Has evolutionism become a leading religion?

[coadie]

Originally Posted by dizzyde

I'll take your word on that.


I would be interested in having a breakdown of all of your fields of studies and any degrees that you possess?

From what I understand in just a few days of reading your posts, is that you apparently teach, have some involvement in the medical field, and are also somewhat of a self professed language and science expert?

I am also wondering, with this much expertise, what your current job placement is, since you seem to have a large amount of time available to spend on the internet?

Not a language expert at all. Since I was young, i was provided secretaries and doing my keyboard work is hillarious.

[dizzyde]

Originally Posted by coadie

Not a language expert at all. Since I was young, i was provided secretaries and doing my keyboard work is hillarious.

[coadie]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Go read Behe on the matter of humans and apes sharing a common ancestor. He chooses to emphasize what he calls "intelligently designed descent," but it is common descent all the way. Behe is an evolutionist and a believer.

http://www.arn.org/docs/behe/mb_dm11496.htm

Miller and Levine address your misapprehension of the evolution of blood clotting in vertebrates here:

http://www.millerandlevine.com/km/ev.../Clotting.html

Hopefully you are not the one to heparinize the patient since you can't even spell the word.

You are a non science junk artist.

Now, it would not be fair, just because we have presented a realistic evolutionary scheme, supported by gene sequences from modern organisms, to suggest that we now know exactly how the clotting system has evolved.

The guy has nothing on clotting. He has no blood. He has no DNA. He is just arm chair speculating and pelthais gobbles it up.

In other words, we ought to be able to find a non-clotting fibrinogen protein in an invertebrate.

This is for the sorcerors handbook. They can't find the onset of blood clotting and we know it.
They don't have material or observation. Just hope and wishfull thinking.

Pelthais is so uneducatted that he can't apply logic. If the clotting mechanism was missing, a placental mammal would die in childbirth. It is a fatal shortcomming. Too much or not enough thrombin and we have pulmonary emboli.

But they have some bone pieces and stories after stories.

Evolutionists don't follow scientific methods. They just conjure up dreams.

Can we know for sure that this is how blood clotting (or any other biochemical system) evolved? The strict answer, of course, is we cannot

So the link fails and we still waste time believeing the crackpot religion of darwinism???

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by coadie

Actually it is used as a slang expression.

It is a home made word. Stick with dead fossils.

Originally Posted by dizzyde

Actually it is a medical term, as someone who was a certified dialysis technician and having worked exclusively with blood and blood related issues, I know this. And if you would bother to use a dictionary, you would know this too.

I'm really, really hoping coadie isn't involved in the medical field as he is now trying to insinuate. A "home made word?"

A while back he was trying to lead us to believe that he worked as a CPA/consultant in a large office with a television. Now, he treats "patients?"

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by coadie

Engrish is my second language of 4. i did also take latin before studying medicine. We have 6 languages in use at our house.

And now this.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by coadie

You are a non science junk artist.





The guy has nothing on clotting. He has no blood. He has no DNA. He is just arm chair speculating and pelthais gobbles it up.

"The guy" is Michael Behe who YOU quoted on the subject of clotting.

Get a grip, dude. I just tracked down your "quote mining" attempt and linked to the entire interview.

Behe - YOUR source that YOU quoted - is a well known EVOLUTIONIST. He is often cited by folks in the Intelligent Design movement because Behe is also a believer. But Behe VERY MUCH accepts and teaches the principle of COMMON DESCENT, one of the cornerstones of Darwin's theory of Natural Selection.

Originally Posted by coadie

This is for the sorcerors handbook. They can't find the onset of blood clotting and we know it.
They don't have material or observation. Just hope and wishfull thinking.

If Behe is such a bad source, why did you quote him on blood clotting? (http://apostolicfriendsforum.com/sho...919#post972919). You actually ct-and-pasted a statement by Behe that was easily Googled and tracked down to the interview that I linked to.

Or were you hoping to convince everyone that Behe's words were actually your own? That's plagiarism.

Originally Posted by coadie

Pelthais is so uneducatted that he can't apply logic. If the clotting mechanism was missing, a placental mammal would die in childbirth. It is a fatal shortcomming. Too much or not enough thrombin and we have pulmonary emboli.

But they have some bone pieces and stories after stories.

Evolutionists don't follow scientific methods. They just conjure up dreams.

So the link fails and we still waste time believeing the crackpot religion of darwinism???

You quoted Behe as authoritative and now you claim that this "link fails" after learning about Behe's real scientific outlook.

Lame-o.

(That's a "home made word").

[pelathais]

coadie:

YOU also brought up the genealogy of Luke 3 (without bothering to reference it either). We're all still waiting for you to explain:

"How could Zerubbabel be descended along the patrilineal lines of both of David's sons, Solomon and Nathan?"

http://apostolicfriendsforum.com/sho...068#post973068

We're also waiting for you to provide a source for your "quote" of Dr. Lynn Margulis http://apostolicfriendsforum.com/sho...747#post972747 - or did you simply make that one up as well?

You lied about a Charles Darwin quote: http://apostolicfriendsforum.com/sho...081#post973081

You completely and INTENTIONALLY twisted small clips of something Stephen J Gould had once said: http://apostolicfriendsforum.com/sho...750#post972750

How about you manning up? Take responsibility for the things you post. Answer the questions that YOU raise.

Where's your response to the list of almost 200 transitional fossils that I shared - fossils that YOU said didn't exist? You have no response. Just more .

You're a cloud without water. You are a tree without fruit. You are a raging wave of the sea, foaming out your own shame. A wandering star with a reservation for darkness. You are a spot, a snare, a hidden reef amonst our conversations.

But, you can repent. I believe that you can change. To change however, you must truly want to change. Stop your posing and posturing. Stop clipping out words from people like Michael Behe and trying to pass them off as your own. Just be yourself, but determine in your heart to be a litte better "self" each day.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by coadie

Not a language expert at all. Since I was young, i was provided secretaries and doing my keyboard work is hillarious.

No. No you were not "provided secretaries" "since you were young."

You just made that up.

Your language skills are poor and give evidence of a person who, while clever, has never really put any time into learning. Your frequent spelling errors show us that you have done little reading in your life time. They are not a "keyboard" problem as you have tried to claim. They are not typos. They are simply phonetic bumbling around.

Your assertion that you actually "speak 4 languages" is laughable. It's funny in several languages. And it is the very sad testimony of a little man who feels that he never really measured up. So, he goes on AFF and spouts off random thoughts in an arrogant fashion hoping to buffalo his way through the discourse.

[coadie]

Originally Posted by pelathais

"The guy" is Michael Behe who YOU quoted on the subject of clotting.

Get a grip, dude. I just tracked down your "quote mining" attempt and linked to the entire interview.

Behe - YOUR source that YOU quoted - is a well known EVOLUTIONIST. He is often cited by folks in the Intelligent Design movement because Behe is also a believer. But Behe VERY MUCH accepts and teaches the principle of COMMON DESCENT, one of the cornerstones of Darwin's theory of Natural Selection.



If Behe is such a bad source, why did you quote him on blood clotting? (http://apostolicfriendsforum.com/sho...919#post972919). You actually ct-and-pasted a statement by Behe that was easily Googled and tracked down to the interview that I linked to.

Or were you hoping to convince everyone that Behe's words were actually your own? That's plagiarism.



You quoted Behe as authoritative and now you claim that this "link fails" after learning about Behe's real scientific outlook.

Lame-o.

(That's a "home made word").

Again, so the blood clotting is all in that disturbed mind?
R F doolittle is drawing a blank also.

I did quote your link from miller and levine. I guess you are wrong that it comes from BEHE?

You are getting too desparate and may need some time to catch your breath.



so the Darwinsitas are bleeding on the blood clotting claim?


http://www.slideshare.net/leafwarbler/csu-fresno

Here are slides on clotting today but none on evolution of clotting.

See these people would need some actural multimillion year old blood and we know they can't show it. so they speculate.

Lie for Darwin. It is all extrapolation and presupposition. No proof. No evidence.

Pelthais drinks the dishonest claims.

[Jason B]

creation/evolution debate I was listening to today. Didn't finish it, but there may be some here who want to watch it:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...85675446958159