Evolution debunked in 1 paragraph.

[jem]

still waiting for the Stu the troll to show a link to proof of abiogenesis.

 

[stu]

Quote from jem:

still waiting for the Stu the troll to show a link to proof of abiogenesis.

You don't even know what abiogenesis actually is or you wouldn't be waiting for proof of it like a thick head.
Are you waiting for proof of electrons too as they aren't proven. Just don't let a computer screen spoil that delusion.

Sensible people will be waiting for further scientific knowledge leading to what would be the inevitable outcome from proven science already present in abiogenesis.

 

[jem]

Definition of ABIOGENESIS

: the supposed spontaneous origination of living organisms directly from lifeless matter
— abi·og·e·nist noun

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abiogenesis

Even in your troll speak... abiogenesis is not "plenty of science" showing life from non life.

You were caught ignorant... now you need to adjust your worldview to the fact that science has no proof of what you atheist heart desires.

 

[stu]

Quote from jem:

Definition of ABIOGENESIS

: the supposed spontaneous origination of living organisms directly from lifeless matter
— abi·og·e·nist noun

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abiogenesis

Even in your troll speak... abiogenesis is not "plenty of science" showing life from non life.

You were caught ignorant... now you need to adjust your worldview to the fact that science has no proof of what you atheist heart desires.

Of course there is "plenty of science" you fat head. You were the one who produced what you called 'top Nobel scientists' who themselves have developed "plenty of science" .

Even in that definition of abiogenesis "the supposed spontaneous origination of living organisms directly from lifeless matter"... it does not determine that there is not "plenty of science" , which of course there is.

No amount of infantile comments and dumb remarks from you is going to alter the fact.

 

[wolfpack]

Quote from jem:


You were caught ignorant... now you need to adjust your worldview to the fact that science has no proof of what you atheist heart desires.

The bible has all the answers. Peer reviewed by the greatest minds in storytelling 2000 years ago. This kind of fact checking can't be beat.

 

[jem]

Quote from stu:

Of course there is "plenty of science" you fat head. You were the one who produced what you called 'top Nobel scientists' who themselves have developed "plenty of science" .

Even in that definition of abiogenesis the "supposed spontaneous origination of living organisms directly from lifeless matter"... it does not determine that there is not "plenty of science" which of course there is.

No amount of infantile comments and dumb remarks from you is going to alter the fact.

You repeatedly exhibit a dictionary comprehension problem on a multitude of words.

"Supposed spontaneous origination" " is dictionary speak for unproven, unobserved theory that life evolved from non life. In a sense it could not be more clear that there is not plenty of science showing life evolved from non life. (it is "supposed" (not proven) by the theory of abiogensis).

 

[jem]

Quote from wolfpack:

The bible has all the answers. Peer reviewed by the greatest minds in storytelling 2000 years ago. This kind of fact checking can't be beat.

you must be Stu's new sock puppet.
This debate has nothing to do with the bible.

In this debate Stu pretended he had proof that life evolved from non life.

I presented science showing he was nuts... and he has been trying to fraudulently redefine his way out since.

 

[Trader666]

Of course, all you can do is troll and spew BS after I gave an example of you contradicting yourself twice, one time in each of two back-to-back sentences. That's is an astounding feat of STUpidity, even for you

Quote from STupid:

You've already made a big enough tit of yourself so was there really any need for you to resurrect the thread just to do the same again?

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from stu:

... abiogenesis "the supposed spontaneous origination of living organisms directly from lifeless matter"...

You got a link to a video of that?

 

[stu]

Quote from jem:

You repeatedly exhibit a dictionary comprehension problem on a multitude of words.

"Supposed spontaneous origination" " is dictionary speak for unproven, unobserved theory that life evolved from non life. In a sense it could not be more clear that there is not plenty of science showing life evolved from non life. (it is "supposed" (not proven) by the theory of abiogensis).

Abiogenesis is a well established branch of natural science whether you or a dictionary likes it or not.

Getting all confused like you do about what is science , what is clear, what is proven by interpreting a dictionary, then making up false statements and assertions from your befuddlement, does not change the fact there is "plenty of science" in abiogenesis.

So again, what exactly are you trying to do by all this denial but to slot in a preference for a non explainable, non scientific, non knowledge based, non verifiable , non observable, non testable, non provable magic creator .

Of course that's what you want, and its everything to do with your bible story book and corresponding religion.
You just can't be honest enough to acknowledge your blind ignorant religious non fact faith.

Quote from jem:

you must be Stu's new sock puppet.
This debate has nothing to do with the bible.

In this debate Stu pretended he had proof that life evolved from non life.

I presented science showing he was nuts... and he has been trying to fraudulently redefine his way out since.

Problem is you can't back any of that prevarication up.
I've said and 'pretended' no such thing. Because you can't understand so change what was actually said does not make what you say true.

You "presented science" Don’t make me laugh.. The only thing you've presented is your own ass - on a plate - to yourself.