Originally posted by BobRyan:
Even evolutionists admit that the failed "stories" about horse evolution were erroneous - essentially contrived to "fit" the many-storied-myths of evolutionism.
Evolutionists "admit" that, with more fossil evidence, the more complicated details of horse evolution have come into view, and the earlier picture was valid, as an outline is a valid view of more detailed narrative.
Abiogenesis so necessary to evolutionism - has been shown to be impossible.
Nobody knows how life could begin naturally, in complete detail, at this time. That is not the same as having shown it to be impossible. Therefore, I have to ask you -
What are you talking about here?
Supposed transitionals between Birds and reptiles are shown to be TRUE BIRDS.
So there was once an almost bird and then there was a barely bird. This is, however, not an argument against evolution!
The MASSIVE decrease in entroyp so necessary in the local system for evolution from molecule-to-brain mythology is SEEN to be false by the confesssion of evolutionists themselves Isaac Asimov for example.
Isacc Asimov himself always said entropy was not any barrier to evolution. This is because (a) He knew less than BobRyan about entropy and was wrong or (b) because he knew more than BobRyan about entropy and it is not a problem.
Let the impartial reader decide which is more likely to be true.
Point after point is raised showing that EVEN atheist evolutionists (those who have NO CHOICE but to cling to the godless model called evolutionism) - even they will confess some of the less-falttering facts of TRUE science as it opposes the myths and "Stories" of evolutionism.
As misunderstood by BobRyan, however, not as they intended to be understood.
Yet you will find Christian evolutionists clinging to the "bad science" yes even the "junk science" of the myths of evolutionism "anyway".
But then we point out the horrible damage this does to the Bible and the Gospel - and "still" they cling to myth over scripture and even myth over "good science".
And folks like BobRyan keep opposing the scientific findings of common descent of all life and the great age of the universe in spite of the damage it does to the gospel by asking people with scientific knowledge to deny what they already know to be true in order to be saved.
And its not as any of them - like BobRyan, for example, don't go right ahead and deny the literal teaching of the bible about how the sun goes up in the daytime and down in the night to its own place of habitation to come back out the next day. Just because science has taught them the literal teaching isn't true.
You know what the difference is? The evidence isn't yet clear to them. Partly because the educational system hasn't been very good at teaching science. Partly because they've all agreed to avoid the evidence as a matter of religious duty.
