?"***You are a funny guy, Dwise. But you are two dimes short
of 25 cents if you expect anyone to believe that the itty, bitty,
simple cell created itself.Darwin had no idea of the complexity of the cell. But we now
understand the impossibility of this happening. Darwin knew
nothing about epigenetics. He based his ridiculous assertion
on bird beaks.If you are a creationist, say so!!! Are a TE?Atheists believe in long, long, long eons of time. It is their
God. For them time can accomplish anything, even the
impossible.But, time cannot break the law of biogenesis, which states:Life only arises from pre-existing life. Also, that living
organisms produce only more living things like themselves.I believe this law, exactly life a sincere, honest scientist would
do.Science vs. atheists.​