DivineTruthRedeemed #fundie

DivineTruthRedeemed #fundie youtube.com

Question 1 asnwer: Monkeys and chimps are indeed 98% related to us, but that does not necessarilly mean that we evolved from them.
Q2: If you are reffering to cloning, we are only? able to copy from the original dna design; we are unable to create oriignal dna with our own hands.
Q3: He didn't create small pox. The cells were probably originally harmless germs, but sin changed everything, so the germs gave a bad reaction. His love is seperated from us. This is why he lets that happen.

52 comments

old comment by Swedish Pagan

So little text, so many fails...

Monkeys and chimps? Don't you mean monkeys and apes? Or what have the Gorillas, the Orangutangs and the Gibbons done, to not be included?

Of course we didn't evolve from them. They are the end species on their branch at the moment, as we are on ours. Somewhere in the past we had a common ancestor that evolved in two or three different ways, making its branch fork into three different branches.

What's with the question mark in the middle of the sentence? Do you want to come off as extra stupid?
Cloning is copying, yes, you are absolutely correct. We are able to make changes in the DNA sequence, there you are partly wrong.

He? Who he? Guess you mean the invisible sky-daddy? The small pox virus evolved, just like everything else.
Unpleasant, isn't he, your sky-bully? Separating his love from you so he can let you die of horrible, disfiguring diseases.

Nice little film there. I did not know that so many Americans were that ignorant of scientific developments? I thought that America was a fairly advanced country, technologically speaking. My bad...
Over here in Europe I guess most religious people think that God jumpstarted the evolution.

old comment by Lucilius

1. Your DNA is practically identical to your siblings', and you (plural) are a combination of your parents. This indicates a close relationship. Same thing, with lots of intervening generations.

2. Somebody's never heard of patented organisms, have they? Cells that make insulin, glow-in-the-dark plants, and the granddaddy of amazing genetic feats, maize not familiar with any of them huh?

3. So did humans commit some sin to make them vulnerable to smallpox, or did the germs do something naughty and therefore become virulent? I've heard this idiotic claim before, that "sin" alters DNA, with never a shred of evidence, or indeed any understanding of what DNA is or actually does.

For that matter, a deity that decides sentient creatures should die horrible deaths just because their ancestors ticked him/her/it off, is neither a paragon of wisdom and love nor anything worthy of worship.

@Swedish Pagan: The United States is big enough to have a large number of talented researchers and a decent number of people who understand and appreciate science, but also to have those groups vastly outnumbered by a horde of gibbering, drooling morons.

old comment by breakerslion

Please provide credentials or citations that would lead us to believe that you are qualified to answer even one of those questions, Q3 in particular. Unless divinity schools are handing out degrees on toilet paper these days ... oh wait....

Even so, God created everything/God didn't create small pox is too blatant a contradiction I would have thought, even for the most jaded bullshit artist. Let me see if I understand the rest of your bizarre statement. 1. Sin is an ingredient, like in some cosmic witch's brew? 2. You believe that God's magic soul-injecting sperm goes through some kind of "love separator" (like a cream separator at a dairy maybe?) after it leaves His magic penis and before it hits a fertilized human egg?

You are a whacktard that has seen too many horror movies and can't distinguish fantasy from reality.

old comment by Anon-e-moose

"Question 1 asnwer: Monkeys and chimps are indeed 98% related to us, but that does not necessarilly mean that we evolved from them."

Remember the whole 'Missing Link' thing? Recently it was found: Darwinius masillae. Proof we ARE descended from primates.

"Q2: If you are reffering to cloning, we are only? able to copy from the original dna design; we are unable to create oriignal dna with our own hands."

Scientists here in the UK have recently created synthetic sperm. You know what THAT means...

"Q3: He didn't create small pox. The cells were probably originally harmless germs, but sin changed everything, so the germs gave a bad reaction. His love is seperated from us. This is why he lets that happen."

[citation needed]. Besides, we mere mortals were able to isolate & innoculate infected
population areas. Thus ultimately eliminate Smallpox from the human population. With debate to this day amongst scientists whether the last few culture flasks containing the virus should be destroyed, thus making Smallpox extinct. And if 'Knowledge' is the 'Original Sin', then humans have beaten God at his own game.

Science - 3. God - 0

Game, Set & Match to Scientists.

tl;dr: Every time a gap is filled, God becomes less & less relevant.

old comment by observiNG

If you are reffering to cloning, we are only? able to copy from the original dna design; we are unable to create oriignal dna with our own hands.

Cloning is copying, indeed. However, if you are implying that this is "only" copying and no creation of DNA is possible, let me remind you of something. IIRC, the similar sentiment was expressed after Woehler first synthesized urea in XIX century. Back then the clerics would say, well, he was only able to synthesize it because it is a waste product, not a "real" organic chemical. Correct me if I'm wrong, but we have since learned to synthesize many more organic materials, and are quite successful at that.

Oh, and please... learn fucking grammar! Question marks do not belong in the middle of a sentence, and it's separated for you.

old comment by BobsOldSocks

"Question 1 asnwer: Monkeys and chimps are indeed 98% related to us"

Umm...no, they're not, only chimps are.

"but that does not necessarilly mean that we evolved from them."

Ignoring your misunderstanding about our evolutionary ancestors, what does it mean then? If you say "common design" I'll laugh in your face. Then ask you to explain, with examples, how we can differentiate between those things that are "designed" and those that are not.

"Q2: If you are reffering to cloning, we are only? able to copy from the original dna design; we are unable to create oriignal dna with our own hands."

And?

"Q3: He didn't create small pox. The cells were probably originally harmless germs, but sin changed everything,"

There's no such thing as sin.

"so the germs gave a bad reaction."

"His love is seperated from us. This is why he lets that happen."

Again, ?? If your god's love is separated from us it must be him doing the separating and thus he's guilty of torture, misery and murder.

old comment by Zoo

Question 1 asnwer: Monkeys and chimps are indeed 98% related to us, but that does not necessarilly mean that we evolved from them.

Ignoring for the moment that speciation is a branching process, this is true. This is why this is not the only piece of evidence we use in determining relationship, like anatomy, behavior, similarity of various genes (not just wholesale DNA), fossils, etc.

Q2: If you are reffering to cloning, we are only? able to copy from the original dna design; we are unable to create oriignal dna with our own hands.

I beg to differ. Scientists already do this. They have machines and chemicals and the knowledge to do exactly that. That's not to say we're at a stage to create an entire human genome from this process (and why bother when we can manipulate and use existing DNA), but we can make DNA we invented.

Q3: He didn't create small pox. The cells were probably originally harmless germs, but sin changed everything, so the germs gave a bad reaction. His love is seperated from us. This is why he lets that happen.

Smallpox and other pathogens probably did come from harmless organisms. But they originated because "nobody else was doing it". Their purpose is to fill a niche that had previously been unfilled. (This is how you can answer "what is the purpose of?" anything that its 'job' [seed disperser or pollinator, say] is not immediately apparent. It's purpose is to do whatever it is doing because nothing else in its vicinity was.) It has absolutely nothing to do with sin.

DivineTruthRedeemed #fundie youtube.com

52 comments

Confused?