rocketboy

nope yo u must be thinking of your twin

Mormons are like Jehova witnesse's ,they will go out of there way to ram and cram shit down peoples throats ,theres a right way and wrong way to hel p people learn about God IMO

we all get i n a hurry.... but that was particulary bad

the dangerous scary norwegian metal band with stage props ....hahaha yep they will surely wil l turn the religous world upside down with their success and strong meesage.and Madonna aside form her religous views and mockerys is jus t gross ,old,and lame as yanni ,id go to my local bar on tuesday karaoke nights if i wanted to see an old washed up whore sing pop songs about sex

open your eyes and look around you and it is obvious God is everywhere ...facts ?please any fact so far on evolution is just opinion .one of the zillion problems we face is yo u are basing these so called "findings" on the parameters surrounding what we think evolution has taught us ,(thats deep thinking for many of you ) there is a universe i n which you cant see or test or read i n textbook . as hard as it is to imagine there are some things in which yo umust have faith in and the weak close minded will have a very hard time with this concept.

termites : Once a year (at mating time) some male and female termites grow wings and fly from the nest. After one flight, they cast off their wings, which they will never need again. The male and female couples then burrow into the ground, and start another nest. Evolution cannot explain the way termites live. They don

moles : There are also other burrowing animals with similar physical characteristics to true moles, such as the Golden Mole of Africa and the marsupial mole of Australia. The Golden Mole, like a true mole, is (near) blind, stout-bodied and almost tailless (with a light-coloured fur giving it its name), but has four toes, two with pick-like claws.10 Marsupial moles are described by Encyclopaedia Britannica as being

crabs : Hermit crabs have an amazing relationship with sea anemones. These invertebrates are covered with stinging cells which explode at the slightest touch. But hermit crabs regularly carry sea anemones around with them, stuck to their shells. In fact, they will often pick up sea anemones and

frogs and toads didnt evolve either : Britannica admits there is great debate as to how frogs in particular should be classified, due to a lack of evolutionary evidence:

guess what guys evolution is a religion!!!... not a science.it has no real facts and is mans way of pushing God out to make his own rules ,also i will ntoe that you need ot read between the lines in the bible as to whats a factual story and whats a teaching beifre yo ustart on about johnna and the whale and parting the seas .so many animals show us that they were formed through creationsim that is amzing that anyone even would consider evoution iMO,ive already pointed out the horses and whales and heres some reasons why a camel coulndt have evolved either Camels are classified in the family Camelidae, along with the South American animals called llamas and alpacas, so they are all called

athesits tend to group christians together as if we rape choir boys and have orgys with prostitues on saturday nights and go to chruch the following morning .throughtout history man has done horrible wicked things falsley saying they are done i n the name of God .theres definitly alot of people who give christians a bad name and dont represent the word of God does this mean we are all hypocrits ?that is like saying every black red green blue person in the world is a thief and a liar becasue one or two of the mstole your car stereo . the world is a better place because of christ and it is apparent in any country who doesnt practice christianity ,they have nothign and are destitute because of their way of life and beleif sytem .if yo u love america and your freedom and rights ...yo ulove the techings and principles of the bible , americas forefathers had a strong tie to christianty and constructed our doctrines around the holy bible

i really dont know why yo u guys thin k everyone is cramming christianty down your throat,jus ttrying to show yo utheres a better way to live .dont yo u guys like a good intelliagble debate about where we came from ? if yo u practice your dark arts as you call them, then thats your business.. but yo u are the ones who put christianty down initially and labled us idiots and fools and then wonder why you are then ridiculed

why do yo uuse this logic ?you are confusing the atmosphere and space with heaven ,theres no contradiction ...it syas heaven is above the waters ,it does not state heaven is our stratosphere

okay first every atheist is so quick to spout off how llittle we actually know about the earth and how old it is and how we are just a drop i n a ocean of time so it wil l all come clear to us soon and make perfect sense ,..and now we are lead to belive by atheists that we have a solid working understanding of exactly when gepgraphicly oceans and land and animals and light came to be ,which is it John kerry ? oh and yo uprobably didnt realize your genesis scripture is not even correct chronelogicaly and takes scripture out of context totally and their days arent even correct lol ,i have a real bible in my lap and im not going off a biased website ,it clearly states in Genesis 1:3-5 God creates light and he creates darkness all o n the first day ...plants came later which gives them plenty of opportunity to bask i n the light and experiance photosynthesis.

the misinterpretation sriptures from your atheist site once again assumes that darwins evolutionary theories are fact ... which is not the case ,you cannot test and prove thsi concept..yo ucant accuratly disprove anything by using a variable against a theory ,there must be certain given knowns . show me the proof according to geology or is it really jus t proof accroding to evolutionists concepts of what they THINK happend

haah this is proof ? according to science ?you outline the order of events according to what evolution explains as true and known . yo u cant base factual evidence of innaccuracys on darwins theorys and mans perameters of what or how he thinks it should be or the order it should have been

the bible is the most read book of all time and its easy to understanbd why because it is the only faith historically accurate wit h accurate people, places, and things that are proven by science , i could go on for years showing you christianty has plenty of proof ,but instead of pointy one finger and having four point back at you ,what do yo u have other than a guy in a wizard costume and a plastic crystal necklace thats made i n China ? you demand proof and accurate accounts yet offer no explaination or proof of your own to discredit mr or prove your own faith in witchcraft? When we look at other "scriptures," we find they do not interface with history at all, or they interface inaccurately. some innaccurate scripture of other religions : The eastern "scriptures" have no interest in history, because this is the world of illusion from which we are to be delivered. Ancient polytheistic religions likewise had no interest in history. Their gods acted only in myths, removed as far as possible from real history. The Koran is almost entirely assertions of Allah. It has very little historical interface, and what there is contains clear inaccuracies. Sura 26:55-60 says that the Israelites under Pharaoh were but "a scanty band" (in contrast to the multitude mentioned in Ex. 1:9) and that in leaving Egypt they forsook "their gardens and fountains and splendid dwellings" (in contrast to their slavery and hardship mentioned Ex. 1:11-14). This renders the whole motive for Israel

evolution and the Wonderful whales Cetaceans have many unique features to enable them to live in water. For example: * Enormous lung capacity with efficient oxygen exchange for long dives. * A powerful tail with large horizontal flukes enabling very strong swimming. * Eyes designed to see properly in water with its far higher refractive index, and withstand high pressure. * Ears designed differently from those of land mammals that pick up airborne sound waves and with the eardrum protected from high pressure. * Skin lacking hair and sweat glands but incorporating fibrous, fatty blubber. * Whale fins and tongues have counter-current heat exchangers to minimize heat loss. * Nostrils on the top of the head (blowholes). * Specially fitting mouth and nipples so the baby can be breast-fed underwater. * Baleen whales have sheets of baleen (whalebone) that hang from the roof of the mouth and filter plankton for food. Many cetaceans find objects by echo-location. They have a sonar system which is so precise that it's the envy of the U.S. Navy. It can detect a fish the size of a golf ball 230 feet (70 m) away. It took an expert in chaos theory to show that the dolphin's

holy shit all that childish babble of i know yo u are but what am i ...and your 37 years old , i would have never guessed The horse shows that similarities are due to creation! Limb bones of five different types of animals Evolutionists claim that similarities in the limbs of frogs, reptiles and mammals show that they all evolved from a common ancestor. Amphibians (e.g. frogs) supposedly gave rise to reptiles, which gave rise to mammals, including bats and humans, hence the similarities in their limb structures. However, the horse

heres an interesting topic i found on apes ,man and evolution regarding science Charles Darwin was a clever salesman--he wanted to sell his evolutionary theory and he wanted to promote himself as a great man of science. Very aware of the power of public opinion, he was careful not to shock the public sensibilities more than necessary. Thus, in his Origin of Species published in 1859 he advanced his theory that all species of plants and animals had descended by evolution from one or a few common ancestral cells. But he avoided the issue of human origins, only suggesting that the future would illuminate this question. some of his knowledgeable critics immediately warned of the plain implication of his theory, that man had an animal ancestry. Only after twelve years, when his reputation was secure, did he publish The Descent of Man in which he made man a product of evolution from ape-like ancestors. This was obviously the ultimate conclusion of his theory. If it is a fact, as virtually all science textbooks teach, it is surely the most significant fact of human history. For if the origin of the race was mere dust, its destiny likewise is nothing but dust. Has science proved it to be so. Let us survey the evidence. Fossils provide the principle historical evidence offered for human evolution. It seems as if every year or some striking new fossil "hominid" hits the front pages. But like a blazing meteor, it soon is forgotten, only to have another soon replace it in the news. John Reader commented in the New Scientist (3/26/81), "Not many (if any) have held the stage for long; by now laymen could be forgiven for regarding each new arrival as no less ephemeral than the weather forecast." Thus, the Neanderthal people, their fossil remains first found in 1856, are now conceded to have been true human beings. Also they were not hunched over but walked as upright as we do. Furthermore, the Cro-Magnon people, essentially the same as us modern humans, are now known to have lived at the same time as the Neanderthalers. In 1891 Eugene Dubois discovered the so-called Java Man skull. But he concealed for thirty years a true human skull of very large brain capacity found two years earlier. In 1936 he concluded that Java Man was actually the skull of a giant gibbon. Scientists today, however, continue to hold that fossils of this type, now called Homo erectus, were our ancestors. They cannot, however, prove that these fossils have any connection with an cultural artifacts or implements such as tools found in their vicinity. The Piltdown fossil found in England in 1912 was shown in 1953 to be a cleverly contrived hoax. The greater part of the scientific world accepted the fraud for forty years. One of the men implicated in this fraud was Teilhard de Chardin. He later was involved as a fund-raiser for the investigation of the Peking Man or Sinanthropus fossils in China. Only drawings, photographs, and plaster casts were allowed out of China. Just two outside authorities were permitted to examine them, and they both raised very serious questions, doubting the connection of Sinanthropus to man. During World War II the fossils mysteriously disappeared, leaving no scientific evidence. Since the 1920s prominent candidates for our ancestors have been coming to light in Africa. The principal type is called Australopithecus. A shining star since the early 1980s has been Australopithecus afarensis, the prime example of which was affectionately dubbed "Lucy." In just a few years Lucy suffered several criticism, however. Professors R. Susman and J. Stern of the State Univ. of New York at Stoneybrook commented that Lucy not only spent a lot of time in trees, but that she probably also nested in the trees and lived a lot like other monkeys. Even Dr. Donald Johanson, Lucy's finder, admitted, "There is little evidence that Australopithecines made and used tools." thus the stars rise and fall, and John Reader's gloomy assessment of the fossil man scene is again confirmed. To establish evolutionary ancestors, a sequence of intermediate fossil types is necessary. The recently popular sequence is Australopithecus afarensis to Homo habilis to Homo erectus to Homo sapiens. Prof. S.J. Gould of Harvard University has pointed out, however, that there are substantial fossil gaps between these types. Therefore, evolution of one into the other cannot be proved. In addition, only the Homo sapiens fossils can be firmly related to evidence of culture and tools. The currently hot evidence for human evolution comes from molecular biology. The DNA molecules or genes of different species are compared, and particular protein molecules are likewise compared. The more similar are the sequences of nucleotide units in the DNA molecules, and the more similar are the sequences of amino acid units in the protein molecules, the closer the evolutionary relationship is assumed to be. This type of evidence can be used to construct diagrams of assumed evolutionary history which looks like a tree, with root, trunk, branches, twigs and leaves at the ends of the branches. It does not, however, prove that the evolutionary history actually occurred. There are problems with this theory of DNA and protein evolution, however. Different proteins sometimes give different results from each other and from DNA. For example, the cytochrome c molecule of man is identical to that of chimpanzee, but differs by one amino acid from that of the rhesus monkey. The comparison of carbonic anhydrase I molecules shows rhesus monkey considerably more distant from man, but chimp till quite close. In fact, it has been said that chimp DNA is as much as 99 percent similar to human DNA. But then it is reasonable to ask why there is so much difference between chimps and humans. It appears that DNA may not determine everything after all. One thing certain is that DNA comparisons do not prove evolution. It should be pointed out that for computerized comparisons of DNA sequences from different species and of protein sequences from different species, the data often must be "massaged" in order to make things work out right. "Right" means in agreement with accepted evolutionary theories. Finally, it is important to remember that these comparisons of molecules are just like comparisons of anatomy in that they provide only circumstantial evidence for one or another conclusion. They do not prove any evolutionary history or relationships.

better read the three 6 mafia thread . the older yo u claim the earth is, the more examples youd easily have to prove evoultion .if this happend billions of times over billions of years we would see more half creatures than we would whole creatures by far and theres no such thing as half creatures and not one has ever been found ,that alone should be enough to call the bullshit police, but its all yo u people have to cling to is that evolution magicly happend from pond scum when it is mathematiclly more likely to win a one in a million lotto -one million times i n a row than to have our environment that even supports life or maybe yo u prefer tom cruise theorys on space invaders .

i can play your childish repetative game too : yo u are dumb and belive i n fake shit and you have no ansewers and your gay and your a fake and im right and your wrong