Wisconsin university email Videos

+Colin Barker You are welcome. Unfortunately, Mr.Kirton is stuck in his intellectual stagnation, by his veneration of CreaZionism. He is yet to comprehend, that he has to KNOW OF something, namely what it is SUPPOSED to be, in the first place, BEFORE he can even THINK of any refutation. I provide you with an example:I deny the existence of J(the)C OUTSIDE the human brain of the respective believer.But before that, I must KNOW in what manner J(the)C is SUPPOSED to exist outside the believers' brain.J(the)C is is supposed to be THAT part of the ETERNALLY existing Triune G-D, which TEMPORARILY manifested in the physical world, namely as a human being born from the maiden (incorrectly translated as "virgin") by the name of Maria.Please do not respond the the current question, bcz that will not help him out.What is the evolution of the living beings [supposed to be] ?

+Everton Kirton What is the evolution of the living beings?

+Everton Kirton Arguments are standing on their own merits. And quite not on any property of the messenger.

+G-D IS A THOUGHT Thank you for clearing up any confusion. To be quite honest you can show as much evidence as possible and it will never make sense to neanderthals..

+Everton Kirton 20, why is my age relevant? Lol

how old are you?

+Colin Barker Your approach is honest, but it does not address the "change of kind" required by the Creazionists. Corn from Grass will be talked down to "just an adaptation".A non ambiguous change is from single celled organisms to humans over a time period of 1 billion years. Which is 1)indicated by the fossil evidence itself, embedded in the temporary-context. As well as 2)from the evidence on the development of the individual specimen, namely from a Zygote, which is a single celled organism.@ Everton Kirton: Unfortunately for YOU, "Reasonable Faith" (that YOU are subscribed to) does quite NOT subscribe to Young Earth Creazionism. If you do not believe me, then ask Dr.William Lane Craig personally. Be so kind and do not even try to play word games with me. Oh, and I almost forgot:What IS the evolution of the living beings?

+Everton Kirton MacroEvolution is the largest changes of species over a long period of time. Better example then the mosquitoes, corn. Corn is essentially a form of grass that was farmed and cultivated for thousands of years. We selected to breed the ones that produced the most food for us and that is how we have the corn we have today. Corn today and the grain it came from look completely different and cannot breed together. This is macroEvolution. Yes, we had a hand in it but it can just so easily happen in nature given enough time.

wow you are my first biologist and am honored to be having a dialog with you. and your write i don't have as much information as you, i mean hell your a biologist! but unfortunately for you i study the problems with evolution. this makes me capable to defend my belief. but unfortunately its 3:45am, where i am, if your wondering where i am, am in Jamaica, and am very tired so i will get back to you later. God bless you.   

+Everton Kirton As a scientist (unfortunately for you I am a Biologist) I can expose ad libitum ET ad nauseam, your "lying for Jesus".1)Rocks, their respective age and the respective fossil record provide a DEMONSTRATION of "the evolution of the living beings" :Over 1 billion y: Show ONLY single-celled organisms.  Over 550 million y BEGIN to show fossils of simple, multicellular animals.Over 500 million y BEGIN to show fossils of ancient fish without jawbones.Over 400 million y BEGIN to show fossils of fish with jawbones.Over 350 million y BEGIN to show amphibians.Over 300 million y BEGIN to show reptiles.Over 230 million y BEGIN to show mammals.Over 150 million y BEGIN to show birds.2)The determination of the age of the rocks is accurate and correct, it is based on the IMMUTABILITY of the velocity of the natural radioactive decay of some chemical elements. This IMMUTABILITY is a consequence of the fine tuning of the physical world. 3)You do not even remotely know what you are talking about. PROVEN by your inability to boil the evolution of the living beings down to a very, very simple summary, which kindergarten students in GERMANY already know. You are in denial of a physical phaenomenon that you are clueless about in the very first place, in other words you are a scientific illiterate and and anti-scientific charlatan. You rather have the audacity, to assert, evolution be >>>that an animal can change into a different species over a log period of time<<< No, it is NOT. Are you insane??? WHAT the hell should an individual animal change into another species??? Now, Liar for Jesus, thank you for your admission of your intellectual defeat. I am still waiting for your definition of the evolution of the living beings

you did not give the definition that i asked you for. any ways maro-evolution states that an animal can change into a different species over a log period of time. the above stated has never been observed, no one has ever seen a whale evolve from a land dwelling animal to a sea creature. NO ONE!!! and thats just one example.now about the fossil record. there is no such thing a fossil record, thats what they call it. all it is, is just a collection of bones that people say lived billions of years ago using there dating methods that are really assumptions made from limited evidence. they just added their own interpretation to the bones they found.when you find a bone in the dirt, all you know about it is that the animal died. you don't know that it had any kids that lived. it does not come with a sign that says died three billion years ago. 

+Everton Kirton What is the evolution of the living beings - what do we observe? Is the vast fossil record suddenly NOT an observation? Is the fossil record suddenly NOT a very physical, non-ambiguous source-of-information? Can you at least summarize the fossil record, before you proclaim a GNOSTIC position (!) "the evolution of the living beings has never been observed?

tell me what is macro-evolution, because maybe am mistaken.

+Everton Kirton You do realize microevolution makes up macroevolution, right. Furthermore, we have seen macroevolution. During the bombings of London in WW2, people fled to the subway stations and mosquitoes followed. Those mosquitoes bred and genetically drifted from the average mosquito and no it can be observed (your magic word) that these two kinds of mosquitoes cannot breed together. This is macroevolution.

thanks

+Everton Kirton The logical and the physical laws were created by the human brain. The !!!PHYSICAL!!! [source-of-]information was the [behavior-of-] the physical world, trust me on that. Laws= HumanDESCRIPTIONS=non-physical TOOLS. Which is very obvious in the case of A=A which was created FROM the [observation-of-]the fact, that a physical object is just itself at an instant. The physical world does quite not "submit" to extrinsic "laws". It rather is just as it is and it will not defy its own nature. The question "do laws exist" can be reduced to an reformulated as "do human thoughts exist" respectively.

the law of non-contradiction would present itself if they were created by man, because if they were created by man, then that means the laws of logic are based on opinion which would mean that they can be changed over time or by different opinion, and the laws of logic would would sease to exist if human beings sease to exist which is not the case. and i understand that the beginning of the world is not the same as the origin of life because they are both different in definition (law of identity). the origin of life is organic evolution which has never been observed and never proven, and the beginning of the world is cosmic evolution (big bang) which also has never been observed or proven to be true.

+Everton Kirton All laws including "A=A" and the physical laws do not exist on their own. They were created by the human brain, did you know that? As regards the beginning of the world and the origin of life - these are not tantamount to a physical phaenomenon aka "evolution of the living beings".

Am not talking about logic or logical absolutes, am talking about evolution and the lies that the scientists are telling us about the beginning of the world and the origin of life. notice i never mentioned logic i said evolution. only micro-evolution is fact.

+Everton Kirton I just see, you are dedicated to Matt Slick's "CARM wisdom".Who created the the logical absolute "A=A"?

+Everton Kirton You just said, I summarize it, "Evolution is, when Australopithecus afarensis is our ancestor" but evolution is just not that.

australopithecus afarensis, this has never been proven to be our ancestors, but if you want to challenge me lets go

+Everton Kirton I bet you do not know what the evolution of the living beings is, young man