Most atheists dont know about science (Page 162)

Angry Beaver: true dat

kittybobo34: Chrono,, the only problem with your concept of creation is that it doesn't account for all the new species that keep happening, like reptiles from amphibians, dinosaurs from reptiles twice, and marsupials then mammals.

chronology: Sigh, with all respect to you kitty, that is your opinion. There is zero,and I will repeat zero evidence, that amphibians set up gene splicing labs, scanned DNA from other creatures. Then having scanned the DNA placed it in cells and began breeding new species. Maybe they did, but believing in a Great Architect of creation who did the Gene splicing makes more sense.

Educated respectable folks like yourself these days are falling for the story that Aliens did this. The movie Prometheus describes such people. Personally I still think actually creating a world and all life on it is beyond even the most advanced Civilizations. Only God can create such worlds.

kittybobo34: Just the morphology that the early reptiles had the same characteristics of the amphibians, and went on to fill all the niches on the planet with reptilian creatures.

Blackshoes:

Blackshoes:

theHating: "all life on it is beyond even the most advanced Civilizations"

Civilization hasn't had 700,000,000 years to develop unlike the natural development of vestiges.

Blackshoes: So you say. Odd that there is almost no evidence of any organized civilization beyond 10 thousand years old

theHating:

Blackshoes: Bacteria has had over a 3 billion year to evolve? Yet it remains Bacteria
Where is ToEs assumption for Bacteria?
Where is ToEs prediction now OMG so sad

theHating: Wow, you dont understand how things EVOLVE according to the laws of evolution, big surprise

Blackshoes: Neither do you', or do evolutionary paradigms make one bite of sense without mountains of explanation on how the unlikely and impossible must be plausible So that their religious dogmas and endless preaching of the pseudoscience of ToE can continue.

theHating: Bacteria has had over a 3 billion year to evolve? Yet it remains Bacteria

The evolution of bacteria

In the currently accepted classification of life, there are three domains (Eukaryotes, Bacteria and Archaea),[2] which, in terms of taxonomy, despite following the same principles have several different conventions between them and between their subdivisions as are studied by different disciplines (botany, zoology, mycology and microbiology), for example in zoology there are type specimens, whereas in microbiology there are type strains.

Prokaryotes share many common features, such as lack of nuclear membrane, unicellularity, division by binary-fission and generally small size. The various species differ amongst each other based on several characteristics, allowing their identification and classification. Examples include:

Phylogeny: All bacteria stem from a common ancestor and diversified since, and consequently possess different levels of evolutionary relatedness (see Bacterial phyla and Timeline of evolution)
Metabolism: Different bacteria may have different metabolic abilities (see Microbial metabolism)
Environment: Different bacteria thrive in different environments, such as high/low temperature and salt (see Extremophiles)
Morphology: There are many structural differences between bacteria, such as cell shape, Gram stain (number of lipid bilayers) or bilayer composition (see Bacterial cellular morphologies, Bacterial cell structure)
Pathogenicity: Some bacteria are pathogenic to plants or animals (see Pathogenic bacteria)

What would be weird is if anything else could survive today without symbiotic relationiships between many kinds of bacteria and multicellular life. Do you then question the intelligence behind a designer's incorporating a 3 billion year long project into another project that depends on its existence in order to live?

Blackshoes: Quoting Microevolutionary change' doesn't support the fairytale of Marocevolution which is clearly false.
No trans-species event has ever occurred.

theHating: So you believe all macro was the final product that god designed? So then what is intelligent about microevolution -- gene mutations occuring naturally, say, from a miscommunication of the information in the cell, or selective breeding. How do you draw the distinction between GENETICALLY MODIFIED fruit of today with GOD'S DESIGN over 4 millennia ago.?

theHating: All emergent complexity begins with no complexity at all, certainly nothing about a single bird seems like intelligence, but when you have a flock flying in unison, this is an emergent property of UNINTENDED NATURALISM.

theHating: Nothing about a single cell precludes an emergent design until multiple cells create the bird.

At no point is a single allele of bacteria intended until it is needed to digest food in the guts of animalia.

kittybobo34: Hating brought up an interesting point. Fruit and plant based foods have improved 1000% since the early wild versions because of human intervention. If it were intelligently designed they would have been perfect from the start.

theHating: Nevertheless, how does an intelligent disney (oops, design) proponent assert ANYTHING is gods intended product if they also assert microevolution to be a natural explanation for random gene frequency mutation?

theHating: ID = INTENTIONALLY DELUDED

theHating: Are the poor dental dispositions of the Brits a sign of intelligent design??? What is intelligent about randomly fked up teeth???

kittybobo34: Not to mention back problems, from a form that is incompletely adapted to walking upright. Or
the appendix, incompletely removed from our leaf eating ancestors. Or
the human foot, incompletely redesigned hand into a walking appendage. Or
the occasional tail that comes with new borns.

theHating: Nevermind the observations of embryonic stages of human development. The human offspring resembles every trait of its ancestry in the first 9 months of its conception.