Wld any of u guys do me a favor?
-
Khi- Ok im talking abt progressive evolution then. Ofcourse things can devolve n this is in accordance with the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Everything degrades with time.
The Second Law does not inhibit evolution just like it does not inhibit your growth from a simple single cell to a complex Khizar.
Khi- Apes n monkeys dont have a speech center in their brain like humans. However they r related in a way. The Quran says evil humans were transformed into apes so here we have it. Again devolution not progression n i totally agree with tht.
But apes and monkeys can communicate with each other! Anyway, you still stick to the Xtian decay theory...
So you assume flightless birds descend from flying birds? Okay. That's quite a lot of evolution, you know.
Khi- Id call thuis reverse evolution or devolution n i totally agree with tht. Im refuting progressive evolution here where simple beings became more complex. Thts the whole argument.
Are flightless birds more simple than flying birds? How would you define simple and complex?
Also, I don't know what to call the evolution from a flying bird into an ostrich or kiwi other than macroevolution.
Khi- Yes i believe we all have sinned INDIVIDUALLY(not only Adam n Eve like Xtians claim) n thts y we fell from high heaven 2 this world which is decaying day by day.
Two Deaths and Two Lives for the Disbelievers*How can you disbelieve in GOD when you were dead and He gave you life, then He puts you to death, then He brings you back to life, then to Him you ultimately return?
*228 The righteous do not really die; they go straight to Heaven. When their interim on this earth comes to an end, the angels of death simply invite them to go to the same Paradise where Adam and Eve once lived (2154, 3169, 824, 2258, 1632, 3620-27, 4456, 8927-30). Thus, while the righteous experience only the first death following OUR original sin, the unrighteous go through two deaths (4011). At the time of death, the disbelievers know their miserable fate (850, 4727), then they suffer a continuous nightmare that lasts until Hell is created (4046, 8923, Appendix 17, RK).Read and checked all verses. None support your belief of decay.
It is only a difference in scale. Run microevolution for a million years, even a hundred thousand years, and you get macroevolution.
Khi- N this is exactly where uve left science n entered Religion. Therefore macro evolution is entirely religious. There is no evidence tht this happens whtsoever. There r limits set in the gene code u know which cannot be tresspassed.
Extrapolation in science is not religion. Geologists, physicists, astronomers do that. Besides, I don't need faith to accept evolution. I just need to look at the evidence. Oh wait. You don't even want to look at the evidence because you are already sure that you cannot be wrong.
'limits in set the gene code u know'? No, I don't know. Back this up. Cite a scientific study so I can read abot it.
Khi- Ofcourse not. Fossils dont cnt as evidence. Ive already told u y. I leave u 2 think abt tht.
Khi- I already told u y fossils cannot possibly count as evidence. All u need 2 is after finding a bunch of bones in the dirt rearrange them acording 2 ur preconceived ideas n VOILA u can show anything u want.
Khizar said, 'I wont bother 2 c the evidence, no way, I am sure I am right'
Nowhere in the verse I see that humans are created perfect, so your opinion is just as good as mine.
Khi- Read this verse then
We created man in the best design.First, that verse doesn't cover all other creatures.
Second, 'ahsani taqwim' does not necessarily mean perfect.
Look at these.428 Yuriidu Allahu an yukhaffifa 'ankum wa khuliqa al-insanu da'iifan
Literal God wants that He reduces/lightens from you, and the human was created weak3054 Allahu alladzii khalaqakum min da'fin tsumma ja'ala min ba'di da'fin quwwatan tsumma ja'ala min ba'di quwwatin da'fan wa shaybatan yakhluqu ma yasyaa~-u wa huwa al-'aliimu al-qadiiru
Literal God (is) who created you from weakness then He created/put from after weakness power/strength, then He created/put from after power/strength weakness, and white or gray (old aged), He creates what He wills/wants, and He is the knowledgeable, the capable/able3711 Faistaftihim ahum asyaddu khalqan am man khalaqna inna khalaqnahum min thiinin lazibin
Literal So ask/take their opinion, are they a stronger creation, or who We created? That We created them from very sticky mud/clay . -
Who cares if evolution is true or not? Why make so many threads proving its true or false? It does not change anyones belief in God. I can understand you making one thread or something, but you keep bringing up the same topic over and over again. You're creating animosity between other believers on here for no reason.
Peace.
-
Peace
Im sorry i cant help myself brothers and sisters lol
http//www.hardichr.dk/billeder%20sjove/struds%2001.jpg
regards
Noah -
To Andya,
Salam,
'Ahsani Taqweem' means 'best DESIGN'. I know tht man has been created week. We rnt steel hard machines but can easily get damaged so tht we know our own limits. However this does not change the fact of our BEST DESIGN. The rest ive already told u my opinion. If u wanna consider fossils as evidence, fine, go ahead. Ive already told u tht fossils cannot possibly cnt as evidence, NOT tht i ignore the evidence. U twisted my words 2 make it seem i said something which i dont. GOD Bless! -
Who cares if evolution is true or not? Why make so many threads proving its true or false? It does not change anyones belief in God. I can understand you making one thread or something, but you keep bringing up the same topic over and over again. You're creating animosity between other believers on here for no reason.
Peace.
Good post Riz!
-
To Andya,
Salam,
'Ahsani Taqweem' means 'best DESIGN'. I know tht man has been created week. We rnt steel hard machines but can easily get damaged so tht we know our own limits. However this does not change the fact of our BEST DESIGN. The rest ive already told u my opinion. If u wanna consider fossils as evidence, fine, go ahead. Ive already told u tht fossils cannot possibly cnt as evidence, NOT tht i ignore the evidence. U twisted my words 2 make it seem i said something which i dont. GOD Bless!You ignore the other verses.
Fossils are accepted as scientific evidence. They are real. We know the existence of dinosaurs, Archaeopteryx, mammoths, and Neanderthals from fossils. Yet you refuse to study them. Therefore I say you want to ignore the evidence. If you don't want to be viewed as ignoring the evidence, then why do you shy away from learning?
-
You ignore the other verses.
Khi- No i dont.
Fossils are accepted as scientific evidence. They are real. We know the existence of dinosaurs, Archaeopteryx, mammoths, and Neanderthals from fossils. Yet you refuse to study them. Therefore I say you want to ignore the evidence. If you don't want to be viewed as ignoring the evidence, then why do you shy away from learning?
Khi- Ok if theyr evidence 4 u fine. However 4 me n many others they r clearly not. Not 2 mention the many fakes presented by evolutionists in the past like piltdown man n nebraska man, the 1st had an orang ottans jaw fixed into a human skull n the latter a pigs tooth! So this is not evidence. On the contrary these r lies. GOD Bless!
-
Khi- Ok if theyr evidence 4 u fine. However 4 me n many others they r clearly not. Not 2 mention the many fakes presented by evolutionists in the past like piltdown man n nebraska man, the 1st had an orang ottans jaw fixed into a human skull n the latter a pigs tooth! So this is not evidence. On the contrary these r lies. GOD Bless!
Regarding Piltdown Man & Nebraska Man Sure, Piltdown is a fake (created to counter an actual fossil, the Taung child, Australopithecus africanus) and Nebraska is a mistake. But we don't need them now. The actual fossil record of ancient humans are quite good now. That is the evidence, which you don't bother to study.
This is a good place to study the evidence for human evolution
http//www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs -
Regarding Piltdown Man & Nebraska Man Sure, Piltdown is a fake (created to counter an actual fossil, the Taung child, Australopithecus africanus) and Nebraska is a mistake. But we don't need them now. The actual fossil record of ancient humans are quite good now. That is the evidence, which you don't bother to study.
This is a good place to study the evidence for human evolution
http//www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homsKhi- Salam. 4 the 1st time ic u admitting tht the evolutionists fakes something n thus lied 2 the piblic in deperate support 4 their theory. Im glad u accepted tht. However u then go on 2 say tht the record is "quite good" now n tht tht is the evidence!! I mean Duh! GOD Bless!
-
Khi- Salam. 4 the 1st time ic u admitting tht the evolutionists fakes something n thus lied 2 the piblic in deperate support 4 their theory. Im glad u accepted tht. However u then go on 2 say tht the record is "quite good" now n tht tht is the evidence!! I mean Duh! GOD Bless!
You know, if you cared to do some research about Piltdown, it was forged to divert attention from an real 'ape-man' fossil, Australopithecus africanus. For some reason there are people who don't want their ancestors to be from Africa.
You don't even try to look at the other fossils as if Piltdown is the only one that matters. The fact is, nobody in science cares about Piltdown any more these days. There are good, real fossils that show the shapes of humans in the past Java Man, the Taung child, Lucy, Turkana Boy, 'Mrs Ples', Neanderthals, Toumai. Those are good evidence. We don't need fake fossils if we have real ones.
-
You don't even try to look at the other fossils as if Piltdown is the only one that matters. The fact is, nobody in science cares about Piltdown any more these days. There are good, real fossils that show the shapes of humans in the past Java Man, the Taung child, Lucy, Turkana Boy, 'Mrs Ples', Neanderthals, Toumai. Those are good evidence. We don't need fake fossils if we have real ones.
Khi- Salam. No they r not good evidence either. N as i said since evolutinists forged in the past there is no guarantee tht theyd do it again. Btw Kent already refuted Lucy n the Neanderthals as being our ancestors. Turkana boy was refuted by Harun Yahya in the clip 'The collapse of Darwinism'. N most important of all NO FOSSILS CNT AS EVIDENCE. Remeber i showed u a link 2 dino remains with humans n u immediately rejected them? GOD Bless!
-
Khi- Salam. No they r not good evidence either. N as i said since evolutinists forged in the past there is no guarantee tht theyd do it again. Btw Kent already refuted Lucy n the Neanderthals as being our ancestors. Turkana boy was refuted by Harun Yahya in the clip 'The collapse of Darwinism'. N most important of all NO FOSSILS CNT AS EVIDENCE. Remeber i showed u a link 2 dino remains with humans n u immediately rejected them? GOD Bless!
If you want to avoid the evidence because you're afraid of them, go ahead. It just shows how your reasoning goes.
You just don't want to be bothered to study because you're so sure you're right. Therefore I can't argue properly with you.
You are sure the fossils are forgery, but even most creationists acknowledge them as real. Where is your source that said the entire human fossil record is false?
Lucy
http//www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/lucy.jpgTell me, what is Kent Hovind's refutation of Lucy? Write it here.
Turkana Boy
http//www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/15000.jpgTell me, what is Harun Yahya's refutation of Turkana Boy? Write it here.
Dino remains with human? Where? In that thread I only see pictures and sculptures. No fossils.
-
You just don't want to be bothered to study because you're so sure you're right. Therefore I can't argue with you.
Khi- Salam. Well now i can say the same 4 regarding u.
Dino remains with human? Where? In that thread I only see pictures and sculptures. No fossils.
Khi- I told u 2 also view the clip 4 more details. Did u see it? GOD Bless!