Undeniable and Scientific Evidence of THE Creator.

[Zzyzx]

.
From another thread

I present undeniable and scientific evidence of THE Creator.

I await the evidence.

Question for debate: Is the evidence undeniable and scientific (and compelling / convincing) or is it just more of the same stuff that has been presented ad nausea?

[Zzyzx]

.

I agree my friend, I am strange and I never once denied this since I've been here. I honestly don't know, maybe it's the way I was raised, also what I have gone through in my life, but this should not be held against me. Maybe my approach is not so kosher, I know, even a Trigonometry Professor told me that, but I was right. CNC Programmers, best engineers in their field would get mad at me for changing and correcting programs that they spent coinless hours, even days to figure out on computers but couldn't, yet I seemed so positive that it would be right!?
It drove them crazy, and some even got mad and ordered Management to ban me from touching another 5-axis machine program. A few days later, since we were extremely behind production they ran my corrected program, and it solved all the problems. I was given full authority to correct and change anything that I felt needed correction. Within days, I improved production 300%, another words a titanium impeller that took 3 shifts to machine, now only took one.

Congratulations on your achievement with machinery and correcting engineers CNC programming to solve production problems and increase production 300%.

Does that somehow relate to discussion of science and Undeniable and Scientific Evidence of THE Creator.

I see this same thing happening with you my friend, but if you knew me in person, or if you personally knew more about me, maybe I wouldn't be so detestable to you.

No need to flatter yourself by thinking you are detestable to me. That is NOT a matter related to debate.

I know what science is, my God is the greatest scientist there is.

Big claim – substantiation, verification, evidence, citations, URLs?

And I have been sharing this critical piece of info on a Forum that reaches the entire world, also personally with anyone that would give me an ear.

Have your ideas been accepted by scholars, scientists, theologians, or even website debaters?

Does it look like I'm selfish about this?

Since you ask it appears as though "delusions of grandeur" might apply more than selfish (though I would not say that if you had not asked).

Do you have anything more than just general personal opinion about what I say?

I ask repeatedly that you say something that is scientific – as you claimed with "Undeniable and Scientific Evidence of THE Creator" and wonder when you will begin – now that you have given the emotional / testimonial / opinion part.

Can you show me where I am wrong?

You have presented NOTHING that can be shown to be either right or wrong. It is all just your own emotion, opinion and imagination.

Show me where or what I said is not science instead of just rambling on that this is not science?

What part of that is scientific? Science (from Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge") is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe.

Your post appears to me to be nothing more than a rant composed of personal opinions, speculations and testimonials. Nothing is systematic, nothing is verified, nothing is tested, evidence is not offered. Do you really expect to be given scientific credit for your emotions?

I asked you many times to set some ground rules, but it seems you are afraid to step outside your little circle.

I have responded, perhaps more than once, that the Forum sets ground rules. If you wish that there be other rules, suggest them and they will be considered.

Look, I'm sorry, .. but just read your posts to me and honestly tell me that this is not something personal against me?

I have absolutely no interest in your personally – zero – zilch. I do, however, have something against claims and statements made in debate that cannot be verified as true and accurate. I also have something against claims that opinion, conjecture, testimonial represent evidence, truth or accuracy. The person who makes such claims is immaterial to me or to my response.

Look, this is who I am, and this is what you get. I can't go back in my mothers womb and be born again, I can't start over, get more education where you could tolerate me more.

Another option is that you could learn the meaning of science, the meaning of debate, the importance of verifiable evidence, the LACK of significance of personal opinion / emotion / testimonial. Of course, that might not leave much . . . .

I have presented proof,

If someone says "I looked in a mirror and decided all these things" would YOU regard that as proof of anything – let alone "indisputable scientific proof of the creator"?

anyone can debate it, so debate.

There is nothing to debate about mirrors and smoke

What did you expect,

I guessed that what you would produce would be nothing more than opinion and conjecture. Perhaps even that guess was a bit optimistic.

That's math, mine is simple science anyone can observe for themselves.

Correction: Yours is nothing even close to science.


From your post #93 of this thread:

I look at myself and ask who am I?

I look in the mirror and I can see my parents in me

Infinite regress tells me that there has to be someone uncreated that created man

So I look at big things for signs of infinity

I was running out of the possibility of finding an Eternal, Infinite Creative being

So where can I find something Infinite, Eternal that even time couldn't kill,

Someone has suggested we were created by a finite quantum speck of whatever . . . So nope, that's out of the question.

So back again I went to and fro, who or what could have created me and this universe? . . . Nope, not this either.

As I was thinking, I read about the Blue brain project . . . So nope, that's out also.

But this triggered something, and it was not my brain. I realized that this light went off in my mind, before I even stored any of it in my brain.

I tried to put the entire universe inside my mind, and not only could I put the entire universe in there, I could put as many universes as I wanted to in there.

YES! Yes, my mind passed the scientific test, it IS infinite.

It has to be a He, the dominant one like man.

"Who am I?" is created, and "I Am Who I Am" must be the Creator.

The Infinite, Eternal, Creative Mind who Is and lives, who can be best described as "I Am Who I Am".

He is all knowing since he created everything that was created,

He IS, or Eternal so no need to look who created Him since all we need is One Eternal and Infinite, and everything else is the created within Him.

Kindly point out anything scientific

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 100 by arian]


Moderator Comment

This post would be considered to not comply with the guidelines on ranting. Please read through the guidelines and abide by them.
This post contains the same set of paragraphs as many as four times, as well as other multiple repeats. I'm not sure, but the new material in this post appears to be miniscule. Please take some care to only provide new material that is not repetitious and not ranting. This style of post is very tiresome to all readers, whether they agree with you or not. This 'comment' is in the nature of an intervention/clarification; but future posts of this nature will result in 'warnings.'

______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[arian]

Here is what Far Wonderer said: "Do you dislike the idea that humans evolved from non-human apes?"

I corrected him that according to the Evolution story, humans didn't evolve from non-human apes, .. you ARE still an evolving animal, an ape,

I said we evolved from apes that were not human. That doesn't mean that we aren't apes.

As I said, please check out Evolution in the Science & Religion sub forum.

If you evolved from non-human apes, more specifically chimps and you are still an animal, an ape, what have you evolved from?

If a duck can't change/evolve into a crocodile, or is there according to evolution a crocaduck, and all evolved from a single celled bacteria, then how did we get all these different species? I don't mean the different families like dogs and horses, but how did we get a crocodile and a duck?

At what point did one species evolve into another, yet one species (duck) cannot evolve into another (crocodile)? Remember 'at what point' are the keywords here, like in; moment. Like this; duck, duck, duck, family of ducks, crocodile, crocodile, family of crocodiles, etc. show me this miraculous and magical point or moment when one species turns into another, yet they remain the same? Does a duck lay an egg with a crocodile in it? Does the duck wake up one morning and realize it is no longer a duck but a crocodile?

Can you open another post where we can debate this further so I won't be warned for derailing this thread? Thank you. And please PM me if and when you do.

specifically a chimp.

Definitely not a chimp. Specifically a human. Humans are apes, but we are not chimps. We might have a lot in common with chimps, being as we're both apes, but we are not the same thing.

But you were a chimp once, right? Chimp, chimp, chimp, family of chimps, chimp 'human', and no longer chimp, correct?

I have a question: Do you also have a problem being classified as a mammal?

If this relates to me being an animal, yes.

Again, may I ask you this, in your evolution theory: Has one specie, over millions or even billions of years ever evolve into a completely different specie where one can no longer reproduce with the other?

Again? There was a first time?

Yeah, of course that has happened. Although, far more interesting is when one species splits into two or more.

Sorry I was concentrating on the OP, and my mind wondered off to the OP on Evolution where we went through this a hundred times. But it's OK.

One species like let's say a lizard splits into two or more, like one family member wonders off and becomes a giraffe and the other a lion, right? Of course this take millions of years of un-observation, but it happens all the time, correct? Only according to evolution, one species doesn't change overnight, or give birth to another species, it happens over time, very long time where no scientist could ever observe it, it just happens, one moment a lizard (not that this lizard looks anything like a lion, no, it is a family of lizard) and then POOF! No longer a lizard but a lion.

Hitler 'classified' my ancestry on my mothers side as 'rats', so classifications can be very religious and hateful in nature, like taxonomy is.

Does this mean that you think calling someone a mammal is hateful?

If I am being classified as an animal, most definitely YES.

I agree that classifications can be hateful.

Oh really? Can you explain to me why? You know, in evolutionary terms what classification could possibly be hateful?

I disagree that taxonomy is hateful. There is nothing in taxonomy that says you or anyone you have ever known is somehow less than human. Humans are apes, mammals, animals, and yet still uniquely human.

Umm.. Okie-dokie. So it was more like: "You Jews are not less then humans, you are just animals, and your ancestors were rats, or whatever, .. lizards that evolved to apes. No offence meant! If this offends you it is because you are a dumb animal, not smart animal apes like us Evolutionists!"

But, personally, even being "human" isn't important to me, because I am who I am.

Well yea, since you are still an animal, an ape, why should being a human be important to you? You Are What You Are by no will or plan of anyone's but time, very, very long time. Oh yea, and mutation with a sprinkle of that magical fairy dust called entropy.

I mean we can actually scientifically observe mutation and entropy at work every day, and we have Evolutionist speeding up this process. Yes, I have seen the pictures, modern wonders of evolution with children born with another head growing out of his mouth. This is when they moved Evolution from a theory to fact since they have observed and documented evolution as it happens. And these children are actually different species because they can no longer reproduce with other human/animal apes.

[arian]

.

I agree my friend, I am strange and I never once denied this since I've been here. I honestly don't know, maybe it's the way I was raised, also what I have gone through in my life, but this should not be held against me. Maybe my approach is not so kosher, I know, even a Trigonometry Professor told me that, but I was right. CNC Programmers, best engineers in their field would get mad at me for changing and correcting programs that they spent coinless hours, even days to figure out on computers but couldn't, yet I seemed so positive that it would be right!?
It drove them crazy, and some even got mad and ordered Management to ban me from touching another 5-axis machine program. A few days later, since we were extremely behind production they ran my corrected program, and it solved all the problems. I was given full authority to correct and change anything that I felt needed correction. Within days, I improved production 300%, another words a titanium impeller that took 3 shifts to machine, now only took one.

Congratulations on your achievement with machinery and correcting engineers CNC programming to solve production problems and increase production 300%.

Does that somehow relate to discussion of science and Undeniable and Scientific Evidence of THE Creator.

I pointed out that some people have different approaches to even complex problems theories that they themselves cannot explain, yet it works.

My evidence to a Creator is like that, a somewhat different scientific approach. You being a teacher I'm sure you seen the different approaches your students took to answer the questions or present their reports?

I see this same thing happening with you my friend, but if you knew me in person, or if you personally knew more about me, maybe I wouldn't be so detestable to you.

No need to flatter yourself by thinking you are detestable to me. That is NOT a matter related to debate.

Neither is your response, or 90% of your other responses and requests to repeat myself. You may repeat yourself all day long, yet no Moderator steps in to stop you !?!?

I asked you many times to point out what you don't see as scientific proof? What do you do? you keep repeating it's not scientific proof and how you being a teacher of science knows this.
If you do, point it out, like you did my machining examples. You had no problem pointing that out and make me look like I was boasting.

I know what science is, my God is the greatest scientist there is.

Big claim – substantiation, verification, evidence, citations, URLs?

See in 'Christianity and Apologetics' the OP by Zzyzx; "Undeniable and Scientific Evidence of The Creator"

And I have been sharing this critical piece of info on a Forum that reaches the entire world, also personally with anyone that would give me an ear.

Have your ideas been accepted by scholars, scientists, theologians, or even website debaters?

So the only acceptable evidence in debate is from those with credentials? So since I have no credentials, my evidence is unacceptable, considered as delusions of grandeur?

Does it look like I'm selfish about this?

Since you ask it appears as though "delusions of grandeur" might apply more than selfish (though I would not say that if you had not asked).

You find me saying: "Does it look like I'm selfish about this?" as delusions of grandeur? Can you please explain?

Do you have anything more than just general personal opinion about what I say?

I ask repeatedly that you say something that is scientific – as you claimed with "Undeniable and Scientific Evidence of THE Creator" and wonder when you will begin – now that you have given the emotional / testimonial / opinion part.

What parts of my scientifically observed evidence of the Creator is emotional / testimonial / opinion? Can you elaborate please? Point it out?

Can you show me where I am wrong?

You have presented NOTHING that can be shown to be either right or wrong. It is all just your own emotion, opinion and imagination.

You call my artistic expression emotion, my observation as imagination, and my proof as opinion. Yet people can debate the Big-bang theory as the Creator of the Universe that happened 13.75 billion years ago as scientific evidence? That looking into space we are looking billions of years into the past?
Where is the logic in this? Is this fair debate?

Show me where or what I said is not science instead of just rambling on that this is not science?

What part of that is scientific? Science (from Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge") is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe.

I have done that for the 'Creator' of the Universe. It's a start as I said, "the very tip of a very big iceberg", .. remember? No scientist has EVER presented EVERYTHING about a concept or observation in it entirety all at once.

He sends out his hypothesis, then sees what other scientists or anyone interested in the subject has to say, and then it goes on from there. It may take 1 to 300 years or even more to get it to be fact. The scientist like Einstein may have understood what he was saying, but it may take many, many years before it is understood and accepted by all.

And yes, it is a fact that some scientists may oppose the scientific observation for many different reasons, even personal reasons no matter how solid the evidence.

Your post appears to me to be nothing more than a rant composed of personal opinions, speculations and testimonials. Nothing is systematic, nothing is verified, nothing is tested, evidence is not offered. Do you really expect to be given scientific credit for your emotions?

LOL, .. you cut and quote my reply to your off topic comment and respond to that, but you refuse to cut and post and then reply to my scientific evidence of the Creator!? Hmm, now why is that? To my evidence you keep rambling on the samo-thing: "nothing more than a rant composed of personal opinions, speculations and testimonials. Nothing is systematic, nothing is verified, nothing is tested, evidence is not offered."

And your buddies Moderator comment me, and even threaten me with a Warning, on what you do, as if I've done it.

I asked you many times to set some ground rules, but it seems you are afraid to step outside your little circle.

I have responded, perhaps more than once, that the Forum sets ground rules. If you wish that there be other rules, suggest them and they will be considered.

Practically everyone states some ground rules into their OP, to stay on topic. But me, you expect me to summon Otseng, all the Moderators to request a total Forum Change just for this one OP. OK then.

Look, I'm sorry, .. but just read your posts to me and honestly tell me that this is not something personal against me?

I have absolutely no interest in your personally – zero – zilch. I do, however, have something against claims and statements made in debate that cannot be verified as true and accurate. I also have something against claims that opinion, conjecture, testimonial represent evidence, truth or accuracy. The person who makes such claims is immaterial to me or to my response.

It seems you don't have any interest in the truth and evidence I present either, zero - zilch. Your generalized opinion is what seems to matter to you, and of course this has nothing to do with me personally. Got it.

Look, this is who I am, and this is what you get. I can't go back in my mothers womb and be born again, I can't start over, get more education where you could tolerate me more.

Another option is that you could learn the meaning of science, the meaning of debate, the importance of verifiable evidence, the LACK of significance of personal opinion / emotion / testimonial. Of course, that might not leave much . . . .

I believe you mistake me for someone who just got on this debating Forum, I have read and participated in thousands of debates here, and MOST of the posts, including yours lack in everything you mentioned above. Or break civil debate, take things personally, berate, team up against, mock in indirect ways. So don't flatter yourself, at times you can be one of the worst, only you are very intelligent and don't make it so obvious.

Come on and debate my evidence, stop making yourself look so perfect and all. I told you, I am not an animal, so my comments may reveal some of my humanity, like emotion for instance. Or how I came about my discovery by the observations I made throughout my life, it is not some programmed chip in my brain, or coming from animal instinct.

I have presented proof,

If someone says "I looked in a mirror and decided all these things" would YOU regard that as proof of anything – let alone "indisputable scientific proof of the creator"?

Look how you distort and <snip> what I said.

Not even an idiot would accept the Undeniable scientific Evidence of The Creator from a comment like: "I looked in a mirror and decided all these things" LOL. Your so silly, gosh.

anyone can debate it, so debate.

There is nothing to debate about mirrors and smoke

LOL, .. does that mean you refuse, or just give up?

What did you expect,

I guessed that what you would produce would be nothing more than opinion and conjecture. Perhaps even that guess was a bit optimistic.

LOL, when all else fails, cut out 4 words and mock it. Nothing personal right?

That's math, mine is simple science anyone can observe for themselves.

Correction: Yours is nothing even close to science.

From your post #93 of this thread:

I look at myself and ask who am I?

I look in the mirror and I can see my parents in me

Infinite regress tells me that there has to be someone uncreated that created man

So I look at big things for signs of infinity

I was running out of the possibility of finding an Eternal, Infinite Creative being

So where can I find something Infinite, Eternal that even time couldn't kill,

Someone has suggested we were created by a finite quantum speck of whatever . . . So nope, that's out of the question.

So back again I went to and fro, who or what could have created me and this universe? . . . Nope, not this either.

As I was thinking, I read about the Blue brain project . . . So nope, that's out also.

But this triggered something, and it was not my brain. I realized that this light went off in my mind, before I even stored any of it in my brain.

I tried to put the entire universe inside my mind, and not only could I put the entire universe in there, I could put as many universes as I wanted to in there.

YES! Yes, my mind passed the scientific test, it IS infinite.

It has to be a He, the dominant one like man.

"Who am I?" is created, and "I Am Who I Am" must be the Creator.

The Infinite, Eternal, Creative Mind who Is and lives, who can be best described as "I Am Who I Am".

He is all knowing since he created everything that was created,

He IS, or Eternal so no need to look who created Him since all we need is One Eternal and Infinite, and everything else is the created within Him.

Kindly point out anything scientific

Glad to, finally a request to explain instead of mock. Only not to what you clipped out, but what I said.

Next post;

[arian]

God

The Infinite, Eternal, Creative Mind who Is and lives, who can be best described as "I Am Who I Am".

Observing the world around me, I look at myself and ask who am I? I am a complex awesome self contained biological unit with self awareness where I can ask; "Who Am I?"

I wasn't just shaving, I really did ask these questions.
You have anything to add, or ask regarding this comment?

I look in the mirror and I can see my parents in me, and so could they see their parents in them. Infinite regress tells me that there has to be someone uncreated that created man, that is us humans. So there has to be a Creator. But whoever He is, he would have to be infinite and eternal, He cannot have a creator or be of the finite.

Likeness = I see me in the mirror
seen my parents in me = I must be in the likeness of other humans, not an animal
Infinite regress = Grandpa beget mom, mom beget me, me beget my kids etc. But who beget the first human?
Creator = cannot be the created because of infinite regress, and because the created cannot create a Creator. Finite cannot turn into Infinite, .. Simple logic.

So what in this universe is infinite and eternal?

So I look at big things for signs of infinity. Hmm, the universe looks big, but now they tell me that even space is filled with quantum stuff, so even space is created like me, not only that, space reveals entropy or time, so it is not even eternal. There goes space as being infinite and eternal, let alone reason, plan and design. And time which they tell me can evolve things, actually shows that it only destroys things. I know, it is killing me, it killed my parents and billions of other people. Time is NOT a creator, but a destroyer, so that's out. So since the universe is made of finite created stuff, and it ages with time, it cannot be the Creator.

Any questions?

I was running out of the possibility of finding an Eternal, Infinite Creative being that could have planned, designed and created everything in this universe, except Himself/Itself.

Simple logic, I create by using my mind, then I instruct my brain to move my extremities to get what I need, and put it together.

So where can I find something Infinite, Eternal that even time couldn't kill, that can plan, reason, create even something as complex as me, but not be of the created as I am?

Simple logic, or 'knowledge'. I have a creative mind, but I didn't create me, so there has to be a Creator mind that created me.

Someone has suggested we were created by a finite quantum speck of whatever which 13.7 billion years ago resided in who knows what, and without any reason or plan it somehow big-banged creating the universe and us humans? But this whatever, that resided in who knows what is still of the created like me, and infected by entropy/time. it would of died a long, .. long time ago, entropied itself to death. So nope, that's out of the question.

Using science (knowledge) it is only logical that the BB Evolution theory cannot be the Creator since it is finite, and trapped in time.

So back again I went to and fro, who or what could have created me and this universe? I heard many other explanation from a supposedly very wise fellow human who seen humans as apes, and apes as some other creatures, all the way back billions of years where he seen man as a tiny single celled bacterium. That maybe this bacterium created me simply by just laying around wasting time!?! But this too is of the created, an unreasonable finite speck at that, from the same source as me. Nope, not this either.

Again using science with common sense of entropy, logic dictates that anything created, or of the finite cannot become the Creator which has to be Infinite. Finite cannot exist without there having to be something or someone Infinite. Finite can only go on forever if there is room like infinity, and Eternity. There needs to be only One Infinite and Eternal.

As I was thinking, I read about the Blue brain project and how man is creating a new human 2.0, starting with the brain.
But here too we fall into that infinite regress, man creating man, and the brain is subject to entropy and aging. If they transfer everything from the brain on a CD disk, the disk ages, and the program itself is subject to corruption. The Matrix it may be loaded into is also subject to corruption, and the computer it is residing in needs energy to keep it alive.
So nope, that's out also.

Any questions regarding the Blue Brain Project, the brain vs. the mind? I can answer all that, and how it fails to deliver even life, not alone eternal life to any humans. They created a pretty awesome computer though, that can even play Jeopardy.

But this triggered something, and it was not my brain. I realized that this light went off in my mind, before I even stored any of it in my brain.

AHA! I said, the mind may be it. So as any good new scientist I tested my mind to see if it is finite, or infinite, and by George I could put earth, our solar system, our galaxy, then I tried to put the entire universe inside my mind, and not only could I put the entire universe in there, I could put as many universes as I wanted to in there.

Any questions on this conclusion that our Mind is Infinite? If it is infinite, it must be because it is a part on the Creator. If it is part of the Creator, then I must be 'created' in the Infinite Creators image.

YES! Yes, my mind passed the scientific test, it IS infinite. But wait, I still don't remember creating the universe or myself!? I am still OF the created then. There has to be a Creator like my mind, but who or what?

The what was out since the Creator Mind has to be self sufficient, and be able to reason, plan design AND create. It has to be a He, the dominant one like man. It started to make sense, God must be an Eternal Infinite, Creative Mind that is alive. What would this someone refer to Himself as, I asked? I was, .. I will be, .. and of course, I Am since He is Eternal and Infinite. I Am knows He is, and wouldn't conflict with His creation like myself who asks "Who am I?"

It all fits like a glove, any questions?

"Who am I?" is created, and "I Am Who I Am" must be the Creator. It is the only logical acceptable scientific answer; The Infinite, Eternal, Creative Mind who Is and lives, who can be best described as "I Am Who I Am".

He is all knowing since he created everything that was created, or that we are a part of, He has all the power like my mind that can create many universes with no great effort at all, He IS, or Eternal so no need to look who created Him since all we need is One Eternal and Infinite, and everything else is the created within Him.

This is wisdom/science, as I have observed myself, as I observed other humans around me, as I observed the world and the universe as we see and know it.

This is the basics, and the foundation of the Undeniable Scientific Evidence of The Creator.

Now go ahead, I know you want to, so go ahead and ban me or have me banned. The only responders are the few that keep derailing the thread and I keep getting Moderator Comments and Warnings because of them. This is no longer civil or even debate.

If anyone else does respond, please keep religion and their man-made god/gods out of it. Science ONLY, religious science and philosophy that is concerned with the truth is welcomed, but religious science that try to create and peddle their version of creators are not. This is about the Truth, the Creator who is the "Answer to Everything".

Now I'm done, I have discovered, identified 'nothing' right here IN everything, and described to you the "Answer to Everything", which is our Creator God.

He really is not that far from any of us, He is right here within us. But because He gave us of Himself which includes free will and all, we can deny Him.

[Danmark]

If you evolved from non-human apes, more specifically chimps and you are still an animal, an ape, what have you evolved from?

If a duck can't change/evolve into a crocodile, or is there according to evolution a crocaduck, and all evolved from a single celled bacteria, then how did we get all these different species? I don't mean the different families like dogs and horses, but how did we get a crocodile and a duck?

At what point did one species evolve into another, yet one species (duck) cannot evolve into another (crocodile)? Remember 'at what point' are the keywords here, like in; moment. Like this; duck, duck, duck, family of ducks, crocodile, crocodile, family of crocodiles, etc. show me this miraculous and magical point or moment when one species turns into another, yet they remain the same? Does a duck lay an egg with a crocodile in it? Does the duck wake up one morning and realize it is no longer a duck but a crocodile?

Arian, your examples and arguments against evolution are classics demonstrating a complete and utter misunderstanding of evolution. It is another example of the "If we came from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?" straw man that is based on false assumptions and ignorance of the actual evolutionary process. This has been explained to you in great detail many times previously. Your misunderstanding of the science, theory and fact of evolution cannot be converted into an argument for "scientific" evidence for God.

BTW if you are determined to claim there should be a 'crocoduck,' check out the platypus.
Poisonous platypuses confirm convergent evolution
Genome analysis shows that the monotremes and snakes have similar venoms.
http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101012/ ... 0.534.html

[Divine Insight]

Using science (knowledge) it is only logical that the BB Evolution theory cannot be the Creator since it is finite, and trapped in time.

This is simply false and does not represent scientific knowledge. Nowhere in science is it claimed that the Big Bang is the creator of itself. Also there exist hypotheses based on quantum field theory that do suggest how the Big Bang may have gotten started. Those hypotheses have not yet been confirmed, and may ultimately never be confirmed. None the less Quantum Field Theory allows for this possibility and no intelligent mind would be required if this science is true. Our universe was not "designed" by an intelligent mind as you continually assert without evidence.

You also throw Big Bang and Evolution theory together like as if they are one in the same. They are not. In fact evolution has been observed to be how the universe come to be the way it is including the evolution o life on earth. That is an observation of how the universe has actually unfolded. So evolution is on observation not a theory. We do coincidentally also have a 'theory' of how evolution can work, and that theory has been confirmed to be true. Evolution does work precisely as evolution theory describes. So clearly our theory of evolution turned out to be true because it matches the observed evolution of our universe.

Finally, your arguments for a "God" are not undeniable evidence for a God. But I will grant you that they are potentially plausible arguments for a God. The problem is that they wouldn't point to the God of Hebrew mythology anyway. On the contrary they would point to panentheistic religions like Taoism or Buddhism.

So at best you have offered plausible arguments for Taoism or Buddhism. And I'll totally grant that plausibility. However, that is far from undeniable scientific evidence for a creator.

It also does not even remotely point to, or even hint at, the highly personalized egotistic and male-chauvinistic Godhead invented by the ancient Hebrews. There is nothing in any of your arguments that would even remotely suggest that Hebrew mythology has any merit at all. On the contrary the God of Hebrew mythology does not fit into your paradigm.

You have already claimed to be this infinite mind that has created this universe. Remember? You claimed to have proven that your mind is indeed infinite. (even though you then quickly demonstrated why that must necessarily be false). But just the same, the picture you are attempting to paint of a God does not fit the picture of God painted by the Hebrew Bible anyway.

What you have been making arguments for are panetheistic philosophies like Taoism or Buddhism. And your arguments are not "undeniable". Especially your arguments on the scientific picture of reality. Your arguments against science are extremely strawman. You make up totally bogus reasons why you think science can't be true and then hold those out as "undeniable proof" that science can't be right. But that's a totally false argument on your behalf because you are misrepresenting what science actually has to say. So those arguments are indeed strawman. You build up a false straw image of what science has to say and then blow that away like as if it represents you actually blowing science away.

Those kinds of strawman arguments aren't going to work on anyone who actually understands science because they know that it's not saying the things that you claim it says. They can easily see your strawman. The only people you can fool with that argument are those who are ignorant of the sciences.

And like I say, you're jumping to the wrong conclusions anyway. Even if your argument held water it wouldn't point to Hebrew mythology. Instead it would be support for Taoism or Buddhism only. It would not support an egotistical godhead like Yahweh. You have no more reason to jump to the conclusion that Hebrew Yahweh is God anymore than you have to jump to the conclusion that the Greek Zeus is God, or Thor, or Odin, etc.

In fact, once you start making those kinds of unwarranted jumps you could just as easily claim that you have undeniable evidence of the existence of the Wiccan Moon Goddess. Or hey, what's preventing you from jumping to the conclusion that the flying spaghetti monster is God? Or Allah? You name it. It's a free-for-all by the time you start jumping to totally unwarranted conclusions which is exactly what you are doing.

[Zzyzx]

.

Simple logic, or 'knowledge'. I have a creative mind, but I didn't create me, so there has to be a Creator mind that created me.

Someone should gently point out that an egg from your mother was fertilized by a male sperm about nine months prior to your birth. That was most likely to have been through intercourse. Had that not happened, you would not exist.

However, I knew a young woman who claimed that she was a child of immaculate conception because "My father [a very dignified personage] wouldn't do that sort of thing."

Now go ahead, I know you want to, so go ahead and ban me or have me banned.

The only person who can have you banned is YOU – for repeated infractions of Forum Rules and Guidelines.

The only responders are the few that keep derailing the thread and I keep getting Moderator Comments and Warnings because of them. This is no longer civil or even debate.

If you feel as though someone has been uncivil, instead of complaining the proper action is to use the "report" button at the top of each post to call attention of Admin and Moderators to what you deem uncivil.

However, be aware that members demolishing your claimed "undeniable and scientific evidence of the creator" is NOT uncivil (though it may or should be uncomfortable and embarrassing for you personally).

If you wish to upgrade this thread to a debate, kindly present actual "scientific" evidence – not pseudo-science or claims that your thoughts constitute science.



In the interest of brevity and coherent debate I respond to the scientific and/or sensible parts of your post.


Looking



Looking




Hmmmmm . . . . personal anecdotes and emotional episodes. "I looked in the mirror and then had these thoughts."

Perhaps someone doesn't know the difference between testimonials or conjectures and science. Some freshmen at the university had difficulty making that distinction – but a year later they had usually learned the difference or had dropped out of science majors.

[McCulloch]

If you evolved from non-human apes, more specifically chimps and you are still an animal, an ape, what have you evolved from?

Chimps and humans are different species of ape that share a common ancestor, probably chimp-like.

If a duck can't change/evolve into a crocodile, or is there according to evolution a crocaduck, and all evolved from a single celled bacteria, then how did we get all these different species? I don't mean the different families like dogs and horses, but how did we get a crocodile and a duck?

I don't quite understand the problem you are attempting to address with this question. Ducks evolved from a common ancestor to ducks, loons, geese and swans. Crocodiles evolved from a common ancestor to crocodiles, alligators and caimans.

At what point did one species evolve into another, yet one species (duck) cannot evolve into another (crocodile)? Remember 'at what point' are the keywords here, like in; moment. Like this; duck, duck, duck, family of ducks, crocodile, crocodile, family of crocodiles, etc. show me this miraculous and magical point or moment when one species turns into another, yet they remain the same? Does a duck lay an egg with a crocodile in it? Does the duck wake up one morning and realize it is no longer a duck but a crocodile?

What part of gradual change do you not understand? I have used the example of the English language before. Is there a magic point in time when the English language began to be spoken? Did one generation suddenly decide that they would not teach their children their dialect of Anglo-Frisian but English instead? No, there is no identifiable generation of the first to speak English. Each generation taught the next generation their own language. Yet without any one generation noticing a significant difference this:

• Fæder Å«re þū þe eart on heofonum,
  Sī þīn nama ġeh�lgod.
  T�becume þīn rīċe,
  ġewurþe þīn willa, on eorðan sw� sw� on heofonum.
  Ūre ġedæġhw�mlīcan hl�f syle ūs t� dæġ,
  and forġyf ūs ūre gyltas, sw� sw� wē forġyfað ūrum gyltendum.
  And ne ġelǣd þū ūs on costnunge, ac �lȳs ūs of yfele.
  S�þlīċe.

Transformed into this:

• Father of ours, thou who art in heavens,
  Be thy name hallowed.
  Come thy kingdom,
  Worth (manifest) thy will, on earth as also in heaven.
  Our daily loaf do sell (give) to us today,
  And forgive us our guilts as also we forgive our debtors,
  And do not lead thou us into temptation, but release/deliver us from evil.
  Soothly.

in less than a thousand years.
Your question about pinpointing the moment that speciation occurs would be like asking which day of which year that the West Saxon dialect became unintelligible to English speakers.

Biologists have on a very large scale, have divided all of the living organisms into two categories:

• those with cells with no nucleus
• those with cells having a nucleus (Eukarya)

Human cells have a nucleus, therefore humans are eukarya.
Eukarya can be classified into four large groups:

• Protista - single celled life forms
• Fungi
• Plantae
• Animalia - multicellular life forms which ingest other life forms for sustenance.

All Humans are animals. We eat other animals, plants and fungi.