Apart from Adam we have: A&T who will build a football stadium in Harar with all the aid money (biggest game will be Harar Stars vs Ethiopian B team). Ngonge who will build himself a Khaliij royalty like palace in Jaamac Qabar (not sure if the tuulo is big enough). JB who would build the tallest building in the world in Sheikh calling it 'Daartii Jacalka'(forget about the roads that lead up to it). So my vote goes to AZ

Naden, One will read-up when time permits. In the meantime I would still like some sort of response from you and others on the Human/Ape argument. Are you in the same camp as Raamsade?

*eating kimis sprinkled with sugar and spread over with honey and washing it down with a strong cup of PG* (I should have fasted) Hey Ibti. Juxa forget responsibilities and go home!

^Saxiib meesha waa la iibsaday. Tourism is the idea. Expect a small Dubai like fun and frolics destination.

LoL@JB's edited salaan. Show dadkuu hoosta ka caayaa marku salaamayo

Way bilaabantay,,,,,, http://www.kempinski -mea.com/en/start/99 47/89678.htm?

Last day off. What shall I do???? Hmmmm,,,,,, Bal warama

A&T, anaynu meel iska soo galno ma ogtahay horta?

We've got both Chelsea and Manure soon

Originally posted by Che -Guevara: My clan is as good as my next fix! quote: 'family' (immediate and extended in kasta oo ay intaasiba badantahay). N that's your clan No. I'm from a very large family but my subclan is bigger than Nngonges.

^UK, Canada iyo Mongolia.

Originally posted by NGONGE: ^^ As if I know. Lakin you still know quite a bit and you're a person that spent almost all of his life outside the country. As for everything: How many people from your clan know what job you do. How many know the number of kids you have. How many know how much you earn. How many know things that, in the normal workings of the rest of the world, only your family should know? You see how clan is everything in the qurbo by looking at single mothers. Note how many 'abtis' their kids suddenly acquire. You see it in the way schools, mosques, the needy and even the workings of government are viewed or helped. Clan is EVERYWHERE. Clan is everything. I don't know 'quite a bit' saxib. What I do know I only recently learned. Not many know about my life apart from mostly 'family' (immediate and extended in kasta oo ay intaasiba badantahay). Clan is a natural fall back position for Somalis yes but only in places aynu ku badannahay.

^True.

What is 'everything'? Personally it doesn't mean much to me. I hardly know lafaha aan u kala baxno let alone any other clans. Sayid, Burco iyo Qhardo ha isu keenin'e compare it with it's tuulo equivalent Jaamac Qabar

Originally posted by Jacaylbaro: quote: Ahmad-Magnoon Mischief maker baad tahay ninyow

Find a property?? Waar is says 'How to get pregnant fast'

Hello Ngonge Anyone seen the banner at top of this page?

^Enlighten me. Naden, I do intend to read up on the subject from all sides (easier said than done though). However, naturally, arguments AGAINST evolution have attracted my attention. These arguments sound well reasoned to a science layman such as myself. What has not been easy to find is well reasoned counter arguments hence my battle here with evolutionist nomads. The Human was an Ape argument for example. This has so many holes in it with well reasoned scientific arguments against it I'm surprised this is actually still being debated. Is there something I'm missing? The Masri and the Turk have done their bit. It's easy to claim they are mistaken without much in the of a write up against their views (maybe you can point out a website that does this).

Naden, I haven't read the book nor have I read any others on evolution nor was I particularly attentive in biology. I thought it was a waste of time as I will go on to make millions as a banker. Then I got bored of that as well. Anyway, x years later and a million dollars less, I'm putting evolution under the microscope (pun intended). What I haven't seen yet is a concise response from it's SOL champions to questions posed. What I'm trying to do is highlight the fact the if there are questions with no or inconsistent answers, sitting on one side of the fence rather than 'on it' can only be perceived as erroneous. As for HY and the old Egyptian professor they are doing something they believe to be correct with what look like sincere intentions. It isn't healthy to second guess another's intentions. Lets have that discussion. Might be best to narrow it down to say 3 or 4 areas to be discussed otherwise we will go in sorts of directions. Have a think.

Pilgrim, any idea who is insuring them and what the policy covers?

^LoL

Arac, So you acknowledge the Cambrian explosion did occur? Why do we not have intermediary fossils? I for one would be interested to see what a half fish half invertebrate looks like. ps isn't there evidence in other fossil records that suggest a great flood did actually occur? Is this being denied/challenged by evolutionists?

Naden, Thanks. I try to have a discussion. After a false start or two I throw some meat into the ring for the all to fight over. This isn't the first time you have stated your reservations on HY and his work. You haven't given any reasons for those reservations. Care to expand? I am also finding it difficult to find anyone refuting the contents of his book. Maybe our nomads can have go???? ps this thread in need of your full participation me thinks. I can't get anything out of Johnny's haphazard debating skills. pps a new thread may be required as this one is leaning more towards the evolution/creation argument.

Raamsade Is that what you call 'evidence'? Have you ever critically evaluated this 'evidence'? I for one would be very interested on how you would refute the following assessment by Harun Yahya in his book Evolution Deceit. THE FOSSIL RECORD REFUTES EVOLUTION THE EVER-MISSING LINKS According to the theory of evolution, every living species has emerged from a predecessor. One species which existed previously turned into something else over time and all species have come into being in this way. According to the theory, this transformation proceeds gradually over millions of years. If this were the case, then innumerable intermediate species should have lived during the immense period of time when these transformations were supposedly occurring. For instance, there should have lived in the past some half-fish/half-repti le creatures which had acquired some reptilian traits in addition to the fish traits they already had. Or there should have existed some reptile/bird creatures, which had acquired some avian traits in addition to the reptilian traits they already possessed. Evolutionists refer to these imaginary creatures, which they believe to have lived in the past, as "transitional forms". If such animals had really existed, there would have been millions, even billions, of them. More importantly, the remains of these creatures should be present in the fossil record. The number of these transitional forms should have been even greater than that of present animal species, and their remains should be found all over the world. In The Origin of Species, Darwin accepted this fact and explained: If my theory be true, numberless intermediate varieties, linking most closely all of the species of the same group together must assuredly have existed... Consequently evidence of their former existence could be found only amongst fossil remains.23 Even Darwin himself was aware of the absence of such transitional forms. He hoped that they would be found in the future. Despite his optimism, he realised that these missing intermediate forms were the biggest stumbling-block for his theory. That is why he wrote the following in the chapter of the The Origin of Species entitled "Difficulties of the Theory": …Why, if species have descended from other species by fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms? Why is not all nature in confusion, instead of the species being, as we see them, well defined?… But, as by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?… But in the intermediate region, having intermediate conditions of life, why do we not now find closely-linking intermediate varieties? This difficulty for a long time quite confounded me.24 The only explanation Darwin could come up with to counter this objection was the argument that the fossil record uncovered so far was inadequate. He asserted that when the fossil record had been studied in detail, the missing links would be found. Believing in Darwin's prophecy, evolutionist paleontologists have been digging up fossils and searching for missing links all over the world since the middle of the 19th century. Despite their best efforts, no transitional forms have yet been uncovered. All the fossils unearthed in excavations have shown that, contrary to the beliefs of evolutionists, life appeared on earth all of a sudden and fully-formed. Trying to prove their theory, evolutionists have instead unwittingly caused it to collapse. A famous British paleontologist, Derek V. Ager, admits this fact even though he is an evolutionist: The point emerges that if we examine the fossil record in detail, whether at the level of orders or of species, we find-over and over again-not gradual evolution, but the sudden explosion of one group at the expense of another.25 Another evolutionist paleontologist Mark Czarnecki comments as follows: A major problem in proving the theory has been the fossil record; the imprints of vanished species preserved in the Earth's geological formations. This record has never revealed traces of Darwin's hypothetical intermediate variants - instead species appear and disappear abruptly, and this anomaly has fueled the creationist argument that each species was created by God.26 These gaps in the fossil record cannot be explained by saying that sufficient fossils have not yet been found, but that they one day will be. Another American scholar, Robert Wesson, states in his 1991 book Beyond Natural Selection, that "the gaps in the fossil record are real and meaningful". He elaborates this claim in this way: The gaps in the record are real, however. The absence of a record of any important branching is quite phenomenal. Species are usually static, or nearly so, for long periods, species seldom and genera never show evolution into new species or genera but replacement of one by another, and change is more or less abrupt.27 LIVING FOSSILS A few fossilized creatures dating back millions of years, but which are no different to modern specimens. These remains are “living” proof that all living things emerged, not as the result of evolution, but by flawless creation, and that they never underwent evolution at all. The living honeybee is no different than its fossil relative, which is millions of years old. The 135 million year old dragon fly fossil is no different than its modern counterparts. A comparison of a fossilized ant 100 million years old with a modern-day ant clearly indicates that these insects do not have any evolutionary history. LIFE EMERGED ON EARTH SUDDENLY AND IN COMPLEX FORMS When terrestrial strata and the fossil record are examined, it is to be seen that all living organisms appeared simultaneously. The oldest stratum of the earth in which fossils of living creatures have been found is that of the Cambrian, which has an estimated age of 500-550 million years. The living creatures found in the strata belonging to the Cambrian period emerged all of a sudden in the fossil record-there are no pre-existing ancestors. The fossils found in Cambrian rocks belonged to snails, trilobites, sponges, earthworms, jellyfish, sea hedgehogs, and other complex invertebrates. This wide mosaic of living organisms made up of such a great number of complex creatures emerged so suddenly that this miraculous event is referred to as the "Cambrian Explosion" in geological literature. Most of the creatures in this layer have complex systems have complex systems and advanced structures, such as eyes, gills, and circulatory systems, exactly the same as those in modern specimens. For instance, the double-lensed, combed eye structure of trilobites is a wonder of creation. David Raup, a professor of geology in Harvard, Rochester, and Chicago Universities, says: "the trilobites 450 million years ago used an optimal design which would require a well trained and imaginative optical engineer to develop today".28 These complex invertebrates emerged suddenly and completely without having any link or any transitional form between them and the unicellular organisms, which were the only life forms on earth prior to them. The fossil record proves that transitional forms never existed, no evolution took place and all species have been created separately in a perfect form. Richard Monastersky, a science journalist at Science News, one of the popular publications of evolutionist literature, states the following about the "Cambrian Explosion", which is a deathtrap for evolutionary theory: A half-billion years ago, the remarkably complex forms of animals we see today suddenly appeared. This moment, right at the start of Earth's Cambrian Period, some 550 million years ago, marks the evolutionary explosion that filled the seas with the earth's first complex creatures. ...the large animal phyla of today were present already in the early Cambrian ...and they were as distinct from each other as they are today.29 Deeper investigation into the Cambrian Explosion shows what a great dilemma it creates for the theory of evolution. Recent findings indicate that almost all phyla, the most basic animal divisions, emerged abruptly in the Cambrian period. An article published in Science magazine in 2001 says: "The beginning of the Cambrian period, some 545 million years ago, saw the sudden appearance in the fossil record of almost all the main types of animals (phyla) that still dominate the biota today".30 The same article notes that for such complex and distinct living groups to be explained according to the theory of evolution, very rich fossil beds showing a gradual developmental process should have been found, but this has not yet proved possible: This differential evolution and dispersal, too, must have required a previous history of the group for which there is no fossil record.31 How the earth came to overflow with such a great number of animal species all of a sudden, and how these distinct types of species with no common ancestors could have emerged, is a question that remains unanswered by evolutionists. The Oxford University zoologist Richard Dawkins, one of the foremost advocates of evolutionist thought in the world, comments on this reality that undermines the very foundation of all the arguments he has been defending: For example the Cambrian strata of rocks... are the oldest ones in which we find most of the major invertebrate groups. And we find many of them already in an advanced state of evolution, the very first time they appear. It is as though they were just planted there, without any evolutionary history.32 THE EYE OF THE TRILOBITE The trilobites that appeared in the Cambrian period all of a sudden have an extremely complex eye structure. Consisting of millions of honeycomb-shaped tiny particles and a double-lens system, this eye "has an optimal design which would require a well-trained and imaginative optical engineer to develop today" in the words of David Raup, a professor of geology. This eye emerged 530 million years ago in a perfect state. No doubt, the sudden appearance of such a wondrous design cannot be explained by evolution and it proves the actuality of creation. Moreover, the honeycomb eye structure of the trilobite has survived to our own day without a single change. Some insects such as bees and dragon flies have the same eye structure as did the trilobite.* This situation disproves the evolutionary thesis that living things evolved progressively from the primitive to the complex. (*) R. L. Gregory, Eye and Brain: The Physiology of Seeing, Oxford University Press, 1995, s. 31. As Dawkins is forced to acknowledge, the Cambrian Explosion is strong evidence for creation, because creation is the only way to explain the fully-formed emergence of life on earth. Douglas Futuyma, a prominent evolutionist biologist admits this fact: "Organisms either appeared on the earth fully developed or they did not. If they did not, they must have developed from preüexisting species by some process of modification. If they did appear in a fully developed state, they must indeed have been created by some omnipotent intelligence." 33 Darwin himself recognised the possibility of this when he wrote: "If numerous species, belonging to the same genera or families, have really started into life all at once, the fact would be fatal to the theory of descent with slow modification through natural selection." 34 The Cambrian Period is nothing more or less than Darwin's "fatal stroke". This is why the Swiss evolutionist paleoanthropologist Stefan Bengtson, who confesses the lack of transitional links while describing the Cambrian Age, makes the following comment: "Baffling (and embarrasing) to Darwin, this event still dazzles us".35 Obviously, the fossil record indicates that living things did not evolve from primitive to the advanced forms, but instead emerged all of a sudden and in a perfect state. In short, living beings did not come into existence by evolution, they were created. MOLECULAR COMPARISONS DEEPEN EVOLUTION'S CAMBRIAN IMPASSE Another fact that puts evolutionists into a deep quandary about the Cambrian Explosion is the comparisons between different living taxa. The results of these comparisons reveal that animal taxa considered to be "close relatives" by evolutionists until quite recently, are genetically very different, which puts the "intermediate form" hypothesis, that only exists theoretically, into an even greater quandary. An article published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in 2000 reports that DNA analyses have displaced taxa that used to be considered "intermediate forms" in the past: DNA sequence analysis dictates new interpretation of phylogenic trees. Taxa that were once thought to represent successive grades of complexity at the base of the metazoan tree are being displaced to much higher positions inside the tree. This leaves no evolutionary "intermediates" and forces us to rethink the genesis of bilaterian complexity....36 In the same article, evolutionist writers note that some taxa which were considered "intermediate" between groups such as sponges, cnidarians and ctenophores can no longer be considered as such because of new genetic findings, and that they have "lost hope" of constructing such evolutionary family trees: The new molecular based phylogeny has several important implications. Foremost among them is the disappearance of "intermediate" taxa between sponges, cnidarians, ctenophores, and the last common ancestor of bilaterians or "Urbilateria." ...A corollary is that we have a major gap in the stem leading to the Urbilataria. We have lost the hope, so common in older evolutionary reasoning, of reconstructing the morphology of the "coelomate ancestor" through a scenario involving successive grades of increasing complexity based on the anatomy of extant "primitive" lineages. 37 23 Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species: A Facsimile of the First Edition, Harvard University Press, 1964, p. 179. 24 Ibid, pp. 172, 280. 25 Derek V. Ager, "The Nature of the Fossil Record", Proceedings of the British Geological Association, Vol 87, 1976, p. 133. 26 Mark Czarnecki, "The Revival of the Creationist Crusade", MacLean's, January 19, 1981, p. 56. 27 R. Wesson, Beyond Natural Selection, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1991, p. 45. 28 David Raup, "Conflicts Between Darwin and Paleontology", Bulletin, Field Museum of Natural History, Vol 50, January 1979, p. 24. 29 Richard Monastersky, "Mysteries of the Orient", Discover, April 1993, p. 40. 30 Richard Fortey, "The Cambrian Explosion Exploded?", Science, vol 293, No 5529, 20 July 2001, p. 438-439. 31 Ibid. 32 Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker, London: W. W. Norton 1986, p. 229. 33 Douglas J. Futuyma, Science on Trial, New York: Pantheon Books, 1983, p. 197. 34 Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species: A Facsimile of the First Edition, Harvard University Press, 1964, p. 302. 35 Stefan Bengston, Nature, Vol. 345, 1990, p. 765. 36 The New Animal Phylogeny: Reliability And Implications, Proc. of Nat. Aca. of Sci., 25 April 2000, vol 97, No 9, p. 4453-4456. 37 Ibid. The floor is yours ladies and gents.