www.evolutionfairytale.com

goldliger #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

Logical proof of evidence for God and creation. (And a universe full of it.)

Question to atheist # 1: If the statement is true, "God created the genetic code and DNA to create life", would the genetic code and DNA be evidence for God? ...If your answer is "no", how and why would it NOT be valid evidence of God (while noting that if God created the genetic code, nothing else did)?

(Hint: The answer to the above is "yes", because the genetic code and DNA as potential evidence for anything else would be 100% falsified, when we have objective proof that God is/was its author.)

Question to atheist # 2: Do you have 100% objective proof that God *didn't* create the genetic code and DNA to create life? If "yes", please provide your proof with zero speculative language.

(Hint: No such proof exists.)

Question to atheist # 3: Aside from the genetic code and DNA, can you name a SINGLE code (that meets the following definition), that was NOT designed by an intelligent being?

...Definition of CODE for our purposes above: Sequential, *meaningful* information is encoded (DNA) and decoded (RNA). Such as English. Binary code. Morse code. Etc.

Note that ALL evidence, either for "naturalism" or "creationism" is in a POTENTIAL state, until the objective proof is in, as to which "suspect" is responsible.

...This is why it's logically impossible to claim that we do NOT have a mountain of evidence for God and creation; this is why ALL OF CREATION is evidence for God.

Further, unless you can provide another example of a code that was NOT created by an intelligent being under the definition provided, we have 100% inference that the genetic code and DNA was created by an intelligent being. And 0% inference that it was a result of naturalistic, mindless, Godless causation.

Note that this is in NO WAY begging the question, or a circular argument, because we're assuming based on logic that *both* naturalism and creationism are theoretical possibilities. And that all of creation is evidence (in a required "potential" state), until the objective proof is in.

Thanks for reading.

Cassiterides #fundie evolutionfairytale.com


A scientist in 1899 claimed the diameter is only 32 miles, some of his points made are very interesting.

''The sun is always somewhere between the tropics of Cancer and Capricorn, a distance admitted to be less than 3,000 miles; how then can the sun if it be so many thousand miles in diameter, squeece itself into a space of about 3,000 miles only...can a camel ride on a mouse, or a whale rush down the throat of a herring?

What is the diameter of the sun?

32 miles. If the navigator neglects to apply the sun's semi-diameter to his observation at sea, he is 16 nautical miles (nearly) in calculating the position his ship is in. A minute of arc on the sextant represents a nautical mile, and if the semi-diameter be 16 miles, the diameter is of course 32 miles. And as measured by the sextant, the sun's diameter is 32 minutes of arc, that is 32 nautical miles in diameter. If ever dispoof is attempted, it will be a literary curiosity, well worth framing.''

[later in the same thread]


I asked how you know the distance to the sun. You are claiming it's not an estimate but that you know the precise figure. So have you traveled to the sun and back? My point was to clarify the distinction between fact and estimates (guesses).
I'm open minded and read different theories. Unless you go up into space yourself there is no way of proving the exact size of the sun or location of celestial objects. It appears you base all your faith in what NASA etc tell you without ever questioning anything. I thought atheists were meant to be 'skeptics'?

Fred Williams #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

It is a pet peeve of mine when evolutionists equivocate on what evolution is. They equivocate on the word evolution by claiming micro-evolution is “evolution”, then essentially declare victory. Then we get the usual strawman arguments to follow. I find this to be one of the most intellectually dishonest arguments going, and never intended this forum to tolerate this kind of blatant equivocation.

Bob Barclay #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

The problem lies in the fact that evolutionists believe they can make dead bones talk. When I read there religious jargon about the fossil record I just have to shake my head and say where is the science. An example of their religious explanation can be seen in their intermediate dud the fish-o-pod Tiktaalik. They describe the bones of the fossil while intermingaling their religious jargon and any story they want to tell just rolls out of the mouths. Since there is no way to verify or test these stories we are told it is evolutionary gospel truth. Building the story into something that it is not.

It is by far the most intolerant religion on the face of the earth today. If given control of the governments their religious intolerance rises to a deadly attack against any who dare speak against it. Examples in the twentieth century are vivid reminders of what the religion of evolution is capable of. Under the leadership of Stalin and Chairman Mao atheistic evolution was responsible for about 100 million deaths of those who did not agree with them. This is not including all the atheistic evolutionists governments this is just two of them.

The Deacon #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

It [stem-cell research] is the culture of death. The secular humanist left is only interested in maintaining the right to murder babies. Anything that seems to help their cause is acceptable to them because there is no fear of God before their eyes.

Fred Williams #homophobia evolutionfairytale.com

[No, I asked if you would prefer your son/daughter to be executed than be homosexual. Would you?]

I would only want my son executed if he chose to be a homo in a society with an effective capital deterrent already in place. That way at least scores of other kids would be saved. But you refuse to grant the point, there is no evidence you will ever accept that homosexuality is a destructive, deadly, evil lifestyle.

xdisciplex #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

I also don't really understand it. I guess people only pay so much attention to these theories because they assume that those scientists which come up with them know what they do.
What I noticed is that many atheists, I don't know if this is one of their tactics, are trying to make it look like evolutionists are simply too dumb to really understand the evolutionary theory and this is the reason why they think it's silly.

CTD #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

The speed of light in a perfect vacuum cannot be measured without first obtaining a perfect vacuum. Light has been measured traveling at many different speeds, some of them far in excess of the "textbook" rate.

92g #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

Fossilzed T-rex's may appear to be carnivore's, but they were fossilzed during the flood.

That doesn't disprove the possiblity that they ate a vegitarian diet before the fall, and changed between that time.

The flood being the prmiary cause of the fossils we find is also why you would never to expect to find any of them fossilzed before they changed, if they changed.

Its also possible that they they ate a vegitarian diet. You don't know enough about T-rex's to claim much about them at all, except that they were very big, and had a nice set of teeth.

Springer #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

Evolution is a religion because it is based on ideology, not science. It assumes the non-existence of intelligent design. Evolutionists will readily concede that intelligent design is not falsifiable, so they arbitrarily falsify it not through science, but through belief They proclaim that evoluiton is a fact of nature by eliminating the only competing theory, intelligent design. If they cannot disprove ID, then why do they assume it doesn't exist? The answer is because they're not interested in truth... only in proving themselves correct.

(emphasis original)

Cassiterides #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

Regarding some scientific evidence against the speed of light, from what i remember when i studied science a while back i was told that light can not travel through a vaccum (as sound cant). Therefore i have no idea why people believe starlight travels through space. Astronomers knew this for many years which is why they were searching for some kind of aether.

Ron #homophobia evolutionfairytale.com

I think it is important to note that there is absolutely nothing that being gay adds to society. Homosexuality and lesbianism has absolutely no positive affect on any society in which you find such activity.

You may attempt to say; “but there are many homosexuals and lesbians that have added greatly to society in the areas of art, science, and humanitarian pursuits (etc—) and I'd agree, BUT this isn’t BECAUSE they were homosexuals or lesbians, rather because they were PEOPLE.

In fact, the act that gives homosexuals and lesbians their title doesn’t even add to society; rather, it stunts society. The sexual proclivities that drive homosexuals and lesbians, does not, and cannot ever, result in procreation. In fact, in order for the homosexuals and lesbians to procreate, they must act (hypocritically) against that which they call their “nature”. But, biologically, their sexual proclivities act anathema to biological nature.

Another thing to ponder, is this: I will be called a “bigot” for making the above statements (which begs further questions because the definition for "bigot" relates to race not sexual prefrence), or I will be labeled “intolerant” for making the above statements (which begs further questions such as "isn't the hetreophobe being "intolerant" of my opinions?). But when one comes to the crux of the matter, all I have done is stated facts—.

Fred Williams #fundie #homophobia evolutionfairytale.com

I've been wanting to chime in on this. For starters, though I can't speak for TeeJay I doubt he "wants to execute homosexuals". Instead, he wants it to be a capital offense, there's a big difference. As a capital offense, you would have very few homosexuals to execute, as is shown in countries that have this law. Anyone with any shred of compassion would not want their son or daughter to grow up and decide (yes *decide*, as twin studies have proven) to be a homosexual since their life expectancy will dramatically shrink. In the case of men their life expectancy rivals that of a heroin addict. The homosexual murder rate, suicide rate, sexual disease rate, and drug use rate is dramatically higher than the normal population. The problem is, atheists and unfortunately many Christians fall into the role of Job's friends and question the logic of God, often times without really taking the time to understand the big picture. Instead, they think of the friend or family member they know who is a homosexual and couldn't fathom having the guy or gal executed. But wouldn't it be better if they weren't a homosexual in the first place? Why would anyone want to wish such a depressing and short-lived life on someone? I support homosexuality as a capital offense because God is smarter than I am and He knows it will save tons of lives and make people happier, not "gayer". It would keep the Sandusky's of the world away from kids who themselves (as studies show) because of the encounter become more susceptible to that lifestyle later in life. I, and I suspect TeeJay, supports it because we love the person enough to compel them to live a good, long life, instead of showing them "luv" while we walk them right over the cliff.

Dig4gold #fundie #dunning-kruger evolutionfairytale.com

You could put a healthy living frog in a blender and blend it up then take the compound and wait and wait and wait but no life will spontaneously arise from it even though it started as a living entity. Even though you began with all of the components of life you would not observe life spontaneously arising from this mixture. Why? Because life only comes from life.

Fred Williams #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

[How to spot an evo-babbler, emphasis original]

3) Claims you are quoting evolutionists out of context. An all time Talk.Origins classic! 90% probability!

2) Asks you to quote from the proper scientific literature (i.e only pro-evolution literature). This brings a solid 90% probability you have a genuine evo-babbler on your hands!

1) And the number one sure sign – cites articles from the Talk.Origins repository, where you will be fortunate to find 1 scholarly article out of every 50. If done just once, it still registers in at an impressive 80% accuracy! If they list more than one reference to Talk.Origins in the same post, you have a dead-ringer at 99.98% probability!

Joshua #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

The current model of Evolution is false because of its hocus pocus mechanisms. Early I read a thread in reference to bones and how non-boned organisms could develop into boned organisms through RM+NS [random mutation + natural selection]. The question was simple, what on a non-boned organism could be modified to become a bone therefore demonstrating common ancestry – descent with modification ?

I postulated this question to a pro-evolutionist and to my amazement I received the following answer, “it just happened”. Hardly scientific.

Dave #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

[How science would be taught in a Fundie's ideal world]

1. In a typical day's one-hour science class session, about 45 minutes would be spent studying science, operational science, which is basically the science that most scientists agree about, whether they are Bible-believing scientists or materialistic-only scientists.

2. Then, about 12 minutes would be spent teaching origins science. The materialistic-only theories would be dismissed for a lack of objective evidence, and students would learn the wonderful truth of how the world has come to be the way it is today following creation, Adam and Eve, the flood, etc.

3. Then, the last three minutes would be spent reviewing Darwin's and the Neo's theories of evolution along with other myths of origins, like Greek mythology, American Indian legends and such as that. These wouldn't be taught for their education value, but as a warning to children that when they step away from objective reality, they open themselves up to becoming vulnerable to all kinds of kooky ideas.

Critical Science Failure

Anyone else think Super Sport had a kid?

Cassiterides #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

Gravity is a theory, not a proven fact.

The effects of gravity can be explained by other theories. An example would be the acceleration theory which asserts the earth is actually moving 'upward' at a constant rate of 1g (9.8m/sec^2). This produces the same effect as "gravity".

See there are different theories for the same phenomena - and none are facts, they are just theories.

The Return of Eye Beams!

Pew! Pew! Pew!

Cassiterides #fundie #crackpot evolutionfairytale.com

In a thread regarding astrophysics, distance and star light

Here is a question you.

So a light year = the distance light travels in a year.

You mentioned the figure 11 million light years away.

So my question is how are we observing this light 11 million light years away now?

I'm not 11 million years old, i'm 20.

---------------------------------------------

Later on he goes on to say...

If it takes 11 million years to travel to earth, how can i see it now? I'm only 20.

If it takes 11 million years to travel to earth then the viewer would need to be 11 million years old.

---------------------------------------------

And it continues with...

I don't believe light travels at all, i've looked at various models and worked on many but none of it works. The basics of visual perception is often overlooked. When we look at something what is actually going on? The emission theory states that the light emits (not a travelling speed) from our own eyes not from the object we look at. The intromission theory states the opposite.

The emission theory is the most common sense, so i don't believe there is any speed of light. The 'Starlight Problem' has never been a problem for me and the YEC model. The earliest Church Fathers (2nd-4th century AD) who believed in emmision theory also had no problem with starlight and a young universe.

disruptor #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

HIV does not, in fact, exist. The so-called human immunodeficiency virus, HIV, is only an "externalization", to absolve the AIDS patient of responsibility for his/her disease.

Anyone doubting this should consider that HIV has never even been isolated. This simple and amazing fact in itself should make everyone suspicious about the entire AIDS industry.

When someone "tests positive" for HIV, they actually test positive for reverse transcriptase enzyme activity which is assumed to indicate the presence of HIV in the patient. There is in fact a total lack of evidence for the existence of HIV.

At the time, everyone was in a mad rush to find the "cause" of AIDS. Those who came up with something first would be assured of endless research funds, fame etc. The h*mosexual lobby seized on the first announcement to claim a viral cause, since then it would no longer be their own fault. It's always easier to blame a "virus" than one's own misbehavior.

Fred Williams #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

I disagree with the premise of the geologic column, since there is no evidence for it (it only exists in the text books). Mt St Helens was your death knell, since even some unbelieving geologist scientists admit 90% of all geology was overturned by that event. Now you even have a growing number of evos who admit the evidence for the Grand Canyon supports the theory that it was carved out rapidly by a water breech. So much for the “geologic column” existing there!

Scott #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

What is valid about the Big Bang??? I see nothing valid to it. Where is the evidence??? The Big Bang would be a little bit more convincing if it actually had more than just evidence based on how light enters the telescope, but fortunately it doesn't have anymore evidence than this.

ikester7579 #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

[I've searched and searched and I can't find any evidence that Haeckel was ever put on trial for fraud [for his embryonic drawings]]

This is great. Evolutionist-atheist are denying this by omitting it from their websites. I can only find it listed on creationists websites which proves the point I made earlier about with holding information as a form of deception, or lies.

So it never happend eh?

So what's next? Omit the holocaust? There are already several atheist websites saying it never hapened. People believe what they want, and you can believe that Haeckel was never put on trial by his university. Makes no difference to me.

Origen #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

To build a bridge between science and faith is to question whether or not the United States has gone into communism and abandoned freedom of religion and speech in America? Has evolution become the State religion?
Being a former heavy metal vocalist (yeah--I took a piss) I can testify that the music Industry has fashioned evolution AND the occult has normalcy in the form of ritual Darwinism. Most of all the songs today in the Hard Rock world combine the occult and evolution in their lyrics. The Industry are some of the worst Special Interest groups out there on a limb. Their influence has grown into a ginormous following of Devil Worshipping Darwiniacs. I mean this is serious occult and capable of brainwashing a multitude into the NewAge Occult. And all this is done first in politics, for the purpose of legalizing drugs and destroying the right for the Church to remain on State property. Christian metal (or co-called) today is usually owned by secular labels which water down the lyrics and eventually ruin the Christian bands with drugs and idolatry. Music is the biggest form of expression and today's youth can only hear what their peers hear and thats occultic evolution (i.e., theistic evolution; the same mystic faith of Hitler believe it or not. Consider this: The Jesus of Dan Brown is the same Jesus of Hitler! As Jesus would say, "he who has an ear better listen!").

ikester7579 #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

Side note: I have one suggestion on word usage. Illumination is what Satan does. Bringing into the light is what God does. Hence why the illuminati is called what it is. Studying black magic and witchcraft, I came to figure this out.

Note: I studied this so I knew as a Christain what I was up against when I met someone who believed this.

ikester7579 #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

When adding evolution to God's creation, there are some things that need to be considered.

1) If evolution goes so well with God, why did Darwin have to recant his faith in order to write his theory? Can we do something the originator of evolution could not?

2) If evolution goes so well with God, then it should be used to bring people closer to God. And there should not be people losing their faith due to believing it.

3) Evolution should be used as a salvation tool, if it works so well with God. The preaching of it alone should draw people to the front of the church to get saved. But is this what we see?

4) Evolutionists argue that evolution is not a religion. But yet will accept someone who mixes both as one of their own. And will defend them in debates as well. Can a non-religous subject be combined with a religous one and work without turning the non-religous one into religion?

5) Evolution and God working together should not promote God hate sites like FSTDT.com

disruptor #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

The concepts "old" or "young" have no real meaning when applied to periods before human language. We can talk about the Earth as "billions of years old" (and the concept may even be helpful in furthering our understanding of the Earth), but this has as little meaning as "the square root of minus 1" (which still has its uses in mathematics) or as "a unicorn's horn" (which has its mythological uses). The existence of a word for a thing - even for a useful thing - is no proof for the existence of that same thing.

The Earth therefore cannot be "older" than the age of human language in which the concept "old" first appeared. "Old" or "young" mean nothing without a human to express them. Nor do the words "God", "Earth" or any other word.

So phrases such as OLD or YOUNG EARTH only start to mean something when human speech first appears. The words that allow us to speak of the Earth and its age mark the beginning:

John 1:1 In the beginning was the WORD.

The Earth is therefore YOUNG, probably no older than the last Ice Age, since human speech began round about that time

Ikester7579 #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

[Understood.
At Adam and Eve, the first humans with souls. Around the time when He put them in the garden.
At the fall when Adam and Eve disobeyed God.]

So Adam and Eve were the first man and woman in the "evolution" process? Can you back that up in scripture?

Also, why was this not included in Darwin's book? He was a Christian at one time. So why would he leave this out?

Added: So here I show that not only does the bible not support this. But Darwin's book does not support this.

Fred Williams #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

I believe the Bible overwhelmingly supports a <U>swift</U> death penalty for murder, rape, homosexuality, adultery, kidnapping, and yes, even unrepentant cursing of your parents. [...] If you work through the logical consequences, it is brilliant wisdom that would have saved countless lives

Springer #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

Furthermore, outrageous claims cannot be disproven. The theory of evolution is non-falsifiable. Every single obstacle encountered, regardless of how insurmountable, is swept under the rug with the excuse that "someday further research will explain these minor details." Evolution has proclaimed itself to be a fact because it has discarded the only competing theory... intelligent design.

crystaleaglesprings #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

There have also been many meteorites that have made it through. h*vind says if you get enough going in one direction, it'll create a cold current. (He's talking about a comet dumping ice on the poles and creating the "ice age." What do you think? If a big enough comet passed by, and had a bunch of it's mass ripped off by gravity, could it get through the poles by creating a cold channel?

ikester7579 #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

But it's not like H*m*sexuals are knocking on your door on Sunday afternoons, handing you leaflets that say if you don't turn g*y you will tortured for the rest of your existence.]

You know where the trash can is, correct? If you don't want to read the stuff, toss it. It's your choice.

But h*m*sexuals do call churches and test them on what they allow to go on in their church. This is so they will record what they say pertaining to their lifestyle. And if they can make them say the wrong thing, they get together and file a class action lawsuit to sue the church right out of bussiness.

Now which is worse, the leaflets that can be thrown away?
Or being sued and your whole life ruined?

So don't try the guilt trip game here.

Admin3 #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

Well, I have a question. Is not our magnetic field (a planet or moon, generated magnetic field) required for us to survive? If we leave it, would we not die? And if not, NASA should already be doing test flight simulation away from our planet, and our moon. So that we know what to expect. But they have not, which tells me there's a problem.

Phaedrus #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

They want to equate evolution with biology and biology with science, so that anyone who dares question evolution is an enemy of science. This is pure, undiluted nonesense. Biology does not need darwinism, is doesn't need the single common ancestor model, it doesn't need fossils, it doesn't need a lot of old dirt and rocks. Biology is the study of living systems, not dead relics and by the way, biology tells us nothing about our primordial past.

<p>They have made a radical and hotly contested suggestion to the Kansas State School Board that has evolutionists running for cover. Teach students biology and the other natural sciences and let them decide for themselves if it's God's handywork or pure chance. Just outragous.

Calypsis4 #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

So live in denial. The fact is that Criss Angel made a blood pact with the devil in order to gain the power to do such things. It's in his own autobiography & when I can locate that quote in my files I will bring it out. As far as O'Neal and what happened to him: he was hypnotized before going over the house. You missed that. But he saw the recording.Furthermore, you did not explain in the slightest as to how Criss Angel managed to pull this off in any physical or illusionary matter. That's because you can't. It was supernatural and we have personally seen it before more than once. I counseled a seriously demonized woman who levitated all of her body off the floor(at a 35 degree angle) except the tips of her toes after being knocked out cold by a force we could not see. Don't even try to tell me such things don't exist. The woman was only two feet in front of me when this happened to her and I have witnesses that saw it with me. These things exist in line with what the Bible says about the supernatural and it is all related to what God told us in His Word.

92g #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

The is as about as silly as it gets. As an unbeliever, you are not in a position to say what the God that created you is allowed to do and what he is not allowed to do. It may be deceptive if he told you to make invalid assumptions, make some measurements, and then claim you know the age of the universe, but he did not do that. Someone else did that, and your gullible enough to believe them, so don't fuss about God deceiving you.

The Bible states "In the beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth". That's really all he needs to say for you to realize that you are deceiving yourself.

There are other scientific data points that indicate the earth is young, e.g. the earth's magnetic field, and the helium found in zircons, so while you have done a good job of deceiving yourself, please don't be offended if we don't join you your delusion.

Admin3 #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

So, would you say they are lying about finding what is shown in those pictures [of frozen dragons]? Seems alot of trouble to do something like that. Guess it must have to do with realitivism, where you create your own reality and decide whether it's real or not.

Blitzking #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

God doesn't "Kill" Anyone.. He merely shortens their lives, which is his right as Man's Creator..
 
YOU SEE...
 
Got lives OUTSIDE of the Time Space Matter continuum, So the future and the past are all the
same to him.. That is why his Son said "You must be born again" And worship God "In spirit and
in Truth"... You see, as far as God is concerned,, Atheists and God haters ARE ALREADY DEAD....
They are merely walking, talking, breathing CORPSES  Completely Dead to the Spirit. Which is all
that is important in God's view.. He is not impressed with bones, organs, skin, and tissue... All that
he cares about is Man's Heart and having a meaningful relationship with him.. He forces Nobody
to seek him....

lwj2op2 #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

the many varieties of skulls which have been portrayed as "evolutions" toward Human are able to be found on the shoulders of living humans now "walking the streets" of Earth. They are more common in third world countries where bone altering disease is more common.

The supposed Neandrathal children were long ago dismissed for reasons similar to my "walking the streets" statement, they were not Neandrathal, just sick. If I correctly recall the most common cause was Elephantitus. I am sure I spelled that wrong but Word did not know it either.

Cassiterides #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

(in response to the U.S. Religious Knowledge Survey which demonstrates Atheists/Agnostics correctly answered more religious questions than those of religious belief)

Because most Atheists are closet-Christians and most evolutionists closet-creationists. The only reason they pretend/say they are Atheists is fear (i.e of being mocked or ridiculed). Most scientists actually embrace creation or intelligent design ideas but are too scared to speak out in fear of losing their jobs.

Dave #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

[Dave's "proof" that all carnivores were originally herbivores before the fall]

We have four cats who used to be outdoor cats, and who used to be extremely adept hunters, eating snakes, lizards, birds, small rabbits, voles, mice, etc. A couple of years ago we converted them over to indoor cats where they were getting only bagged cat food. We discovered quite by accident that being indoors all the time they weren't having their need for greens met. See, they could munch on grass when they were outside, but they now rely on us to give them their grass ration every morning. If we don't they definitely make it known to us. They crave the stuff.

Because of this, we discovered that our dog, who is mostly an inside dog, really likes getting lettuce, broccoli, carrots, potatoes, etc., and only eats her bagged dog food after she's gleaned what she can from my son's plate (ahem).

There is no way you could convince me that our dog and our cats couldn't live on a balanced vegetarian diet. Yahoo! The Bible is right again. No surprise there.

Cassiterides #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

Those are standard and have to be put up legally. From what i know about [sungazing], there are no actual health risks, i have a brother who is into alternitive medicine etc and he's been into sungazing for a while. You don't do it for long, the idea is that you only do it for a few minutes (or even seconds) each day. The idea is that it replaces food and drink and is a source of energy.

Moonlight is the opposite - it is destructive. Hence why their is folklore about lunar effect if you look at it. The word lunacy comes from ancient times when the moon was thought to cause mental problems.

[Unless you think our eyes damage themselves through their own emissions, this shows vision comes from light entering the eye, not vice versa.]

There are many other lights, however there is no evidence actually that light travels.

[In any case, emission theory and sungazing don't seem to have anything to do with the speed of light being infinite, which I think was your original claim? We have measured the speed of light and its not infinite, so I'm not sure where you're going with this.]

The speed of light is a theory based on the theory of relativity, which attempts to connect space and time.

The theory of relativity though is just a theory. Theories are not fact. Anything with theory in it's name is not proven most notebly: the theory of evolution.

I could invent a theory now i.e the theory that the sky is yellow, so the ''Yellow Sky Theory''. Obviously this doesn't make it a fact, it's just theoretical.

Most evolutionists though have a hard time understanding what is fact and what is theory or assumption, speculation etc. They can't distinguish between the two, and so they think evolution and any other science theory which has a considerable amount of support is a fact when it isn't.

Cassiterides #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

Many early Christians practiced sungazing. It's a form of breatharianism or inedia (extreme fasting), where you fully abstain from eating or drinking. There are many Christians who believe Adam and Eve were originally breathatarians and sungazers (there was no meat before the fall).

Ratan Manek achieved no eating or drinking for 211 days via sungazing. Nicholas of Flue, the patron saint of Switzerland achieved fasting for 19 years. There are other accounts of where people have survived for very long periods without eating or drinking because of sungazing. Sungazing is not only apart of eastern teaching, but is something everyone was originally doing. How it was done however became lost like most other ancient knowledge. If you look up the accounts of Christian mystics who lived for tens of years without eating or drinking. How did they do it? They did it through the sun.

Springer #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

The theory of evolution has done nothing to advance science and has provided no benefit to mankind. It is a theory which has only degraded man’s image of himself in the world and has promoted moral relativism and everything that goes with it. This is in contrast to other scientific disciplines, all of which have served to benefit man either directly or indirectly.
The study of evolution is an intellectual exercise which is analogous to playing video games. It can be intellectually entertaining but, in the final analysis, it is a waste of time.

scott #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

Atheist are trying to create a black hole.... well seeing if these stargate nerds actually THINK they can do this, simply through their pride they will create something from a horror movie and all die doing it, and anyone in the immediate area including innocent kittens who dont believe in evolution anyways.

This black hole machine... how atheistically typical...

Atheist always try to look, and sound intelligent, but the whole world will see when they lacklusterly get up in the morning, hop into their toyota yaris, go to walmart, get their oil changed, get a bite to eat and drive on over to the black hole machine.

They finally turn the machine on and say: " Hey Bob, weve done it, WE have single handedly disproven God"..... ahahahahahahaha huuuuuulllllkkkk cruuuunnnch...... as he is sucked into the black hole, then the lab mice try to get away but are sucked in also... along with anyone in the immediate area (including there beloved toyota yaris')..... and hilariously open the gates of hell....

Therefore single handedly proving that these atheist had no common sense whatsoever.... but hay, this is just a possibility.

How many times will an atheist continue to say that he absolutely positively KNOWs that the universe is billions of years old, and that God obviously doesnt exist, because people who believe in God are just a little below the cambrian layers if you know what i mean.

Springer #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

The theory of evolution, IMO, deserves no respect. Evolution is touted as "science" but, in reality, is based only on imagination and religious persuasions. If they're going to pretend to be scientists, then they need to adhere to the empirical approach, which is totally foreign to their way of thinking. I think the biggest fallacy of evolutionary thinking is the wreckless use of extrapolations....e.g., peppered moths "prove" that natural selection is operative... therefore, man evolved from slime. This is not science. This is a misuse of "science" as a means to an end. [emphasis added]