Intelligent Reasoning

Promoting, advancing and defending Intelligent Design via data, logic and Intelligent Reasoning and exposing the alleged theory of evolution as the nonsense it is. I also educate evotards about ID and the alleged theory of evolution one tard at a time and sometimes in groups

Sunday, January 02, 2011

"Genome Data Proves False the Theory of Evolution"...

Hey, hey, hey- a little pre-biotic soup can go a long way:

Genome Data Proves False the Theory of Evolution, New Theory Shows Complex Animals and Plants Originated from Prebiotic Chemistry

All 3 papers can be downloaded...


  • At 7:27 PM, Blogger Unknown said…

    The guy cites himself in every reference.

    Plus, he is making a simple Ultimate 747 argument.

    This guy, whose been peddling this shit for years, is a moron.

  • At 8:24 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    And what argument does your position, which has been peddling shit for years, have?

  • At 9:15 PM, Blogger Unknown said…

    Nothing. Those of us who buy into evolution only have most of the world's scientists on our side and the plethora of evidence that has been peer reviewed and substantiated over 150 years. Aside from that, like I said, we got nothing.

    You use good logic, Joe! If my side is lame, find another lame side to take! Brilliant!

  • At 7:29 AM, Blogger Joe G said…


    You don't have any evidence that supports your position.

    In 150 years you still don't have any scince that demonstrates blind, undirected chemical processes can construct functional multipart systems.

    IOW you can have those scientists as they don't have anything.

    My logic is that ID is based on observations and experiences, ie it is based on our knowledge of cause and effect relationships.

  • At 7:37 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Here ya go TFT:

    It appears the theory of evolution is devoid of content = empty. The evidence for that is found in the following avoided questions:

    1- How can we test the premise that the bacterial flagellum evolved in a population that never had one via an accumulation of genetic accidents?

    2- How can we test the premise that fish evolved into land animals via an accumulation of genetic accidents?

    3- How can we test the premise that reptiles evolved into mammals via an accumulation of genetic accidents?

    Those are a few of the thousands questions evos need a testable hypothesis for.

    So why are evos so afraid of those questions? I say it is because by attempting to answer them they will expose their position as the bullshit it is.


Post a Comment

<< Home