Willowtree's Scientific Evidence against Evolution

I read what you showed me Nosy Ned. It seems they don't like Wyatt so much on this site. But on other sites they like him very much.The site you gave me said nobody has really been back there in a while. So maybe we need a new expedition.

Sigh...What part of "they didn't find the ark" don't you understand?

---

Ia! Cthulhu fhtagn!

well, they never found the missing link either. But you are still looking, right?

Another troll looking for a feed.

Just a small appetizer for the troll. Yes, we have found many missing links and continue to do so.

We havent found any evidence of Jesus either, maybe he is the missing link ?Brian.

You guys - I will look at what you have to say but you have to do the same for me.did you look at the picture? I read the articles you showed me. But I wanted to see pictures about what they were talking about and they didn't have any.I wish you would be nicer.

yes, he is. he's the link between Man and God.The evidence is all over the place. They found many of the places the Bible talked about. Also, a Russian scientist just proved that the red sea can be parted with a wind.

Uh, well, you can go to "fair Verona", the setting for Romeo and Juliet (I've been there), but that doesn't make it a true story.

Hi,He is the link between sanity and insanity thats for sure. James Bond novels speak of London and Moscow, they must be true.Your Russian scientist was actually 2 Russian mathematicians, and they didnt prove, they hypothesised, no theory is ever proven. Oh, and they worked on it for six months with an incorrect figure of 600 000 Israelites, I hope they didnt get a gov grant for it.Brian.[This message has been edited by Brian, 02-03-2004]

I am responding to responses. I did not initiate this round of Bible stuff.I believe I should be allowed to briefly respond to Mamuthus and Mark Austin and Crashfrog.If not then put on your Admin hat and I will respect your ruling.And there is yet another round of Bible type posts going on further up the road yet I see no similar hint directed at them as was me.

Willowtree, the god sense nonsense is of your own initiation. Now, since it has no scientific validity, how about providing the scientific evidence which you claimed to have which contradicted the theory of evolution? Feel free to be as expansive and detailed as you like, provided you can remain on topic and provide scientific evidence rather than philosophical or theological arguments.To other poster, I suggest we ignore the troll activity from psycho.

Without linking to other sites tell me where the information written in DNA originates from ?Tell me the evolutionary process by which the information written in DNA came into existence ?Tell me in plain english how the human eye evolved ?The brain ?Can evolution explain how a piece of meat can think ?How can any evolutionist claim mankind evolved from an ape when the hominid fossil record is by volume of quantity "meagre". These bones are bones of contention seeing how ape and human bones are quite similar.And the irony here is the fact that the only scientists insisting that these bones are transitional are scientists who are atheist.
Don't insult my intelligence and claim their worldview is not involved. It aint a matter of opinion.How is it you completely failed to credit me for actually defending RM&NS in post 116 ?I plainly said I see theological evidence for RM&NS in Holy Writ yet your one way street refuses to expand.Maybe I will start a topic and lay out the evidence FOR RM&NS from the Bible.The integrity of my truth adherence walk has been demonstrated. I withdrew evidence when NosyNed convinced me otherwise. I warmly credited two other evolutionists through out these debates when they posted obviously strong arguments.Actually I am sick of my own arguments because no one (save Quetzal/ Mamuthus/Mark Austin) have had the decency to respond. I keep repeating myself over and over yet nobody can in their own words convince me that they understand the unique argument I brought to these debates. (and I didn't say agree - I said understand)This failure tells me virtually nobody is like me, that is possessing the capacity to embrace a different fact in place of an untrue one that you/I have already spoken up for.My mistake originally was to topic my material in a scientific forum, but if my view is understood it explains why the scientific is defective.When I did post scientific I posted mainstream stuff. (Milton, Behe, Johnson ) And this material was NOT refuted or defeated except for that which I withdrew.The acid test of devotion to truth comes via when a fact is introduced that controverts something you've already said. If a person embraces the new fact they pass the test and psychologically every honest person monitoring the event recognizes this person to be a lover of truth and thus worthy of trust. That is human nature.
I can walk away from this debate with a clear conscience knowing I have passed the test. And shame on anyone who criticizes me for tooting my own horn.

The Bible is the ultimate objective evidence. Go to my topic "Message of the Bible" and lets tango.Crash, you should know from your very interesting exchange with fellow EvC member Peter that even a drunk on the street is evidence - he just aint credible.

I won't even venture into what your concept of "mainstream" is when you cite the above three examples.Nevertheless, what material from your "scientific" sources has not been refute in this thread? Do you have no more "scientific" evidence against evolution. If not, we will dispose of those pieces which you consider have not yet been refuted. O2U.