RE: Mutations disprove the theory of upward evolution
October 4, 2013 at 10:07 am
(This post was last modified: October 4, 2013 at 10:16 am by Doubting Thomas.)
(October 4, 2013 at 9:40 am)TheBeardedDude Wrote: Also, you ever going to go back to those other threads and answer my questions?
What do you think? There's an incredibly long list of questions SBG has ignored.
(October 4, 2013 at 9:45 am)SavedByGraceThruFaith Wrote:(October 4, 2013 at 9:44 am)TheBeardedDude Wrote: No. The primitive forms are still around. Chemosynthesizers are still pumping away in oxygen-starved environments where the aerobes can't survive.
If they are the same as the originals that may disprove the theory of evolution.
Then explain nylon-eating bacteria. Nylon didn't exist until man invented it in the 1930's. Then at some point later, nylon-eating bacteria were discovered. If that's not evolution, then what is it? Did God create these bacteria capable of digesting nylon and left them dormant for thousands of years until man got around to inventing food for them?
(October 4, 2013 at 9:52 am)Faith No More Wrote: Standard operating procedure for a creationist is that when objections to evolution have been refuted, ignore them and blindly go forward with other objections. Any relevant and valid points made against the creationist's objections will dismissed as if they never existed in the first place.
Those questions make them uncomfortable, so it's best to ignore them.
(October 4, 2013 at 9:55 am)SavedByGraceThruFaith Wrote: My post already disproved that interpretation of the rocks and fossils.
Man, you ain't disproved shit.
Christian apologetics is the art of rolling a dog turd in sugar and selling it as a donut.
