| |
| God is just a part of the evolution of creation |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| lawsinium |
 Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 12:38 pm Post subject: God is just a part of the evolution of creation |
 |
|
Forum Freshman
Joined: 13 Jul 2008
Posts: 13
|
You do not need to be a scientist to figure out this matching game: up and down, man and woman, right and left, A and Z, zero and one, yin and yang, black and white and so forth and so on. All these things can be obviously detected or interpreted by our senses. Now, we may ask ourselves why objects always co-exist with a partner - an alter pair. Is this how nature was designed? Are there natural laws that govern this duality? Maybe, in order to answer all these queries, we need to change our perspective and look at these objects that we see, touch, hear, smell and taste in a different light.
In my book Creation by Laws, I analyzed the principle of pairing, provided a lot of examples known to man and in conclusion, supported by my isodimensional morphical figures, I found out that using the Family Duality theory as a basis, I and even you can figure out and can explain how all things evolved - from the birth of our universe(the presence of something and the absence of nothing) , to the planetary big bang (mass and energy), the Darwinian evolution of organism(egg and sperm), the genesis (Adam and Eve), and the microlevel family of man-made systems exemplified by the tools system(metal and wood), the alphabetical system (A to Z), and the numerical system ( zero and one) to name a few. All these dualities, following the stages of family life cycle called Creation by Laws, created all the things we perceived.
This theory, I mnemonically coined the âLife Algorithmic Ways of Spontaneous Inceptionâ, or simply called Creation by Laws, authoritatively dictates a continuous propagation of "life" (living and non-living) and exponential transformation of species (living and non-living) in a never-ending process of procreation, which is guided by verifiable empirical list of instinctive instructions, that activates gradually the natural process of evolution of anything in the universe, a process that allows even GOD to be part and parcel of the evolutionary creation.
The practical significance of this article:
My article revolutionizes the Family Age, where all living things must come together to unite in order to save the earth and to enjoy life to its fullest by introducing a new way of living. If this duality theory will be accepted by the common tao, then the reality of protecting and sustaining the world will be almost at hand. If civilization started from Stone Age, Agricultural Age, Industrial Age, Technology Age, Information Age, it is high time now to recognize and to promote with immediate attention the Family Age.
Also, within this family age, since all creatures belongs to the same family tree and ergo have the same status as all other species, each and every organisms including us must be equally treated. Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and straight should not be regarded as different since all of them have the same common particle that we inherited since the birth of the universe. There are standard man-made norms that we follow, but the happiness of anybody should not be taken from them. After all, it is not only sex that makes a partnership survive, companionship and care contribute the most in order for a relationship to last. And from my book about Creation by Laws, you will be surprised that pairing is not only for man and woman in order to grow and multiply. Everything in this world can spontaneously propagate and exponentially transform by simply following the natural seven laws of creation.
On the other hand, if the leaders of every country recognize this family theory, then there will be no innocent kids or soldiers that will be killed in the line of fire, there will be no crimes since everyone is earning at their own face, and the earth will be protected since a new way of green living is being introduced. And on this picturesque, the key element of unity is not through peace but harmony. Like bees or ants in colonies who worked in harmony and protect their "Queen", human beings, with a slight gift of intelligence and not to far from other species, must worked together too to protect "Mother Earth" in order to survive, grow and flourish.
Creation by Laws: A Journal of a Creative Mind; (ISBN: 978-1-60047-217-6). |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Obviously |
| Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 12:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 14 Aug 2007
Posts: 1151
Location: Norway
|
In the sub-atomic level things start to seem rather asymmetrical.
The reason religion and science doesn't mix is because of evidence. One bases its conclusions on evidence whilst the other bases its conclusions on pure personal convictions.
_________________
"I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own -- a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms."
-- Albert Einstein
"I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings."
-- Albert Einstein |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| lawsinium |
| Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 2:12 pm Post subject: All objects evolved in an inverse symmetrical configuration |
|
|
Forum Freshman
Joined: 13 Jul 2008
Posts: 13
|
Physicists classified all physical objects as either matter or energy whereas Biologists classified them as living and non-living. Most of these objects experienced rigorous experimentations. They have been dissected and sliced and broken down into the smallest units possible, atoms and molecules. Atoms are further made up of electrons and a nucleus. This nucleus in turn contains even smaller particles called protons and neutrons. As scientists try to slice these sub-atomic specks to the smallest units of all, they come to never ending pairs or âquarksâ. There are different types or âflavoursâ of quarks with equally unusual sounding names (up and down, charm and strange, top and bottom). These colorful matched names only serve to show that particles always exist in duality. I baptized this phenomenon as âparticle dualityâ. And to be more colorful, I named these two particles as posicles and negacles.
I provided you with some concrete observable examples of particle dualities within this forum, which are common in our daily lives. I gave this partnership a colorful name -posicles for positive particles and negacles for the negative particles. Objects like man, one, A, magnetism, black, north, body, and up are examples classified under positive particles. On the other side of the system, woman, zero, Z, electricity, white, south, soul and down are classified as negative particles.
In order to multiply in a family dual system, a particle with its alterpair should co-exist and co-operate in unison but independently in order to evolve and survive. Like the alphabet system, which begins with the letter A and ends with the alter letter Z, in between these letters are 24 more letters that creates billions of words. The numerical system, which begins with 0 and comes with 1, within these numbers, googolplexes of combinations are created. The reproductive system in general, begins with an egg and meets with a sperm to generate life on earth. The fourth generation called the Matter-Wnergy System, which is made up of matter and energy, created all the living and non-living things in this physical isodimensional universe. And in my theory, everything started from the presence of something which we called space and the absence of nothing which I coined "nabse".
if you want to learn more why things are paired, they are all explained in my literature. And all of these examples are experimentally backed up by my isodimensional morphical figures, which anyone of us can really figure out if we just only spend most of our time analyzing deeply what we already have right in front of our eyes.
Creation by Laws: A Journal of a Creative Mind; (ISBN: 978-1-60047-217-6). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mitchellmckain |
| Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 06 Oct 2005
Posts: 1885
Location: Salt Lake City, UTAH, USA
|
Sir Joey Ledesma Lawsin,
I can appreciate your efforts to expose people to your book, after all, I got involved in internet forums partly to make people aware of my relativistic space-flight simulator, not that I can boast a huge amount of success. However, if you do not want to trigger people's automatic reaction to "in your face" advertizing, you need to be a little bit more personal about it - i.e. we need to know you as a person.
So tell us about yourself. What is your educational/scientific background or interests? What is your religious background or interests? Where does your inspiration for this book of yours come from? What brings you to the science forum? What country do you live in?
Have you read Orson Scott Card's book, "Ender's Game"?
_________________
See my physics of spaceflight simulator at http://www.relspace.astahost.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| lawsinium |
| Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Freshman
Joined: 13 Jul 2008
Posts: 13
|
Prof. Mitchell McKain,
I do not know if this is the right place to introduce myself. But if the owner of this site will allow me, then I will be happy to oblige to your request. However, since my biography is just lying around somewhere online, you may try google or yahoo to learn more about me. Obviously, I know you have surfed the internet since you got my complete name posted. lolz
Anyways to answer some of your questions: .My family is a solid roman catholic. I was educated in a catholic school and worked for 10 years with the Society of Jesuits. During my teenage life, I always go to mass even it is not a sunday. And at that young age too, I was already engrossed in collecting chemical elements as a hobby. In one of my experiments, I found out some of my air-tighted "vacuum" vials with same different sizes of bubbles were positioned equally in pairs. And this pairing became my basis in solving the mysteries of our existence. And through the years I was always haunted by this inconclusive experiment, that in the end I decided to finish this experiment and put them in writing - Creation by Laws was created. I'm from San Francisco, California and I do believe in angels.
What brings me to this forum? Well just like those years when scientists claimed that they had discovered something new and it contradicts the teachings of the church, they were ostracized by both the church and the society. In my case, I have asked the help of some well known figures in the science community, but to no avail I have not received any response from each of them. Maybe they have not read my emails or simply they are adamant to accept my theory that might contradict their work or they just religiously follow some norms within their organization or maybe because I am just a simple tax payer. I registered in this forum with the belief that most of us here, whether our theories are accepted or not, gather together with one aim in life - we have the passion to discuss and debate - Whether it is a pigment of our imagination, a strange phenomena far beyond our existence, or a product of ones mental activity, we are here to voice out our thoughts, to exchange point of views or simply be a collections of unconventional ideas for the creative minds.
Thank you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Scifor Refugee |
| Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 7:30 am Post subject: Re: God is just a part of the evolution of creation |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 1135
|
| lawsinium wrote: |
| You do not need to be a scientist to figure out this matching game: up and down, man and woman, right and left, A and Z, zero and one, yin and yang, black and white and so forth and so on. All these things can be obviously detected or interpreted by our senses. Now, we may ask ourselves why objects always co-exist with a partner - an alter pair. |
There does not seem to be any reason to think that there is any cosmic significance to the fact that some things seem to have an opposite. Many things do not. What is the "alter pair" of a tree? A planet? A lightening bolt? A bowling ball? The number pi? The color green?
What is the opposite of an electron - a proton or a positron? You could make perfectly good arguments for either/both. And why is 1 the alter pair of zero? Why not -1? Why not infinity?
So far as I can tell, opposites (or "alter pairs" as you call them) are just a made-up idea that comes from the human compulsion to categorize things. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| (Q) |
| Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 7:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 12 May 2005
Posts: 1373
|
| lawsinium wrote: |
| My family is a solid roman catholic. I was educated in a catholic school and worked for 10 years with the Society of Jesuits. |
So, you were indoctrinated into the Catholic cult.
| Quote: |
| During my teenage life, I always go to mass even it is not a sunday. |
A successful indoctrination, no less.
| Quote: |
| I found out some of my air-tighted "vacuum" vials with same different sizes of bubbles were positioned equally in pairs. And this pairing became my basis in solving the mysteries of our existence. |
You imagined you solved the mysteries of our existence, based on a couple of bubbles in a vial, supported by your indoctrination and your cult.
| Quote: |
| I do believe in angels. |
... and leprechauns and unicorns and things that go bump in the night. That's a great statement for credibility. Uh-huh.
| Quote: |
| In my case, I have asked the help of some well known figures in the science community, but to no avail I have not received any response from each of them. |
That's no surprise. Who in their right mind would take you seriously?
| Quote: |
| Maybe they have not read my emails or simply they are adamant to accept my theory that might contradict their work or they just religiously follow some norms within their organization or maybe because I am just a simple tax payer. |
It's really quite simple. Scientists deal with evidence, you have none other than your imaginative, cult-driven speculations.
| Quote: |
| a pigment of our imagination |
You'll fit right in with a number of other theists with similar credentials.
_________________
I may have no understanding of the current theory of evolution. But that's because science keeps changing it. A few weeks ago I read in the newspaper that it had once again been adjusted & just the other day I discovered a new book called "The New Theory of Evolution" ~~Steven Titchenell : W.V.B.I.G. President. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Ophiolite |
| Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 8:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Radioactive Isotope
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 4626
Location: Scotland
|
Your idea, while interesting as a lighthearted analogy, which in turn can serve as a different metaphorical perspective on reality, seems to contain nothing of substance: nothing that provides testable predictions, or even an improved philosophy of life, or a fresh cosmology.
At the risk of offending - which unlike (Q) I am not trying to do - it seems the sort of juvenile speculation one comes up with as a teenager. I haven't checked out your online details as Mitchell has done, but is it safe to assume you are quite young? [No harm there. Youth is something most of us grow out of.  ]
_________________
The Universe is not only weirder than we imagine it is weirder than we can imagine. J.B.S.Haldane. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| (Q) |
| Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 12:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 12 May 2005
Posts: 1373
|
| Ophiolite wrote: |
At the risk of offending - which unlike (Q) I am not trying to do - it seems the sort of juvenile speculation one comes up with as a teenager. |
The good "Sir" Lawsin appears to have been far more offensive than I ever could.
"Here is a typical example from today's wikiwoo: one Joey Ledesma Lawsin, author of a self-published pamplet called Creation by Laws: A Journal of a Creative Mind and a self-designated peer , has just registered a WP account (to his credit, he obviously isn't trying very hard to disguise his personal connection to the book in question) and promptly spammed adverts into several pre-existing WP articles on mainstream topics. A minute with a search engine will show that Lawsin has spammed other forums with links to his blogspot blog."
http://www.bautforum.com/about-baut/75461-could-baut-assist-page-patrol-wikipedia.html
_________________
I may have no understanding of the current theory of evolution. But that's because science keeps changing it. A few weeks ago I read in the newspaper that it had once again been adjusted & just the other day I discovered a new book called "The New Theory of Evolution" ~~Steven Titchenell : W.V.B.I.G. President. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Ophiolite |
| Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 12:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Radioactive Isotope
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 4626
Location: Scotland
|
| (Q) wrote: |
| The good "Sir" Lawsin appears to have been far more offensive than I ever could. |
Come now, you underestimate yourself.
_________________
The Universe is not only weirder than we imagine it is weirder than we can imagine. J.B.S.Haldane. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| lawsinium |
| Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 1:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Freshman
Joined: 13 Jul 2008
Posts: 13
|
Do you call it indoctrination when you are challenging the existence of god? How can you judge from a few lines of words that someone was successfully indoctrinated? Is that enough evidence that you can simply judge a person's character?
A lot of people believe in god, they are made up of scientists, attorneys, and all kind of very intelligent professionals. Do they have evidence that god exist. Have you seen him physically or even in your dreams? Will you believe Christ that he talked to his Godly Father? Psychotic disorder probably? What about those who believe in santa claus, leprechauns, ufo, astral projections, and those professionals to up to this moment still believe that the world is flat? Do they need evidence in order to believe? Are they being indoctrinated just like how you are being indoctrinated by the concept that you always need evidence to prove that something is true? Do you need evidence to identify who is your father or mother is?
Some (not everyone) scientists believed in the big bang theory, do they have evidence that it took place? Nasa contradicts some of its claims. How about the string theory? Are these people crazy because they do not have evidence to prove their claims but they are supported by fancy equations and formula?
Or maybe when I say that your ballpen on top of your table is moving, or that evidently all you see are nothing but black and that what you see are already in the past? To some people they need some evidence to contest such claims, but to those ordinary people like us - we do not need evidence to prove them. It is second nature. Or maybe you are walking with your head and not with your feet? lolz. You might have the answers or not, but the main point is that we are diversified. And diversification exponentially transform all sort of species - some has little intelligence, others has more intelligence and others might just be intellectually smart like Einstein (he knows the tricks of his trade). Please do your homework first, before you throw stones to a quite pond.
By the way if I tell you I am working with NASA Ames Research Center, will you change your perceptions about me?
Have you experienced to be in a playground, where a lot of kids are just having fun? They maybe multi-culture: black, white, yellow, brown and maybe green. But whatever color they belong to, they enjoy each other presence. They do not know each other and they can not even spell out their own name, but they start hooking up, running around, swinging or maybe talking about santa claus, capricorns, invisible friends. Everyone is simply enjoying life. And when they reach home with their pajamas on, they excitedly tell their stories to their mom and dad. And as they go to sleep, you will notice on their lips, a smile - a sweet innocent smile.
And to those of you who would like to ask questions about my work, I would be glad to answer all your querries but please read my book first - it serves as a helpful evidence. And before you pass judgment, please donât just look at what you see, look at also what is behind what you see.
As the saying goes -" Do not judge a book by its cover. " And even if you have read the content of the book, it does not mean that it speaks about the totality of the author's mind and as a person.
When I autographed my book, I always write on the first page - " Always give a SMILE, after all it is FREE ". Please do likewise. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mitchellmckain |
| Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 7:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 06 Oct 2005
Posts: 1885
Location: Salt Lake City, UTAH, USA
|
You have to understand Q's mentality (or possibly non-mentality), according to which, just holding an opinion that Q does not approve of, is sufficient proof that you have been indoctrinated. This is why he refuses to belief that any atheists have ever been converted to a religion. I know it is hard to imagine anything more irrational that this, and even harder to imagine how anyone can espouse such a dogma with straight face, but the longer you live the more you come to understand that people can and will believe anything.
| Quote: |
| And to those of you who would like to ask questions about my work, I would be glad to answer all your querries but please read my book first - it serves as a helpful evidence. And before you pass judgment, please donât just look at what you see, look at also what is behind what you see. |
Ah well that is not a universal ability. I am capable enough to know what you mean by this but I am still a neophyte as far as that goes. This is what makes human communication on religious/spiritual topics so difficult.
_________________
See my physics of spaceflight simulator at http://www.relspace.astahost.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| BumFluff |
| Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 11:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Senior
Joined: 06 Mar 2008
Posts: 380
Location: Canada
|
I constantly hear theists maintain that all atheists have been indoctrinated into the thought by their parents. That, in my opinion, is insane. It's one of those arguments that theists have come up with in response to other people arguments that people, being born into a religious family who have had that mode of thought constantly pile driven into them since they were young, are indoctrinated themselves. It's on the same level of argument that I have seen on these boards concerning the possible truthfulness of the bible and the beliefs associated with it and the believers telling atheists that they aren't allowed to use the words within it to make their point because they don't believe in it.
Richard Dawkins (Much as I hate to use something he wrote) stated "There is no such thing as atheism, there are only different levels of agnosticism" or something similar. Dawkins himself has stated that he is a level 4 agnostic on a 5 point scale. Is being born into a family of atheists who constantly drive into you when you are young that there is no such thing as God indoctrination? Yes of course it is. However the majority if non-believers are agnostic and they are being lumped into the group of pure atheists. To tell these people that they have been 'indoctrinated' into their belief of questioning the truth is absolutely hysterical.
Where are you more likely to come across indoctrination? A completely God loving family that goes to church every Sunday that lives a normal life according to their beliefs or an atheistic family that lives a normal life according to their beliefs? On one hand we have a family who goes to church every Sunday with their children to drive it into their heads that their beliefs are true and on the other hand we have a family who merely goes about their daily business without all the theistic propaganda.
_________________
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt" - Bertrand Russell |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| (Q) |
| Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 6:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 12 May 2005
Posts: 1373
|
| lawsinium wrote: |
| Do you call it indoctrination when you are challenging the existence of god? How can you judge from a few lines of words that someone was successfully indoctrinated? |
"My family is a solid roman catholic. I was educated in a catholic school and worked for 10 years with the Society of Jesuits."
| Quote: |
| A lot of people believe in god |
Correction, a lot of people believe in a wide variety of gods. That doesn't make any single one of them real, including your god. In fact, it gives very good reason they are all man made.
| Quote: |
| Will you believe Christ that he talked to his Godly Father? Psychotic disorder probably? |
There is no evidence whatsoever the Christ existed. You may call your beliefs psychotic disorders, that would be relevant.
| Quote: |
| What about those who believe in santa claus, leprechauns, ufo, astral projections, and those professionals to up to this moment still believe that the world is flat? |
They are clearly insane.
| Quote: |
| Do they need evidence in order to believe? |
No one needs evidence to believe in fairy tales, that's why they're fairy tales.
| Quote: |
| Do you need evidence to identify who is your father or mother is? |
Of course.
| Quote: |
| Some (not everyone) scientists believed in the big bang theory, do they have evidence that it took place? Nasa contradicts some of its claims. How about the string theory? Are these people crazy because they do not have evidence to prove their claims but they are supported by fancy equations and formula? |
You fallaciously compare invisible sky daddies with scientific theories.
| Quote: |
| Or maybe when I say that your ballpen on top of your table is moving, or that evidently all you see are nothing but black and that what you see are already in the past? To some people they need some evidence to contest such claims, but to those ordinary people like us - we do not need evidence to prove them. It is second nature. Or maybe you are walking with your head and not with your feet? lolz. You might have the answers or not, but the main point is that we are diversified. And diversification exponentially transform all sort of species - some has little intelligence, others has more intelligence and others might just be intellectually smart like Einstein (he knows the tricks of his trade). Please do your homework first, before you throw stones to a quite pond. |
Gibberish.
| Quote: |
| By the way if I tell you I am working with NASA Ames Research Center, will you change your perceptions about me? |
Yes, as I would most likely conclude you're a liar, too.
| Quote: |
| Have you experienced to be in a playground, where a lot of kids are just having fun? They maybe multi-culture: black, white, yellow, brown and maybe green. But whatever color they belong to, they enjoy each other presence. They do not know each other and they can not even spell out their own name, but they start hooking up, running around, swinging or maybe talking about santa claus, capricorns, invisible friends. Everyone is simply enjoying life. And when they reach home with their pajamas on, they excitedly tell their stories to their mom and dad. And as they go to sleep, you will notice on their lips, a smile - a sweet innocent smile. |
And, then the children grow up and no longer talk about Santa and unicorns, but due to their parents indoctrination into their religion, those adults continue talking about invisible friends as if they were real.
| Quote: |
| And to those of you who would like to ask questions about my work, I would be glad to answer all your querries but please read my book first - it serves as a helpful evidence. And before you pass judgment, please donât just look at what you see, look at also what is behind what you see. |
As O has already pointed out, "juvenile speculation." Only an idiot would pay money for that.
| Quote: |
| As the saying goes -" Do not judge a book by its cover. " |
Your "cover" has already been blown. You've been spamming your nonsense all over the internet and are well known as a woo-woo.
| Quote: |
| When I autographed my book, I always write on the first page - " Always give a SMILE, after all it is FREE ". Please do likewise. |
Do you autograph it with "Sir Joey Ledesma Lawsin"? Were you knighted? Or, are you just another fraud?
_________________
I may have no understanding of the current theory of evolution. But that's because science keeps changing it. A few weeks ago I read in the newspaper that it had once again been adjusted & just the other day I discovered a new book called "The New Theory of Evolution" ~~Steven Titchenell : W.V.B.I.G. President. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| (Q) |
| Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 6:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 12 May 2005
Posts: 1373
|
| mitchellmckain wrote: |
| You have to understand Q's mentality (or possibly non-mentality), according to which, just holding an opinion that Q does not approve of, is sufficient proof that you have been indoctrinated. This is why he refuses to belief that any atheists have ever been converted to a religion. I know it is hard to imagine anything more irrational that this, and even harder to imagine how anyone can espouse such a dogma with straight face, but the longer you live the more you come to understand that people can and will believe anything. |
No matter how fantastic, magical or mysterious the beliefs are, they'll believe. It's called ignorance and gullibility as a result of indoctrination. The gullible will believe almost anything.
I'm sure there may be the odd atheist who might convert to a religion, but they were most likely not atheists to begin with. Someone who simply cannot accept the claims of theists and their multitude of invisible gods suddenly accepts the claims?
I suspect head injuries or mental psychosis the possible causes.
_________________
I may have no understanding of the current theory of evolution. But that's because science keeps changing it. A few weeks ago I read in the newspaper that it had once again been adjusted & just the other day I discovered a new book called "The New Theory of Evolution" ~~Steven Titchenell : W.V.B.I.G. President. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
  |
Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next |
Page 1 of 3 |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
