You do know every normal - ie. someone who did not suffer an important mutation like trisomy - human being have a certain fixed number of genes? Otherwise you need more chromosomes and that doesn't make you a human being anymore. If God managed to give more genes to Adam and Eve for some reason, EVERY one of their kids (and their kids) will have the same number of genes.
Yes
As it turns out, there are three main mitochondrial DNA lineages found across the world. The evolutionists have labeled these lines “M”, “N”, and “R
So three only three? thats about rgiht with the sotry of adam and eve
hmm
Yes, because obviously that's the only explanation possible if homosexuality is a gene thing. The problem is, you know nothing about genetics. If homosexuality was due to consanguinity, after all these years, homosexuals wouldn't be such a minority. You have to know, consanguinity means the very same genes are always reused, there IS variation because we give only half of our genes, but it hardly is enough variation, there's not even new genes. Since homosexual exists, if it was due to a consanguinity thing - and we talk about it coming from TWO parents, and not hundreds, making things tenfold worse - it would be much, much, much more present.
so then you agree its a choice?
if its not a gene thing then what is it?
if its a chocie then they choice to do this and god did not make them
I'm not talking about how old is the Earth.
but you did say thousands of years when it never says how old it is
And you should be less naĩve. That's pseudo-scientific [&@%!] A real scientist doesn't try to "discover" things to fit his religious (or any at all) agenda, a real scientist gather clues, evidence and such from observations and calculations, then analyzing the information and interpreting it, makes theories.
Take a look at
this website and browse through the "scientific" publications. We've been wrong all along.

Scientists explain things that is OBSERVABLE, trying to use their theories for predictions, and the more predictions, the more validity they get. It's easy to come up with [&@%!] that explains something you want to be true if you can't flat-out disprove it, but that doesn't mean it's more valid. Those crazy dudes came up with tons of reasons for everything, and it's actually kinda hard to argue with them. But you know it's all [&@%!] when all their theories are disconnected, don't work together and only explain specific things when everything else the real scientists came up with fit marvelously together, AND manages to make predictions. Same things with that creationist dude who ignores the countless evidence towards evolution. Did you know whales have pelvises? Did you know we have a bone that is usually used for tails? Did you know we have a part in our intestines that are used by herbivores to digest things we can't? It's because we have common ancestors.
DUDE, please, tell me what is scientific in taking unproven things as true, and using them into researches? Or at least using them in a scientific text? That's utter travesty.
So if this is so wrong shoe me one thing that is right?
if its wrong cause you say so?
prove this is not true as it deals with science so you can
The evidence from mitochondrial DNA fits our model just as neatly as the Y chromosome data. As it turns out, there are three main mitochondrial DNA lineages found across the world. The evolutionists have labeled these lines “M”, “N”, and “R”, so we’ll refer to them by the same names. They would not say these came off the Ark. They claim they were derived from older lines found in Africa, but this is based on a suite of assumptions (I discussed these in detail in a recent article in the Journal of Creation7). It also turns out that M, N, and R differ by only a few mutations. This gives us some indication of the amount of mutation that occurred in the generations prior to the Flood.
After all why are their only three main ones?
You keep saying that what I post is some type of scene yet
you have posted nothing to prove your point
only using the fact you know i know nothing about this
"Yes Genetic came over time, and environmental pressure which was added by our Race
so again
our choices made it"
That's not in the bible dude. Genetics and environment pressure are recent concepts compared to the bible's existence.
Your missing the point
just cause we "found" out about them now dose not mean they did not exist back then
That's not even what I'm talking about.
1. What does impraont means?
2. It IS true. It's been proven, ie. it's not an opinion.
it's also proven you can ignore it
so yes it is an opinion
Read again. I feel like having a one-way discussion, you ignore what annoys you and answers to the rest. Yes you can choose CERTAIN things, but like I said, you CAN'T have control over certain feelings. That is NOT a choice. I'm not saying we have no choice over anything, but we don't have TOTAL control, which is 100% true, but you fail to see this. It's not an opinion thing, it's a fact.
sigh here we go
Free will dose not meazn total control, some of my sayings
'm not saying free will means you can do anythjing [/quote]
Free will dose not mean you can fly with your farts[/quote]
so who ignored what?
Total control means we can do more choices... Plus, why did you argue about adrenalin and heartbeats if that doesn't matter in the first place...
Huh becuse your points are flawed we can control them
Yeah, yeah, anyone can say "screw depression I'm tired of it". More ignorant [&@%!] Sure you don't need medication to stop being depressed, but it's not a single choice like that. It's quite complex. As far as I know, the only things that can really make you stop being depressed is if your life gets better, maybe through choices you made, but you just can't choose to stop being depressed.
Many pepole do it, I've done it
no one said a choice is instant either
If your one person who is not 100% right on everything, how come did you have proven so many contradictions not true? A lot of what you said is YOUR , things which were never said in the bible.
[/quote]
this is bull man show me "my interpretation"
its a fact that they did not have the clasfactions of mainal and all that
it's a fact that the 2nd chapter in the bible is not in order
and they are in the bible
you keep saying "not in the bible"
when in fact it is
the fact of what you have been saying proves you dont know whats in it