(October 4, 2013 at 3:36 pm)Crossless1 Wrote:

(October 4, 2013 at 3:33 pm)SavedByGraceThruFaith Wrote: If the picture is your evidence them you have no evidence.

It gives birth to mud skippers.

Great, now that you are suddenly concerned about evidence, please provide your evidence for Yahweh. We've been waiting.

Atheistic origin science is false. It cannot account for the life forms that exist. Thus, its opposite, theistic origin science is true.

There is no amount of evidence the delusional believer will accept.

To paraphrase Jefferson, ridicule is the only weapon to be used against idiots and their idiocies.

(October 4, 2013 at 10:46 am)Drich Wrote: Just an observation.

The Christian presented a statement containing facts (statements that can be proved or disproved.) The Atheist response? was to attack the christian's character, education, and the general viablity of his ablity to make a claim that was typically atheistic in nature, rather than simply pairing the christian's facts against stronger reference material and properly disprooving the christian claim properly..

Asking about someone's education is not an attack, you asshat.

(October 4, 2013 at 3:39 pm)SavedByGraceThruFaith Wrote:

(October 4, 2013 at 3:36 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: Great, now that you are suddenly concerned about evidence, please provide your evidence for Yahweh. We've been waiting.

Atheistic origin science is false. It cannot account for the life forms that exist. Thus, its opposite, theistic origin science is true.

I asked for evidence of your god, not further unneeded evidence of your sub-standard education and lack of reasoning skills. Try again, troll.

(October 4, 2013 at 3:39 pm)SavedByGraceThruFaith Wrote: Atheistic origin science is false. It cannot account for the life forms that exist. Thus, its opposite, theistic origin science is true.

(October 4, 2013 at 3:35 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: You are aware that fish do not give birth, yes?

Oh wait, of course you aren't.

I'm not aware of it either.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guppy#Reproduction

(October 4, 2013 at 3:49 pm)apophenia Wrote:

(October 4, 2013 at 3:35 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: You are aware that fish do not give birth, yes?

Oh wait, of course you aren't.

I'm not aware of it either.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guppy#Reproduction

But they do only produce fish, right.

All fish produce fish. It has never been observed that a fish produce anything but fish.

Cats produce cats.
Dogs produce dogs.

We have no record of anything other than an animal produces the same kind.

Simple science.

Like I said in the Amazon atheist forum to the person who said the same exact thing: (was it you btw?) Mutations don't have to be errors and they don't have to be either negative or positive either.

It would take a person who genuinely wanted to challenge their own beliefs a whole 5 minutes to read about this information. What you're claiming simply isn't true, you understand that right? You can claim it all you want, but the fact is we have evidence to the contrary.

(October 4, 2013 at 3:53 pm)SavedByGraceThruFaith Wrote: But they do only produce fish, right.

All fish produce fish. It has never been observed that a fish produce anything but fish.

Cats produce cats.
Dogs produce dogs.

We have no record of anything other than an animal produces the same kind.

Simple science.

So then find me a mainstream scientific source that says that evolution is one species giving birth to offspring of another species, and you might have a point.

Or can't you do that?

(October 4, 2013 at 3:53 pm)SavedByGraceThruFaith Wrote: But they do only produce fish, right.

All fish produce fish. It has never been observed that a fish produce anything but fish.

Cats produce cats.
Dogs produce dogs.

We have no record of anything other than an animal produces the same kind.

Simple science.

If you continue to ignore the posts which adress your questions and which deliver counters to your arguments you will find yourself alienated and very lonely on this forum.

You will be a lonesome toad screaming here and then whilest most members will recognise that but will continue to turn arround and attend to more interesting and certainly more joyfull activities on this forum.

Or was it your goal to be that in the first place?