Science Disproves Evolution

The term "microevolution" is an atheists fantasy, it does not exist. It is nothing more than variation within the genetic code. Macroevolution is fiction. We have never seen one species turn into another. DNA simply will not allow it. Evolution is nothing more than smoke and mirrors.

Microevolution is a pathetic joke. It is nothing more than variation within a species thanks to the many wonders of DNA. Evolution is an atheist's crutch to support their religion and false conclusion that there is no deity.

Wait....why are we discussing evolution in a forum about Christianity? Maybe you think this is some sort of brain trust? God created everything from nothing. I don't know how He did that nor do I care. This forum is a faith based forum for Christians and not a mensa IQ contest. If you want to discuss Jesus, I will be happy to join in.

Atheism is as much a religion as not smoking is a habit.

Microevolution is a pathetic joke. It is nothing more than variation within a species thanks to the many wonders of DNA. Evolution is an atheist's crutch to support their religion and false conclusion that there is no deity.

Wait....why are we discussing evolution in a forum about Christianity? Maybe you think this is some sort of brain trust? God created everything from nothing. I don't know how He did that nor do I care. This forum is a faith based forum for Christians and not a mensa IQ contest. If you want to discuss Jesus, I will be happy to join in.

Someone really needs to quit looking for objectified science sources.

Observed evolution over the course of human history. Every GMO ever.

instances of speciation, there's far to many to list.

Some More Observed Speciation Events

some classic examples would be the more ancient wolf to various dog species, etc.

Well big surprise! A wolf is a dog. Grey, how bout you study up on this stuff instead of just throwing out tiny inconsequential bits information like this. Study up on what a species actually is. Also there's a huge difference between a bacterial and mold species and a complicated organism species. Maybe if you'd just stop trying to prove your point and start thinking these things out for yourself, you might come up with some solid reasoning, maybe even a good argument. Again, a wolf IS OF the same species as a dog!

Sorry, it's a subspecies.

Most buddhist believe in deites though, or worship the Buddha as one.

Well big surprise! A wolf is a dog. Grey, how bout you study up on this stuff instead of just throwing out tiny inconsequential bits information like this. Study up on what a species actually is. Also there's a huge difference between a bacterial and mold species and a complicated organism species. Maybe if you'd just stop trying to prove your point and start thinking these things out for yourself, you might come up with some solid reasoning, maybe even a good argument. Again, a wolf IS OF the same species as a dog!

For something to be a religious belief, a deity is not required. Take Buddhism for example. They are classed as a religion have religious orders and temples but do not believe in a deity.

Atheism is clearly a faith based religion like Buddism. They make a claim out of faith that can not be verified. They claim there is no deity. To prove there is no deity, one would have to have knowledge of every location in every dimension. In other words they would have to be omniscent. You can not disprove something from lack of evidence. Even so, the atheist sticks to his dogma inspite of no evidence.

Yet day after day atheists repeat their mantra that there is no deity. Furthermore atheists can often be found in Christian forums arguing their religion is true. They point to evolution as part of their dogma and look to pope, Richard Dawkins and other priests of their conclusions based on faith.

You can deny that you use faith until you are blue in the face but as long as the atheist claims there is no deity, they are exorcising pure unadulterated faith. The agnostic is honest and lacks faith. He simply says he does not know. The atheist goes far beyond this and states out of faith, there is no deity.

That is because some Buddhists also incorporate other religions into their practice of buddhism.

Nirvana is also a supernatural claim. And your previous statement is wrong about Buddhism not having deities then, when they incorporate other deities you are still wrong.

The definition of religion:

the service and worship of God(s) or the supernatural - Merriam Webster

So pretty much everything you said was wrong. There is no "claim" in the idea of atheism, we don't believe in a god or gods, I'm even an agnostic atheist, I don't see evidence to believe there to be a god, and I doubt that we'd be able to verify the claims if there is one. We aren't the ones who need to assert evidence, we're skeptics clearly your idea of what an atheist is, is more alined with that of an anti-theist. There is no "dogma" uniting atheists, other than the fact that all don't believe in a god, its like saying all you non-smokers! There are "strong" atheists and "weak" atheists varying on their viewpoints but you seem content to clump them into one. Science and evolution are not tenants of atheism, theres even a few young earth atheists, which is quite bizzare, but there are a few out there.

You seem to have a lot of misconceptions and demonized viewpoints of atheists.

Once again atheism is as much of a religion as not smoking is a habit.
You can insist otherwise but it would be like me screaming right is left and left is right.

For something to be a religious belief, a deity is not required. Take Buddhism for example. They are classed as a religion have religious orders and temples but do not believe in a deity.

Atheism is clearly a faith based religion like Buddism. They make a claim out of faith that can not be verified. They claim there is no deity. To prove there is no deity, one would have to have knowledge of every location in every dimension. In other words they would have to be omniscent. You can not disprove something from lack of evidence. Even so, the atheist sticks to his dogma inspite of no evidence.

Yet day after day atheists repeat their mantra that there is no deity. Furthermore atheists can often be found in Christian forums arguing their religion is true. They point to evolution as part of their dogma and look to pope, Richard Dawkins and other priests of their conclusions based on faith.

You can deny that you use faith until you are blue in the face but as long as the atheist claims there is no deity, they are exorcising pure unadulterated faith. The agnostic is honest and lacks faith. He simply says he does not know. The atheist goes far beyond this and states out of faith, there is no deity.

I think most atheists claim there is no evidence for a deity not "there is definitely no deity."

It's easy to say I am wrong, but the proof is in the pudding.

Atheism and Buddhism -- Buddhism as an Atheistic Religion

Is Buddhism Atheistic? - ReligionFacts

Well, atleast now we are talking about religon!

As I have stated elsewhere on this thread or another like it. Buddhism does not have a belief in a deity. In fact all branches of Buddhism do not have dogma that includes a belief in a deity. Even so some buddhist have also incorporated a belief of a deity into their personal beliefs. One can be a Buddhist jew for example.

Nirvana in Buddhism is a state of mind and not a location.

If as you claim atheism can not be a religion because it does not service a deity then one can not call Buddhism, Scientology, Taoism and confucianism a religion also. It is odd that you claim atheism is not a religion inspite of the fact that , Buddhism, Taoism and confucianism are classed as a "religion" and atheism is incorporated into these religions.

An agnostic says he does not know if God exists. An atheist makes the claim that there is no God. The term atheism means with out God.