Do you believe in Evolution?

[Frisbeeteria]

Did you look at my information?

It's lost in all these comments. Would you be so kind to dig it out for me?

From this and other comments, I can only believe that you are here exclusively to troll and annoy. Given your extensive warning history in your short time here,

*** Forumbanned for one week ***

Just so you know, posting with any puppets in the interrim will result in the deletion of both nations. Posting along these same trollish lines on your return will also result in deletion.

[Riiser-Larsen]

I believe it. But I don't believe we evolved from any type of monkey or apes. I believe we evolved separately, on our own timeline.

Ta da! We actually didn't evolve from monkeys, we just shared a common ancestor. Likely many millions of years ago, and it didn't look anything like either species looks today.

[Liriena]

I believe it. But I don't believe we evolved from any type of monkey or apes. I believe we evolved separately, on our own timeline.

Monkeys/apes/the big fucking group known as 'primates' are not our ancestors. We do, however, share a common ancestor.

But since you decided to make the claim, I suppose you want to hold onto this... *passes hot potato*
Prove your assertion.

[Old Tyrannia]

I believe it. But I don't believe we evolved from any type of monkey or apes. I believe we evolved separately, on our own timeline.

Explain further.

[Chinese Regions]

I believe it. But I don't believe we evolved from any type of monkey or apes. I believe we evolved separately, on our own timeline.

What? Monkeys only exist in a parallel universe?

[Liriena]

Another hot potato coming right up!

*gives hot potato*

Now the burden of proof is on you as well.

They work together, they coincide.

Prove your assertion, don't just repeat it.

[Neo Rome Republic]

Here's my problem:
So what I'm told is that, it's ''magic'' is a valid answer? In that case all biological evidence of people not coming back to life is false when it comes to vampires, vampires are real, because they are ''supernatural''. If a person makes a claim about God, and it doesn't have to be Scientific, then how does this work with burden of proof?

[Riiser-Larsen]

It's lost in all these comments. Would you be so kind to dig it out for me?

From this and other comments, I can only believe that you are here exclusively to troll and annoy. Given your extensive warning history in your short time here,

*** Forumbanned for one week ***

Just so you know, posting with any puppets in the interrim will result in the deletion of both nations. Posting along these same trollish lines on your return will also result in deletion.

We should give you some theme song to put in your signature "The adventures of moderator man"

[Utceforp]

I believe it. But I don't believe we evolved from any type of monkey or apes. I believe we evolved separately, on our own timeline.

I'm sorry, that's just so funny. Really, I don't mean to be condescending or anything but that is just so... I don't even know.

Anyway, what do you believe we evolved from? Why do you believe we didn't evolve from apes?

[Bottle]

Evolution coincides with the bible, science and religion work together.

See, now THIS actually pisses me off.

The fuck they "work together." Religion does none of the fucking work! Religion has contributed NOTHING to our understanding of biology or evolution. Religion has contributed precisely ZERO hypotheses. Religion has generated precisely ZERO useful experiments.

I know you probably just meant that religious belief and scientific belief can coexist for you and for many other people. Fine, whatever. But I hate the phrasing, because religion is doing absolutely buggerall when it comes to the actual WORK.

[Kantria]

Creationists, what political party in Germany used this symbol?

Guilt by association is just as invalid when attacking creationists as it is when attacking those who accept evolutionary theory.

[Nationalist State of Knox]

Here's my problem:
So what I'm told is that, it's ''magic'' is a valid answer? In that case all biological evidence of people not coming back to life is false when it comes to vampires, vampires are real, because they are ''supernatural''. If a person makes a claim about God, and it doesn't have to be Scientific, then how does this work with burden of proof?

If Jesus isn't real, why are vampires afraid of crosses?

[EEEEEEEEEWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW]

Um, evolution has NEVER been proven. It's called the Big-Bang THEORY for a reasons. And there have been many flaws found in each paper trying to prove Evolution. One thing that HAS been proven is The Uncertainty Principle, which proves there IS no evolution

[The Merchant Republics]

Yes of course; although I've at times had to mute myself in conversations with my own fellow Christians. Which is a sad case indeed.

I do indeed respect the scientific consensus that demonstrates the certainty of the process of evolution. I don't regard their to be an conflict between that science and my faith.

[Chinese Regions]

I believe it. But I don't believe we evolved from any type of monkey or apes. I believe we evolved separately, on our own timeline.

Monkeys/apes/the big fucking group known as 'primates' are not our ancestors. We do, however, share a common ancestor.

But since you decided to make the claim, I suppose you want to hold onto this... *passes hot potato*
Prove your assertion.

Our ancestors were apes and most certainly primates and we still are apes and primates, we did not evolve from other modern apes/primates, we we share a common ancestor with them.

[Bottle]

No no, back up a step. Start them at the beginning.

They first must provide a testable hypothesis of God.

They don't even have to provide evidence yet. They just have to provide a hypothesis which lays out how we might go about COLLECTING evidence. So far they haven't even done that, so don't skip ahead to the evidence part.

My mistake.

Forty whacks with a wet noodle for giving Creationists entirely too much credit.

[The Blue Wolf Federation]

Look for intelligent design in the universe, I suppose. I'm not the one who's saying God exists btw.

I just read Riiser's post, and he/she brings up a good point.

Alright, I'll change that to

"I predict that God exists because _________________________"

Fill in the blank.

"I predict that God exists because__________________________"

First of all, the problem with your question is that you ask for a prediction. Considering that aspect, God cannot be understood from that perspective. Therefore, I cannot fill in the blank because the blank does not apply to my methodology of thought.

I Believe in God because I see his works through creation.

I Believe in God because He is the control group. One cannot refer to all of creation without God being somewhere at work. Not logically anyway.

I believe that Man's inherent desire and ability to create is a gift from God.

I believe that the above statement is invalid because it overlooks the Fact that God is not a force that can be Predicted. He acts in predictable ways so that we can understand him.

I believe that God allows us to live in a broken and sinful world because of our daily choices.

I believe that God has allowed for those who wish to stray from him a refuge for them to flee to. This is the theology of Science. The worship and glorification thereof is permitted because of the permission of free will.

That any one could call me wrong is impossible. This is what I believe. You could not know better than myself what I think.

[Chinese Regions]

Um, evolution has NEVER been proven. It's called the Big-Bang THEORY for a reasons. And there have been many flaws found in each paper trying to prove Evolution. One thing that HAS been proven is The Uncertainty Principle, which proves there IS no evolution

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=254663&sid=d40ec66af7519ea2ee2bdf523a4ce92e#p15799474
You have frustrated Darwin, Einstein, Hawking and Heisenberg possibly every other scientist ever in a single post.

[Liriena]

Um, evolution has NEVER been proven. It's called the Big-Bang THEORY for a reasons. And there have been many flaws found in each paper trying to prove Evolution. One thing that HAS been proven is The Uncertainty Principle, which proves there IS no evolution

You really have no idea what you're talking about, do you?

[Riiser-Larsen]

Here's my problem:
So what I'm told is that, it's ''magic'' is a valid answer? In that case all biological evidence of people not coming back to life is false when it comes to vampires, vampires are real, because they are ''supernatural''. If a person makes a claim about God, and it doesn't have to be Scientific, then how does this work with burden of proof?

If Jesus isn't real, why are vampires afraid of crosses?

Vampires don't exist, not you have the hot potato of proving that vampires exist.

If I said God must exist to combat the dark lord Cthulhu, that doesn't make my claim any more valid.

[Nationalist State of Knox]

Um, evolution has NEVER been proven. It's called the Big-Bang THEORY for a reasons. And there have been many flaws found in each paper trying to prove Evolution. One thing that HAS been proven is The Uncertainty Principle, which proves there IS no evolution

The Uncertainty Principle is quantum mechanics, not evolutionary biology.

lrn 2 science

[Neo Rome Republic]

Here's my problem:
So what I'm told is that, it's ''magic'' is a valid answer? In that case all biological evidence of people not coming back to life is false when it comes to vampires, vampires are real, because they are ''supernatural''. If a person makes a claim about God, and it doesn't have to be Scientific, then how does this work with burden of proof?

If Jesus isn't real, why are vampires afraid of crosses?

That doesn't answer my question I'm told that God has no Scientific burden of proof because he's ''magic''. How can the claimant then possibly have a burden of proof?

[Utceforp]

They work together, they coincide.

Prove your assertion, don't just repeat it.

He doesn't need to prove his assertion because proving his assertion isn't something he needs to do because he doesn't need to prove his assertion because proving his assertion isn't something he needs to do because he doesn't need to prove his assertion because proving his assertion isn't something he needs to do because he doesn't need to prove his assertion because proving his assertion isn't something he needs to do because he doesn't need to prove his assertion because proving his assertion isn't something he needs to do because he doesn't need to prove his assertion because proving his assertion isn't something he needs to do because he doesn't need to prove his assertion because proving his assertion isn't something he needs to do because he doesn't need to prove his assertion because proving his assertion isn't something he needs to do because he doesn't need to prove his assertion...

[Liriena]

Monkeys/apes/the big fucking group known as 'primates' are not our ancestors. We do, however, share a common ancestor.

But since you decided to make the claim, I suppose you want to hold onto this... *passes hot potato*
Prove your assertion.

Our ancestors were apes and most certainly primates and we still are apes and primates, we did not evolve from other modern apes/primates, we we share a common ancestor with them.

I was trying to say that, but my shitty writing got in the way.

[Old Tyrannia]

Um, evolution has NEVER been proven. It's called the Big-Bang THEORY for a reasons. And there have been many flaws found in each paper trying to prove Evolution. One thing that HAS been proven is The Uncertainty Principle, which proves there IS no evolution

The Big Bang Theory has nothing to do with evolution.