Evolution is a religion 6.0

Yes isn't that the general thinking? That via micro evolution, somehow macro evolution is the long termed product of that? The problem is of course the mechanism which has never been shown to actually do that, other than it being an idea. What happened at the genetic level to manifest a new species? For if we actually knew, we could replicate it by manipulation of matter. We could, using intelligence replicate what this dumb and unintelligent universe did. Except we cannot. And yet we are told with certainty that it happened?

 

No what you really mean is that no evidence has been shown that would convince you personally. But then of course since the small changes that result in new species occur over hundreds of thousands of years chances are that nobody will ever personally witness what you so laughingly call " macro evolution" Much more rational to believe in an invisible being who just makes things and then fools people with fossil records and DNA.

 

General concensus is redundant. And no his nonsense will be as laughable then as it is now. And do you actually know where and in what field he supposedly got his doctorate.

 

What I mean is that if physics tried that game, the science itself would call foul! Einstein run into such resistance, until that eclipse gave them the evidence. Your theory needs an eclipse. Just show us the theory is so well understood as to be able to provide hard evidence that macro evolution happened as they think, by adaptation and mutation. Of course physics was not a reaction against religion, so it isn't the same game as the theory of evolution. It has emotional investment. And that is how they get away as being a science without the evidence of replication of what their beliefs maintain.

 

Peanut Brittle is a religion.

 

Dr. Chaim H. Tejman is at least dubious and any attempt at verifying credentials has been fruitless.

 

Yes, his credentials appear to be a fraud. But let us see if anyone can actually support him!

 

He is a medical doctor whose wife died of cancer and he
was searching for a cure for cancer through Wave Theory.

http://www.grandunifiedtheory.org.il/Book10/Cancer.htm

Many brilliant people are able to get into more than one specialty.

 

Give me a link to his actual degree!

 

There is endless proof of evolution. Just not proof the closed minded are willing to accept. And " macro evolution" is not a science or anything other than the smoke screen believes in creationism use to divert the discussion.

 

Lots of things evolve. I have evolved. My businesses have evolved. My market has evolved.
On the other hand,
Darwinism is the creation myth of atheism.
Even if there is no God, Darwinism is still more ridiculous.
Even if there is no God, it did not happen the way Darwinists are left to believe it did.
I call B. S.

 

can you provide any scientific evidence for any of these claims?

 

You unsupported opinion based on nothing whatsoever is duly noted and ignored.

 

I take it you actually mean Abiogenesis when you say Darwinism. If so....it makes more sense that Chemicals created life (since all life is a combination of chemicals) than that something undefined and unknowable decided one day to convert mud into men. What of the millions of creatures than existed up until a few thousand years ago? Are they just a trick?

 

Nothing has the potential to be the effect of its own absence. Material contingency is empirical evidence of necessary being.
Now, if you want to argue that matter exists necessarily, then you are going have to explain why matter has none of the characteristics attributable to necessary being and all of the characteristics attributable to contingent being.

 

Are you purposefully trying to create confusion or do you seriously think this way....this makes no sense. Please try actual articulation of thought in a language that can be understood...Aye aint awl dat brayat.

 

No it isn't, and you've been schooled on this in about 10 threads now.

Matter has always existed. It can not be created or destroyed.

 

Matter is subject to change. Anything subject to change is subject. It is not-necessary. It is contingent in its being. If contingent being exists, necessary being must exist. In even simpler terms, if matter is created, there is a creator.

Matter is contingent in its being. It does not exist necessarily. It came to be and is subject to constant change. As I wrote above, if contingent being exists, necessary being must exist.
No cause and effect sequence can being with an effect; however, a cause and effect sequence can start with an uncaused cause, an efficient cause.
Absolutely everything I can observe, measure or test proves to be contingent in its being.
Material contingency is empirical evidence of necessary being.

As creators of things, we recognize created things. We are unique that way. That's where religion comes from.

 

So....basically because you do not know where matter and everything came from it must be attributed to something (God) rather than accepting that we do not know (Yet). And just because a thing is observed or experienced does not imply a creator. I walk outside and get wet in the rain....no one created it...nature did.

 

Not quite. Everything we do know about matter tells us that matter is contingent in its being.

 

Contingent On Its Being? Hopefully you understand what that actually means.

Basically you are saying matter is there because it is there...Okay, I agree it is there which is agreeing with you I suppose. But I am not used to agreeing with not saying anything.