Do you believe in creation or evolution?

[Fenster]

It's ok to say you don't know. I don't know and have never once claimed to. But when I look at the complexity of cells and DNA I find it hard to believe it all came together randomly from nothing.

For sure it's fine to say "I don't know" but you're not saying that, it would make you agnostic, you claim it was ID (basically god/a supernatural being).

That's the problem, you don't seem to understand the irony in posting mumbo jumbo/pseudo science to question the validity of real science, when the whole agenda of your source is about proving a literal interpretation of the bible.

However, you dismiss all the real science presented as lies and manipulation.

What makes your own sources authentic? They claim the moon landings were real, in part proven by the fact a fellow creationist - James Irwin - was one of the astronauts.

Explain that? No wait, let me guess, they're lying/wrong about the bit that doesn't support your narrative? They've been duped.

[Alpha]

It's ok to say you don't know. I don't know and have never once claimed to. But when I look at the complexity of cells and DNA I find it hard to believe it all came together randomly from nothing.

For sure it's fine to say "I don't know" but you're not saying that, it would make you agnostic, you claim it was ID (basically god/a supernatural being).

That's the problem, you don't seem to understand the irony in posting mumbo jumbo/pseudo science to question the validity of real science, when the whole agenda of your source is about proving a literal interpretation of the bible.

However, you dismiss all the real science presented as lies and manipulation.

What makes your own sources authentic? They claim the moon landings were real, in part proven by the fact a fellow creationist - James Irwin - was one of the astronauts.

Explain that? No wait, let me guess, they're lying/wrong about the bit that doesn't support your narrative? They've been duped.

I literally said I don't know what created us. We could all be a Sims game for all I know.

I don't believe in evolution and have given my reasons for this. I don't believe in God, or the bible. I'm not sure what sources you're referring to. Just because I don't believe in evolution doesn't mean I have to be religious. But I do follow the same logic that everything seems so perfect to have occurred randomly.

Sorry I don't understand what you're trying to say.

[Fenster]

It's ok to say you don't know. I don't know and have never once claimed to. But when I look at the complexity of cells and DNA I find it hard to believe it all came together randomly from nothing.

For sure it's fine to say "I don't know" but you're not saying that, it would make you agnostic, you claim it was ID (basically god/a supernatural being).

That's the problem, you don't seem to understand the irony in posting mumbo jumbo/pseudo science to question the validity of real science, when the whole agenda of your source is about proving a literal interpretation of the bible.

However, you dismiss all the real science presented as lies and manipulation.

What makes your own sources authentic? They claim the moon landings were real, in part proven by the fact a fellow creationist - James Irwin - was one of the astronauts.

Explain that? No wait, let me guess, they're lying/wrong about the bit that doesn't support your narrative? They've been duped.

I literally said I don't know what created us. We could all be a Sims game for all I know.

I don't believe in evolution and have given my reasons for this. I don't believe in God, or the bible. I'm not sure what sources you're referring to. Just because I don't believe in evolution doesn't mean I have to be religious. But I do follow the same logic that everything seems so perfect to have occurred randomly.

Sorry I don't understand what you're trying to say.

No worries mate.