One thing that we Christians know is that 'transitional' is one of those words used all the time by atheistic evolietionists. In line with their situational and relativistical 'morals' and 'ethics' atheists also abuse science by inserting imaginary mumbo-jumbo into the lexicon of biology.
This is unintentionally hilarious for those of us who know the Creator's work. I am grateful every day that I do not have to try hard to ignore it, as do atheists. In their headlong rush to live unencumbered in their sins atheist even forget their own religious beliefs :
'Everything Came From Nothing By Accident' and 'If You Can't See It, Then It Doesn't Exist'.
Whoops.
Let us review one of these imaginary creatures so beloved by God-haters. Here they operate from The University of Chicago with this gigantic alligator-shaped lie:
"In 2006, a team of scientists unveiled the discovery of Tiktaalik roseae, a fossil fish known as the 'fishapod' "
Uh huh? Let us examine that. They found the fossil of a fish so decided to call it a 'fishapod' ?
http://tiktaalik.uchicago.edu/
Not content with finding a fossil of a fish, the atheists/evolietionists of course clamored to hail yet another 'Missing Link' (TM) (lol, how many 'The Missing Links' shall we see (read 'not see') until they finally give up?!!) and label it something else altogether. Hmmm, what could they dream up?
The 'Fishapod'! What next, it's our 'cousin' or somesuch?? lol.
George Lucas could make a film using these guys! Oh look, a Fishapod, must be one of Richard Dawkin's Alien Seeders (TM) sending out a landing party!! We can at least see the funny side of their imaginations.
But seriously, can someone please tell me how old mudskipper bones all of a sudden became 'proof' of:
1. 'when the very first fish ventured out onto land'.
2. '375 million years ago'
http://tiktaalik.uchicago.edu/meetTik.html
I rest my case. No-one was there thousands of years ago to see this mudskipper so no atheist can be taken seriously when they start calling mudskippers 'fishapods' or 'fishfrogs' that 'perhaps' 'crawled' out of the water but were previously fish kinds? LIES people. Plain lies. Mudskippers aren't frogs and they aren't dogs. They are a 'kind'. There are NO LINKS between kinds. There weren't when Darwin was alive, and there aren't today. No matter how many atheists go 'waaaaaah', this fact is not changing. Sorry.
Atheists claim to know about things they have never seen, yet they deny the One thing that is all around them (Creation) and they deny The One who can save them (Jesus).
Genesis 6:18 "Of the birds according to their kinds, and of the animals according to their kinds, of every creeping thing of the ground according to its kind, two of every sort shall come in to you, to keep them alive."
Illustration copyright © 2010 Lyle Tamarind
I notice you failed to offer any meaningful critique of the actual anatomical features of Tiktaalik that led to its consideration as a transitional fossil.
ReplyDeleteFrom your illustration, it is clear you have no idea what an actual transitional form would look like if it was sitting on your nose. You probably think evolution is false because you don't see mermaids swimming around, don't you?
Nevertheless, looks like I found a new blog that will be good for a few laughs. Keep up the good work. You'll have to work hard at it if you want to be as aggressively ignorant as Ray Comfort. No doubt that is what you are shooting for.
I just noticed your Frogdog post. So you do actually think that evolutionary theory posits the existence of something in the same vain as mermaids, a half and half blend of two modern animals
ReplyDeleteWow.
Please go back to school.
Poor Keith. It must be difficult holding onto a world view that just can't stand up to scrutiny
ReplyDeleteYou know what I find so weird about fundamentalists? They often crow about objective standards of morality coming from their deity, and yet they eagerly lie about people/ideas they disagree with. For instance, notice how many times Keith uses the word "lie" in reference to the ToE or atheism in general. And yet nothing he says here is an accurate portrayal of either of those two things.
ReplyDeleteIt's almost as if he's NOT afraid of sin or the God of the Bible. Someone who lies so often can't possibly take them seriously.
Whateverman, thankyou for your comments although calling a man a 'liar' is a basic atheist argument, you do not support your argument (read 'insult') with facts. For this reason I urge you to examine the phenomenon of 'projection bias'.
ReplyDeleteIn His Love,
Keith
"I just noticed your Frogdog post. So you do actually think that evolutionary theory posits the existence of something in the same vain as mermaids, a half and half blend of two modern animals"
ReplyDeleteRando, thank you for your comments. Of course I realise that evolietionists have not posited the 'frogdog'. That is a humorous invention all of my own. Try a sense of humor, you might like it? In fact you must at least have some humor to swallow stories of fish becoming amphibians and dinosaurs becoming birds. What next? A wolf becoming a whale?
Keith Tamarind did bable the following: calling a man a 'liar' is a basic atheist argument, you do not support your argument (read 'insult') with facts
ReplyDeleteFacts:
1) I'm not an atheist
2) No "evolutionist" believes the fish frog in your picture every existed. A minimal understanding of the theory of evolution would dispel this notion. You've also been informed (and have been sent links for further investigation) that "frog dogs" are not predicted by this same theory. Despite this, you repeat the same nonsense.
ie. You lie
Grow up, Keith. Believe what you want to, but dishonestly claiming logic supports that belief when it clearly does not is immature. Dishonesty is a sin, but you don't seem to worried about being tortured eternally for it.
Pretending to be a Christian while rejecting what the Bible says? Ray Comfort has a term for people like you:
False Christian
Whateverman, look up the word 'parody' before you dishonestly use the fishafrog as a ruse to calling me 'dishonest'. Yea the fishafrog is a parody of the claims evolietionists make about half-fish-half-amphibians. Valid parody.
ReplyDeleteFor someone who claims not to be an atheist you sure act a lot like one.
And again you fail to offer any attempt at a meaningful critique of the transitional features that Tiktaalik possesses. You'd rather flail at straw men. Not surprising behavior for a Ray Comfort wannabe.
ReplyDeleteAll hail Jake the Alligator Man!
ReplyDeleteBow to your 'One True' transitional overlord!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jake_the_Alligator_Man
the fishafrog is a parody of the claims evolietionists make about half-fish-half-amphibians. Valid parody.
ReplyDeleteExcept that it's not valid. And since the frog dog was obviously NOT a parody (ie. merely an example of your dishonesty), you give us no reason to think that this silly fish-frog thing is any different.
How about You back up YOUR claims with facts. Explain to us why evolutionary theory does not predict fish frogs. If you can do that, I'll retract my claim of dishonesty. I'm not going to wait for you to do this, because I'm pretty sure you're incapable of it. However, the offer stands.
For someone who claims not to be an atheist you sure act a lot like one.
For someone who claims to be a Christian, you sure DON'T act like one.
Whateverman barked:
ReplyDelete" Explain to us why evolutionary theory does not predict fish frogs. If you can do that, I'll retract my claim of dishonesty"
Dear Whateverman, I do not know what evolutionists predict, they appear to make it up as thy go along.. I do known they dig up fish and call them 'fishapods', claiming they are half-fish-half-amphibians-part alligator whatever....the scientific community welcomes hoaxes and inventions from time to time. We all remember Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man, Archeoraptor , etc... if you can't stand a little parody then I suggest you take yourself and your religion of evolietion a little too seriously. It's a pathetic joke that went too far is all.
You're a coward for pretending you were making a joke.
ReplyDeleteFrom everything you've written at Atheist Central and from your blog posts here, it's clear you believe evolutionary theory to be faulty. Rather than explain why you believe this, you repeatedly "parody" it.
In fact, that's all you do. You can't explain what evolutionary theory predicts, and you can't explain why your juvenile cartoons actually don't represent the thing you disagree with.
No, Keith. These images are clearly your ONLY argument. They're not parodies. You're a coward for pretending otherwise.
You ran away previously when asked civilized, polite questions, so I'll repeat them here on the off-chance that you consider yourself an adult:
ReplyDelete1) What kind of evidence would you accept for the validity of the theory of evolution?
2) Why do you conflate atheism with the theory of evolution, when there are plenty of Christians who also accept the theory?
3) Why is tiktaalik not one of the transitional fossils you claim to be looking for?
That's what I thought.
ReplyDeleteWhateverman asked:
ReplyDelete1) What kind of evidence would you accept for the validity of the theory of evolution?
Answer: That game doesn't hunt. There is no evidence for 'evolution' (species to species), so that is a game I refuse to play. Whenever an atheist finds a new fossil of an extinct animal, it cries 'The Missing Link'. Animals are as God made them. Species to species evolution is a lie. You might as well ask 'what kind of evidence would you accept to prove that 2+2 = 7,149?' Senseless and deceptive.
2) Why do you conflate atheism with the theory of evolution, when there are plenty of Christians who also accept the theory?
Answer: Look up 'false convert'. Liberal 'Christians' attempt to fit atheism/evolutionism into the Bible by distortion/denial. Evolutionism and atheism go hand in glove. To deny this is to wilfully lie.
3) Why is tiktaalik not one of the transitional fossils you claim to be looking for?
Answer: See above. You are playing games.
Gee, who is the one playing games here, Keithy-baby??
ReplyDeleteKeith, I see you're still lying. Remember what your bible says about lying?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteMakes you wonder what they put in the water down there in Florida.
ReplyDeleteHey Keith,
ReplyDeleteIf you actually read the tiktaalik site, you will find that the scientists didn't "find" the fossil and then make stuff up about it, they actually PREDICTED it would be in the stratum it was in.
Read it for yourself:
http://tiktaalik.uchicago.edu/searching4Tik.html
This is awesome!! Not only do you not have a general understanding of TOE, but basic electricity is also beyond you.
ReplyDeleteYou Said...
"In order to utilize/receive the electricity, in the plug is something called a fuse. This fuse senses the current and passes it thru."
A few minutes of research might make you look less like the dolt that you are. I suspect that may well be unattainable.
TTFN
Keith wants to quote Glen's 'Stephen J' rant (over at Atheist Central) as material for a new post here. Or at least, that's what he claimed.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I doubt Keith's ability to copy/paste, let alone run a blog, but keep your eyes peeled...
Keith tamarind wrote;
ReplyDelete"I find it hard to comprehend that anyone would give atheist(sic) a job, let alone trust them to teach there(sic) children. Liars should be exposed, they are dangerous and hateful and wish to destroy God and Country. Anyone who subscribes to the lie of Atheism is basically telling the world that they are a liar. SO they are trying to redefine it to make it exceptable(sic) along with bestiality, theivery(sic), foetal holocaust, homosex(sic), etc etc. So sad. They will get judged for what they are. But before then, they need to See more..."
Keith - Not only are you demonstrably ignorant, but you are clearly a disgusting and nasty little prick.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteKeith Tamarind wrote the following: I find it hard to comprehend
ReplyDeleteThat certainly does explain most of what he writes...
As your lame mentor Ray disallowed this at the Swamp, here it is uncensored:
ReplyDeleteListen you bleating ninny, the chances of you recognizing the truth if it bored itself deep into that unicellular brain of yours are about as good as me taking advice from you after Hell freezes over. Less than nil.
Like your clueless mates, the lights are on but no-one's in. No denying you exist, amoeba-like, with a barely-flickering consciousness & no conscience at all, but then again stupid is as stupid does, it seems. No surprises there.
As for likening me to Satan, whom you no doubt believe is real, par for the course for delusional narcissists like yourself.
As per your bleak beliefs, you may be full of shame & self-loathing, overwhelmed by feelings of inadequacy & self-doubt, but you shouldn't project your wretched sadness onto others.
It only makes you look like more of a fool than you already are.
What a tool you are, a product of the Ray Comfort way of thinking. Lame.
ReplyDelete