Problems with the theory of evolution.

[Anomalocaris]

The sun loses 400 Million tons every second in this process, thus it is burning constantly and will eventually putter out like stars do that we are able to observe in the final stage of their existence.

Could this be proof that God created our sun with an "expiration date"?

No, this is proof the sun is changing all the time. The sun will be very different 6 billion years from now, but the chances are it will always remain as a cohensive object roughly the same mass as today (with in a factor of 2) for trillions of years, as far as science feels comfortable looking into.

You know, like how it talks about the 'end times' in the bible.

Yes, so did many other ignorant primitives. That things will not remain the way they are doesn't mean the idiots of the "end time" knew anything at all about what they are talking about, when it will happen, they mechanism by which it will end, and and through what agency it will happen.

Yes. I don't understand what 'troll' or 'trolling' or 'trolled' or 'Poe' means. Is this some kind of scientist slang? These terms keep getting thrown around and I don't understand what they mean.

No, they are not scientific slang. There is not such thing as scientific slang. There is scientific jargon.

They are not even scientific jargon. They are words in common circulation. They are so pervasive in the modern society, so integral to modernity, that if you have been raised not knowing what they mean, then you were probably raised in an environment that saw fit to deny the full lessons of the story of reeal human progress to you, in order to confine you mentally to the barbarous legends of iron age, such as those about "god".

That's another word I've seen since reading these forums. Abiogenesis. Now if the bible is supposedly false, why are you people using the word 'genesis' in a scientific theory?

Because "Genisis" itself is a word pilfered by sleazy opportunistic christians from an older, and better, civilization who holds a better reputation amongst scientists than early christians. We use the word because it was a word passed down to us from a pre-christian civilization that we could respect.

There is no need for rude language.

You are so ignorant that you should be thankful for real enlightenment whatever lanuguage you might be fortunate enough to hear them in.

Even expressed in the most crass manner they would still benefit you infinitely more than the pseudo pomp of biblical bullshit.

Well these scientists are saying we come from stardust. Who's to say that "dust" mentioned in the bible isn't the stardust that scientists are always talking about? Maybe they inadvertently proved some of the bible there, huh?

Maybe the ignorant yokels who cooked up the bible didn't have any clue how many different kinds of dust there can be, and got luck by using all encompassing term to pretend overarching knowledge, huh?

Please try to keep this fair and don't insult me. I'm not insulting anybody. Those are ad hominem attacks. Lets just try to have a civil discussion.

To say you are ignorant and therefore speak in a manner normally thought fit only for the stupid is not to insult you. It is to give you a more complete view of yourself as might be seen by people who have explored the world more intensively and more thoroughly than the biblical yokels and bible addled christians can imagine.

Christianity sucks, and we are telling you how much you've been damaged by it. Be grateful to us.