63

No. My oldest is 48 and my youngest is 32. When they were in school the objective was to be educated not have social experiments performed on them. My oldest grandson is 14 and plays school sports with black, brown and yellow teammates. Thank God (so far) these boys don’t see color. All they care about is working together and winning. You know, the way ■■■■ is supposed to be.

3 Likes
64

Yes it is.

65

no one is performing social experiments on my pre-teen public school kids.

66

The spooky thing is it’s actually considered and eventually will happen.

67

Of course they are.

2 Likes
69

Without using creationism, explain the big bang.

1 Like
70

That’s the point he wants all his theories taught as absolute truths but any theories outside of his own belief system are theories. It’s the old unidentified catalyst argument in regards to the Big Bang.

71

That’s real “Checkmate Darwinist”

There is no difference between “micro” and “macro” evolution in any real sense. The expression of alleles through natural selection does not make a distinction as to whether the changes are small in gradualism or in more rapid punctuated equilibrium. It is the same natural force.

So to say that one exists and not the other is just plain false. And to use a source that says that I am wrong when the same source invalidates the claim that “micro” is possible but “macro” is not is quite silly.

All of this to avoid explaining Human Chromosome 2.

72

sure sure.

75

No one can and anyone who says that they know the answer is lying to you.

1 Like
76

So creationism is a possibility then?

77

Creationism isn’t science. It’s not something that can be tested. It’s just faith, without evidence.

1 Like
78

Sure… but the possibility of it being the deity that you think it is dimishingly small.

I am fine with the more truthful answer of “No one knows”

But for the religious I don’t understand why gaps in our knowledge have to be explained by invoking God. Because when that gap gets filled it makes God smaller.

Just say that we don’t know… it is way more truthful.

1 Like
79

Cal Berkeley university disagrees with you, time to move on and accept defeat. Evolutionists wrote off the two because it shoots a complete hole in their hypothesis.

80

But there is this problem of using a resource that obliterates your contention to make me look wrong.

Pretty funny.

81

That’s your truth, not mine and that’s where the rubber meets the road. Enforcing your truths on others as absolute truths is the issue. On both sides of the aisle.

1 Like
82

Kinda like hoping man was an ape at one time?

83

Saying “we don’t know” isn’t enforcing a “truth”… it is telling the truth.

84

Chimpanzees.

We are related to Chimpanzees… not apes.

Should look into that Human Chromosome 2 some time.

85

The source literally made a graph of what micro and macro evolution are and used examples it obliterated nothing.