Evolution or Creationism?
theysayjump
02-07-2005 15:15:30
What do you believe in and why?
personally i think its a bit of both.
if you believe in other please say what and why.
D
tracemhunter
02-07-2005 15:26:15
eh not a good idea to do a topic like this. people always tend to get on the defensive about this shit.
slease
02-07-2005 15:42:48
Evolution. What can I say, science makes sense, mythology doesn't. I've been an atheist since I was 15, just a realization that I've now supported with fact.
Peinecone
02-07-2005 15:47:58
[quotedff3a43ec0="slease"]Evolution. What can I say, science makes sense, mythology doesn't. I've been an atheist since I was 15, just a realization that I've now supported with fact.[/quotedff3a43ec0]
i also say evolution. I grew up a Lutheran, and even taught sunday school for a year in high school. Now i am agnostic
ben laden
02-07-2005 15:49:32
Evolution. Also atheist for years. No sense in believing in fairy tales.
bballp6699
02-07-2005 15:53:08
[quotee455612973="tracemhunter"]eh not a good idea to do a topic like this. people always tend to get on the defensive about this shit.[/quotee455612973]
True people do, but it's only the hypocrites that don't even understand what they believe in that do it anyways.
slease
02-07-2005 15:59:44
I agree, it's good to discuss things like this, it's healthy.
computer-guy
02-07-2005 16:27:14
i say creation cause it doesn't make sence that all this just happend by chance.
Crynos
02-07-2005 16:31:34
[quoteefdb89dacf="computer-guy"]i say creation cause it doesn't make sence that all this just happend by chance.[/quoteefdb89dacf]
But it does make since that some unknown deity magically created us?
ben laden
02-07-2005 16:33:20
lol, great, it's already started. The argument that has no ending and neither side will see the other's side.
computer-guy
02-07-2005 16:42:50
yea it does,and there's even written proof to verify what i am saying.
oh yea there was a blob in space that suddanly became all of this,YEA RIGHT! lol
Crynos
02-07-2005 17:01:21
[quote5219ea14b2="computer-guy"]yea it does,and there's even written proof to verify what i am saying.
oh yea there was a blob in space that suddanly became all of this,YEA RIGHT! lol[/quote5219ea14b2]
Im hoping you dont mean the bible...
computer-guy
02-07-2005 17:08:07
yes i mean the Bible!
they've also found that the flood was true and noahs ark.
i see no proof of evolution!
i could go on and on......
computer-guy
02-07-2005 17:17:36
stackmjwiz
02-07-2005 17:18:23
[quote7354b0b2ed]i say creation cause it doesn't make sence that all this just happend by chance.[/quote7354b0b2ed]
Exactly. The Universe is comprised of atoms. Who put them there? Who created the bits of matter?
Evolution doesn't explain this. Nor does the Big Bang theory. Science cannot explain the creation of the universe, or the earth.
Crynos
02-07-2005 17:22:39
[quoteb21c02bc77="stackmjwiz"][quoteb21c02bc77]i say creation cause it doesn't make sence that all this just happend by chance.[/quoteb21c02bc77]
Exactly. The Universe is comprised of atoms. Who put them there? Who created the bits of matter?
Evolution doesn't explain this. Nor does the Big Bang theory. Science cannot explain the creation of the universe, or the earth.[/quoteb21c02bc77]
But blindly putting faith in god doesnt explain it either, im saying i agree with the big bang theory, hell, i have no idea how it all happened, but i also dont believe it was created by god.
computer-guy
02-07-2005 17:26:55
why? u couldn't beleve that there is 1 great being that created u and is controling everthing?
slease
02-07-2005 17:27:08
[quote3e845973be="computer-guy"]yes i mean the Bible!
they've also found that the flood was true and noahs ark.
i see no proof of evolution!
i could go on and on......[/quote3e845973be]
The new testament was written by the Catholic Church, if there is a god, it is far from his word. They have discovered evidence of a recurring flood in Mesopotamia, the bible is not the only document that writes of this flood. That part is history.
computer-guy
02-07-2005 17:33:09
i am fully aware of that,also u are wrong about the catholics writing the NewTestement.
the NewTestement was written by the Apostles and inspired by the
Holy Spirit(God) in like around 58 A.D. to 78 A.D.
Crynos
02-07-2005 17:35:01
[quote3082344b1d="computer-guy"]i am fully aware of that,also u are wrong about the catholics writing the NewTestement.
the NewTestement was written by the Apostles and inspired by the
Holy Spirit(God).[/quote3082344b1d]
I also wrote a book that was inspired by "god" saying that the big bang theory is true, does that make it correct?
computer-guy
02-07-2005 17:38:46
You don't understand what i mean when i say inspired by God,plus u just said u don't beleve in God so how could u claim to of wrote a book that was inspired by him.
slease
02-07-2005 17:45:49
[quote7033c68999="computer-guy"]i am fully aware of that,also u are wrong about the catholics writing the NewTestement.
the NewTestement was written by the Apostles and inspired by the
Holy Spirit(God) in like around 58 B.C. to 78 B.C.[/quote7033c68999]
You're correct, the original text was written in gospels by the apostles. This was not called the bible. I'm saying that church put the work together and edited for cohesiveness this work they came up with became the first form of what you know of as the bible. How much you believe they edited the original gospels is a matter of opinion, but it is certain that many of the gospels of the other apostles were left out.
computer-guy
02-07-2005 17:51:54
[quote2de366520a="slease"][quote2de366520a="computer-guy"]i am fully aware of that,also u are wrong about the catholics writing the NewTestement.
the NewTestement was written by the Apostles and inspired by the
Holy Spirit(God) in like around 58 B.C. to 78 B.C.[/quote2de366520a]
You're correct, the original text was written in gospels by the apostles. This was not called the bible. I'm saying that church put the work together and edited for cohesiveness this work they came up with became the first form of what you know of as the bible. How much you believe they edited the original gospels is a matter of opinion, but it is certain that many of the gospels of the other apostles were left out.[/quote2de366520a]
yes but that means the weren't inspired by the Holy Spirit and the King James version is the best around on not being altered,cause there are many different versions that claim to be the real thing but aren't,like the book of morman(who have twisted up everthing),the books the catholics added on to theirs,and i could go on......
slease
02-07-2005 18:05:32
[quote039c2a029e="computer-guy"][quote039c2a029e="slease"][quote039c2a029e="computer-guy"]i am fully aware of that,also u are wrong about the catholics writing the NewTestement.
the NewTestement was written by the Apostles and inspired by the
Holy Spirit(God) in like around 58 B.C. to 78 B.C.[/quote039c2a029e]
You're correct, the original text was written in gospels by the apostles. This was not called the bible. I'm saying that church put the work together and edited for cohesiveness this work they came up with became the first form of what you know of as the bible. How much you believe they edited the original gospels is a matter of opinion, but it is certain that many of the gospels of the other apostles were left out.[/quote039c2a029e]
yes but that means the weren't inspired by the Holy Spirit and the King James version is the best around on not being altered,cause there are many different versions that claim to be the real thing but aren't,like the book of morman(who have twisted up everthing),the books the catholics added on to theirs,and i could go on......[/quote039c2a029e]
It's classic to believe that your faith is the one true faith... but really... the King James bible is not extremely different than the Roman bible it came from. It's just translated into English. The only information that the british had at the time to make a translation from was the information presented to them from the Roman bible...
and what weren't inspired by the holy spirit... the gospels that were left out of the new testement? doesn't that seem a little too convenient to you?
EatChex89
02-07-2005 18:54:05
im a creationist.
nobodyukno
02-07-2005 18:54:34
[quote20d7193d49="stackmjwiz"][quote20d7193d49]i say creation cause it doesn't make sence that all this just happend by chance.[/quote20d7193d49]
Exactly. The Universe is comprised of atoms. Who put them there? Who created the bits of matter?
Evolution doesn't explain this. Nor does the Big Bang theory. Science cannot explain the creation of the universe, or the earth.[/quote20d7193d49]
Yes that is true so God has to be real. Any of you guys heard of the thory of where if matter created everything then that same matter would have to be alive today because of some reason im forgetting?
And the Bible has been proven so many times and people still try to make exscuses that there not true but they make them look even stupider.
slease
02-07-2005 19:21:47
[quotef88efa667b="nobodyukno"]
And the Bible has been proven so many times and people still try to make exscuses that there not true but they make them look even stupider.[/quotef88efa667b]
Really, I'd love to see where. And please send me to some legitimate source and not creationist.org. I'd really love to see where the bible has already been proven, I haven't seen it yet.
And I'm not sure what you were saying about matter. But were you trying to say "Matter is neither created nor destroyed"? That's the Law of Conservation of Mass.
geej86
02-07-2005 19:24:13
[quotecd1245d04a]
Evolution 44% [ 8 ]
Creationism 44% [ 8 ]
[/quotecd1245d04a]
i never thought it would 50/50 like this, really surprising. silly darwin!!
/evolution
computer-guy
02-07-2005 19:45:15
[quote837e5b7603="slease"][quote837e5b7603="computer-guy"][quote837e5b7603="slease"][quote837e5b7603="computer-guy"]i am fully aware of that,also u are wrong about the catholics writing the NewTestement.
the NewTestement was written by the Apostles and inspired by the
Holy Spirit(God) in like around 58 B.C. to 78 B.C.[/quote837e5b7603]
You're correct, the original text was written in gospels by the apostles. This was not called the bible. I'm saying that church put the work together and edited for cohesiveness this work they came up with became the first form of what you know of as the bible. How much you believe they edited the original gospels is a matter of opinion, but it is certain that many of the gospels of the other apostles were left out.[/quote837e5b7603]
yes but that means the weren't inspired by the Holy Spirit and the King James version is the best around on not being altered,cause there are many different versions that claim to be the real thing but aren't,like the book of morman(who have twisted up everthing),the books the catholics added on to theirs,and i could go on......[/quote837e5b7603]
It's classic to believe that your faith is the one true faith... but really... the King James bible is not extremely different than the Roman bible it came from. It's just translated into English. The only information that the british had at the time to make a translation from was the information presented to them from the Roman bible...
and what weren't inspired by the holy spirit... the gospels that were left out of the new testement? doesn't that seem a little too convenient to you?[/quote837e5b7603]
no,i'm just saying what i was taught and i did research and there is no other books.
Crynos
02-07-2005 20:23:12
[quote03df2b1d59="nobodyukno"][quote03df2b1d59="stackmjwiz"][quote03df2b1d59]i say creation cause it doesn't make sence that all this just happend by chance.[/quote03df2b1d59]
Exactly. The Universe is comprised of atoms. Who put them there? Who created the bits of matter?
Evolution doesn't explain this. Nor does the Big Bang theory. Science cannot explain the creation of the universe, or the earth.[/quote03df2b1d59]
[b03df2b1d59]Yes that is true so God has to be real.[/b03df2b1d59] Any of you guys heard of the thory of where if matter created everything then that same matter would have to be alive today because of some reason im forgetting?
And the Bible has been proven so many times and people still try to make exscuses that there not true but they make them look even stupider.[/quote03df2b1d59]
Wtf kind of logic is that? That makes absolutely no sense. Evolution doesnt prove it so ill blindly put faith into a being that there is no proof of?
PS. I agree with slease, give me lnks to a reputable source where the bible has been proven that is not a rabid religious orginazation.
EatChex89
02-07-2005 20:27:31
the reason people choose to believe in evolution is because they don't want to admit that there is a God, because if they admitted that, then they would have to also admit that they are doomed to eternal punishment. So naturally they choose evolution hoping to avoid the punishment (which is unavoidable anyway..)
but anyway. there is [bfb9e1a717d]NO proof[/bfb9e1a717d] that evolution even occured, and it makes alot more sense to have some "unknown diety" creating us.
Also
[quotefb9e1a717d="Crynos"]
But blindly putting faith in god doesnt explain it either, im saying i agree with the big bang theory, hell, i have no idea how it all happened, but i also dont believe it was created by god.[/quotefb9e1a717d]
So you won't put faith in God, but you'll go ahead and put faith in the "big bang theory"... makes sense to me..
Like I said, it all leads down to the fact that men don't want to admit that there is a God and that they have an eternal punishment waiting for them.
Crynos
02-07-2005 20:41:22
[quotee808e2262a="EatChex89"]the reason people choose to believe in evolution is because they don't want to admit that there is a God, because if they admitted that, then they would have to also admit that they are doomed to eternal punishment. So naturally they choose evolution hoping to avoid the punishment (which is unavoidable anyway..)
but anyway. there is [be808e2262a]NO proof[/be808e2262a] that evolution even occured, and it makes alot more sense to have some "unknown diety" creating us.
Also
[quotee808e2262a="Crynos"]
But blindly putting faith in god doesnt explain it either, im saying i agree with the big bang theory, hell, i have no idea how it all happened, but i also dont believe it was created by god.[/quotee808e2262a]
So you won't put faith in God, but you'll go ahead and put faith in the "big bang theory"... makes sense to me..
Like I said, it all leads down to the fact that men don't want to admit that there is a God and that they have an eternal punishment waiting for them.[/quotee808e2262a]
No, i said earlier i have no idea how it happened, i admit it, but im not going to put faith in god because there is no proof he exists, and if god cant forgive me for not believing in something that theres no proof of i wouldnt care for him as a god anyways.
slease
02-07-2005 20:44:37
[quoteca6eb5cb7a="EatChex89"]the reason people choose to believe in evolution is because they don't want to admit that there is a God, because if they admitted that, then they would have to also admit that they are doomed to eternal punishment. So naturally they choose evolution hoping to avoid the punishment (which is unavoidable anyway..)[/quoteca6eb5cb7a]
Now which facet of christianity are you speaking for? Many liberal churches have accepted evolution as fact and have incorporated it in with religious doctrine by assigning symbolic meanings to the events in Genesis. Other mainline churches can not dispute the proven FACTS behind evolution so they create blends of evolution and creationism, commonly called theistic evolution. This has become very well known recently because certain states have been pushing to have this tought in public schools. Theistic evolution states that God created the universe and used evolution and science to develop the world into what we see now. There is no literal 7 day creation period in this theory.
The rest of the stuff you said in that sentence is just utter crap. You could use your false reasoning and turn it around just as easily. "Christians are afraid that if god is not real that they aren't destined for a glorious afterlife and have to face the unknown." So don't use poor logic like that please, it makes for bad discussion.
theysayjump
02-07-2005 20:46:05
the way i see it is that people only believe in God, cos the bible says he exists.
if the bible wasnt written (whenever it was written), how many people do you think would believe in God?
personally i think that there is too much in this world, solar system, universe to just all be coincidence or down to the Big Bang theory....how about God created this world and universe, but also put men, animals, creatures whatever on this planet, and then they evolved.
Evolution could be down to God, or God could be down to Evolution.
slease
02-07-2005 20:59:09
Here's a great wikipedia article on Theistic Evolution, all of you hardcore creationists may want to take a look at the moderate creationist view. Also called intelligent design theory.
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design
theysayjump, this might be the same thing you were thinking of.
nicd.01
02-07-2005 21:03:39
[quote65689b75c2="theysayjump"]the way i see it is that people only believe in God, cos the bible says he exists.
if the bible wasnt written (whenever it was written), how many people do you think would believe in God?
personally i think that there is too much in this world, solar system, universe to just all be coincidence or down to the Big Bang theory....how about God created this world and universe, but also put men, animals, creatures whatever on this planet, and then they evolved.
Evolution could be down to God, or God could be down to Evolution.[/quote65689b75c2]
Exactly. The fact is that no one knows the answer to this question so people really need to stop damning people to hell just because they feel differently. A civilized debate is fine, but rabid condemnation and ridicule isn't. Personally, I went to Catholic school until 9th grade and we were taught evolution in every science class we had. In religion class, we were taught that the bible is full of metaphor. This was coming from a school that had two 80 year old people come in to teach us the horrors of abortion with grainy film strips from the 60s.
oddjob1266
02-07-2005 21:16:29
I got an idea...let's just make up our own minds and not try to change each others...clearly the people who keep posting here are so polarized and have their opinions set in their head and that's all there is to it....just be happy that you can believe what you do and let it go.
computer-guy
02-07-2005 21:28:49
[quotee73616a437="oddjob1266"]I got an idea...let's just make up our own minds and not try to change each others...clearly the people who keep posting here are so polarized and have their opinions set in their head and that's all there is to it....just be happy that you can believe what you do and let it go.[/quotee73616a437]
i agree,lets not get at each others throats trying to change the way we beleve,
i might say stuff later on but that nothing to get uptight about. lol
theysayjump
02-07-2005 21:35:24
[quoteb1c759a4b6="slease"]Here's a great wikipedia article on Theistic Evolution, all of you hardcore creationists may want to take a look at the moderate creationist view. Also called intelligent design theory.
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design
theysayjump, this might be the same thing you were thinking of.[/quoteb1c759a4b6]
yeah thats what i was talking about....but i hadnt heard of that before, thats just the way i thought/think.
i dont adamently believe in God, but like i said i also dont think that everything in our universe could have happened just by chance.
im not sure if i believe in God or not.....not at the moment anyway.
but yeah thanks for that slease!
EatChex89
02-07-2005 22:21:12
the reason other churches put evolution into their teaching is to attract followers.. and to be "modern"
theysayjump
02-07-2005 22:24:22
they could also believe in it.
Collateral
02-07-2005 22:26:10
Heh, I don't believe in religions of any kind. I both believe in creationism along with ebolution. I believe simple lifeforms couldn't just all of a sudden appear without any explanation. I believe everything evolved from the same single celled lifeform and here we are today.
computer-guy
02-07-2005 22:46:07
[quotec3936d2617="EatChex89"]the reason other churches put evolution into their teaching is to attract followers.. and to be "modern"[/quotec3936d2617]
way to go eatchex! i couldn't post it fast enough.
also the churches that teach that aren't teaching the right thing.
the right thing is God created Adam and eve who dissobeyed him and humanaty fell in to sin,everybody who is,and who will be is a sinner,including myself!
so therefore anyone and everyone has sin and the punishment is death(going to hell)
God loves us ans so he sent is son to earth to die for us on the cross to make it possible for us to be saved and live with him forever in heaven.
Jesus(Gods son) took upon him all of our sins and even went to hell for a period for us.
the only thing we have to is is beleve that he did this and that he can save u and u will be saved.
there's no other way to do it accept beleve, u can't say well i don't sin that much so i can go, and u can't be saved by doing anything else.plus u will never lose you salvation no matter how hard u try.
and u still don't beleve me,(even though i preached long enough,lol)
well i'll get your proof,plus theysayjump, there's no evolution in creation at all.
God made man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nose the breath of life and man became a living soul. (Genesis 27)
he made everthing out of nothing cause he can do all,there was no evolving from a fish to a monkey to and ape-man to a human. all false.
i'll get your proof by tomorrow.
theysayjump
02-07-2005 23:27:49
im not trying to sound like a dick, and im not putting anyone, or anyone's faith down but if there is a God, dont you think it will be up to HIM to decide who goes to hell, who doesnt, if someone is a good christian, bad christian etc.
we can all sit here and say that he either does or doesnt exist, but it makes no difference. If he exists, then he decides what happens, he decides if something is right or wrong, and just cos you or someone else says he does....that doesnt mean so.
you cant sit there and say that you will go to hell if you dont believe.....if he exists, then it will be up to him if the non-believers go to hell....not because someone said so in a book.....which is all it comes down to basically.....someone writes something in a book, you believe it and come down on anyone else who doesnt.
God makes the choices, not us, so we cant sit here and say he wont do this or he wont do that.
WE DONT/CANT KNOW!
drummer_kew_03
03-07-2005 00:01:25
[quote5551334e36="theysayjump"]im not trying to sound like a dick, and im not putting anyone, or anyone's faith down but if there is a God, dont you think it will be up to HIM to decide who goes to hell, who doesnt, if someone is a good christian, bad christian etc.[/quote5551334e36]
He's already decided to save us. We just have to let him. If you're drowning in the water, a person can reach in to help you, but if you don't reach to them and hold on they can't save you. The reason that we should go to hell for even one sin is because he is perfect, and sinning makes us imperfect. Since he is perfect, he cannot have imperfection (us) in his presence.
theysayjump
03-07-2005 00:13:28
says who?
like i said, nobody can speak for God or what will happen to someone. that will be up to him to decide.
people can say that this or that will happen because they/we/you simply dont know. they/we/you are going by what someone wrote in a book.
slease
03-07-2005 00:15:00
I'm really quite surprised to see this many creationists still exist. For those that vote creationist, can I ask you to list the church that you go to? Just the denomination. Just curious. I was Southern Methodist for a time if that helps anyone open up.
theysayjump
03-07-2005 00:18:13
whats the difference between southern methodist and other methodists?
nicd.01
03-07-2005 00:28:05
So if a church can accept that maybe evolution can coexist with creationist theories they are just doing it to pretend to be "modern." Who the hell said you're religion was any more right than theirs? This shit is all open to interpretation so you can't say that one person is more right than another? What about other non-Christian religions? I guess they'll all just go to a hell they don't believe in because your religion said so. Honestly, what do you devout Christians (I'm assuming you're Christian) think is going to happen to people of other faiths? If you look up the stats, the majority of the world is non-Christian. Are they also saved? And remember, Leviticus 1919 clearly says "Keep my decrees. Do not mate different kinds of animals. Do not plant your field with two kinds of seed. Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material." So keep that in mind the next time you think about buying a shirt with blended fabrics. See computer-guy, everyone can search bible verse!
xXHasek99
03-07-2005 00:28:38
those who don't believe in aliens are FOOLS! (just wanted to throw that in the kettle D )
Hasek.
slease
03-07-2005 01:16:24
[quote4d02a259a7="theysayjump"]whats the difference between southern methodist and other methodists?[/quote4d02a259a7]
Uhm, not too sure what the difference is now. I believe it has to do with the split in the civil war which caused churches like Methodists and Baptists to part in half. The Southern branches became revivalist and are considered more fundamentalist. Most creationists in this thread are probably Southern Methodist or Southern Baptist.
drummer_kew_03
03-07-2005 05:30:32
[quote398856410f="nicd.01"]So if a church can accept that maybe evolution can coexist with creationist theories they are just doing it to pretend to be "modern." Who the hell said you're religion was any more right than theirs? This shit is all open to interpretation so you can't say that one person is more right than another? What about other non-Christian religions? I guess they'll all just go to a hell they don't believe in because your religion said so. Honestly, what do you devout Christians (I'm assuming you're Christian) think is going to happen to people of other faiths? If you look up the stats, the majority of the world is non-Christian. Are they also saved? And remember, Leviticus 1919 clearly says "Keep my decrees. Do not mate different kinds of animals. Do not plant your field with two kinds of seed. Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material." So keep that in mind the next time you think about buying a shirt with blended fabrics. See computer-guy, everyone can search bible verse![/quote398856410f]
We're under new law since the new testement, so Leviticus' laws don't really count.
ben laden
03-07-2005 05:40:44
I choose to worship the sun, because unlike some other deities that will remain unnamed, its immediate benefits to me are obvious. It grows things so I can eat, keeps me warm, and gives me light among other things. Additionally, I can see it so I'm left with no doubt as to its existence. roll roll roll roll roll
This is why I don't argue this subject anymore; because it's really quite impossible with the quality of some of you peoples' logic. It's utterly horrible.
nobodyukno
03-07-2005 06:39:35
[quote31a398aea2="Crynos"][quote31a398aea2="EatChex89"]the reason people choose to believe in evolution is because they don't want to admit that there is a God, because if they admitted that, then they would have to also admit that they are doomed to eternal punishment. So naturally they choose evolution hoping to avoid the punishment (which is unavoidable anyway..)
but anyway. there is [b31a398aea2]NO proof[/b31a398aea2] that evolution even occured, and it makes alot more sense to have some "unknown diety" creating us.
Also
[quote31a398aea2="Crynos"]
But blindly putting faith in god doesnt explain it either, im saying i agree with the big bang theory, hell, i have no idea how it all happened, but i also dont believe it was created by god.[/quote31a398aea2]
So you won't put faith in God, but you'll go ahead and put faith in the "big bang theory"... makes sense to me..
Like I said, it all leads down to the fact that men don't want to admit that there is a God and that they have an eternal punishment waiting for them.[/quote31a398aea2]
No, i said earlier i have no idea how it happened, i admit it, but im not going to put faith in god because there is no proof he exists, and if god cant forgive me for not believing in something that theres no proof of i wouldnt care for him as a god anyways.[/quote31a398aea2]
Thats the whole point. If everyone knew God was real everyone would be
going to Heaven because it would be so easy to believe in and follow him.
But since you can't see him that means you have to have faith in him and that is thing that really decides if you belive in him or not. Its if you have faith in him that he died on the cross to forgive for all our sins so that we could go to HEaven.
ben laden
03-07-2005 07:08:57
[quote2f040800a4="nobodyukno"][quote2f040800a4="Crynos"][quote2f040800a4="EatChex89"]point
[quote2f040800a4="Crynos"]
point I'm about to counter[/quote2f040800a4]
COUNTER POINTED![/quote2f040800a4]
REBUTTALED![/quote2f040800a4]
Thats the whole point. If everyone knew God was real everyone would be
going to Heaven because it would be so easy to believe in and follow him.
But since you can't see him that means you have to have faith in him and that is thing that really decides if you belive in him or not. Its if you have faith in him that he died on the cross to forgive for all our sins so that we could go to HEaven.[/quote2f040800a4]
That's a horrible argument and exposes the ludicrous type of circular argument that all people in favor of religion/god eventually resign to. If there was a god, I really think he's an asshole for throwing us a bunch of red herrings and all this evidence that brings doubt to his existence, yet he still expects us to have faith in him. Whatever, that's bullshit. I like how Christians and the like joke about the myth of Santa and laugh about it, yet they go to church every week and pray to an invisible omniscient being in the sky that has provided no evidence for its existence, WHEN OBVIOUSLY PRAYING OR NOT PRAYING WILL HAVE NO EFFECT ON THEM. God is just a grown-up's Santa, and I bet a lot of people that have doubt about god refuse to acknowledge the doubt because they'd just look like fucking morons if suddenly admitted they'd spent their entire life worshipping a fairy tale.
tracemhunter
03-07-2005 09:03:14
its not that i dont believe in god, its just the fanbase that pisses me off. where in the bible does it say i have to give 10% of my money or i am going to hell? perhaps this explains why the Catholic Church is the richest organization in the world. i am going to hell if i do a certain number of things yet "God loves me." idk its just kind of weird. i dont know what to believe.
Sara332282
03-07-2005 09:11:11
[quote7c8e8b210e="ben laden"]I choose to worship the sun, because unlike some other deities that will remain unnamed, its immediate benefits to me are obvious. It grows things so I can eat, keeps me warm, and gives me light among other things. Additionally, I can see it so I'm left with no doubt as to its existence. [/quote7c8e8b210e]
Actually Ben, it's interesting that you bring that up bc my sister's fiance has the same belief. You never mentioned this to me.
If you lireallyli wanted to be picky though.... just bc you see it doesnt mean it exists. The only thing you can be completely certain exists is your inner self. I mean how do you know all this is here? There is only one thing you can be sure of....
COGITO ERGO SUM
This arguement would qualify under "other". It says that there is no evolution or creation bc THIS doesnt even exist. it is in our minds. Is this a dream within a dream..
But that isnt where i place my beliefs, i was just saying.
Except in the whole picture when i think we are all one and one with God. I know my sisters hold the view that God is greater and separate from us. I agree greater than us.... but that does not mean he is separate from us.
But whatever it is you choose to put faith in, [b7c8e8b210e]there can only be one truth[/b7c8e8b210e].
Then again, some will argue [i7c8e8b210e]that[/i7c8e8b210e].
Crynos
03-07-2005 09:12:13
[quote18c2f1a6a4="ben laden"][quote18c2f1a6a4="nobodyukno"][quote18c2f1a6a4="Crynos"][quote18c2f1a6a4="EatChex89"]point
[quote18c2f1a6a4="Crynos"]
point I'm about to counter[/quote18c2f1a6a4]
COUNTER POINTED![/quote18c2f1a6a4]
REBUTTALED![/quote18c2f1a6a4]
blind faith logic[/quote18c2f1a6a4]
hard own[/quote18c2f1a6a4]
Good point about santa
Sara332282
03-07-2005 09:17:48
[quote1310a5e269="tracemhunter"]its not that i dont believe in god, its just the fanbase that pisses me off. where in the bible does it say i have to give 10% of my money or i am going to hell?[/quote1310a5e269]
OH OH OH!!!! This gets me sooo much!!! I am so pleased that you brought this up!!!!
[b1310a5e269]You give what you can[/b1310a5e269]. Not everyone is in a position to give a lot of money. Who should go to Hell, huh?..... the individual that has soo much to give (both financially and other) and gives his "10%" or the person who cant contribute financially 10% but does good deeds. Why is it so about money?? Arent actions more important? That is the gift that keeps on giving.
AND
So i dont necessarily believe in Jesus anymore and my sisters say i am going to Hell. Yet the murderer who does believe in Jesus is saved and absolved of his previous actions bc on his death bed he "realizes"?
That's a little off topic though.
ben laden
03-07-2005 09:51:37
Sara- I never mentioned it to you because I was being completely sarcastic. It's actually paraphrased from a George Carlin bit. ) )
By the way, it's funny that the Catholic church is mentioned and how you have to tithe and everything. You know how everyone has such a bad image of Scientology? That's basically what the Catholic Church is, besides the different beliefs. With Scientology, the more money you give them the more they make your soul clean (which is why the religion appeals to rich celebrities, it takes very little work, you don't have to be a good person, and all you have to do is give them your money, which you have an excess of anyways). With the Catholic church, the more money you give them the more likely they are to overlook what a prick you are and convince you that you're going to heaven.
GOLDEN CANDLESTICKS
+karma for anyone who knows what that reference is from.
slease
03-07-2005 11:11:36
It's interesting, actually the church stopped selling penance for sins a long time ago because that was one of the reasons the protestant reformation occured. It's really amazing that every single piece of the bible you all believe in comes from this church that was corrupt as corrupt gets and yet you all take it as fact. I just don't get it, maybe its just me.
computer-guy
03-07-2005 11:37:38
I'm a Baptist, also you guy's only pick and listen to what u want to hear,the rest u tune out,and that cause u really think that it can be possible for God to exist but u don't want to admit it.
And for you people that mentioned about having to give money and be sinless otherwise u go to hell is [bac19f3ba61]FALSE![/bac19f3ba61]
All you have do do is Beleve and your saved,You can never lose your salvation once you beleve,even if u do every possible sin and stop in your faith your still going to be saved.
And for you benladan to worship the son is wrong,
The sun is a creation by God and can't help do anything,What do you beleve in the other stars is space also? because the sun is a star like all the rest of countless stars out there.
ben laden
03-07-2005 11:56:03
1. Get a brain.
2. Educate yourself not only with religion and world history but also with arguing any possible point that you may have.
3. Then come back.
slease
03-07-2005 11:58:23
[quote7a7ced2266="computer-guy"]I'm a Baptist, also you guy's only pick and listen to what u want to hear,the rest u tune out,and that cause u really think that it can be possible for God to exist but u don't want to admit it.
And for you people that mentioned about having to give money and be sinless otherwise u go to hell is [b7a7ced2266]FALSE![/b7a7ced2266]
All you have do do is Beleve and your saved,You can never lose your salvation once you beleve,even if u do every possible sin and stop in your faith your still going to be saved.
And for you benladan to worship the son is wrong,
The sun is a creation by God and can't help do anything,What do you beleve in the other stars is space also? because the sun is a star like all the rest of countless stars out there.[/quote7a7ced2266]
Kid, you're preaching 5th grade material in a college level class. God could possibly exist, of course there is a possibility.
It's interesting that you believe that only belief leads to salvation, most other baptists would argue that to be saved one must be baptised. Calvinists would argue that everyone who will be saved was preselected before the world existed and what you do on earth doesn't matter. I'd just like you to know that you are not speaking for all Christians.
And why can't Ben Laden worship the Sun, you worship your choice of god he can worship his. Sun worship is a much more ancient religion than Christianity and should be given the proper respect.
ben laden
03-07-2005 12:06:30
Simply because I'm bored, I'll bite at this.
[quote80c77d001e="computer-guy"]I'm a Baptist, also you guy's only pick and listen to what u want to hear,the rest u tune out,and that cause u really think that it can be possible for God to exist but u don't want to admit it.[/quote80c77d001e]
Any facts/evidence to back this up? Or are you just saying what you want to believe we're doing? I see everything you're saying, and so far I'm definitely not impressed. I acknowledge that it's possible for god to exist. I just realize that it's EXTREMELY UNLIKELY. You're probably the one with the problem about acknowleding that there is the possibility that he doesn't exist.
[quote80c77d001e="computer-guy"]And for you people that mentioned about having to give money and be sinless otherwise u go to hell is [b80c77d001e]FALSE![/b80c77d001e][/quote80c77d001e]
Wow, no shit, are you serious? We know that, we're saying that's basically what churches do. Not explicitly, but the undertone is there, with them demanding that you are to give a certain amount of your yearly income to them, tax-free or not.
[quote80c77d001e="computer-guy"]All you have do do is Beleve and your saved,You can never lose your salvation once you beleve,even if u do every possible sin and stop in your faith your still going to be saved.[/quote80c77d001e]
WHOA, really??!!! Shit, dude, I've always had this overriding feeling of wanting to MURDER AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE! You're saying once I believe, I can carry out this plan to get rid of all the riff raff of the world without fear of eternal damnation??!!!! FUCKIN' A! I'M GONNA GO MAKE SURE MY AK IS STILL IN WORKING ORDER NOW! And I'm gonna go to church, cause I have to believe first.
[quote80c77d001e="computer-guy"]And for you benladan to worship the son is wrong,
The sun is a creation by God and can't help do anything,What do you beleve in the other stars is space also? because the sun is a star like all the rest of countless stars out there.[/quote80c77d001e]
Sigh......I don't even know what to say to this, except........LOL.
And hey, DON'T TALK ABOUT MY GOD LIKE THAT OR I'LL DECLARE WAR ON YOUR RELIGION! You can't say that, god has never done anything for me! Name one physical or mental thing that god has done for me. I've never experienced him. I've never seen him. He's never sent me any messages.
The SUN (only one spelling, sir) on the other hand, I can see it (although I try not to look directly at it). I can feel it's warmth. I can breathe the delicious air that it provides by growing trees and plants and stuff. I can eat the delicious meat from the earth's animals that the sun provides for. It keeps me sane (I'm not like those crazy Sweeds that have to live without it for half a year and go crazy because of it-they're simply not my god's chosen ones). It provides a reliable timepiece; I know many people will be active when god shines his light on me. What does YOUR god do for YOU!!! HAH
Edit And like Slease said, your arguments make you look like you're in elementary school. I've been arguing religious topics online for years with smarter people than you, you might as well give up now.
Double Edit And by give up, I mean kill yourself.
Triple Edit And by kill yourself, I mean I'm just kidding, please don't kill yourself!
computer-guy
03-07-2005 12:25:32
[quote8aa9a0b643]1. Get a brain.
2. Educate yourself not only with religion and world history but also with arguing any possible point that you may have.
3. Then come back.
Kid, you're preaching 5th grade material in a college level class. God could possibly exist, of course there is a possibility.
It's interesting that you believe that only belief leads to salvation, most other baptists would argue that to be saved one must be baptised. Calvinists would argue that everyone who will be saved was preselected before the world existed and what you do on earth doesn't matter. I'd just like you to know that you are not speaking for all Christians.
And why can't Ben Laden worship the Sun, you worship your choice of god he can worship his. Sun worship is a much more ancient religion than Christianity and should be given the proper respect[/quote8aa9a0b643]
For 1. who are you calling a kid?
2.This isn't the college debate team! Nor a college class. so don't give me any of this crap about you didn't post in proper sentences,spelling,your point wasn't set right and crearly stated,so therefore you know nothing and can't be taken seriously.
3. You are infinitly wrong about sun worship being the oldest religion.
my religion is the oldest because it has been around since creation.
4.What would you know about everthing?Your bearly out of college yourself and hence have no experence,and i'm not saying I am ether so don't be putting words into my mouth. 22,that really qualifys you to be a professor!
roll
5.I don't frankly care if my posts sound and are composed at 5th grade leavel! This is a Freestuff thread,its not a college test.
6.I know plenty about religion and world history.I see know point throwing my pearls before the swine,(telling you everthing I know when you clearly don't understand.)
Collateral
03-07-2005 12:29:49
Collage class? I've never seen one of those. HAHAH College
computer-guy
03-07-2005 12:30:28
[quote28bddcf78c] Name one physical or mental thing that god has done for me. I've never experienced him. I've never seen him. He's never sent me any messages. [/quote28bddcf78c]
He provided you with a way to get to heaven,and he's not going to just do stuff for you when you don't even beleve in him.Instead you beleve in one of his creations.
thats all i'm going to say to that.
theysayjump
03-07-2005 12:39:29
well your religion hasnt been around the longest since your religion isnt Godism or Godianity.......your religion is born from the birth and death of Jesus Christ.
and he wasnt around when the world was created so neither could your religion.
it is a fact that there are religions more than 7000 years old (5000 BC) so no your religion is not the oldest.
computer-guy
03-07-2005 12:45:11
[quote7f0d698586="theysayjump"]well your religion hasnt been around the longest since your religion isnt Godism or Godianity.......your religion is born from the birth and death of Jesus Christ.
and he wasnt around when the world was created so neither could your religion.
it is a fact that there are religions more than 7000 years old (5000 BC) so no your religion is not the oldest.[/quote7f0d698586]
I'm not going to argue with you about simplistic points like this.
All i'm going to say is mine is the oldest and Jesus is God and therefore has been around for ever.So thats how mine can be the oldest.
ben laden
03-07-2005 12:46:26
Your religion has been around for AT MOST 2000 years.
GOOD
FUCKING
GAME
You are a goddamned moron. You know what I see in your posts? Someone arguing who knows many of the points he is arguing are wrong, but he blindly trudges forward, because he doesn't want to admit it. Because, really, you haven't offered any REAL arguments to the people attacking you. YOu're just saying 'oh, you don't know what you're talking about" or "oh, you don't know anything anyways" or "whatever, your point is stupid so I won't argue it anyways."
computer-guy
03-07-2005 12:52:49
[quoted4b2659455="ben laden"]Your religion has been around for AT MOST 2000 years.
GOOD
FUCKING
GAME
You are a goddamned moron. You know what I see in your posts? Someone arguing who knows many of the points he is arguing are wrong, but he blindly trudges forward, because he doesn't want to admit it. Because, really, you haven't offered any REAL arguments to the people attacking you. YOu're just saying 'oh, you don't know what you're talking about" or "oh, you don't know anything anyways" or "whatever, your point is stupid so I won't argue it anyways."[/quoted4b2659455]
Whatever! roll
I'm not going to waist my time on this topic anymore.It was a nice thought theysayjump but its just getting all of of us ticted off at each other when neither of us are going to change each others minds abot what we beleve in.
theysayjump
03-07-2005 12:54:11
i was always confused about the difference between jesus and god.
like why do some people say jesus is god, if it was god who sent jesus to earth, and jesus was the son of god?
i dont get it.
theysayjump
03-07-2005 12:55:07
i didnt start the discussion to change peoples minds i just thought it would be a good topic for discussion.
slease
03-07-2005 12:56:54
And so the debate stops with someone so set in their ideals that they won't even consider posibilities.
I never said you write like you were in 5th grade, I was referring to education level of your argument. I don't believe you have researched your religion past what you hear in church or read in the bible.
Your religion is not the oldest religion on Earth. You can believe that your god has been around since preexistence but the worship of him has not.
slease
03-07-2005 12:58:08
[quote3dcc8245d0="theysayjump"]i was always confused about the difference between jesus and god.
like why do some people say jesus is god, if it was god who sent jesus to earth, and jesus was the son of god?
i dont get it.[/quote3dcc8245d0]
Holy Trinity, I think the Holy Spirit is another deity. Christianity isn't monotheistic.
nobodyukno
03-07-2005 12:59:07
[quote5e124196bc="theysayjump"]i was always confused about the difference between jesus and god.
like why do some people say jesus is god, if it was god who sent jesus to earth, and jesus was the son of god?
i dont get it.[/quote5e124196bc]
Did you ever hear of the trinity of God the father God the son and The Holy Spirirt there all the same thing. God is Jesus but Jesus is God's son. Its confusing
theysayjump
03-07-2005 13:01:45
yeah that doesnt make sense to me.
computer-guy
03-07-2005 13:05:58
oh.... well good job!
Also (this is the last thing)
You will think i'm crazy(be serious you already do)but God is 3 in 1.He has 3 parts to him God the Father,God the Son,and God the Holy Spirit.
All 3 parts are one.I know its hard to comprehend but its true.
God the Son is Jesus who God the father sent down to die for our sins.God the father is the God head(the part of him that is in charge of everything.God the Holy Spirit is who indwells you when you beleve.(he's the one who makes you feel guilty about sinning)
All what I can say is he exists because I have prayed to him countless times and everything comes true.
Crynos
03-07-2005 13:06:23
[quote5044eb7b50="computer-guy"][quote5044eb7b50="theysayjump"]well your religion hasnt been around the longest since your religion isnt Godism or Godianity.......your religion is born from the birth and death of Jesus Christ.
and he wasnt around when the world was created so neither could your religion.
it is a fact that there are religions more than 7000 years old (5000 BC) so no your religion is not the oldest.[/quote5044eb7b50]
I'm not going to argue with you about simplistic points like this.
All i'm going to say is mine is the oldest and Jesus is God and therefore has been around for ever.So thats how mine can be the oldest.[/quote5044eb7b50]
Actually the worship of crynos (religion) is the oldest religion as it has been around since my birth which is when the world started.
/Sarcasm
ben laden
03-07-2005 13:12:49
EVERYTHING YOU PRAY FOR COMES TRUE?!
Holy crap, can you pray for me to get a bigger penis, because these 2 inches just aren't cutting it!
HOLY SHIT DID I JUST SAY THAT ONLINE??!!!
/sarcasm
/or is that what I want you think?
idrinklisterine
03-07-2005 13:15:58
I just read all four pages of this thread, and I was just wondering if anyone's ever seen that study that says the more educated someone is, the less likely they are to be religious. This thread seems to be a good illustration of that.
slease
03-07-2005 13:19:01
[quotefab51e1fef="computer-guy"]oh.... well good job!
Also (this is the last thing)
You will think i'm crazy(be serious you already do)but God is 3 in 1.He has 3 parts to him God the Father,God the Son,and God the Holy Spirit.
All 3 parts are one.I know its hard to comprehend but its true.
God the Son is Jesus who God the father sent down to die for our sins.God the father is the God head(the part of him that is in charge of everything.God the Holy Spirit is who indwells you when you beleve.(he's the one who makes you feel guilty about sinning)
All what I can say is he exists because I have prayed to him countless times and everything comes true.[/quotefab51e1fef]
Yea, it's a toss up, in theory it could be monotheistic, but the way the religion is actually practiced God and Jesus are worshipped as two seperate entities which makes Christianity polytheistic.
computer-guy
03-07-2005 13:20:06
[quotebd784868dd="ben laden"]EVERYTHING YOU PRAY FOR COMES TRUE?!
Holy crap, can you pray for me to get a bigger penis, because these 2 inches just aren't cutting it!
HOLY SHIT DID I JUST SAY THAT ONLINE??!!!
/sarcasm
/or is that what I want you think?[/quotebd784868dd]
Don't be Rediculous! roll
theysayjump
03-07-2005 13:23:28
rediculousli
ben laden
03-07-2005 13:26:27
ridiculousli
computer-guy
03-07-2005 13:30:49
[quote5476bbb131="theysayjump"]rediculousli[/quote5476bbb131]
[quote5476bbb131="ben laden"]ridiculousli[/quote5476bbb131]
Ridiculouslili,lol
theysayjump
03-07-2005 13:38:26
lol yeah my bad.
Ridiculousli
get it right computer guy roll
wink
computer-guy
03-07-2005 13:49:31
[quote4a9635a137="theysayjump"]lol yeah my bad.
Ridiculousli
get it right computer guy roll
wink[/quote4a9635a137]
yea i think i've got it now after so many posts about it,lol lol
theysayjump
03-07-2005 13:54:32
well so far, it looks like Evolution wins.
ben laden
03-07-2005 13:57:33
LOL, way to rub it in.
Ahh, just wait. Maybe some creationist will come around with an argument that will destroy SLEASE AND MY'S DOUBLE TAG TEAM OF DEATH!!!!!!
but that's unlikely
theysayjump
03-07-2005 14:04:10
never say never......give it a couple of hours or so.
altough i think the discussion has been defused somewhwat so maybe it will just be left alone from now on (
Batman
03-07-2005 14:20:15
[ucba4d21e81][bcba4d21e81]THE ULTIMATE CREATIONIST ARGUMENT[/bcba4d21e81][/ucba4d21e81]
Actually, I'm just kidding. There's no logical argument that can be said to prove this.
nicd.01
03-07-2005 14:41:58
[quotead7ad70961="Batman"][uad7ad70961][bad7ad70961]THE ULTIMATE CREATIONIST ARGUMENT[/bad7ad70961][/uad7ad70961]
[edited for space]
Actually, I'm just kidding. There's no logical argument that can be said to prove this.[/quotead7ad70961]
Burn.
ben laden
03-07-2005 14:43:24
Yeah, that was pretty funny.
Crynos
03-07-2005 15:04:58
That was nice batman D
theysayjump
03-07-2005 15:12:30
oh, someone has put it back to all square, 13-13
idrinklisterine
03-07-2005 15:16:22
Damn, that image is disturbing. I hope the service it's hosted on crashes P
theysayjump
03-07-2005 15:17:38
lol why does everyone hate it so?
Crynos
03-07-2005 15:28:31
[quotecb8b48a08e="idrinklisterine"]Damn, that image is disturbing. I hope the service it's hosted on crashes P[/quotecb8b48a08e]Photobucket has bandwidth limits doesnt it? lievil grinli
idrinklisterine
03-07-2005 15:32:29
[quotea89bb98560="Crynos"][quotea89bb98560="idrinklisterine"]Damn, that image is disturbing. I hope the service it's hosted on crashes P[/quotea89bb98560]Photobucket has bandwidth limits doesnt it? lievil grinli[/quotea89bb98560]
lirefreshrefreshrefreshli
theysayjump
03-07-2005 15:33:10
lol bitches!
Sonofshoe
03-07-2005 15:35:55
hehe, no more image for me )
In FireFox, Right click, scroll down, block from...etc etc, refresh
Phbs83
03-07-2005 15:58:54
Yeah, luckily I found out that great firefox feature )
theysayjump - it's distrubing, takes too much space, and with the amount of posting you do is literally everywhere.
One more for Evolution.
I believe in what I can see/touch/smell/hear/taste. If I believed in something I can't "feel" with my 5 senses, I would be very disappointed if I find somehow it doesn't exist and was just an idea.
theysayjump
03-07-2005 16:02:26
i think it looks even better now D
Collateral
03-07-2005 16:09:05
HAHAHAHAHA
Phbs83
03-07-2005 16:09:16
Animated gifs shouldn't be allowed for a signature ) Already blocked 2 of these on the forums ...
ben laden
03-07-2005 16:13:59
I kinda like it. I mean, it's not HOT or anything from the waist up, but it's funny and strangely hypnotic. It does take up quite a bit of space though. lol
theysayjump
03-07-2005 16:17:30
ok ill change it back (
EDIT
better?
oh and this topic certainly took a turn huh?
Phbs83
03-07-2005 16:28:10
Perfect. Thanks ) I liked that Scottish sig before ;)
RyGuy16
04-07-2005 11:10:16
I believe in creationism myself. I also think that things can "evolve" by changing with time but not so much that all life is created from nothingness. The chances are unimaginable. Also, hominids came about a long time ago and evolved into the modern human right? Well according to other articles, skeletons resembling modern humans have been found that date back before we had even evolved according to modern science. There have also been many other discoveries that disprove evolution yet no one is able to disprove the existence of God. There is even doubts about the Bible because of the existence of dinosaurs. Yet when really examined, dinosaurs are mentioned in the Bible, not directly but they are there. Creatures are described that cannot fit the discriptions of any modern day animals yet fit the characteristics of dinosaurs. These are just a few facts to support the belief in God. Sorry if I didnt state it all in a well typed paragraph. Just wanted to get some points across.
Phbs83
04-07-2005 11:17:16
Can you please mention one of the discoveries that disprove evolution?
And is this "hominids" the humanoids? If I guess right, you contradict yourself - you say that we evolved from them, yet they have been around long time before us... duh... if we evolved from them, they [ba8d89a9eaf]must[/ba8d89a9eaf] have been around long before us.
RyGuy16
04-07-2005 11:18:56
[quoteb1859aa79e="Phbs83"]Can you please mention one of the discoveries that disprove evolution?
And is this "hominids" the humanoids? If I guess right, you contradict yourself - you say that we evolved from them, yet they have been around long time before us... duh... if we evolved from them, they [bb1859aa79e]must[/bb1859aa79e] have been around long before us.[/quoteb1859aa79e]
NO....we were supposed to evolve from them BUT there were discoveries of modern human skeletons that date back to BEFORE we had supposedly evolved.
Phbs83
04-07-2005 11:20:48
Well, we can't speculate on the exact date homo sapiens evolved.
Scientists might have made a mistake the first time, and now found proof that we evolved earlier than expected
Anyway, what are the discoveries that disprove evolution?
Godrockdj
04-07-2005 11:45:16
/me will chime in later, as she just got back from a long weekend and is headed out to a BBQ )
J4320
04-07-2005 17:58:08
Yeah I'm a Christian and a Creationist believer. I've been brought up Christian and I know almost everything there is to know about Creation VS Evolution. I've been raised in a Christian school since 1st grade. I'm kind of bumping this thread. I didn't notice it and it's a good one. In my opinion, Evolution makes no sense. We couldn't happen by accident.
slease
04-07-2005 18:11:57
[quote21af198584="J4320"]Yeah I'm a Christian and a Creationist believer. I've been brought up Christian and I know almost everything there is to know about Creation VS Evolution. I've been raised in a Christian school since 1st grade. I'm kind of bumping this thread. I didn't notice it and it's a good one. In my opinion, Evolution makes no sense. We couldn't happen by accident.[/quote21af198584]
Evolution has nothing to do with us happening by accident. You are bringing in other things into the definition of evolution.
Evolution is a biological Fact in that species evolve from other species. This has been proven and scientifically documented to the point that it is considered a fact.
The theoretical part of evolution which has not been proven is the mechanism that evolution takes to change one creature to another.
So while it has been proven that we have evolved from lesser species it has not been proven how. I hope this clears some issues up and doesn't just open up another can of controversy.
J4320
04-07-2005 18:18:42
[quote84c28f563b="slease"][quote84c28f563b="J4320"]Yeah I'm a Christian and a Creationist believer. I've been brought up Christian and I know almost everything there is to know about Creation VS Evolution. I've been raised in a Christian school since 1st grade. I'm kind of bumping this thread. I didn't notice it and it's a good one. In my opinion, Evolution makes no sense. We couldn't happen by accident.[/quote84c28f563b]
Evolution has nothing to do with us happening by accident. You are bringing in other things into the definition of evolution.
Evolution is a biological Fact in that species evolve from other species. This has been proven and scientifically documented to the point that it is considered a fact.
The theoretical part of evolution which has not been proven is the mechanism that evolution takes to change one creature to another.
So while it has been proven that we have evolved from lesser species it has not been proven how. I hope this clears some issues up and doesn't just open up another can of controversy.[/quote84c28f563b]
I wasn't talking about the term evolution, I'm talking about the theory. When I was referring to "accident" I was talking about how it all began according to evolution. The "Big Bang." And yes that is just one of the many theories of Evolution, it is one of the main theories in Evolution on how life began.
Most Evolutionists believe that life happened from gasses in space being mixed and BANG! Simple lifeforms began and kept evolving. Many refer to that as the "accident."
And what are the chances of a [b84c28f563b]LIFE[/b84c28f563b] being formed from gasses? Life has never been artificially made before, ever.
slease
04-07-2005 18:25:13
[quote59500a3df2="J4320"][quote59500a3df2="slease"][quote59500a3df2="J4320"]Yeah I'm a Christian and a Creationist believer. I've been brought up Christian and I know almost everything there is to know about Creation VS Evolution. I've been raised in a Christian school since 1st grade. I'm kind of bumping this thread. I didn't notice it and it's a good one. In my opinion, Evolution makes no sense. We couldn't happen by accident.[/quote59500a3df2]
Evolution has nothing to do with us happening by accident. You are bringing in other things into the definition of evolution.
Evolution is a biological Fact in that species evolve from other species. This has been proven and scientifically documented to the point that it is considered a fact.
The theoretical part of evolution which has not been proven is the mechanism that evolution takes to change one creature to another.
So while it has been proven that we have evolved from lesser species it has not been proven how. I hope this clears some issues up and doesn't just open up another can of controversy.[/quote59500a3df2]
I wasn't talking about the term evolution, I'm talking about the theory. When I was referring to "accident" I was talking about how it all began according to evolution. The "Big Bang." And yes that is just one of the many theories of Evolution, it is one of the main theories in Evolution on how life began.
Most Evolutionists believe that life happened from gasses in space being mixed and BANG! Simple lifeforms began and kept evolving. Many refer to that as the "accident."
And what are the chances of a [b59500a3df2]LIFE[/b59500a3df2] being formed from gasses? Life has never been artificially made before, ever.[/quote59500a3df2]
No, you're not talking about the theory of evolution. You are speaking of another theory that is prominent AMONG evolutionists. The theory of evolution is only Darwins theory that all current species evolved from previous species. Please don't confuse what evolutionists believe with the actual theory of evolution.
And that accident had billions of years to occur, it is a viable theory. I find it more convincing than the ones where an omnipotent being created life.
J4320
04-07-2005 18:36:42
[quote2d3eb946a4="slease"][quote2d3eb946a4="J4320"][quote2d3eb946a4="slease"][quote2d3eb946a4="J4320"]Yeah I'm a Christian and a Creationist believer. I've been brought up Christian and I know almost everything there is to know about Creation VS Evolution. I've been raised in a Christian school since 1st grade. I'm kind of bumping this thread. I didn't notice it and it's a good one. In my opinion, Evolution makes no sense. We couldn't happen by accident.[/quote2d3eb946a4]
Evolution has nothing to do with us happening by accident. You are bringing in other things into the definition of evolution.
Evolution is a biological Fact in that species evolve from other species. This has been proven and scientifically documented to the point that it is considered a fact.
The theoretical part of evolution which has not been proven is the mechanism that evolution takes to change one creature to another.
So while it has been proven that we have evolved from lesser species it has not been proven how. I hope this clears some issues up and doesn't just open up another can of controversy.[/quote2d3eb946a4]
I wasn't talking about the term evolution, I'm talking about the theory. When I was referring to "accident" I was talking about how it all began according to evolution. The "Big Bang." And yes that is just one of the many theories of Evolution, it is one of the main theories in Evolution on how life began.
Most Evolutionists believe that life happened from gasses in space being mixed and BANG! Simple lifeforms began and kept evolving. Many refer to that as the "accident."
And what are the chances of a [b2d3eb946a4]LIFE[/b2d3eb946a4] being formed from gasses? Life has never been artificially made before, ever.[/quote2d3eb946a4]
[b2d3eb946a4]No, you're not talking about the theory of evolution. You are speaking of another theory that is prominent AMONG evolutionists.[/b2d3eb946a4] The theory of evolution is only Darwins theory that all current species evolved from previous species. Please don't confuse what evolutionists believe with the actual theory of evolution.
And that accident had billions of years to occur, it is a viable theory. I find it more convincing than the ones where an omnipotent being created life.[/quote2d3eb946a4]
Yes I know, that's why I stated this-
[quote2d3eb946a4]And yes that is just one of the many theories of Evolution[/quote2d3eb946a4]
[quote2d3eb946a4]The theory of evolution is only Darwins theory that all current species evolved from previous species. Please don't confuse what evolutionists believe with the actual theory of evolution.[/quote2d3eb946a4]
Yeah I know that. I'm not mixing anything up as I said before that the big bang was just a theory inside of the whole theory of evolution.
slease
04-07-2005 18:45:13
I see what you were saying then, you were just calling 2 different things the theory of evolution and it confused me.
J4320
04-07-2005 18:49:01
[quotee81276e6b5="slease"]I see what you were saying then, you were just calling 2 different things the theory of evolution and it confused me.[/quotee81276e6b5]
Yeah I should have clarified this part-
[quotee81276e6b5]And yes that is just one of the many theories of Evolution[/quotee81276e6b5]
I should have made it more clear that I was saying that the the "Big Bang" theory was a theory inside of the theory of Evolution as Evolution holds many theories inside of itself.
computer-guy
04-07-2005 19:00:37
[quoted2f683aaa6="slease"]And that accident had billions of years to occur, it is a viable theory. I find it more convincing than the ones where an omnipotent being created life.[/quoted2f683aaa6]
Actualy the universe has only been around in the thounsands of years,not billions.
When God created everything he made it so it would apear older,and Christian scientists beleve God made the world within the thousands of years.
So it hasn't had that much time like you state.
theysayjump
04-07-2005 19:02:53
ok, so what are you trying to say J4320?
wink
J4320
04-07-2005 19:12:27
[quote609d54b10e="theysayjump"]ok, so what are you trying to say J4320?
wink[/quote609d54b10e]
Lol, well what I was trying to say at first was that life is too complicated to happen by accident(as I talked about the "Big Bang" theory). That's what I was saying. I mean life itself is a HUGE feat. How did it happen? God made life. But some wonder- when was God created? Well Christians believe that he was never started, but he was always here. He was never born. He is never-ending. It's hard to comprehend for a man's small mind. That's why you need faith. And if you have any questions about Evolution VS Creation just ask me and I'll try to answer you as best as I can.
Collateral
04-07-2005 19:17:09
[quote40f7abbc1b="computer-guy"][quote40f7abbc1b="slease"]And that accident had billions of years to occur, it is a viable theory. I find it more convincing than the ones where an omnipotent being created life.[/quote40f7abbc1b]
Actualy the universe has only been around in the thounsands of years,not billions.
When God created everything he made it so it would apear older,and Christian scientists beleve God made the world within the thousands of years.
So it hasn't had that much time like you state.[/quote40f7abbc1b]
God made the world within thousands of years? Doubtful. How were dinosaurs alive millions of years ago if the world is only thousands of years old?
idrinklisterine
04-07-2005 19:19:04
J4320, do you agree with computer-guy's explanation of how old the universe is? I was wondering because I'd like a more in depth explanation of this idea, since it's always been hard for me to believe that people can accept something like this (I'm serious here, not trying to pick a fight or anything).
Crynos
04-07-2005 19:23:51
[quote048c068955="computer-guy"][quote048c068955="slease"]And that accident had billions of years to occur, it is a viable theory. I find it more convincing than the ones where an omnipotent being created life.[/quote048c068955]
Actualy the universe has only been around in the thounsands of years,not billions.
When God created everything he made it so it would apear older,and Christian scientists beleve God made the world within the thousands of years.
So it hasn't had that much time like you state.[/quote048c068955]
What? The universe has been around for more than thousands of years...
J4320
04-07-2005 19:31:15
[quotedda30bd1fe="Collateral"][quotedda30bd1fe="computer-guy"][quotedda30bd1fe="slease"]And that accident had billions of years to occur, it is a viable theory. I find it more convincing than the ones where an omnipotent being created life.[/quotedda30bd1fe]
Actualy the universe has only been around in the thounsands of years,not billions.
When God created everything he made it so it would apear older,and Christian scientists beleve God made the world within the thousands of years.
So it hasn't had that much time like you state.[/quotedda30bd1fe]
God made the world within thousands of years? Doubtful. How were dinosaurs alive millions of years ago if the world is only thousands of years old?[/quotedda30bd1fe]
Lol, God made the world in 6 days and slept on the 7th. He slept on the seventh day to show man to rest on the 7th-not because he was tired. And yes, the world isn't millions of years old. It's thousands. Dinosaurs were made in the beginning of earth's creation. When it came time for the flood though, Noah(Noah's Ark) could only take two of each species on the ark(male and female). But dinosaurs were VERY big for the ark so they took them in the ark as eggs or babies. After the flood when the animals were set free, many dinos didn't survive. And the ones that did were hunted by man such as dragon slayers in the medieval times.
And idrinklisterine, scientists have done carbon dating on fossils and rocks but noone knows exactly how old the earth is. Through scientific research though it shows that earth is only thousands-not millions- of years old. Evolutionists don't want to admit this because it doesn't go along with there theory of Evolution as they say it took millions of years to evolve.
Evolution has been proven faulty in many ways, yet people are trying to take God out of the world in every way, including science. So public schools stick with teaching Evolution. Have you've ever seen those diagrams of skeletal bones of a creature evolving a bit by a time? Well those were made up and aren't even true. They haven't even found this "missing link" and they still put it in textbooks. Nothing has yet been proven to show the evolving of a creature in skeletal bones.
idrinklisterine
04-07-2005 19:34:45
Wait, what research shows that the earth is only thousands of years old? Also, according to your explanation, shouldn't there be fossils of dinosaurs that are only thousands of years old? Haven't dinosaur fossils already been found to be millions of years old?
Crynos
04-07-2005 19:45:38
[quote57c2fc786f="idrinklisterine"]Wait, what research shows that the earth is only thousands of years old? Also, according to your explanation, shouldn't there be fossils of dinosaurs that are only thousands of years old? Haven't dinosaur fossils already been found to be millions of years old?[/quote57c2fc786f]
ditto
J4320
04-07-2005 19:46:07
[quote32e30fb53a="idrinklisterine"]Wait, what research shows that the earth is only thousands of years old? Also, according to your explanation, shouldn't there be fossils of dinosaurs that are only thousands of years old? Haven't dinosaur fossils already been found to be millions of years old?[/quote32e30fb53a]
Noone knows exactly how old dino bones are. It's all estimations. But there are scientific methods that can calculate the approximate age a little bit. They support thousands-not millions- of years old. Dino bones are dino bones. You don't look at them and say, "This one is a thousand years old and this on is a million years old!" It is extremely hard to calculate the age of them.
And when I was talking about faked diagrams of evolution and all, here is an example. There was a man named Haekel in the 1800's. He was an evolutionist and made up something called embryonic recapitulation. It basically says that the human fetus goes through various stages of its evolutionary history as it develops. So Haekel had some embryos drawn showing the evolution of them. But later it was discovered that these evolutioned embryos were made up. And they are still being used in textbooks today in public schools. Why keep it if it was disproved? Now I'm gonna go watch some fireworks. I'll be back laterz. D And here are some of Haekel's drawings just to show you-
[img32e30fb53a]http/" alt=""/img263.imageshack.us/img="263/5205/haeckel9ik.th.jpg[" alt=""/img32e30fb53a][=http//img="263.imageshack.us/my.php?image=haeckel9ik.jpg][img32e30fb53a]http/" alt=""/img263.imageshack.us/img="263/5205/haeckel9ik.th.jpg[" alt=""/img32e30fb53a]
slease
04-07-2005 19:52:39
First of all, dinosaur bones don't exist anymore. All we have are dinosaur bone fossils.
These theories are so absurd JR... Do you have any of this proof you have been talking about? Because these fossils have been carbon dated and carbon dated back millions of years. Carbon dating doesn't even work on fossils as young as you say.
idrinklisterine
04-07-2005 19:56:44
http//www.worldbydesign.org/research/c14dating/datingdinosaurs.html
slease, what do you think about the claims on that site? They basically say the opposite of what you just said, and argue that radiocarbon dating only works on stuff thats less than 50,000 years old. Is that BS? Or, are you both right, and radiocarbon dating and carbon dating are two totally different things?
slease
04-07-2005 19:58:31
oops, your right, i didn't mean carbon dating, that does only work up to 50,000 years old. I'll find the name for the radioactive dating technique i meant.
J4320
04-07-2005 20:01:48
[quotec9f7a47244="slease"]First of all, dinosaur bones don't exist anymore. All we have are dinosaur bone fossils.
These theories are so absurd JR... Do you have any of this proof you have been talking about? Because these fossils have been carbon dated and carbon dated back millions of years. Carbon dating doesn't even work on fossils as young as you say.[/quotec9f7a47244]
I'm just repeating off of the years and years I've been taught. If you want evidence, do a google search. I hate starting arguments and I hate having to back up every single thing I say. I'm just repeating what was taught to me to help you better understand evolution vs creation. There are SO many things that prove evolution wrong. Ask me something that can prove creation wrong and I'll see what I can throw back at you. And JR... I like that.... D
J4320
04-07-2005 20:02:33
[quote3520ab496f="slease"]oops, your right, i didn't mean carbon dating, that does only work up to 50,000 years old. I'll find the name for the radioactive dating technique i meant.[/quote3520ab496f]
Lol yeah. You kind of had it backwords there. No problem though.
Crynos
04-07-2005 20:03:24
[quoted81c6d563d="J4320"][quoted81c6d563d="slease"]First of all, dinosaur bones don't exist anymore. All we have are dinosaur bone fossils.
These theories are so absurd JR... Do you have any of this proof you have been talking about? Because these fossils have been carbon dated and carbon dated back millions of years. Carbon dating doesn't even work on fossils as young as you say.[/quoted81c6d563d]
Yeah, carbon dating is a strange thing. I'm not too sure how it works. And it's one of the things I was taught about how people measure how old things are. I'm just repeating off of the years and years I've been taught. If you want evidence, do a google search. I hate starting arguments and I hate having to back up every single thing I say. I'm just repeating what was taught to me to help you better understand evolution vs creation. There are SO many things that prove evolution wrong. Ask me something that can prove creation wrong and I'll see what I can throw back at you. And JR... I like that.... D[/quoted81c6d563d]
Maybe you should your own research instead of believing everything youre taught.
slease
04-07-2005 20:06:40
lol, J4 i mean, finger slipped.
Carbon dating works by measuring the age of the Carbon-14 in a fossil/bone/plant matter. But Carbon-14 completely dissapates between 50,000-100,000 years so that doesn't work for very old things.
So to date dinosaur fossils Potassium-Argon dating is used which can be used in the same way to measure volcanic rock age. So when a dinosaur was encased in lava, which many are found that way, you can date the age of the rocks. Thats how they get the relative ages of different species of dinosaurs.
idrinklisterine
04-07-2005 20:35:40
So that website is very misleading. They're discrediting evolution by saying that carbon dating can't be used to measure the age of dinosaur fossils, but that's not even the method scientists use to date fossils that old.
computer-guy
04-07-2005 20:35:55
[quote57dd72c866="Collateral"]God made the world within thousands of years? Doubtful. How were dinosaurs alive millions of years ago if the world is only thousands of years old?[/quote57dd72c866]
No.no.no...I wrote the wrong words.What i was implying was that the earth isn't as old as u say(millions and billions of years). Mainly it is esimated to be within the thousands of years.
Also I didn't mean God had created it in that time,I meant what J4320 said but didn't get it across right.He can probably exsplain thing better than I to u guy's. Sorry for the miss quote.
Here's whats right.
[quote57dd72c866="J4320"]Lol, God made the world in 6 days and slept on the 7th. He slept on the seventh day to show man to rest on the 7th-not because he was tired. And yes, the world isn't millions of years old. It's thousands. Dinosaurs were made in the beginning of earth's creation. When it came time for the flood though, Noah(Noah's Ark) could only take two of each species on the ark(male and female). But dinosaurs were VERY big for the ark so they took them in the ark as eggs or babies. After the flood when the animals were set free, many dinos didn't survive. And the ones that did were hunted by man such as dragon slayers in the medieval times.
And idrinklisterine, scientists have done carbon dating on fossils and rocks but noone knows exactly how old the earth is. Through scientific research though it shows that earth is only thousands-not millions- of years old. Evolutionists don't want to admit this because it doesn't go along with there theory of Evolution as they say it took millions of years to evolve.
Evolution has been proven faulty in many ways, yet people are trying to take God out of the world in every way, including science. So public schools stick with teaching Evolution. Have you've ever seen those diagrams of skeletal bones of a creature evolving a bit by a time? Well those were made up and aren't even true. They haven't even found this "missing link" and they still put it in textbooks. Nothing has yet been proven to show the evolving of a creature in skeletal bone[/quote57dd72c866]
Crynos
04-07-2005 20:39:36
It appears the BBC (who i would deem to be a credible source) disagree with you. http//www.bbc.co.uk/dinosaurs/chronology/index.shtml
nicd.01
04-07-2005 20:45:26
Maybe you can post us some data that wasn't performed by a religious orginization but by a credible, unbiased source. It seriously blows my mind that people can so blindly accept something just because it's published on a .orgurl==http://=http:///url website. Here's another question that wasn't answered earlier. What do creationists think about other religions? Are all of their beliefs wrong just because they aren't congruent with your own? Accept it or not, there were religions before christianity that had completely different ideas and stories. Were they all wrong just because you don't believe them? As for doing a google search, I did one and all I found were sites for various religious orginizations. I'm sorry but they are not credible sources. It's the same thing as years of tobacco company studies proving their products don't cause cancer.
computer-guy
04-07-2005 21:10:02
[quote30c49a8bd6="nicd.01"]Maybe you can post us some data that wasn't performed by a religious orginization but by a credible, unbiased source. It seriously blows my mind that people can so blindly accept something just because it's published on a .orgurl==http://=http:///url website. Here's another question that wasn't answered earlier. What do creationists think about other religions? Are all of their beliefs wrong just because they aren't congruent with your own? Accept it or not, there were religions before christianity that had completely different ideas and stories. Were they all wrong just because you don't believe them? As for doing a google search, I did one and all I found were sites for various religious orginizations. I'm sorry but they are not credible sources. It's the same thing as years of tobacco company studies proving their products don't cause cancer.[/quote30c49a8bd6]
I'll see if i can get what u ask.
theysayjump
04-07-2005 21:11:08
[quote483268eb63="Crynos"]It appears the BBC (who i would deem to be a credible source) disagree with you. http//www.bbc.co.uk/dinosaurs/chronology/index.shtml[/quote483268eb63]
you beat me to Crynos, i was just about to post the same thing D
J4320
04-07-2005 21:29:45
[quote3906799b25="nicd.01"]Maybe you can post us some data that wasn't performed by a religious orginization but by a credible, unbiased source. It seriously blows my mind that people can so blindly accept something just because it's published on a .orgurl==http://=http:///url website. Here's another question that wasn't answered earlier. What do creationists think about other religions? Are all of their beliefs wrong just because they aren't congruent with your own? Accept it or not, there were religions before christianity that had completely different ideas and stories. Were they all wrong just because you don't believe them? As for doing a google search, I did one and all I found were sites for various religious orginizations. I'm sorry but they are not credible sources. [b3906799b25]It's the same thing as years of tobacco company studies proving their products don't cause cancer.[/b3906799b25][/quote3906799b25]
Pfff.... Lol... You guys can believe what you want. Many people who have studied this BECAME a Christian because of this. You can't blindly talk about this if you DON'T know the facts. Science itself [b3906799b25]PROVES[/b3906799b25] evolution wrong. But I guess we can see in the afterlife. I just can't seem to see how such a perfect place happened without a greater being behind it. Evolution is a lie. And the world is following it because-dare I say this- the world doesn't want to follow a code. They don't want to follow rules. They don't want to live up to the expectations of God, they'd rather live in their own little world without him. You cannot deny the spiritual presence in this world. If you deny it, you are a fool.
[quote3906799b25]Maybe you can post us some data that wasn't performed by a religious orginization but by a credible, unbiased source.[/quote3906799b25]
Who is a Creationist and not a Christian? All of these sources would be from Christians, yes. But [b3906799b25]MANY[/b3906799b25] of these Christians were Evolutionists but were turned to Creationism after deep study.
[quote3906799b25]What do creationists think about other religions? Are all of their beliefs wrong just because they aren't congruent with your own? [/quote3906799b25]
And what do we Creationists think about other religions? You mean by the way we believe earth came to be? Well, a lot of cultures support things that were mentioned in the Bible such as a flood and other things. [u3906799b25]And there was a flood.[/u3906799b25] And if their beliefs are different then ours in the way earth was created we don't accuse, we understand why they think that and we show them the truth. Christians are stereotyped, we aren't gonna damn all of you to hell. I just want to know- Who here believes in Evolution? And tell me why you do and back it up with evidence.
And Crynos, please.... You are basing your entire belief of how earth came to be because the BBC says so? If they supported Christian views, they wouldn't be as popular so they support Evolution. Mostly every atheist supports Evolution. And every normal Christian supports creationism. Creationism takes faith to believe that a God made this, yet it is also backed up by science.
Crynos
04-07-2005 21:32:52
No, im giving you a valid non-biased source stating the earth is millions of years old, and you still havent given me a valid source to disprove that. Until you actually back up what youre talking about your opinion carries no weight, its all well and good to say all that stuff youre saying, but can you prove any of it? Doubtful
EDIT You said "Christians are stereotyped, we aren't gonna damn all of you to hell." Does that mean all the christians outside the fireworks show i went to tonight telling me to repent or i would go to hell were just jokin with me?
Collateral
04-07-2005 21:36:03
The deal is, Earth is millions of years old. End of argument. D
slease
04-07-2005 21:38:42
J4320... you're confusing me with what you are calling Evolution again. I thought we had come to agreement that Evolution is the process where one species evolves to become another species... is that what you want proven?
J4320
04-07-2005 21:41:53
[quote381f01d583="Crynos"]No, im giving you a valid non-biased source stating the earth is millions of years old, and you still havent given me a valid source to disprove that. Until you actually back up what youre talking about your opinion carries no weight, its all well and good to say all that stuff youre saying, but can you prove any of it? Doubtful[/quote381f01d583]
It's hard to fight an uphill battle. It totally depends on what you would call a trustable site. There are tons of sites supporting that the earth is old, and there are tons of sites that support earth being young. If you want I'll look and I'll try to find the most non-biased one.
So far noone has done or said much of anything as to how life began without God. Does someone want to explain to me how earth started according to them?
J4320
04-07-2005 21:44:17
[quotee525a69a8f="slease"]J4320... you're confusing me with what you are calling Evolution again. I thought we had come to agreement that Evolution is the process where one species evolves to become another species... is that what you want proven?[/quotee525a69a8f]
Ok, when I mention Evolution, I'm talking about the whole theory and the most popular theories amongst Evolution. I'm talking about Darwin's Theory. And by the way, Darwin later admitted that his theory COULDN'T be true. Darwin's Theory makes NO sense. Natural selection doesn't work for many animals that we have today.
slease
04-07-2005 21:46:28
Source please, which animals? Every animal I can think of it works for, not just animals either, every life form.
Crynos
04-07-2005 21:46:47
[quote4513cc6f91="J4320"][quote4513cc6f91="Crynos"]No, im giving you a valid non-biased source stating the earth is millions of years old, and you still havent given me a valid source to disprove that. Until you actually back up what youre talking about your opinion carries no weight, its all well and good to say all that stuff youre saying, but can you prove any of it? Doubtful[/quote4513cc6f91]
It's hard to fight an uphill battle. It totally depends on what you would call a trustable site. There are tons of sites supporting that the earth is old, and there are tons of sites that support earth being young. If you want I'll look and I'll try to find the most non-biased one.
So far noone has done or said much of anything as to how life began without God. Does someone want to explain to me how earth started according to them?[/quote4513cc6f91]How about since you said science disproves evolution, find me a valid site that shows this, shouldnt be hard if its legit scientific studies.
J4320
04-07-2005 21:58:10
[quoteaed081409a="slease"]Source please, which animals? Every animal I can think of it works for, not just animals either, every life form.[/quoteaed081409a]
Ok, I've read things that were examples of animals that couldn't go through natural selection.
[quoteaed081409a]The Bombardier beetle is 1/2” long, but it has a very mighty weapon. When an enemy is closing in behind him, and just about ready to eat him, an explosion occurs right in the face of the enemy with a very bad smelling gas that shoots out from two tail tubes, the temperature of boiling water. How did he do that? He was studied by two German chemists who discovered that it has 2 chemicals in it’s body, 1) hydrogen peroxide, and 2) hydroquinone. When mixed together you get an explosion. Now how can he carry these chemicals around in him without exploding. He carries a 3rd chemical which is called an inhibitor. The 2 chemicals are mixed with the inhibitor and stored in 2 chambers in it’s body until needed. Then when an enemy approaches, the little beetle squirts the two liquids together and adds a 4th chemical...... and “anti” inhibitor. Then the resulting action is BOOM!!! A hot irritating foul smelling gas is blown right into the face of the predator. Now the fact that he is able to do that is in itself a marvel, but even more interesting, is how he could have evolved that feat. Imagine billions of years ago this little beetle evolves from a...... whatever and has contained in his little body all of these chemicals. Now comes along someone who wants him for lunch. Now keep in mind, he’s the first of his kind to have evolved with this gift. Now he has to figure out just how much hydrogen peroxide and hydroquinone to mix with the inhibitor, and how much of everything to mix with the anti-inhibitor, and at what moment to do so. He has to also keep in mind that if he doesn’t get it exactly right the first time......BOOM! There goes the family tree, along with any future descendants. No, he HAD to be created that way.[/quoteaed081409a]
Here's a site about natural selection-
http//www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/09nsel01.htm
And here's one that I can think of off of the top of my head. You see these reptiles growing feathers and turning into birds. Ok, so when it is half way evolved and it can't fly yet and it's half devoloped wings get in the way how is it gonna avoid predators? It's gonna be easy prey and it's gonna become endangered and extinct.
I'll try to think of more.
J4320
04-07-2005 21:59:30
Here's a thing on DNA and evolution.
http//watkins.gospelcom.net/evolutionprint.htm
And another thing, since when did things get BETTER? A simple organism getting better makes no sense. Why would something get more sophisticated ? Evolution defies the law of entropy, things don't get better, they wear down and get less organized.
Crynos
04-07-2005 22:01:32
Ummm, "brought to you by Creation Science Facts."
Edit to your first link, looking at the other
Edit2 Both those sites are run by christian orginizations...thats like me going to athiest.com (if there is such a thing) and posting facts from there
J4320
04-07-2005 22:05:23
[quote0e0ce9a991="Crynos"]Ummm, "brought to you by Creation Science Facts."
Edit to your first link, looking at the other[/quote0e0ce9a991]
Why can't you just read them? You completely ignore them because they are Christian.
Crynos
04-07-2005 22:08:22
[quote776fd50038="J4320"][quote776fd50038="Crynos"]Ummm, "brought to you by Creation Science Facts."
Edit to your first link, looking at the other[/quote776fd50038]
Why can't you just read them? You completely ignore them because they are Christian.[/quote776fd50038] Why is it so hard to find a non-christian source?
J4320
04-07-2005 22:16:27
[quotecea820ba79="Crynos"][quotecea820ba79="J4320"][quotecea820ba79="Crynos"]Ummm, "brought to you by Creation Science Facts."
Edit to your first link, looking at the other[/quotecea820ba79]
Why can't you just read them? You completely ignore them because they are Christian.[/quotecea820ba79] Why is it so hard to find a non-christian source?[/quotecea820ba79]
Because if you aren't a Christian you probably won't believe in Creationism. Duh. To believe in Creationism you have to believe if there is a God. Why would a non-Christian want to believe that a God made this world if they don't even believe in God in the first place? Your question is like asking me to find you a Christian who believes in Evolution. liEDITliThat wouldn't be a full Christian because he is saying that God didn't even really take a part in earth's beggining.
There is more proof that supports Creationism but it is not nearly as popular as evolution. Why don't one of you go and find a site that can show the missing link? Or how about you tell me how life comes from non-existing life.
slease
04-07-2005 22:27:18
[quote8b7b9289db]The Bombardier beetle is 1/2” long, but it has a very mighty weapon. When an enemy is closing in behind him, and just about ready to eat him, an explosion occurs right in the face of the enemy with a very bad smelling gas that shoots out from two tail tubes, the temperature of boiling water. How did he do that? He was studied by two German chemists who discovered that it has 2 chemicals in it’s body, 1) hydrogen peroxide, and 2) hydroquinone. When mixed together you get an explosion. Now how can he carry these chemicals around in him without exploding. He carries a 3rd chemical which is called an inhibitor. The 2 chemicals are mixed with the inhibitor and stored in 2 chambers in it’s body until needed. Then when an enemy approaches, the little beetle squirts the two liquids together and adds a 4th chemical...... and “anti” inhibitor. Then the resulting action is BOOM!!! A hot irritating foul smelling gas is blown right into the face of the predator. Now the fact that he is able to do that is in itself a marvel, but even more interesting, is how he could have evolved that feat. Imagine billions of years ago this little beetle evolves from a...... whatever and has contained in his little body all of these chemicals. Now comes along someone who wants him for lunch. Now keep in mind, he’s the first of his kind to have evolved with this gift. Now he has to figure out just how much hydrogen peroxide and hydroquinone to mix with the inhibitor, and how much of everything to mix with the anti-inhibitor, and at what moment to do so. He has to also keep in mind that if he doesn’t get it exactly right the first time......BOOM! There goes the family tree, along with any future descendants. No, he HAD to be created that way.[/quote8b7b9289db]
Thats a misrepresentation of natural selection. You're saying that the beetle needs to conciously know the perfect combination of liquids to perform correctly so he couldn't have evolved from a beetle that didn't have that defense mechanism? Thats not true at all. Do you conciously digest your food? Do you conciously ejaculate on orgasm? come on... These processes are built in through mutation.
Crynos
04-07-2005 22:31:35
[quote0d1ef1c114="J4320"][quote0d1ef1c114="Crynos"][quote0d1ef1c114="J4320"][quote0d1ef1c114="Crynos"]Ummm, "brought to you by Creation Science Facts."
Edit to your first link, looking at the other[/quote0d1ef1c114]
Why can't you just read them? You completely ignore them because they are Christian.[/quote0d1ef1c114] Why is it so hard to find a non-christian source?[/quote0d1ef1c114]
Because if you aren't a Christian you probably won't believe in Creationism. Duh. To believe in Creationism you have to believe if there is a God. Why would a non-Christian want to believe that a God made this world if they don't even believe in God in the first place? Your question is like asking me to find you a Christian who believes in Evolution. liEDITliThat wouldn't be a full Christian because he is saying that God didn't even really take a part in earth's beggining.
There is more proof that supports Creationism but it is not nearly as popular as evolution. Why don't one of you go and find a site that can show the missing link? Or how about you tell me how life comes from non-existing life.[/quote0d1ef1c114]
Thats all well and true except for the fact that you said that science proves evolution is impossible, which would lead me to believe there were bonified studies that showed this, which apparently there are not.
J4320
04-07-2005 22:33:20
[quote1ed5c546ce="slease"][quote1ed5c546ce]The Bombardier beetle is 1/2” long, but it has a very mighty weapon. When an enemy is closing in behind him, and just about ready to eat him, an explosion occurs right in the face of the enemy with a very bad smelling gas that shoots out from two tail tubes, the temperature of boiling water. How did he do that? He was studied by two German chemists who discovered that it has 2 chemicals in it’s body, 1) hydrogen peroxide, and 2) hydroquinone. When mixed together you get an explosion. Now how can he carry these chemicals around in him without exploding. He carries a 3rd chemical which is called an inhibitor. The 2 chemicals are mixed with the inhibitor and stored in 2 chambers in it’s body until needed. Then when an enemy approaches, the little beetle squirts the two liquids together and adds a 4th chemical...... and “anti” inhibitor. Then the resulting action is BOOM!!! A hot irritating foul smelling gas is blown right into the face of the predator. Now the fact that he is able to do that is in itself a marvel, but even more interesting, is how he could have evolved that feat. Imagine billions of years ago this little beetle evolves from a...... whatever and has contained in his little body all of these chemicals. Now comes along someone who wants him for lunch. Now keep in mind, he’s the first of his kind to have evolved with this gift. Now he has to figure out just how much hydrogen peroxide and hydroquinone to mix with the inhibitor, and how much of everything to mix with the anti-inhibitor, and at what moment to do so. He has to also keep in mind that if he doesn’t get it exactly right the first time......BOOM! There goes the family tree, along with any future descendants. No, he HAD to be created that way.[/quote1ed5c546ce]
Thats a misrepresentation of natural selection. You're saying that the beetle needs to conciously know the perfect combination of liquids to perform correctly so he couldn't have evolved from a beetle that didn't have that defense mechanism? Thats not true at all. Do you conciously digest your food? Do you conciously ejaculate on orgasm? come on... These processes are built in through mutation.[/quote1ed5c546ce]
I didn't write this as I quoted it. They portray it a little poorly but they have a point. If those liquids are mixed they explode. The odds of the beetle evolving through natural selection and not getting the chemicals mixed are very slim. Why do I have to be the one who tries to show the proof. Why don't any of you go and tell me that there is a proven missing link between man and monkey. Or why don't we see any fossils of animals that are half way through evolving? We don't, they are created.
J4320
04-07-2005 22:34:49
[quote9acd103f6e="Crynos"][quote9acd103f6e="J4320"][quote9acd103f6e="Crynos"][quote9acd103f6e="J4320"][quote9acd103f6e="Crynos"]Ummm, "brought to you by Creation Science Facts."
Edit to your first link, looking at the other[/quote9acd103f6e]
Why can't you just read them? You completely ignore them because they are Christian.[/quote9acd103f6e] Why is it so hard to find a non-christian source?[/quote9acd103f6e]
Because if you aren't a Christian you probably won't believe in Creationism. Duh. To believe in Creationism you have to believe if there is a God. Why would a non-Christian want to believe that a God made this world if they don't even believe in God in the first place? Your question is like asking me to find you a Christian who believes in Evolution. liEDITliThat wouldn't be a full Christian because he is saying that God didn't even really take a part in earth's beggining.
There is more proof that supports Creationism but it is not nearly as popular as evolution. Why don't one of you go and find a site that can show the missing link? Or how about you tell me how life comes from non-existing life.[/quote9acd103f6e]
Thats all well and true except for the fact that you said that science proves evolution is impossible, which would lead me to believe there were bonified studies that showed this, which apparently there are not.[/quote9acd103f6e]
Yes there are. If you would just open your eyes and not shut out a site just because it's Christian you would see.
J4320
04-07-2005 22:37:35
[quote2ce0ca4fe9="slease"][quote2ce0ca4fe9="computer-guy"]yes i mean the Bible!
they've also found that the flood was true and noahs ark.
i see no proof of evolution!
i could go on and on......[/quote2ce0ca4fe9]
[b2ce0ca4fe9]The new testament was written by the Catholic Church[/b2ce0ca4fe9], if there is a god, it is far from his word. They have discovered evidence of a recurring flood in Mesopotamia, the bible is not the only document that writes of this flood. That part is history.[/quote2ce0ca4fe9]
No it wasn't. I was just reading through this thread. And sorry about the triple post. oops
Crynos
04-07-2005 22:40:32
[quote4a7b1a9e5a="J4320"][quote4a7b1a9e5a="slease"][quote4a7b1a9e5a="computer-guy"]yes i mean the Bible!
they've also found that the flood was true and noahs ark.
i see no proof of evolution!
i could go on and on......[/quote4a7b1a9e5a]
[b4a7b1a9e5a]The new testament was written by the Catholic Church[/b4a7b1a9e5a], if there is a god, it is far from his word. They have discovered evidence of a recurring flood in Mesopotamia, the bible is not the only document that writes of this flood. That part is history.[/quote4a7b1a9e5a]
No it wasn't. I was just reading through this thread. And sorry about the triple post. oops[/quote4a7b1a9e5a]
"Always within the same species. All the offspring produced in the plant and animal kingdom remain in the same species. The production of new creatures never occurs." What about cross pollinating fruits to create new types of fruits that have characteristics of both?
Edit Reading deeper and i remember why i dont read christian sources, because they twist everything and basically make things up, example
"Yet, how can it be called "selection"—when nothing was selected! And, surely, it cannot be considered "natural" since cross-species transitions never occur."
theysayjump
04-07-2005 22:40:33
[quote55096fde88="J4320"]Or why don't we see any fossils of animals that are half way through evolving? We don't, they are created.[/quote55096fde88]
how do you determine if an animal is i the middle of evolving......surely if we have evolved from Apes, then we are still evolving ourselves, no?
Crynos
04-07-2005 22:45:18
http//news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4498049.stm
http//news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4618571.stm
http//news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1123973.stm
Collateral
04-07-2005 22:50:45
[quote7cd2f98e4e="theysayjump"][quote7cd2f98e4e="J4320"]Or why don't we see any fossils of animals that are half way through evolving? We don't, they are created.[/quote7cd2f98e4e]
how do you determine if an animal is i the middle of evolving......surely if we have evolved from Apes, then we are still evolving ourselves, no?[/quote7cd2f98e4e]
Yes, we're still evolving ourselves. I was reading one of my magazines and they were talking about how humans have so many unecessary parts and as years pass fewer and fewer people have them. Gosh, I wish I could find that article. Maybe I will look later for it D
J4320
04-07-2005 22:51:05
[quotefe994ce245="Crynos"][quotefe994ce245="J4320"][quotefe994ce245="slease"][quotefe994ce245="computer-guy"]yes i mean the Bible!
they've also found that the flood was true and noahs ark.
i see no proof of evolution!
i could go on and on......[/quotefe994ce245]
[bfe994ce245]The new testament was written by the Catholic Church[/bfe994ce245], if there is a god, it is far from his word. They have discovered evidence of a recurring flood in Mesopotamia, the bible is not the only document that writes of this flood. That part is history.[/quotefe994ce245]
No it wasn't. I was just reading through this thread. And sorry about the triple post. oops[/quotefe994ce245]
[bfe994ce245]"Always within the same species. All the offspring produced in the plant and animal kingdom remain in the same species. The production of new creatures never occurs." What about cross pollinating fruits to create new types of fruits that have characteristics of both?[/bfe994ce245]
Edit Reading deeper and i remember why i dont read christian sources, because they twist everything and basically make things up, example
"Yet, how can it be called "selection"—when nothing was selected! And, surely, it cannot be considered "natural" since cross-species transitions never occur."[/quotefe994ce245]
There is a difference between natural selection and cross breeding.
[quotefe994ce245]Reading deeper and i remember why i dont read christian sources, because they twist everything and basically make things up, example
"Yet, how can it be called "selection"—when nothing was selected! And, surely, it cannot be considered "natural" since cross-species transitions never occur."[/quotefe994ce245]
I don't know where you got that, but that was a pretty dumb thing to say. Care to give me a link? And also, you can't stereotype Christians like that. Everyone says dumb things, Christians and Atheists.
Crynos
04-07-2005 22:51:42
[quote08a4d67d0c="Collateral"][quote08a4d67d0c="theysayjump"][quote08a4d67d0c="J4320"]Or why don't we see any fossils of animals that are half way through evolving? We don't, they are created.[/quote08a4d67d0c]
how do you determine if an animal is i the middle of evolving......surely if we have evolved from Apes, then we are still evolving ourselves, no?[/quote08a4d67d0c]
Yes, we're still evolving ourselves. I was reading one of my magazines and they were talking about how humans have so many unecessary parts and as years pass fewer and fewer people have them. Gosh, I wish I could find that article. Maybe I will look later for it D[/quote08a4d67d0c]
I wouldnt be surprised if down the line we dont have appendixes etc.
J4320
04-07-2005 22:53:37
[quote05fff26a1b="theysayjump"][quote05fff26a1b="J4320"]Or why don't we see any fossils of animals that are half way through evolving? We don't, they are created.[/quote05fff26a1b]
how do you determine if an animal is i the middle of evolving......surely if we have evolved from Apes, then we are still evolving ourselves, no?[/quote05fff26a1b]
There is no middle point from monkey to man. There is just monkey and man. No half monkey man.
Crynos
04-07-2005 22:56:27
[quote93a0d2820f="J4320"][quote93a0d2820f="theysayjump"][quote93a0d2820f="J4320"]Or why don't we see any fossils of animals that are half way through evolving? We don't, they are created.[/quote93a0d2820f]
how do you determine if an animal is i the middle of evolving......surely if we have evolved from Apes, then we are still evolving ourselves, no?[/quote93a0d2820f]
There is no middle point from monkey to man. There is just monkey and man. No half monkey man.[/quote93a0d2820f]
Do you mean you want proof of this? http//www.sinpoldf.com.br/imagens/The-Human-Evolution.jpg
J4320
04-07-2005 23:12:12
[quote81fcaa8906="Crynos"][quote81fcaa8906="J4320"][quote81fcaa8906="theysayjump"][quote81fcaa8906="J4320"]Or why don't we see any fossils of animals that are half way through evolving? We don't, they are created.[/quote81fcaa8906]
how do you determine if an animal is i the middle of evolving......surely if we have evolved from Apes, then we are still evolving ourselves, no?[/quote81fcaa8906]
There is no middle point from monkey to man. There is just monkey and man. No half monkey man.[/quote81fcaa8906]
Do you mean you want proof of this? http//www.sinpoldf.com.br/imagens/The-Human-Evolution.jpg[/quote81fcaa8906]
You have got to be kidding me. Do you think I've never seen that picture before. What a retarded post. You call that proof? I actually laughed to myself when I saw your post and saw the picture. At first I thought you were joking. They have [b81fcaa8906][u81fcaa8906]NO[/u81fcaa8906][/b81fcaa8906][/color81fcaa8906] half man half monkey skull and there is no skeleton of the half evolved one.
theysayjump
04-07-2005 23:13:34
i think he was actually just asking if thats what you meant by the kinda proof that you are looking for....evidence of mammals evolving through those different stages, as opposed to actually submitting that as proof.
Crynos
04-07-2005 23:14:23
[quote302c6a23c8="J4320"][quote302c6a23c8="Crynos"][quote302c6a23c8="J4320"][quote302c6a23c8="theysayjump"][quote302c6a23c8="J4320"]Or why don't we see any fossils of animals that are half way through evolving? We don't, they are created.[/quote302c6a23c8]
how do you determine if an animal is i the middle of evolving......surely if we have evolved from Apes, then we are still evolving ourselves, no?[/quote302c6a23c8]
There is no middle point from monkey to man. There is just monkey and man. No half monkey man.[/quote302c6a23c8]
Do you mean you want proof of this? http//www.sinpoldf.com.br/imagens/The-Human-Evolution.jpg[/quote302c6a23c8]
You have got to be kidding me. Do you think I've never seen that picture before. What a retarded post. You call that proof? I actually laughed to myself when I saw your post and saw the picture. At first I thought you were joking. They have [b302c6a23c8][u302c6a23c8]NO[/u302c6a23c8][/b302c6a23c8][/color302c6a23c8] half man half monkey skull and there is no skeleton of the half evolved one.[/quote302c6a23c8]
Thats not what i meant...i know that doesnt offer proof, i meant if you wanted proof of those steps (ie findiing a legit site proving that)
Collateral
04-07-2005 23:16:41
Ok, After digging through my hundreds of magazines I was able to find all the articles I wanted. Some are just cover pages and if you want the full article just ask. I will just put links to save space. Will add them once they are scanned
Crynos
04-07-2005 23:19:25
[quote93084d8ea6="theysayjump"]i think he was actually just asking if thats what you meant by the kinda proof that you are looking for....evidence of mammals evolving through those different stages, as opposed to actually submitting that as proof.[/quote93084d8ea6]Yup, thats exactly what i was asking
Collateral
04-07-2005 23:32:13
![]("74ac819a97)
http/" alt=""/img.photobucket.com/albums/v626/Collateral1/Evolution.jpg[/img74ac819a97]
Collateral
04-07-2005 23:37:09
Cover, Not actual story
http//img.photobucket.com/albums/v626/Collateral1/ev5.jpg
http//img.photobucket.com/albums/v626/Collateral1/ev6.jpg
Story
http//img.photobucket.com/albums/v626/Collateral1/Ev2.jpg
http//img.photobucket.com/albums/v626/Collateral1/ev3.jpg
http//img.photobucket.com/albums/v626/Collateral1/ev7.jpg
http//img.photobucket.com/albums/v626/Collateral1/ev4.jpg
computer-guy
04-07-2005 23:53:45
How can u call that proof when that clearly is a pro evolution mag.Everytime we give u some proof u say its not a legit source,but yet u guy's get your proof from pro evolution media like u claim we do about creation.
What gives oh hipacrit.
slease
04-07-2005 23:59:48
Uhm, discover magazine... it's a scientific magazine. that's a pretty damn good source.
ben laden
05-07-2005 00:07:20
Wow, I'm very disappointed that I missed this thread's upsurge.
[quotea9eae83d15="J4320"][quotea9eae83d15="nicd.01"]Reasonable rhetoric explaining why the posted link was Creationist/Intelligent-design BS[/quotea9eae83d15]
Pfff.... Lol... You guys can believe what you want. Many people who have studied this BECAME a Christian because of this. You can't blindly talk about this if you DON'T know the facts.[/quotea9eae83d15]
Well I suppose you're the expert, aren't you? You surely seem to be acting like it. Are you the world's foremost authority on evolution and creationism, because why should we have to talk to you to clarify anything? We've made our own decisions and we have valid reasons for it, so we don't need your expertise to tell us anything otherwise.
[quotea9eae83d15="J4320"]Science itself [ba9eae83d15]PROVES[/ba9eae83d15] evolution wrong. But I guess we can see in the afterlife. I just can't seem to see how such a perfect place happened without a greater being behind it. [/quotea9eae83d15]
Are you kidding me? Science disproves CREATIONISM. Science by definition is "systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation." What kind of fucking loony test can you come up with to observe or experiment whether Adam and Eve existed? You can't. You have to take it on the word of some other regular people that decided to write this book thing about something that god told them about. AND THAT'S HILARIOUS. Some guy might have gotten high one day and thought god was talking to him so he wrote it down and now you all take it as fact! ha!
And you have got to be one blind fuck to view the world as perfect. That literally cracks me up. I can't even respond to this, if you think the world is perfect, there's nothing I can do to pull the wool away from your eyes.
[quotea9eae83d15="J4320"]Evolution is a lie. And the world is following it because-dare I say this- the world doesn't want to follow a code. They don't want to follow rules. They don't want to live up to the expectations of God, they'd rather live in their own little world without him. You cannot deny the spiritual presence in this world. If you deny it, you are a fool.[/quotea9eae83d15]
No, the world is following it because they've realized the lie we've been fed for almost 2000 years. It's not that they don't want to follow rules they just don't want to follow rules blindly with no reason and no supporting evidence behind them. It's like the fucking military, it's "do as I say, no matter what." Fuck that, I'm independent enough to realize that that is complete bullshit.
"One who has been tricked or made to appear ridiculous; a dupe"
That's the definition of a fool. Maybe you should rethink who are the fools.
[quotea9eae83d15="J4320"][quotea9eae83d15]Maybe you can post us some data that wasn't performed by a religious orginization but by a credible, unbiased source.[/quotea9eae83d15]
Who is a Creationist and not a Christian? All of these sources would be from Christians, yes. But [ba9eae83d15]MANY[/ba9eae83d15] of these Christians were Evolutionists but were turned to Creationism after deep study. [/quotea9eae83d15]
And that makes them unbiased how? It doesn't. It's still from a site that is called "worldbydesign." Any connotations with intelligent design, anyone?
[quotea9eae83d15="J4320"][quotea9eae83d15]What do creationists think about other religions? Are all of their beliefs wrong just because they aren't congruent with your own? [/quotea9eae83d15]
And what do we Creationists think about other religions? You mean by the way we believe earth came to be? Well, a lot of cultures support things that were mentioned in the Bible such as a flood and other things. [ua9eae83d15]And there was a flood.[/ua9eae83d15] And if their beliefs are different then ours in the way earth was created we don't accuse, we understand why they think that and we show them the truth. Christians are stereotyped, we aren't gonna damn all of you to hell. I just want to know- Who here believes in Evolution? And tell me why you do and back it up with evidence.[/quotea9eae83d15]
Oh, so.....your religion is still right, and it's your job to teach others how wrong they are? How do you come to decide that your religion is the one right religion? Because your religious leaders told you so? Hah.
[quotea9eae83d15="J4320"]And Crynos, please.... You are basing your entire belief of how earth came to be because the BBC says so? If they supported Christian views, they wouldn't be as popular so they support Evolution. Mostly every atheist supports Evolution. And every normal Christian supports creationism. Creationism takes faith to believe that a God made this, yet it is also backed up by science.[/quotea9eae83d15]
Once again, you are a fucking moron for even implying that Creationism is backed by science. But no, you went out and explicitly SAID it. That puts you in a league of your own. Good game, expert.
nicd.01
05-07-2005 00:24:09
[quote586d1a168a="computer-guy"]How can u call that proof when that clearly is a pro evolution mag.Everytime we give u some proof u say its not a legit source,but yet u guy's get your proof from pro evolution media like u claim we do about creation.
What gives oh hipacrit.[/quote586d1a168a]
Do you mean a SCIENCE mag and not some religious website with a point to prove? I guess it's all one big fucking conspiracy out to destroy god by passing around these LIES about evolution. The sad thing is that you honestly believe that. Give me a fucking break. Personally, I trust respected scientists with decades of experience over some crank preacher on an infomercial or website trying to tell me the world is 2,000 years old and that the reasons dinosaurs went extinct was that Noah couldn't fit them on the ark. The fact that people take this shit literally truly frightens me. Ben laden, you took the words right out of my mouth.
Collateral
05-07-2005 00:31:50
I'll say. nicd.01 and ben laden pretty much summed up everything I wanted to say. D
CoMpFrEaK
05-07-2005 00:34:25
how the heck would they prove (as in witness) evolution works? I mean it takes thousands upon millions of years to get any real change. Also 1/2 the time those new traits are due to a mutation or a change in the surrounding atmosphere.
Batman
05-07-2005 00:41:42
Nice ben laden and nicd.01!
![]("b1ab18a491)
http//www.clantuf.com/forums/images/smiles/eusa_clap.gif[" alt=""/imgb1ab18a491]
ben laden
05-07-2005 00:49:58
Oh, and regarding how the world may have been started (by the way, we'll probably never know the exact cause of the start of the universe, it's simply too far back in time) a test was once done to see if life could be created from basic elements (the elements that were in existence before the "big bang" or at the start of the universe if you prefer). Basically what they did was to radioactivate these elements. The reason they did this was because of the natural radiation that is present in space, and to simulate the effect to see if life would emerge from these elements. It did. Microscopic organisms emerged from these compounds (after a long period of time). This doesn't explain everything. Hell, it may not explain anything. But it's something to think about
Edit Oh, btw, about Darwin revoking his theory, are you referring to his "deathbed confession"? Because if you are, I'm sorry to let you in on it, but that's an urban legend which has been denied by his daugher or granddaughter, who was present when he died. There's no proof to the statement that he revoked his theory.
nicd.01
05-07-2005 08:05:29
[quote9dd985cba7="ben laden"]Oh, and regarding how the world may have been started (by the way, we'll probably never know the exact cause of the start of the universe, it's simply too far back in time) a test was once done to see if life could be created from basic elements (the elements that were in existence before the "big bang" or at the start of the universe if you prefer). Basically what they did was to radioactivate these elements. The reason they did this was because of the natural radiation that is present in space, and to simulate the effect to see if life would emerge from these elements. It did. Microscopic organisms emerged from these compounds (after a long period of time). This doesn't explain everything. Hell, it may not explain anything. But it's something to think about
Edit Oh, btw, about Darwin revoking his theory, are you referring to his "deathbed confession"? Because if you are, I'm sorry to let you in on it, but that's an urban legend which has been denied by his daugher or granddaughter, who was present when he died. There's no proof to the statement that he revoked his theory.[/quote9dd985cba7]
waits patiently for a completely unbiased article from godistruth.org that says that Darwin did say that
I can't wait until they start teaching creationism in school.
Phbs83
05-07-2005 08:49:15
Well, J4320, you base your facts only on what you've been taught. You don't even accept other opinions, because they contradict what you've been taught for so many years. That doesn't mean it [bc838d9de2e]is[/bc838d9de2e] the truth, does it? I can tell a kid a plain lie. I can tell that kid every single day for 20+ years something like (just an example nothing else) "2+2=5". That kid will take for granted that it is the truth, and will not accept anything else - that doesn't make the equation equal to 5, does it?
J4320
05-07-2005 08:50:13
[quote2286aa8c70="ben laden"]Oh, and regarding how the world may have been started (by the way, we'll probably never know the exact cause of the start of the universe, it's simply too far back in time) a test was once done to see if life could be created from basic elements (the elements that were in existence before the "big bang" or at the start of the universe if you prefer). Basically what they did was to radioactivate these elements. The reason they did this was because of the natural radiation that is present in space, and to simulate the effect to see if life would emerge from these elements.[b2286aa8c70] It did. Microscopic organisms emerged from these compounds (after a long period of time).[/b2286aa8c70] This doesn't explain everything. Hell, it may not explain anything. But it's something to think about
Edit Oh, btw, about Darwin revoking his theory, are you referring to his "deathbed confession"? Because if you are, I'm sorry to let you in on it, but that's an urban legend which has been denied by his daugher or granddaughter, who was present when he died. There's no proof to the statement that he revoked his theory.[/quote2286aa8c70]
That is a lie. I know of what expirement you are talking about and it didn't work. I've been trying to tell you what we creationists believe and you guys bash me and cuss me out. I've never cussed you out or anything in this whole thread. Stop being so immature about this. I try to tell you the extent of my knowledge about creationism and you guys flame me.
I want to see some things from you guys first-
1. A [b2286aa8c70]REAL[/b2286aa8c70] proof of the missing link or a half evolved creature
2. Proof of actual life coming from non-existing life- It completely defies the law of Biogenesis.
3. Why public schools refuse to take out Haeckel's drawings when they've already been proven fake.
Phbs83
05-07-2005 08:57:59
J4320
05-07-2005 08:58:25
[quote44d90bf514="Phbs83"]Well, J4320, you base your facts only on what you've been taught. You don't even accept other opinions, because they contradict what you've been taught for so many years. That doesn't mean it [b44d90bf514]is[/b44d90bf514] the truth, does it? I can tell a kid a plain lie. I can tell that kid every single day for 20+ years something like (just an example nothing else) "2+2=5". That kid will take for granted that it is the truth, and will not accept anything else - that doesn't make the equation equal to 5, does it?[/quote44d90bf514]
That's a very good statement. This is something that requires faith. I've been taught this for years and years but the main part of this is faith. Without it, the theory doesn't work because without faith that there is a God, this would make no sense. Like I've said before, you would be a fool to deny that there is no spiritual realm in this world. Humans have a spiritual side to them. I've felt the presence of God before and that's something that some of you on here will never understand.
Phbs83
05-07-2005 09:06:03
[quotec7b260b0e8="J4320"][quotec7b260b0e8="Phbs83"]Well, J4320, you base your facts only on what you've been taught. You don't even accept other opinions, because they contradict what you've been taught for so many years. That doesn't mean it [bc7b260b0e8]is[/bc7b260b0e8] the truth, does it? I can tell a kid a plain lie. I can tell that kid every single day for 20+ years something like (just an example nothing else) "2+2=5". That kid will take for granted that it is the truth, and will not accept anything else - that doesn't make the equation equal to 5, does it?[/quotec7b260b0e8]
That's a very good statement. This is something that requires faith. I've been taught this for years and years but the main part of this is faith. Without it, the theory doesn't work because without faith that there is a God, this would make no sense. Like I've said before, you would be a fool to deny that there is no spiritual realm in this world. Humans have a spiritual side to them. I've felt the presence of God before and that's something that some of you on here will never understand.[/quotec7b260b0e8]
Thanks, that makes it much clearer. However, I can't see how you can have faith in something, that you think you have felt, but have no proof that it did happen ;)
J4320
05-07-2005 09:08:47
[quotef809489414="Phbs83"]
Pictures of Homo Habilis & Australopithecus[=http//www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/specimen.html#habilis] Pictures of Homo Habilis & Australopithecus
So these pictures are fake as well? Or these are "homo sapiens" mutants?[/quotef809489414]
Ok, Evolutionists have always searched for the missing link. They can't call that stuff missing links. Nobody's skull is exactly alike. And over time these skulls lose some parts to them and get a little deformed and hard to study. They aren't putting that down as solid proof. They are speculating on what it could be. For all they know it could be a 12 year old. Finding a missing link between man and monkey is extremely hard. I want you guys to show me some proof of a fossil with some immature legs or something like that. Look at this link here-
http//www.everystudent.com/wires/ditching.html
READ IT! Don't ignore it because it's creationist.
Crynos
05-07-2005 09:10:46
[quote325b86e5e7="computer-guy"]How can u call that proof when that clearly is a pro evolution mag.Everytime we give u some proof u say its not a legit source,but yet u guy's get your proof from pro evolution media like u claim we do about creation.
What gives oh hipacrit.[/quote325b86e5e7]
The bbc and a science magazine are pro evolution sources? Damn those scientists, not like they know what theyre talking about, much rather listen to my local preacher.
bballp6699
05-07-2005 09:11:23
This is the thread that does not end and it goes on and on my friends...
J4320
05-07-2005 09:12:16
[quote99f52321a9="Phbs83"][quote99f52321a9="J4320"][quote99f52321a9="Phbs83"]Well, J4320, you base your facts only on what you've been taught. You don't even accept other opinions, because they contradict what you've been taught for so many years. That doesn't mean it [b99f52321a9]is[/b99f52321a9] the truth, does it? I can tell a kid a plain lie. I can tell that kid every single day for 20+ years something like (just an example nothing else) "2+2=5". That kid will take for granted that it is the truth, and will not accept anything else - that doesn't make the equation equal to 5, does it?[/quote99f52321a9]
That's a very good statement. This is something that requires faith. I've been taught this for years and years but the main part of this is faith. Without it, the theory doesn't work because without faith that there is a God, this would make no sense. Like I've said before, you would be a fool to deny that there is no spiritual realm in this world. Humans have a spiritual side to them. I've felt the presence of God before and that's something that some of you on here will never understand.[/quote99f52321a9]
Thanks, that makes it much clearer. [b99f52321a9]However, I can't see how you can have faith in something, that you think you have felt, but have no proof that it did happen [/b99f52321a9] ;)[/quote99f52321a9]
See that's something that man will never comprehend. Faith is something man will never comprehend. How am I suppose to have proof of the presence of God? Should I ask him for a autograph next time? No, it is through the Holy Spirit.
Collateral
05-07-2005 09:16:20
Didn't any of you watch
http//dsc.discovery.com/convergence/cavemen/cavemen.html
J4320
05-07-2005 09:18:51
[quotebef16d38ef="Collateral"]Didn't any of you watch
http//dsc.discovery.com/convergence/cavemen/cavemen.html[/quotebef16d38ef]
Yeah I've seen things like that before. See that's a theory though. They don't have half ape half man things. Only speculations.
Phbs83
05-07-2005 09:21:34
Discovery Channel is pro-evolution too ) Not a trusted source Collateral )
J4320 - so you're telling these skulls are regular ones, just with huge deformations, and over time they are just deformed?)
How come, ancient Egyptians' skulls are not deformed? They are thousands of years old, yet they are like ours?
J4320
05-07-2005 09:22:08
[quotea888ef5713="EatChex89"]the reason people choose to believe in evolution is because they don't want to admit that there is a God, because if they admitted that, then they would have to also admit that they are doomed to eternal punishment. So naturally they choose evolution hoping to avoid the punishment (which is unavoidable anyway..)
but anyway. there is [ba888ef5713]NO proof[/ba888ef5713] that evolution even occured, and it makes alot more sense to have some "unknown diety" creating us.
Also
[quotea888ef5713="Crynos"]
But blindly putting faith in god doesnt explain it either, im saying i agree with the big bang theory, hell, i have no idea how it all happened, but i also dont believe it was created by god.[/quotea888ef5713]
So you won't put faith in God, but you'll go ahead and put faith in the "big bang theory"... makes sense to me..
Like I said, it all leads down to the fact that men don't want to admit that there is a God and that they have an eternal punishment waiting for them.[/quotea888ef5713]
This post by EatChex is very good. Put your faith in an accident or in a creator who has a plan for us. God gave us a free will and doesn't step into society in big ways. He lets us decide if we are for him or not. EatChex is totally right. Man doesn't want an eternal punishment waiting for him.
Collateral
05-07-2005 09:22:48
[quote7a0a160299="J4320"][quote7a0a160299="Collateral"]Didn't any of you watch
http//dsc.discovery.com/convergence/cavemen/cavemen.html[/quote7a0a160299]
Yeah I've seen things like that before. See that's a theory though. They don't have half ape half man things. Only speculations.[/quote7a0a160299]
Look at the fossils.
http//dsc.discovery.com/convergence/cavemen/fossils/fossils.html
And the Earth is only thousands of years old? When if you look at turkana boy, his fossils are 1.5 million years old.
J4320
05-07-2005 09:32:18
[quote6782bb3e96="Collateral"][quote6782bb3e96="J4320"][quote6782bb3e96="Collateral"]Didn't any of you watch
http//dsc.discovery.com/convergence/cavemen/cavemen.html[/quote6782bb3e96]
Yeah I've seen things like that before. See that's a theory though. They don't have half ape half man things. Only speculations.[/quote6782bb3e96]
Look at the fossils.
http//dsc.discovery.com/convergence/cavemen/fossils/fossils.html
And the Earth is only thousands of years old? When if you look at turkana boy, his fossils are [b6782bb3e96]1.5 million years old.[/b6782bb3e96][/quote6782bb3e96]
It's extremely hard to tell how old fossils are. I'm tired of arguing about the age of the earth. The theory of earth being only thousands of years old is a theory by creationists. They could be wrong because there is missing time in the Bible. But in my opinion I think the earth is thousands and not millions of years old. Evolutionists say that the world is older because they need time for things to evolve which according to them takes millions and millions of years. Carbon dating is not a steady thing. These are all predictions of how old turkana boy is. I don't think there is any real way of telling how old things are. All of the things-including creationism- on how old the earth is, is all speculations and calculations.
Phbs83
05-07-2005 09:35:49
Carbon dating as slease (i think) told is not 100% accurate for older (more than 50,000 years old) fossils. There are many other methods to find the (approximate) age of things.
J4320 - you didn't answer my question about Egyptians?
J4320
05-07-2005 09:42:47
[quotedfb0d4248d="Phbs83"]Carbon dating as slease (i think) told is not 100% accurate for older (more than 50,000 years old) fossils. There are many other methods to find the (approximate) age of things.
J4320 - [bdfb0d4248d]you didn't answer my question about Egyptians?[/bdfb0d4248d][/quotedfb0d4248d]
Oh I'm sorry, I didn't see it. I'll go look for it.
Lunarpancake
05-07-2005 09:55:07
[quoteb722dbc47a="computer-guy"]yes i mean the Bible!
they've also found that the flood was true and noahs ark.
i see no proof of evolution!
i could go on and on......[/quoteb722dbc47a]
If your talking about that large boat-type structure they found ontop of a hill in iraq or whereever , they proved that wasnt the arc.
Look on google for it, it was falsafied.
Lunarpancake
05-07-2005 09:57:21
[quote244a1e703e="stackmjwiz"][quote244a1e703e]i say creation cause it doesn't make sence that all this just happend by chance.[/quote244a1e703e]
Exactly. The Universe is comprised of atoms. Who put them there? Who created the bits of matter?
Evolution doesn't explain this. Nor does the Big Bang theory. Science cannot explain the creation of the universe, or the earth.[/quote244a1e703e]
Actually, scientists have re-created the conditions from back when the universe was formed, and they were able to create living organisms from nothing.
J4320
05-07-2005 09:57:33
[quotecfc7a640f8="Phbs83"]Discovery Channel is pro-evolution too ) Not a trusted source Collateral )
J4320 - so you're telling these skulls are regular ones, just with huge deformations, and over time they are just deformed?)
How come, ancient Egyptians' skulls are not deformed? They are thousands of years old, yet they are like ours?[/quotecfc7a640f8]
I'm not saying that they are all deformed. Some could be pretty accurate. But people's skulls are different. I have a friend whose head seriously looks weird. The back of his head protudes. Kind of like if you've seen alien. You know how the back of their heads go far back? His is kind of like that but not that extreme. Kind of weird. But what I'm saying is, skulls are different. They could've found a strange head and claimed it to be the missing link. All they've claimed to be missing links are freak show humans. You [bcfc7a640f8][ucfc7a640f8]never[/ucfc7a640f8][/bcfc7a640f8] see fossils of fish with small feet evolving, reptiles growing feathers, and so on. If I saw something like that I would consider evolution to be more fact than fiction, but we don't see these things. That's because evolution isn't true.
[quotecfc7a640f8]
How come, ancient Egyptians' skulls are not deformed? They are thousands of years old, yet they are like ours?[/quotecfc7a640f8]
If you didn't know, the dry climate of Egypt decays bodies very quickly. That's why Egyptians were masters of preserving dead bodies. They found ways to preserve dead bodies. So most of the time the bodies are very well intact for how old they are. So they're skulls are pretty well of compared to some random skull found in the dirt that has been decaying over the years. And if you've seen the scans of King Tut, his head is a little deformed as well. Here is a picture of his head-
[imgcfc7a640f8]http/" alt=""/img148.imageshack.us/img="148/5135/tutscan2zoom0wm.th.jpg[" alt=""/imgcfc7a640f8][=http//img="148.imageshack.us/my.php?image=tutscan2zoom0wm.jpg][imgcfc7a640f8]http/" alt=""/img148.imageshack.us/img="148/5135/tutscan2zoom0wm.th.jpg[" alt=""/imgcfc7a640f8]
It's not very deformed but it is a little. It's not too deformed due to the mastery of mummification back in the days of Egypt.
And thank you-
[quotecfc7a640f8]Discovery Channel is pro-evolution too ) Not a trusted source Collateral )[/quotecfc7a640f8]
Thanks for not being so biased and thanks for not bashing me and cussing at me.
J4320
05-07-2005 09:58:46
Batman
05-07-2005 10:14:11
[quote51b1a69138="J4320"]If you didn't know, the dry climate of Egypt decays bodies very quickly.[/quote51b1a69138]
Just wanted to let you know that the dry climate in Egypt did quite the opposite. This is what allowed mummies to be made before the Egyptians started using other mummification processes. Since bacteria and fungi need water to live, the dry climate dried the bodies and made them inhospitable for such things, thus stopping decay.
J4320
05-07-2005 10:19:18
[quote6ce1382718="Batman"][quote6ce1382718="J4320"]If you didn't know, the dry climate of Egypt decays bodies very quickly.[/quote6ce1382718]
Just wanted to let you know that the dry climate in Egypt did quite the opposite. This is what allowed mummies to be made before the Egyptians started using other mummification processes. Since bacteria and fungi need water to live, the dry climate dried the bodies and made them inhospitable for such things, thus stopping decay.[/quote6ce1382718]
Oh really? I've always heard that Egypt decayed bodies quickly due to the harsh climate. Ok, but either way, it doesn't make any difference. The mummies are still examples of what I'm talking about.
liEDITli Yep, I found this thing on it. Egyptians actually had to get rid of moisture so they could further preserve the bodies-
[quote6ce1382718]People often associate Egypt with mummies. The dryness of the arid climate preserved bodies buried in shallow sandy pits, as in the image below.
Egyptians intentionally mummified their dead early in their history. The process was an expensive one and usually only rulers or nobility could afford it.
The steps involved took about 70 days and required the removal of all moisture from the body so that the dried form would not easily decay. Later, after all the organs were removed, the body was subjected to various treatments and wrapped in linen bandages up to hundreds of metres long.[/quote6ce1382718]
Cool, I always thought opposite.
Phbs83
05-07-2005 10:22:07
http//dsc.discovery.com/convergence/cavemen/fossils/fossils_zoom2.html
Look at this thing - skulls can't be THAT different - its structure is entirely different. There are some deformations on skulls - however, the whole structure remains the same.
Np, I don't like bashing someone who believes in what he does - it's a matter of choice after all )
J4320
05-07-2005 10:25:44
[quote4b22380573="Phbs83"]http//dsc.discovery.com/convergence/cavemen/fossils/fossils_zoom2.html
Look at this thing - skulls can't be THAT different - its structure is entirely different. There are some deformations on skulls - however, the whole structure remains the same.
Np, I don't like bashing someone who believes in what he does - it's a matter of choice after all )[/quote4b22380573]
You have a good point. But that doesn't even resemble a human at all. That's simply a monkey skull. That looks nothing like half human half man. It looks like all monkey. It is a great discovery, but not in the evolution realm. It could just be some extinct species of monkeys.
Phbs83
05-07-2005 10:28:33
That egyptian head you showed us doesn't prove that egyptians had different skulls. The scan looks almost the same, and that kind of (slight) deformations can be found even on new skulls. But an ancient picture doesn't prove anything - there are different painting styles.
Imagine if in the future, people thought we were like Picasso's paintings?
[quote8cea1b4d4e]
Dart, an anatomist, recognized physical traits of both apes and humans in the skull from Taung. The position of the hole where the skull sat atop the spine, for instance, told him that this child had stood on two legs, unlike any ape. He called the fossil find Australopithecus, or "southern ape."[/quote8cea1b4d4e]
Quoted from the same page
Quote below is from Turkana Boy article
[quote8cea1b4d4e]
Turkana Boy, Homo erectus, lived around 1.5 million years ago in what is now Nariokotome, Kenya.
This lanky ancestor possessed a human-like body, but its brain still had a ways to go.
Teeth are a dime a dozen in the human fossil record, but precious few skeletons have been found. That alone makes Turkana Boy a paleo-celebrity. This fossil, however, also provides keen insight on a critical moment in human evolution.
Everything that came before the boy and his kind could be called bipedal apes. Some of them even created the first stone tools, but they had ape-like bodies if not brains. Suddenly, around 1.8 million years ago, there appeared a new kind of hominid tall, thin, with shorter arms and a slightly bigger brain. It invented a more complex toolkit, specialized for procuring more meat and other protein to fuel a bigger body.[/quote8cea1b4d4e]
Crynos
05-07-2005 10:29:00
"Dart, an anatomist, recognized physical traits of both apes and humans in the skull from Taung. The position of the hole where the skull sat atop the spine, for instance, told him that this child had stood on two legs, unlike any ape. He called the fossil find Australopithecus, or "southern ape.""
Are you saying you have more experience identifying skulls than an anatomist?
J4320
05-07-2005 10:41:07
[quote607238425f="Phbs83"][b607238425f]That egyptian head you showed us doesn't prove that egyptians had different skulls.[/b607238425f] The scan looks almost the same, and that kind of (slight) deformations can be found even on new skulls. But an ancient picture doesn't prove anything - there are different painting styles.
Imagine if in the future, people thought we were like Picasso's paintings?
[quote607238425f]
Dart, an anatomist, recognized physical traits of both apes and humans in the skull from Taung. The position of the hole where the skull sat atop the spine, for instance, told him that this child had stood on two legs, unlike any ape. He called the fossil find Australopithecus, or "southern ape."[/quote607238425f]
Quoted from the same page[/quote607238425f]
I'm not saying that Egyptians had different skulls than normal people. What I was trying to point out was that people have different skulls. And Tut has a weird one. And thus, some of these skulls on the discovery channel could be weird ones of both monkeys and men. And that's not a painting, it's a sculpture.
[quote607238425f]Imagine if in the future, people thought we were like Picasso's paintings?[/quote607238425f]
Don't take it out of context. It was a sculpture found of him and it was ceremonial for them to depict Tut closely and have everything perfect for him so he could have a good afterlife.
[quote607238425f]
Dart, an anatomist, recognized physical traits of both apes and humans in the skull from Taung. The position of the hole where the skull sat atop the spine, for instance, told him that this child had stood on two legs, unlike any ape. He called the fossil find Australopithecus, or "southern ape."[/quote607238425f]
That is an extremely bold statement. I highly doubt he could tell that. I'm not expert on skeletal structures but I find that VERY hard to believe when in that picture when half of the skull is gone. And if he saw it before that part was gone, I still find it hard to believe. I've never once in my life heard that you can tell if a creature crawls or walks on two legs due to the positioning of the skull into the spinal cord. And after all of these years of decay we still can tell? This doesn't prove Evolution. Evolutionists use man and monkey because they are so similar, making it easy to show how it could have happened. We still don't see any fish with legs etc.
I see Homo erectus on there is a mold because it "vanished." There is a very large chance that this mold was made up to better fit the ways of Evolution. The discovery channel is evolutionist and they will be biased towards it. They will report anything that is claimed to be the missing link. Mold or skull.
J4320
05-07-2005 10:42:06
[quoteb8468d5f36="Crynos"]"Dart, an anatomist, recognized physical traits of both apes and humans in the skull from Taung. The position of the hole where the skull sat atop the spine, for instance, told him that this child had stood on two legs, unlike any ape. He called the fossil find Australopithecus, or "southern ape.""
[bb8468d5f36]Are you saying you have more experience identifying skulls than an anatomist?[/bb8468d5f36][/quoteb8468d5f36]
Did I ever say that? No.
DEPjrTX
05-07-2005 10:44:22
[quotefd6d6a95ca="Lunarpancake"][quotefd6d6a95ca="stackmjwiz"][quotefd6d6a95ca]i say creation cause it doesn't make sence that all this just happend by chance.[/quotefd6d6a95ca]
Exactly. The Universe is comprised of atoms. Who put them there? Who created the bits of matter?
Evolution doesn't explain this. Nor does the Big Bang theory. Science cannot explain the creation of the universe, or the earth.[/quotefd6d6a95ca]
Actually, scientists have re-created the conditions from back when the universe was formed, and they were able to create living organisms from nothing.[/quotefd6d6a95ca]
please state your source for this statement.
J4320
05-07-2005 10:46:24
[quote14eb048f33="DEPjrTX"][quote14eb048f33="Lunarpancake"][quote14eb048f33="stackmjwiz"][quote14eb048f33]i say creation cause it doesn't make sence that all this just happend by chance.[/quote14eb048f33]
Exactly. The Universe is comprised of atoms. Who put them there? Who created the bits of matter?
Evolution doesn't explain this. Nor does the Big Bang theory. Science cannot explain the creation of the universe, or the earth.[/quote14eb048f33]
Actually, scientists have re-created the conditions from back when the universe was formed, and they were able to create living organisms from nothing.[/quote14eb048f33]
please state your source for this statement.[/quote14eb048f33]
Yes I would like to see that too. There was an expirement like this that was very popular and everyone got excited because the scientists claimed they could do this but then in failed horribly and it is hardly ever mentioned.
Phbs83
05-07-2005 10:48:34
Egyptian art is not 100% accurate. I can show you many paintings/sculptures/etc. from Egyptian art which have nothing to do with people (and yet they are believed to be showing people).
If that was from ancient Greece or Rome, I would accept it , but for that particular case - sorry, it doesn't matter
J4320
05-07-2005 10:54:33
[quote09b1ae7532="Phbs83"][b09b1ae7532]Egyptian art is not 100% accurate.[/b09b1ae7532] I can show you many paintings/sculptures/etc. from Egyptian art which have nothing to do with people (and yet they are believed to be showing people).
If that was from ancient Greece or Rome, I would accept it , but for that particular case - sorry, it doesn't matter[/quote09b1ae7532]
Exactly. To tell you the truth, their art sucks in my opinion. But he did have a weird head and he had irregular teeth(weird buck teeth). He is an example of an irregular skull. That's all I was saying. And his head did look like that according to ancient art and Hawass' latest CT scans of him.
liEDITli Does someone want to explain to me why we don't see fossils of fish with legs, or reptiles with feathers, or anything like that?
DEPjrTX
05-07-2005 11:11:31
[quote32704f0786="J4320"][quote32704f0786="Phbs83"][b32704f0786]Egyptian art is not 100% accurate.[/b32704f0786] I can show you many paintings/sculptures/etc. from Egyptian art which have nothing to do with people (and yet they are believed to be showing people).
If that was from ancient Greece or Rome, I would accept it , but for that particular case - sorry, it doesn't matter[/quote32704f0786]
Exactly. To tell you the truth, their art sucks in my opinion. But he did have a weird head and he had irregular teeth(weird buck teeth). He is an example of an irregular skull. That's all I was saying. And his head did look like that according to ancient art and Hawass' latest CT scans of him.
liEDITli Does someone want to explain to me why we don't see fossils of fish with legs, or reptiles with feathers, or anything like that?[/quote32704f0786]
This explanation is simple, because there has never been any such creature and this is why evolution is still a theory no a law, it can not be proven as a fact.
J4320
05-07-2005 11:21:29
[quoteabf618fde4="ben laden"]LOL, way to rub it in.
Ahh, just wait. Maybe some creationist will come around with an argument that will destroy SLEASE AND MY'S DOUBLE TAG TEAM OF DEATH!!!!!!
but that's unlikely[/quoteabf618fde4]
Looks like I've done a pretty good job. None of you can deny that.
Matt8789
05-07-2005 11:28:14
9 pages..wait what?
CoMpFrEaK
05-07-2005 11:54:28
[quote6f5d8abfed="Lunarpancake"][quote6f5d8abfed="stackmjwiz"][quote6f5d8abfed]i say creation cause it doesn't make sence that all this just happend by chance.[/quote6f5d8abfed]
Exactly. The Universe is comprised of atoms. Who put them there? Who created the bits of matter?
Evolution doesn't explain this. Nor does the Big Bang theory. Science cannot explain the creation of the universe, or the earth.[/quote6f5d8abfed]
Actually, scientists have re-created the conditions from back when the universe was formed, and they were able to create living organisms from nothing.[/quote6f5d8abfed]
They cant really recreat it
J4320
05-07-2005 12:09:31
Ok here's a really good site that proves evolution wrong through science. Now you may not be a creationist, but I hope you realize that Evolution is a lie. This guy was turned from Evolution to Creation by studying these animals.
[quoteffcc302f6c]This series features Dr. Jobe Martin, who for the past 20 years, has been exploring evolution vs. creation. His findings have been fascinating students around the world as he lectures on these remarkable animal designs that cannot be explained by traditional evolution.
Dr. Martin himself was a traditional evolutionist, but his medical and scientific training would go through an evolution…rather a revolution when he began to study animals that challenged the scientific assumptions of his education. This was the beginning of the evolution of a creationist.[/quoteffcc302f6c]
So this guy was an Evolutionist but now he is a Creationist. Watch the videos on the site. They're good ones.
http//www.incrediblecreaturesthatdefyevolution.com/folders.asp?action=display&record=13
Keep an open mind towards it. Most of you shut it out because he is Christian. I haven't shut out your sites because they are Atheist.
J4320
05-07-2005 12:12:15
Now there's some science that disproves Evolution.
And I found this, it's a good point-
[quotee95f76c6a5]There are changes going on in the evolutionary community because of the growing evidence for design and it is beginning to realize there's no way mindless chance processes could create an ordered, artistic, complex universe like we have; explosions don't create order. The problem is, once people start to talk about a designer, are they willing to name him?"[/quotee95f76c6a5]
liEDITli And here is another good animal example-
[quotee95f76c6a5]There is the giraffe, whose long neck necessitates a powerful heart to pump blood all the way to the brain. By rights the blood flow should blow its brains out when it bends to drink water, but the lofty animal has a delicate series of spigots and a sponge that dissipate and absorb the rush of blood. "How could that evolve?" muses Martin. "He needs all these parts there all the time, or he is dead..."[/quotee95f76c6a5]
The giraffe needed to have all of these complex pumps and blood vessels at one time or he would be dead. You can't have a natural selection for it or else it would be extinct due to dying out.
ben laden
05-07-2005 12:31:04
[quote503355f661="J4320"][quote503355f661="ben laden"]LOL, way to rub it in.
Ahh, just wait. Maybe some creationist will come around with an argument that will destroy SLEASE AND MY'S DOUBLE TAG TEAM OF DEATH!!!!!!
but that's unlikely[/quote503355f661]
Looks like I've done a pretty good job. None of you can deny that.[/quote503355f661]
Not really. You've been arguing against evolution, not for creationism. Just because one doesn't exist doesn't mean the explanation must be the other one.
Basically the only thing you've done a good job of is proving that all creationists will eventually resort to the standby "it's all a matter of faith" argument.
ben laden
05-07-2005 12:36:51
WOW. I just watched the first video from that link. It's laughable at best. The bee knows how to pollinate the vanilla bean, so obviously GOD EXISTS!!!!!!
J4320
05-07-2005 12:37:00
[quotec73a949431="ben laden"][quotec73a949431="J4320"][quotec73a949431="ben laden"]LOL, way to rub it in.
Ahh, just wait. Maybe some creationist will come around with an argument that will destroy SLEASE AND MY'S DOUBLE TAG TEAM OF DEATH!!!!!!
but that's unlikely[/quotec73a949431]
Looks like I've done a pretty good job. None of you can deny that.[/quotec73a949431]
Not really. You've been arguing against evolution, not for creationism. Just because one doesn't exist doesn't mean the explanation must be the other one.
Basically the only thing you've done a good job of is proving that all creationists will eventually resort to the standby "it's all a matter of faith" argument.[/quotec73a949431]
Actually, I have been for creationism, you make no sense at all. I did talk about faith but I've done so much more than that and I've helped the "creationist party" on here. You just blatantly ignore it. And yes, I've done a lot to show all of you the faults in Evolution. I can't believe you would say something like that after all that I've posted. It's gone through your head and out of it.
J4320
05-07-2005 12:38:27
[quote20de4f5a44="ben laden"]WOW. I just watched the first video from that link. It's laughable at best. The bee knows how to pollinate the vanilla bean, so obviously GOD EXISTS!!!!!![/quote20de4f5a44]
You are a complete fool to ignore what the meaning behind it is. But if you want me to explain it to you like I would a little child, I will.
ben laden
05-07-2005 12:57:19
1. I didn't say you weren't for creationism, I simply said you weren't ARGUING for it.
2. You have been spending all of your time arguing AGAINST creationism.
3. Just because evolution may be a lie doesn't mean creationism is the only other alternative.
4. For example, I don't completely believe in evolution, but the concept of creationism is completely laughable to me.
5. I haven't ignored anything. Please stop telling me what I have done if you aren't me, knkxthx.
6. Likewise, don't tell me what has gone through my head or out of it.
7. The fool is this christian propagand-ist and how he tries to prove that there is a god simply because of mutual symbiotic species or the fact that nature is more powerful than our technology.
SEE, I CAN BE CONDESCENDING, TOO, jackass.
Btw, if god created us in such a GENIUS INTELLIGENTLY DESIGNED way, then how do you explain all the useless parts of various animals? For instance, the appendicies of humans? that's not very intelligently designed. In fact, if god designed that, it must have been after a hard night of drinking, crack, and hookers.
Phbs83
05-07-2005 12:57:24
I can't watch the movies right now, so J4320 can you briefly describe what that bee movie shows, and what the meaning behind it is?
ben laden
05-07-2005 12:58:32
It shows that the vanilla bean has a certain way that it has to be pollinated, and that a certain type of bee in the area knows how to pollinate it, so that's evidence that they were created for each other apparently.
Phbs83
05-07-2005 13:01:18
Umm, anyone heard of ecosystems and how every kind of animal/plant etc. in it has to cooperate for the good of the ecosystem?
And [bbbeb0a5b27]that[/bbbeb0a5b27] proves God exists? Yeah Right!
J4320 - can you show us proof that Jesus did all the wonders that are described in the Bible?
ben laden
05-07-2005 13:04:41
[quote87c57827f2="Phbs83"]J4320 - can you show us proof that Jesus did all the wonders that are described in the Bible?[/quote87c57827f2]
I can, but you'll have to give me a year or so to train in a traveling magic show.
Phbs83
05-07-2005 13:07:48
Let's keep the thread friendly )
J4320
05-07-2005 13:12:45
[quotedf8cfaeb59="ben laden"]1. I didn't say you weren't for creationism, I simply said you weren't ARGUING for it.
[bdf8cfaeb59]2. You have been spending all of your time arguing AGAINST creationism. [/bdf8cfaeb59]
3. Just because evolution may be a lie doesn't mean creationism is the only other alternative.
4. For example, I don't completely believe in evolution, but the concept of creationism is completely laughable to me.
5. I haven't ignored anything. Please stop telling me what I have done if you aren't me, knkxthx.
6. Likewise, don't tell me what has gone through my head or out of it.
7. The fool is this christian propagand-ist and how he tries to prove that there is a god simply because of mutual symbiotic species or the fact that nature is more powerful than our technology.
SEE, I CAN BE CONDESCENDING, TOO, jackass.
Btw, if god created us in such a GENIUS INTELLIGENTLY DESIGNED way, then how do you explain all the useless parts of various animals? For instance, the appendicies of humans? that's not very intelligently designed. In fact, if god designed that, it must have been after a hard night of drinking, crack, and hookers.[/quotedf8cfaeb59]
Ummm... Ok... How does that make sense? How am I arguing against it? I'm explaining it and I've helped many people to better understand Creationism.
[quotedf8cfaeb59]3. Just because evolution may be a lie doesn't mean creationism is the only other alternative.[/quotedf8cfaeb59]
I never said it was. I'm stating that Evolution isn't true and I believe in Creationism and I'm telling you what I believe even though you ignore parts of it.
[quotedf8cfaeb59]4. For example, I don't completely believe in evolution, but the concept of creationism is completely laughable to me.[/quotedf8cfaeb59]
Well that's nice. For such a laughable thing you sure get extremely offensive to it. You don't even consider it. For one to completely understand the nature of both sides of things, he must study BOTH sides.
[quotedf8cfaeb59]7. The fool is this christian propagand-ist and how he tries to prove that there is a god simply because of mutual symbiotic species or the fact that nature is more powerful than our technology.
[/quotedf8cfaeb59]
He simply stated how much more light efficiency that bug has than modern technology. It's not something to piss your pants about.
[quotedf8cfaeb59]Btw, if god created us in such a GENIUS INTELLIGENTLY DESIGNED way, then how do you explain all the useless parts of various animals? For instance, the appendicies of humans? that's not very intelligently designed. In fact, if god designed that, it must have been after a hard night of drinking, crack, and hookers.[/quotedf8cfaeb59]
Before the fall of man, man was perfect in God's eyes. After Adam sinned, many things about animals and man were changed. This can be one of the many things.
[quotedf8cfaeb59]
In fact, if god designed that, it must have been after a hard night of drinking, crack, and hookers.[/quotedf8cfaeb59]
Ok now you're really starting to sound like an idiot.
I've seen your attitude about all of this and it's completely negative. I have no idea why you get so offensive and you have to resort to flaming me just because I'm for Creation.
J4320
05-07-2005 13:16:32
[quote4c87bccd29="Phbs83"]Umm, anyone heard of ecosystems and how every kind of animal/plant etc. in it has to cooperate for the good of the ecosystem?
And [b4c87bccd29]that[/b4c87bccd29] proves God exists? Yeah Right!
J4320 - can you show us proof that Jesus did all the wonders that are described in the Bible?[/quote4c87bccd29]
ben laden is just trying to make it sound idiotic. That was just a small thing in there, there were 2 other videos that were good too. And you'd have to see them for yourself because I'm tired of explaining all of this and getting flamed for it.
[quote4c87bccd29]J4320 - can you show us proof that Jesus did all the wonders that are described in the Bible?[/quote4c87bccd29]
How could I do that? What do you want me to do? We're talking about Creation VS Evolution, not Jesus' miracles.
ben laden
05-07-2005 13:26:42
sorry, that was a typo. The line you bolded, creationism should be replaced with evolution. x Mind's working too fast for my fingers.
ben laden
05-07-2005 13:36:51
So wait, I'm pissing my pants about it and getting all offensive about it, but when I make a joke about it I'm just making myself look like an idiot? Which way do you want it, cause I can't do anything that will make myself seem reasonable or smart to you.
[quoted27dcbe9de]Well that's nice. For such a laughable thing you sure get extremely offensive to it. You don't even consider it. For one to completely understand the nature of both sides of things, he must study BOTH sides. [/quoted27dcbe9de]
I get offensive to it because religion is dangerous. Flat-out. Religion is responsible for so much killing, hatred, racism, and division in the world. If I can't get excited about that, then what CAN I get excited about? Not to mention that I'm convinced that it's a complete lie.
I was born and raised Catholic and HAVE studied both sides. Why the fuck do you think I chose to be an atheist in the first place? Kthx for assuming I'm an uneducated dimwit.
[quoted27dcbe9de]I never said it was. I'm stating that Evolution isn't true and I believe in Creationism and I'm telling you what I believe even though you ignore parts of it.[/quoted27dcbe9de]
Once again, I'm not ignoring anything. I'm reading almost every post. Please stop assuming so much. Do you think I'm ignoring you because I haven't made a post that says "OMG I'VE SUDDENLY SEEN THE LIGHT! EVOLUTION IS A LIE AND GOD IS GREAT! HAVE MERCY ON MY SOUL O GREAT ONE!!!!"???? You're not going to persuade me or budge me an inch. I didn't take becoming an atheist lightly, especially when the alternative if I was wrong was eternal damnation.
[quoted27dcbe9de]He simply stated how much more light efficiency that bug has than modern technology. It's not something to piss your pants about.[/quoted27dcbe9de]
I'm not "pissing my pants" about it. You called me a fool, so I'm calling your ridiculous illogical propoganda man a fool. KFUCKINGTHX, for someone who whines about being cussed out you sure are a condescending assumption-machine.
[quoted27dcbe9de]Before the fall of man, man was perfect in God's eyes. After Adam sinned, many things about animals and man were changed. This can be one of the many things.[/quoted27dcbe9de]
Oh, that explains it. roll roll I guess before the fall of man, the appendix was some organ that helped us achieve massively intense orgasms and made us shit gold and breathe candy.
[quoted27dcbe9de]Ok now you're really starting to sound like an idiot.[/quoted27dcbe9de]
Likewise, sir.
I'm not flaming. If I wanted to flame, this thread would already be up to page 20, because you'll just have to trust me when I say I have plenty of experience flaming religious threads. I'm genuinely arguing for my points and against others' points. So if you want to dismiss me as a troll, fine, I could care less.
J4320
05-07-2005 13:37:04
[quote4ed4221ae5="ben laden"]sorry, that was a typo. The line you bolded, creationism should be replaced with evolution. x Mind's working too fast for my fingers.[/quote4ed4221ae5]
It's fine man. I don't want to argue with you or be your enemy. You have your differences and I have mine. wink
liEDITli
Ack.... On with the fight.
ben laden
05-07-2005 13:39:14
I agree. I don't hate you or think you're a moron, and if I met you in real-life I wouldn't treat you any differently than if you were an atheist. You just have to understand that (besides the fact that I love arguing and debating) I'm VERY passionate about my religious belief (or non-belief if you prefer). and it's something that I get very fiery about when arguing.
Edit Affirmative. Ready, aim, fire!
J4320
05-07-2005 13:46:40
[quotef98956e965="ben laden"][bf98956e965]So wait, I'm pissing my pants about it and getting all offensive about it, but when I make a joke about it I'm just making myself look like an idiot? Which way do you want it[/bf98956e965], cause I can't do anything that will make myself seem reasonable or smart to you.
[quotef98956e965]Well that's nice. For such a laughable thing you sure get extremely offensive to it. You don't even consider it. For one to completely understand the nature of both sides of things, he must study BOTH sides. [/quotef98956e965]
I get offensive to it because religion is dangerous. Flat-out. Religion is responsible for so much killing, hatred, racism, and division in the world. If I can't get excited about that, then what CAN I get excited about? Not to mention that I'm convinced that it's a complete lie.
I was born and raised Catholic and HAVE studied both sides. Why the fuck do you think I chose to be an atheist in the first place? Kthx for assuming I'm an uneducated dimwit.
[quotef98956e965]I never said it was. I'm stating that Evolution isn't true and I believe in Creationism and I'm telling you what I believe even though you ignore parts of it.[/quotef98956e965]
Once again, I'm not ignoring anything. I'm reading almost every post. Please stop assuming so much. Do you think I'm ignoring you because I haven't made a post that says "OMG I'VE SUDDENLY SEEN THE LIGHT! EVOLUTION IS A LIE AND GOD IS GREAT! HAVE MERCY ON MY SOUL O GREAT ONE!!!!"???? You're not going to persuade me or budge me an inch. I didn't take becoming an atheist lightly, especially when the alternative if I was wrong was eternal damnation.
[quotef98956e965]He simply stated how much more light efficiency that bug has than modern technology. It's not something to piss your pants about.[/quotef98956e965]
I'm not "pissing my pants" about it. You called me a fool, so I'm calling your ridiculous illogical propoganda man a fool. KFUCKINGTHX, for someone who whines about being cussed out you sure are a condescending assumption-machine.
[quotef98956e965]Before the fall of man, man was perfect in God's eyes. After Adam sinned, many things about animals and man were changed. This can be one of the many things.[/quotef98956e965]
Oh, that explains it. roll roll I guess before the fall of man, the appendix was some organ that helped us achieve massively intense orgasms and made us shit gold and breathe candy.
[quotef98956e965]Ok now you're really starting to sound like an idiot.[/quotef98956e965]
Likewise, sir.
I'm not flaming. If I wanted to flame, this thread would already be up to page 20, because you'll just have to trust me when I say I have plenty of experience flaming religious threads. I'm genuinely arguing for my points and against others' points. So if you want to dismiss me as a troll, fine, I could care less.[/quotef98956e965]
Your trying to be funny when you make a joke, but noone cares. And then you get offensive and you flame.
[quotef98956e965]for someone who whines about being cussed out you sure are a condescending assumption-machine.
[/quotef98956e965]
When I complained about people flaming me and cussing me out, I did it because I thought we could be mature when we talk about this mature subject. But I guess not. And your attitude really tops it off. And I assume from what kind of posts you make. You don't make very intelligent ones.
[quotef98956e965]Oh, that explains it. roll roll I guess before the fall of man, the appendix was some organ that helped us achieve massively intense orgasms and made us shit gold and breathe candy.
[/quotef98956e965]
I said it [bf98956e965]CAN[/bf98956e965] be one of the many things that changed. Not something that did change for a fact.
ben laden
05-07-2005 14:16:22
I care when I make a joke. I could give a shit whether you think it's funny, but it should let you know that I'm not sitting here fuming in my chair over this internet argument. I could care less, I just enjoy it. Obviously YOU CHOSE TO IGNORE THAT. Haha, I love using other peoples' arguments against them. But you keep insisting that I'm getting offensive and flaming. What do you call your last post then?
There's nothing wrong with my attitude. Is it because I curse? What can I say, I do it a lot whether I'm arguing or not. I guess that means my attitude is always negative. roll
Tell me how unintelligent my posts are. Please. I'm dying to hear this one.
People have so much trouble beleiving that they are just smart monkeys. They want to believe that they are specially created; just like people believed that the earth was the center of the universe.
But, also to blame are the Imperialists and the Nazis etc.
Slavery was justified by evolution. European Imperialists saw themselves as the buds of the evolutionary tree and other races evolutionarily inferior and thus that justified slavery.
Also the Nazis believing that the Aryans were the most advanced race and others were inferior. (At the time, Germany was the center of science and the most advanced nation in the world).
J4320
05-07-2005 14:21:58
[quoted3a30acdbf="ben laden"]I care when I make a joke. I could give a shit whether you think it's funny, but it should let you know that I'm not sitting here fuming in my chair over this internet argument. I could care less, I just enjoy it. Obviously YOU CHOSE TO IGNORE THAT. Haha, I love using other peoples' arguments against them. But you keep insisting that I'm getting offensive and flaming. What do you call your last post then?
There's nothing wrong with my attitude. Is it because I curse? What can I say, I do it a lot whether I'm arguing or not. I guess that means my attitude is always negative. roll
Tell me how unintelligent my posts are. Please. I'm dying to hear this one.[/quoted3a30acdbf]
Oooh your Mr Cool now! Wow! He just loves to "use other people's arguments against them!"
[quoted3a30acdbf]I'm not sitting here fuming in my chair over this internet argument.[/quoted3a30acdbf]
Good, I'm not either. These arguments are.... Healthy....
This whole thread has helped me. I have nothing against you at all actually. I've just been debating and debates can get nasty. If I ever meet you in person or want to do a trade with you, I would have no discrimination towards you. All my resentment towards you stays in this thread.
ben laden
05-07-2005 14:27:58
Keep focusing on one thing that I say and flaming me for it (in my mind, you're the one doing the flaming). Just ignore the rest of my post and pretend like nothing I said is worth replying, even though you wouldn't be able to reply with anything of worth.
J4320
05-07-2005 14:29:04
[quote64bf67b278="ben laden"]Keep focusing on one thing that I say and flaming me for it (in my mind, you're the one doing the flaming). Just ignore the rest of my post and pretend like nothing I said is worth replying, even though you wouldn't be able to reply with anything of worth.[/quote64bf67b278]
I was trying to be nice to you. What do you want me to reply about?
ben laden
05-07-2005 14:32:36
Tell me how my posts are unintelligent.
J4320
05-07-2005 14:52:03
Do I have to answer that? Just go look at them. Seriously.
Ethan
05-07-2005 15:27:23
Haha... you had to know that making a thread like this would end up like it has.
I was raised christian yet always felt that evolution still existed.
Most people will admit to microevolution. Just not from moneys to humans evolution.
Also, J4320 Proving that intricate parts of nature are complicated and amazing doesn't prove that they couldn't happen spontaneously. You don't need a god to make a Giraffe's neck work. Don't think of it as all the sudden there was a neck on a horse. Those things happen through long runs of time.
J4320
05-07-2005 15:36:33
[quote3bcae4b50a="Ethan"]Haha... you had to know that making a thread like this would end up like it has.
I was raised christian yet always felt that evolution still existed.
Most people will admit to microevolution. Just not from moneys to humans evolution.
Also, J4320 Proving that intricate parts of nature are complicated and amazing doesn't prove that they couldn't happen spontaneously. You don't need a god to make a Giraffe's neck work. Don't think of it as all the sudden there was a neck on a horse. Those things happen through long runs of time.[/quote3bcae4b50a]
Yes, I realize that. I'm not in the mood for carrying on anymore. The giraffe thing was on a site I found and it made sense how it was saying it to me. Did you watch those videos? All three?
CoMpFrEaK
05-07-2005 16:01:21
[quote92b6d13386="Ethan"]Haha... you had to know that making a thread like this would end up like it has.
I was raised christian yet always felt that evolution still existed.
Most people will admit to microevolution. Just not from moneys to humans evolution.
Also, J4320 Proving that intricate parts of nature are complicated and amazing doesn't prove that they couldn't happen spontaneously. You don't need a god to make a Giraffe's neck work. Don't think of it as all the sudden there was a neck on a horse. Those things happen through long runs of time.[/quote92b6d13386]
i concur
ben laden
05-07-2005 16:15:08
I also concur. And I think my posts have been very intelligent. Maybe not with the wording you want, but I have logically explained posts that use reasonable arguments.
computer-guy
05-07-2005 19:17:51
[quotec3c671a773="ben lauden"]Btw, if god created us in such a GENIUS INTELLIGENTLY DESIGNED way, then how do you explain all the useless parts of various animals? For instance, the appendicies of humans? that's not very intelligently designed. In fact, if god designed that, it must have been after a hard night of drinking, crack, and hookers[/quotec3c671a773]
Ok ben lauden,you want to know why so many human and other animals parts are useless?
Well the reason is because before Adam and Eve(the first humans) Dissobeyed God everything had a a job to do,every single part. Adam and Eve could talk to animals and use 100% of their brain and do countless other things we can't today.The reason why we can't is because after they dissobeyed god sin came upon everything and caused the parts that are useless now to become useless.
If that doesn't make sence please reply because i would clarify it for you.
J4320
05-07-2005 19:29:35
[quote501f3a3191="computer-guy"][quote501f3a3191="ben lauden"]Btw, if god created us in such a GENIUS INTELLIGENTLY DESIGNED way, then how do you explain all the useless parts of various animals? For instance, the appendicies of humans? that's not very intelligently designed. In fact, if god designed that, it must have been after a hard night of drinking, crack, and hookers[/quote501f3a3191]
Ok ben lauden,you want to know why so many human parts are useless?
Well the reason is because before Adam and Eve(the first humans) Dissobeyed God everything had a a job to do,every single part. Adam and Eve could talk to animals and use 100% of their brain and do countless other things we can't today.The reaso wyh we can't is because after they dissobeyed god sin came upon everything and caused the parts that are useless now to become useless.
If that doesn't make sence please reply because i would clarify it for you.[/quote501f3a3191]
Well the Bible never says that our useless things in our bodies had purposes. That was my speculation. But a lot of bad things did happen after Adam and Eve sinned.
nicd.01
05-07-2005 19:32:25
[quote5e478b9253="computer-guy"][quote5e478b9253="ben lauden"]Btw, if god created us in such a GENIUS INTELLIGENTLY DESIGNED way, then how do you explain all the useless parts of various animals? For instance, the appendicies of humans? that's not very intelligently designed. In fact, if god designed that, it must have been after a hard night of drinking, crack, and hookers[/quote5e478b9253]
Ok ben lauden,you want to know why so many human and other animals parts are useless?
Well the reason is because before Adam and Eve(the first humans) Dissobeyed God everything had a a job to do,every single part. Adam and Eve could talk to animals and use 100% of their brain and do countless other things we can't today.The reason why we can't is because after they dissobeyed god sin came upon everything and caused the parts that are useless now to become useless.
If that doesn't make sence please reply because i would clarify it for you.[/quote5e478b9253]
WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE THAT DON'T BELIEVE IN YOUR GOD??? And don't give me that shit that basically every religion is the same BECAUSE THEY AREN'T. These explanations you post are MEANINGLESS for COUNTLESS religions. NO ONE HAS ANSWERED THAT QUESTION! I asked it 2 times and was blown off twice. Is it because that's a big hole in your belief structure? Most modern christians don't even believe this nonsense. You know what I learned? I learned that babies were made when God puts a diamond in a fucking cabbage patch and then the mommy comes and puts it in her tummy with the help of angels and then the angels clap and sing and the baby comes out. Post me the one about the hole to hell that those "scientists" discovered in Siberia, too. It was on TBN so it must be true. I am truly sickened.
computer-guy
05-07-2005 19:45:52
[quote0ef22cc619="J4320"][quote0ef22cc619="computer-guy"][quote0ef22cc619="ben lauden"]Btw, if god created us in such a GENIUS INTELLIGENTLY DESIGNED way, then how do you explain all the useless parts of various animals? For instance, the appendicies of humans? that's not very intelligently designed. In fact, if god designed that, it must have been after a hard night of drinking, crack, and hookers[/quote0ef22cc619]
Ok ben lauden,you want to know why so many human parts are useless?
Well the reason is because before Adam and Eve(the first humans) Dissobeyed God everything had a a job to do,every single part. Adam and Eve could talk to animals and use 100% of their brain and do countless other things we can't today.The reaso wyh we can't is because after they dissobeyed god sin came upon everything and caused the parts that are useless now to become useless.
If that doesn't make sence please reply because i would clarify it for you.[/quote0ef22cc619]
Well the Bible never says that our useless things in our bodies had purposes. That was my speculation. But a lot of bad things did happen after Adam and Eve sinned.[/quote0ef22cc619]
Your right,the Bible doesn't say that but my opinion is its true because God made man in his image which would be perfect,exsept they sinned and could never be perfect again.
Also to you ben lauden,nobody knows why God did alot of things.He could of made them to be useless,or for something that got cancel because of sin.
computer-guy
05-07-2005 19:50:33
[quote735a3244dd="nicd.01"][quote735a3244dd="computer-guy"][quote735a3244dd="ben lauden"]Btw, if god created us in such a GENIUS INTELLIGENTLY DESIGNED way, then how do you explain all the useless parts of various animals? For instance, the appendicies of humans? that's not very intelligently designed. In fact, if god designed that, it must have been after a hard night of drinking, crack, and hookers[/quote735a3244dd]
Ok ben lauden,you want to know why so many human and other animals parts are useless?
Well the reason is because before Adam and Eve(the first humans) Dissobeyed God everything had a a job to do,every single part. Adam and Eve could talk to animals and use 100% of their brain and do countless other things we can't today.The reason why we can't is because after they dissobeyed god sin came upon everything and caused the parts that are useless now to become useless.
If that doesn't make sence please reply because i would clarify it for you.[/quote735a3244dd]
WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE THAT DON'T BELIEVE IN YOUR GOD??? And don't give me that shit that basically every religion is the same BECAUSE THEY AREN'T. These explanations you post are MEANINGLESS for COUNTLESS religions. NO ONE HAS ANSWERED THAT QUESTION! I asked it 2 times and was blown off twice. Is it because that's a big hole in your belief structure? Most modern christians don't even believe this nonsense. You know what I learned? I learned that babies were made when God puts a diamond in a fucking cabbage patch and then the mommy comes and puts it in her tummy with the help of angels and then the angels clap and sing and the baby comes out. Post me the one about the hole to hell that those "scientists" discovered in Siberia, too. It was on TBN so it must be true. I am truly sickened.[/quote735a3244dd]
How can you compare something that is a simple story that is told to a baby because they aren't old enough to understand everything?
Crynos
05-07-2005 19:54:18
How can you blindly relay what you were taught in church, none of your arguments have any fact backing them up, all you say is god did this, god did that, what about the billions of people who dont believe in god?
Godrockdj
05-07-2005 19:57:02
Now that my bbqs are done... )
I've read through, for the most part, the majority of these 10+ pages of posts. There have been some excellent points on both sides. As most of you know I am a Christian that believes in a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. With that said though I was not raised in that kind of an atmosphere. My family fell into the "Catholic by name only" category. So for most of my life I believed in evolution, kind of because it just seemed like the right thing to do. I didn't put much thought or research into backing up my "belief".
When I became a Christian, however, I did reserach my views because people actually questioned me. What I came up with surprised me (as did a lot of other things) and slowly led me to support what would indeed fall under the general umbrella of Creationism.
That was a while ago. Since then I've had many, [b172668ab03]many, [i172668ab03]many[/i172668ab03][/b172668ab03] discussions like this with people like you guys on the net. What I quickly learned was that it's extremely hard to have logical and level-headed debates on the net, especially about spiritual matters like this. For one thing simply because it leads to literally thousands of other trap questions. I could go through these posts, quote what I agree with, find sources for what I disagree with, etc. But it takes a ridiculous amount of time and quite frankly I try not to do it anymore unless necessary. Too many variables. People who know me in real life like my friends have had many such discussions on the matter. I feel comfortable talking in person about this kind of stuff because it isn't amplified to the 97th degree by being on the net. And also, really, most of those discussions are still ongoing - we haven't finished them yet. Because sometimes you just can't. You might not yield in one area and neither will the other person. Or there is simply not enough evidence, or you base it on something the other will not find admissable. It's endless.
So with that said, if you really want to discuss my views with me at least contact me on aim. That's slightly better than on a messageboard.
~ Godrockdj
lilearned as a kid that the stork delivered babiesli
nicd.01
05-07-2005 20:18:48
[quotebdf4ea7c0e="Godrockdj"]Now that my bbqs are done... )
I've read through, for the most part, the majority of these 10+ pages of posts. There have been some excellent points on both sides. As most of you know I am a Christian that believes in a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. With that said though I was not raised in that kind of an atmosphere. My family fell into the "Catholic by name only" category. So for most of my life I believed in evolution, kind of because it just seemed like the right thing to do. I didn't put much thought or research into backing up my "belief".
When I became a Christian, however, I did reserach my views because people actually questioned me. What I came up with surprised me (as did a lot of other things) and slowly led me to support what would indeed fall under the general umbrella of Creationism.
That was a while ago. Since then I've had many, [bbdf4ea7c0e]many, [ibdf4ea7c0e]many[/ibdf4ea7c0e][/bbdf4ea7c0e] discussions like this with people like you guys on the net. What I quickly learned was that it's extremely hard to have logical and level-headed debates on the net, especially about spiritual matters like this. For one thing simply because it leads to literally thousands of other trap questions. I could go through these posts, quote what I agree with, find sources for what I disagree with, etc. But it takes a ridiculous amount of time and quite frankly I try not to do it anymore unless necessary. Too many variables. People who know me in real life like my friends have had many such discussions on the matter. I feel comfortable talking in person about this kind of stuff because it isn't amplified to the 97th degree by being on the net. And also, really, most of those discussions are still ongoing - we haven't finished them yet. Because sometimes you just can't. You might not yield in one area and neither will the other person. Or there is simply not enough evidence, or you base it on something the other will not find admissable. It's endless.
So with that said, if you really want to discuss my views with me at least contact me on aim. That's slightly better than on a messageboard.
~ Godrockdj
lilearned as a kid that the stork delivered babiesli[/quotebdf4ea7c0e]
Well said. -D
ben laden
05-07-2005 20:38:48
[quote1799c54bc1="computer-guy"][quote1799c54bc1="J4320"][quote1799c54bc1="computer-guy"][quote1799c54bc1="ben lauden"]Me raging on some noobs[/quote1799c54bc1]Recounting a fairy tale[/quote1799c54bc1]
Vague generalization about what might have happened thousands or millions of years ago even though the tools and knowledge for writing probably weren't available so how the hell would we know what happened?[/quote1799c54bc1]
[i1799c54bc1]
Warning The following material may be sensitive to those with brains.[/i1799c54bc1]
Your right,the Bible doesn't say that but my opinion is its true because God made man in his image which would be perfect,exsept they sinned and could never be perfect again.
Also to you ben lauden,nobody knows why God did alot of things.He could of made them to be useless,or for something that got cancel because of sin.[/quote1799c54bc1]
OMG MY BRAIN IS GOING TO EXPLODE
AND PLEASE START SPELLING MY NAME RIGHT, IT'S NOT THAT HARD
Collateral
05-07-2005 20:47:08
Computer-guy, are you 13? ...No offense.
theysayjump
05-07-2005 20:54:07
litries not to laughli
i cant believe some of this stuff!
its funny as shit.
computer-guy
05-07-2005 22:31:04
[quoteaa4b1e6fb8="Collateral"]Computer-guy, are you 13? ...No offense.[/quoteaa4b1e6fb8]
No! infact i'm 19!
Sorry ben-laden (lol,I got it right this time! wink )
Crynos
05-07-2005 22:32:47
[quoteb6e252deef="computer-guy"][quoteb6e252deef="Collateral"]Computer-guy, are you 13? ...No offense.[/quoteb6e252deef]
No! infact i'm 19!
Sorry ben-laden (lol,I got it right this time! wink )[/quoteb6e252deef]
Im sorry, thats simply not true, as my god (the space martian jajaputsapholus) has decreed that the earth is only 18 years old.
Edit This is basically as factual as all your arguments have been
theysayjump
05-07-2005 22:37:38
lol
computer-guy
05-07-2005 22:42:44
[quote918ab569c1="Crynos"][quote918ab569c1="computer-guy"][quote918ab569c1="Collateral"]Computer-guy, are you 13? ...No offense.[/quote918ab569c1]
No! infact i'm 19!
Sorry ben-laden (lol,I got it right this time! wink )[/quote918ab569c1]
Im sorry, thats simply not true, as my god (the space martian jajaputsapholus) has decreed that the earth is only 18 years old.
Edit This is basically as factual as all your arguments have been[/quote918ab569c1]
Well i'm sorry too. I thought you were 12.
Anyways quit having a heart-attack over something that isn't true (like my age) and put some of the efort towards proving your theory.
How can people be so stupid! roll
Crynos
05-07-2005 22:47:17
[quote328af9a528="computer-guy"][quote328af9a528="Crynos"][quote328af9a528="computer-guy"][quote328af9a528="Collateral"]Computer-guy, are you 13? ...No offense.[/quote328af9a528]
No! infact i'm 19!
Sorry ben-laden (lol,I got it right this time! wink )[/quote328af9a528]
Im sorry, thats simply not true, as my god (the space martian jajaputsapholus) has decreed that the earth is only 18 years old.
Edit This is basically as factual as all your arguments have been[/quote328af9a528]
Well i'm sorry too. I thought you were 12.
Anyways quit having a heart-attack over something that isn't true (like my age) and put some of the efort towards proving your theory.
How can people be so stupid! roll[/quote328af9a528]
Didnt you get the point of my post? Youre entire argument is based off things you say god did which there is no factual proof of.
Summary
pt.1 You can say your god did multitudes of things, lilililithat does NOT make it truelililili.
pt. 2 you have no factual argument, your only argument is entirely based on blind faith in your god and your god alone
computer-guy
05-07-2005 22:47:24
oh i missspelled! am i 2 now? lol
Crynos
05-07-2005 22:48:53
[quoteaa2cef3f6e="computer-guy"]oh i missspelled! am i 2 now? lol[/quoteaa2cef3f6e]
I dont give a shit how old you are, just give me a valid argument.
computer-guy
05-07-2005 22:50:31
[quote4a84054bcd="Crynos"][quote4a84054bcd="computer-guy"][quote4a84054bcd="Crynos"][quote4a84054bcd="computer-guy"][quote4a84054bcd="Collateral"]Computer-guy, are you 13? ...No offense.[/quote4a84054bcd]
No! infact i'm 19!
Sorry ben-laden (lol,I got it right this time! wink )[/quote4a84054bcd]
Im sorry, thats simply not true, as my god (the space martian jajaputsapholus) has decreed that the earth is only 18 years old.
Edit This is basically as factual as all your arguments have been[/quote4a84054bcd]
Well i'm sorry too. I thought you were 12.
Anyways quit having a heart-attack over something that isn't true (like my age) and put some of the efort towards proving your theory.
How can people be so stupid! roll[/quote4a84054bcd]
Didnt you get the point of my post? Youre entire argument is based off things you say god did which there is no factual proof of.
Summary
pt.1 You can say your god did multitudes of things, lilililithat does NOT make it truelililili.
pt. 2 you have no factual argument, your only argument is entirely based on blind faith in your god and your god alone[/quote4a84054bcd]
I am sorry i should of given some credible sources and other info than just what my God says.I'll do that for now on,i guess i'm the stupid one,lol lol
CoMpFrEaK
05-07-2005 22:51:26
so whats the conclusion after 10+ pages of arguements?
computer-guy
05-07-2005 22:52:55
[quotef38ff11fdb="CoMpFrEaK"]so whats the conclusion after 10+ pages of arguements?[/quotef38ff11fdb]
I don't know? What do u think?
theysayjump
05-07-2005 22:54:41
lol, that everybody is wrong and that everyone else is correct D
computer-guy
05-07-2005 22:56:32
[quotef4d0711864="theysayjump"]lol, that everybody is wrong and that everyone else is correct D[/quotef4d0711864]
lol,i see, )
xXHasek99
05-07-2005 23:04:44
there was a poll once, and it concluded that all polls are wrong mrgreen
theysayjump
05-07-2005 23:06:57
statistically, all statistics are wrong also. wink
xXHasek99
05-07-2005 23:10:47
[quote63e442391c="theysayjump"]statistically, all statistics are wrong also. wink[/quote63e442391c]
stop repeating what i said!!! D
... as for the thread question, it can't be god, coz god is EVIL, i mean he did put us on this earth as puppets, to play with, and do you believe in someone who'd do such a thing to you? i don't think sooooo... therefore it's EVOLUTION!
Hasek.
P.S. OMG i'm so smart!!!! ROFL!
drummer_kew_03
06-07-2005 01:05:35
[quote893a404ea1="nicd.01"]
WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE THAT DON'T BELIEVE IN YOUR GOD??? And don't give me that shit that basically every religion is the same BECAUSE THEY AREN'T. These explanations you post are MEANINGLESS for COUNTLESS religions. NO ONE HAS ANSWERED THAT QUESTION! I asked it 2 times and was blown off twice. Is it because that's a big hole in your belief structure? Most modern christians don't even believe this nonsense. You know what I learned? I learned that babies were made when God puts a diamond in a fucking cabbage patch and then the mommy comes and puts it in her tummy with the help of angels and then the angels clap and sing and the baby comes out. Post me the one about the hole to hell that those "scientists" discovered in Siberia, too. It was on TBN so it must be true. I am truly sickened.[/quote893a404ea1]
The part about other religions
Let's assume that christianity is the right religion. People from any religion, including christianity, who haven't been saved will go to hell. If Christianity is true, then it doesn't matter what others believe. There's no such thing as your own "personal truth". There is only one truth.
The part about TBN
I agree with you. That station makes me sick, and i'm a christian. I'm sure that there are some legitimate christians on there, but I think that most of them are fakes. That's one of those things that makes christians all look like hypocritical psychos.
kairi990
06-07-2005 08:17:47
well, i don't believe in Evolution, to me it just doesn't make sense... and i can't say that creationism is right, because the story in the bible doesn't make much sense. You can't use the story in the bible to prove that we were created, because it is JUST A STORY . How the hell does a single cell micro-organism change into a complex organism with multiple cells like us?
So where did we all come from??
NOBODY KNOWS!
when i get to the light at the end of the tunnel, i'll see who's or what's at the other end. I don't care where we came from, i'm only concerned with where we are going, and right now the world is a mess. The homeless, AIDS, starvation, genocide in africa, poor people; That's what we should worrying about. Not stories and Theories.
J4320
06-07-2005 09:15:54
Let this thread die. Noone is going to change their belief due to these arguments on this forum. Godrockdj put that very well. Just let it die.
ben laden
06-07-2005 10:26:57
[quoteefa1af2dc2="J4320"]Let this thread die. Noone is going to change their belief due to these arguments on this forum. Godrockdj put that very well. Just let it die.[/quoteefa1af2dc2]
NEEEEEEEEEVVVVVVVVERRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!
Crynos
06-07-2005 10:31:54
Cmon guys, we have to at least reach 666 replies, then we can let it die
nicd.01
06-07-2005 11:12:15
There's nothing wrong with open discussion. Debates are good.
Crynos
06-07-2005 11:15:53
[quote55830c468a="nicd.01"]There's nothing wrong with open discussion. Debates are good.[/quote55830c468a]
Agreed, its good to hear the different viewpoints of everyone
J4320
06-07-2005 11:16:17
[quote7c63d3d21d="nicd.01"]There's nothing wrong with open discussion. Debates are good.[/quote7c63d3d21d]
They are. And I've served my purpose for this thread. I don't see how people can believe in Evolution. But of course I'm sure you can't see how someone would believe in Creationism. But seriously, about Evolution, it really makes no sense.
Crynos
06-07-2005 11:17:08
[quote10da34584a="J4320"][quote10da34584a="nicd.01"]There's nothing wrong with open discussion. Debates are good.[/quote10da34584a]
They are. And I've served my purpose for this thread. I don't see how people can believe in Evolution. But of course I'm sure you can't see how someone would believe in Creationism. But seriously, about Evolution, it really makes no sense.[/quote10da34584a]
Same with creationism D
J4320
06-07-2005 11:21:15
Crynos, you know that there is a spiritual side to this world, don't you?
Crynos
06-07-2005 11:22:48
[quoted016a7dc6e="J4320"]Crynos, you know that there is a spiritual side to this world, don't you?[/quoted016a7dc6e] Depends what you mean by spiritual, if you mean god and angels and all that balogna then no, i dont believe it.
theysayjump
09-07-2005 16:45:39
not to drag up an old thread (which is what im doing), but it looks like weve sparked the same discussion over at A4F, some good points i think....if your still interested in this but think that THIS thread has died, go on over there and see what they have to say
http//www.anything4free.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=20166
Scudhawk007
02-11-2005 21:06:20
[bc3bf6b935f]I'm surprised at how close the votes are. I definitely have to go with creationism. Everywhere I look there is evidence of intelligent design. If you walk into the wildest jungle and see a perfectly arranged garden with vegetables and plants all in symmetrical rows, i doubt they grew that way by chance.[/colorc3bf6b935f]
Just the fact that the sun, moon, planets are all arranged in such a fashion that, if they were moved the slightest bit, conditions for life would not be possible (i.e. orbit around the sun, tides by the moon and plantlife creating oxygen).[/colorc3bf6b935f]
Even the complexity of the smallest cell of any living organism. The deeper we look into a cell the harder it is to understand and explain. What's after DNA and RNA? how deep does the complexity go? What are the odds that 15 amino acids will combine to form a protein? The probability, even given the billions of years scientists claim for evolution, is near freakin impossible. [/colorc3bf6b935f]
Just mathematically, my mind is made up. It takes way more "faith" to be an atheist. [ic3bf6b935f]Even if [/ic3bf6b935f]Creation accounts such as the one in Genesis of the bible are mythological (telling of an occurence not explainable otherwise), i think the point is clear--the earth was DESIGNED. [/colorc3bf6b935f][/bc3bf6b935f] wink
Brok3n_Sword
02-11-2005 21:20:40
[quoteee51360be4="Scudhawk007"][bee51360be4]
I'm surprised at how close the votes are. I definitely have to go with creationism. Everywhere I look there is evidence of intelligent design. If you walk into the wildest jungle and see a perfectly arranged garden with vegetables and plants all in symmetrical rows, i doubt they grew that way by chance.[/coloree51360be4]
Just the fact that the sun, moon, planets are all arranged in such a fashion that, if they were moved the slightest bit, conditions for life would not be possible (i.e. orbit around the sun, tides by the moon and plantlife creating oxygen).[/coloree51360be4]
Even the complexity of the smallest cell of any living organism. The deeper we look into a cell the harder it is to understand and explain. What's after DNA and RNA? how deep does the complexity go? What are the odds that 15 amino acids will combine to form a protein? The probability, even given the billions of years scientists claim for evolution, is near freakin impossible. [/coloree51360be4]
Just mathematically, my mind is made up. It takes way more "faith" to be an atheist. [iee51360be4]Even if [/iee51360be4]Creation accounts such as the one in Genesis of the bible are mythological (telling of an occurence not explainable otherwise), i think the point is clear--the earth was DESIGNED. [/coloree51360be4][/bee51360be4] wink[/quoteee51360be4]
![]("ee51360be4)
http//forum.freeipodguide.com/smilies_mod/upload/66c834fa2239077ac828df474e9d6cfa.gif[" alt=""/imgee51360be4]
I'm sorry, but "Intelligent Design" is such a load of crap. It doesn't even involve any initiatives of it's own, it's simply a big long list of critiques of a theory people don't understand. If you really examine the universe, does it really seem that intelligent to you? Natural disasters and things like [url==http//science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/13may_2004mn4.htm]this[=http//science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/13may_2004mn4.htm]this[/url] just don't seem like they'd come from an intelligent creator.
hairyferry
02-11-2005 21:43:24
yeah definately Creationist.... I have a problem with thinking I came from an ape.... We don't even look like those things.. hmm then again look at FON...
THis world/galaxy/universe whatever can't of just happened. Based on what the Bible says I believe the world isn't much over 10,000 years old. Faith is the evidence of things not seen but the things hoped for. Kinda like you having faith in the chair you're sitting on that it's gonna hold you up or not.
Scudhawk007
02-11-2005 22:07:23
[quote25a6d726bb="theysayjump"]well your religion hasnt been around the longest since your religion isnt Godism or Godianity.......your religion is born from the birth and death of Jesus Christ.
and he wasnt around when the world was created so neither could your religion.
it is a fact that there are religions more than 7000 years old (5000 BC) so no your religion is not the oldest.[/quote25a6d726bb]
[b25a6d726bb]Technically, Christianity IS Judaism being fulfilled. Jews however do not believe this, but it is argued plainly by Peter, the apostle (a Jew), if any one cares to pick up a copy of the new testament. My point is, Christianity is as old as Judaism.[/b25a6d726bb][/color25a6d726bb]
[b25a6d726bb]And as far as the statement that Christ wasn't around when the world was created... wink ...people who believe in the validity of the bible might want to check out Colossians 115-17. If you don't, then don't worry about it.[/b25a6d726bb] [/color25a6d726bb] lol
Scudhawk007
02-11-2005 22:24:25
[quoteb8ee566822="computer-guy"][quoteb8ee566822="slease"][quoteb8ee566822="computer-guy"]the NewTestement was written by the Apostles and inspired by the
Holy Spirit(God) in like around 58 B.C. to 78 B.C.[/quoteb8ee566822][/quoteb8ee566822]
...King James version is the best around on not being altered,cause there are many different versions that claim to be the real thing but aren't,like the book of morman(who have twisted up everthing),the books the catholics added on to theirs,and i could go on......[/quoteb8ee566822]
[bb8ee566822]The New Testament began being written roughly around 26-28 A.D. by scholars who estimate Christ's birth to around 6 B.C. unlike the common belief of 0 A.D. The book of Revelation (last book of the new testament) dates around 96 A.D. [/bb8ee566822][/colorb8ee566822]
[bb8ee566822]Also, the King James version was written based on old manuscripts. Majority of scholars rely on the NRSV now because it is the closest to the original Hebrew and Greek texts and are based on the newest, more reliable discoveries of ancient manuscripts. NIV might be the most understandable while still coming in a close second to accuracy.[/bb8ee566822][/colorb8ee566822]
hairyferry
02-11-2005 22:38:44
lol, preach it Rev Scudhawk007.... Good job!
Scudhawk007
02-11-2005 22:40:11
[quote0a36e22486="hairyferry"]lol, preach it Rev Scudhawk007.... Good job![/quote0a36e22486]
wink Here's to good schoolin'!
hairyferry
02-11-2005 22:42:17
Where did you go?
Scudhawk007
02-11-2005 22:44:57
[quote0d71c40ff5="hairyferry"]Where did you go?[/quote0d71c40ff5]
liEDITED OUTli... rated high among the top colleges and universities of Ohio...snaggin' a Bachelor of Arts in Bible & Theology come Spring '06.
lieditli Regarding [i0d71c40ff5]anonymity[/i0d71c40ff5]..."It's like a warm blanket." -Max, The Arms Dealer (Mission Impossible)
hairyferry
02-11-2005 22:46:13
nice
goofygarber
02-11-2005 22:47:03
I go to... high school?
nofxowl
02-11-2005 23:58:05
yeah, while considering the fact that i have a Darwin Fish tatooed on my leg seems to point me in one direction for this topic
hairyferry
03-11-2005 01:25:08
wtf, why would you have a tat like that???
Cash4Cookies
03-11-2005 02:00:30
I haven't read but the last two pages of this thread, but I had to say this.
Do any of you guys that voted creationism understand how big space is? Like...you cant even comprehend how big our galaxy is, and there are billions of galaxies in space. How can you explain that? Did "god" make other galaxies, and solar systems in those galaxies? You say that everything is perfectly placed, and it is. But thats a coincidence. Think about it, there are billions apon billions of galaxies, with their own planets, stars, and whatever else thats in there. How do you know there aren't other planets, where the conditions are perfect? Look, space has been around for forever, it has had infinite chances to make a planet that can support life, you cant even comprehend it. The one time the conditions are perfect, here we are. It could have taken forever, and it might have, who knows. To me, saying that "god" created us is down right ignorant. Don't get me wrong, without religion the world would be complete chaos, and we need something to keep everyone in check. Think about it, even if we could prove that god isn't real, would we? Complete chaos would insue, and the government would have a lot of explaining to do. Bottom line look at the facts, "space" is insanely big, you cannot even begin to comprehend how big it actually is. And to say that we are the only planet with life is just preposterous, its actually impossible.
I have one more gripe about the bible, doesn't the first page read something like; God created land, and then put water in between. I mean that there is enough to turn me off reading it. Last time I checked, Pangea was a fact. The continents are still moving, was that in "gods" plan? What about dinosaurs? Isn't it a fact that humans were NOT around when dinosaurs were? How come as soon as god made the earth he put humans on it? It just doesn't add up to me, religion at all. My final thoughts are Religion is nessesary, it motivates people so they aren't just waiting to die. Without it we would animals (which we are), it would be eat, sleep, and reproduce. Any intelligent religious person, I dare you to think outside the box for a second, and really ask yourself, "Does it make sense?". If it does, I would love to hear what you have to say. Thanks for letting me take up your time.
drummer_kew_03
03-11-2005 02:21:03
[quoted344f8a509="Cash4Cookies"]
I have one more gripe about the bible, doesn't the first page read something like; God created land, and then put water in between. I mean that there is enough to turn me off reading it. Last time I checked, Pangea was a fact. The continents are still moving, was that in "gods" plan? What about dinosaurs? Isn't it a fact that humans were NOT around when dinosaurs were? How come as soon as god made the earth he put humans on it?[/quoted344f8a509]
The plates are moving. Pangea is just a theory, but I believe that it could very well be possible. God created the earth with water on the surface. Then he seperated the water into water in/on the earth and the water in the sky. All the way until Noah, there was no rain and all the water was in the sky. When the flood came, all the water from the sky came down and reformed the face of the earth, pushing up mountain ranges and pushing down oceans.
As for dinosaurs, they are mentioned in the bible. If they died out long before humans, and were turned into fossils, how would people back then have known about them?
Cash4Cookies
03-11-2005 03:03:11
can you please point me to where the bible mentions dinosaurs??? I am very interested to see it mention them, as I have heard the argument about dinosaurs in the bible played many out many times, with the bible thumper always resulting to the "you just have to have faith" line. And the thing about pangea is proven im 99% sure, it was a theory, that was proven. If the bible says god pushed up the mountains and pushed down the oceans then thats dead wrong, and I dont see your argument.
hairyferry
03-11-2005 03:18:45
“Dinosaur” Names, Then and Now
Name and date first written in the Bible Scientific Name (best estimate) and date the name appeared
tanniyn (dragon) before 1400 BC dinosaur 1841 AD
behemoth before 1400 BC brachiosaurus 1903 AD
Leviathan before 1400 BC kronosaurus 1901 AD
Behemoth has the following attributes according to Job 4015-24
It “eats grass like an ox.”
It “moves his tail like a cedar.” (In Hebrew, this literally reads, “he lets hang his tail like a cedar.”)
Its “bones are like beams of bronze,
His ribs like bars of iron.”
“He is the first of the ways of God.”
“He lies under the lotus trees,
In a covert of reeds and marsh.”
Leviathan has the following attributes according to Job chapter 41, Psalm 10425,26 and Isaiah 271. This is only a partial listing—just enough to make the point.
“No one is so fierce that he would dare stir him up.”
“Who can open the doors of his face, with his terrible teeth all around?”
“His rows of scales are his pride, shut up tightly as with a seal; one is so near another that no air can come between them; they are joined one to another, they stick together and cannot be parted.”
“His sneezings flash forth light, and his eyes are like the eyelids of the morning. Out of his mouth go burning lights; sparks of fire shoot out. Smoke goes out of his nostrils, as from a boiling pot and burning rushes. His breath kindles coals, and a flame goes out of his mouth.”
“Though the sword reaches him, it cannot avail; nor does spear, dart, or javelin. He regards iron as straw, and bronze as rotten wood. The arrow cannot make him flee; slingstones become like stubble to him. Darts are regarded as straw; he laughs at the threat of javelins.”
“On earth there is nothing like him, which is made without fear.”
Leviathan “played” in the “great and wide sea” (a paraphrase of Psalm 104 verses 25 and 26—get the exact sense by reading them yourself).
Leviathan is a “reptile [a] that is in the sea.” (Isaiah 271)
hairyferry
03-11-2005 03:24:19
[quote2c0d580688="Cash4Cookies"]I haven't read but the last two pages of this thread, but I had to say this.
Do any of you guys that voted creationism understand how big space is? Like...you cant even comprehend how big our galaxy is, and there are billions of galaxies in space. How can you explain that? Did "god" make other galaxies, and solar systems in those galaxies? You say that everything is perfectly placed, and it is. But thats a coincidence. Think about it, there are billions apon billions of galaxies, with their own planets, stars, and whatever else thats in there. How do you know there aren't other planets, where the conditions are perfect? Look, space has been around for forever, it has had infinite chances to make a planet that can support life, you cant even comprehend it. The one time the conditions are perfect, here we are. It could have taken forever, and it might have, who knows. To me, saying that "god" created us is down right ignorant. Don't get me wrong, without religion the world would be complete chaos, and we need something to keep everyone in check.
Think about it, even if we could prove that god isn't real, would we? Complete chaos would insue, and the government would have a lot of explaining to do. Bottom line look at the facts, "space" is insanely big, you cannot even begin to comprehend how big it actually is. And to say that we are the only planet with life is just preposterous, its actually impossible.
I have one more gripe about the bible, doesn't the first page read something like; God created land, and then put water in between. I mean that there is enough to turn me off reading it. Last time I checked, Pangea was a fact. The continents are still moving, was that in "gods" plan? What about dinosaurs? Isn't it a fact that humans were NOT around when dinosaurs were? How come as soon as god made the earth he put humans on it? It just doesn't add up to me, religion at all. My final thoughts are Religion is nessesary, it motivates people so they aren't just waiting to die. Without it we would animals (which we are), it would be eat, sleep, and reproduce. Any intelligent religious person, I dare you to think outside the box for a second, and really ask yourself, "Does it make sense?". If it does, I would love to hear what you have to say. Thanks for letting me take up your time.[/quote2c0d580688]
Luke 127-8
Are not five sparrows sold for two pennies? And not one of them is forgotten before God. Why, even the hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear not; you are of more value than many sparrows.
If God knows every hair on our heaad and every sparrow in the sky I'm sure stars and galaxies are cake.
Cash4Cookies
03-11-2005 03:33:11
hairyferry, I see that it talks about a dragon (wow roll roll roll ) but nothing about dinosaurs.
And ok, it was easy as cake to make galaxies. He made the countless amount of galaxies, where life on them is a given. Yet failed to mention the other planets and people he made.
Please take a look at
this,[=http//micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/java/scienceopticsu/powersof10/]this, and tell me how its possible we are the only planet that can sustain life out there. I mean, look at how fucking HUGE that is, and thats just OUR GALAXY. It complete blows my mind how much stuff there is out there, we cannot be alone. There is no possible way in my mind that we are alone in this universe. I feel that there is a better chance we are floating in something in a petrie dish with a scientist looking over us, then the whole "god" theory. Unless of course that what "god" is.
hairyferry
03-11-2005 04:03:58
tanniyn (dragon) before 1400 BC dinosaur 1841 AD
The Dragon was the Dinosaur they just didn't call them dinosaurs until the mid 1800's.
lol, that's a lot of stars bro... Honestly I live by what the Bible says. It doesn't talk about aliens or anything like that so I don't believe in things like that. The closest thing to an alien I believe in is an Angel. When it comes to the stars God is amazing, and if He can make all the amazing super complex things here on earth, making trillions of stars with nothing on them in space is cake.
Brok3n_Sword
03-11-2005 04:40:26
[quote2b21f9ab4c="hairyferry"]yeah definately Creationist.... I have a problem with thinking I came from an ape.... We don't even look like those things.. hmm then again look at FON...
THis world/galaxy/universe whatever can't of just happened. Based on what the Bible says I believe the world isn't much over 10,000 years old. Faith is the evidence of things not seen but the things hoped for. Kinda like you having faith in the chair you're sitting on that it's gonna hold you up or not.[/quote2b21f9ab4c]
Were you asleep in your science classes? Remember carbon dating? 10,000 years, lol...
Cash4Cookies
03-11-2005 05:22:53
[quote0c1b94849c="hairyferry"]tanniyn (dragon) before 1400 BC dinosaur 1841 AD
The Dragon was the Dinosaur they just didn't call them dinosaurs until the mid 1800's.
lol, that's a lot of stars bro... Honestly I live by what the Bible says. It doesn't talk about aliens or anything like that so I don't believe in things like that. The closest thing to an alien I believe in is an Angel. When it comes to the stars God is amazing, and if He can make all the amazing super complex things here on earth, making trillions of stars with nothing on them in space is cake.[/quote0c1b94849c]
It says its a dinosaur, but they describe a dragon. The bible is there to keep you in check, and thats good that you belive it, so you don't go and murder children. So you are honeslty telling me, looking at those ACTUAL pictures of our solar system, it is impossible for there to be other life? I mean come on, if you don't see the glaring fact that we aren't the only people out here, you must be very ignorant. I mean, come on, they are saying there might be a form of life on mars, and thats in OUR SOLAR SYSTEM. Do you understand how many other solar systems there are? No one can even count them, there are an almost infinite amount. Its impossible for us to be the only ones out there. I am not trying to discourage you or call you stupid, but you are very closed minded. You are close minded because ever since you could walk, talk, and listen you have been fed the bible and all its bullshit, and its not your fault. I don't expect you to realize that there are other ways to think. Honestly, I can't even understand why people try to ignore science. Just looking at the other solar systems, it is actually ignorant to say there can't be life out there.
I believe in evolution.
All of the 'creation science' that I have read is something that I would call pseudo science. All creation science attempts to do (and I have read over this stuff extensively) is to discredit evolutionary theory without actually providing proof of an alternative. The bias is quite clear.
Remember this, Galileo and Copernicus were threatened by the religious establishment when they presented their ideas (sun revolving around the earth, etc) which were contrary to religious doctrine at the time. Now, their findings are common knowledge. No one except for the truly insane or maybe isolated tribespeople in a jungle somewhere disagrees with them.
In my opinion, God (for lack of a better word) is present within everything naturally occurring on the planet earth (living and dead); not some omnipresent old dude with a beard sitting watching over us all. The indigineous peoples of this continent had the right idea.
Scudhawk007
03-11-2005 06:44:37
[quote6bfd751626="Jake"]I believe in evolution.
All of the 'creation science' that I have read is something that I would call pseudo science. All creation science attempts to do (and I have read over this stuff extensively) is to discredit evolutionary theory without actually providing proof of an alternative. The bias is quite clear.
Remember this, Galileo and Copernicus were threatened by the religious establishment when they presented their ideas (sun revolving around the earth, etc) which were contrary to religious doctrine at the time. Now, their findings are common knowledge. No one except for the truly insane or maybe isolated tribespeople in a jungle somewhere disagrees with them.
In my opinion, God (for lack of a better word) is present within everything naturally occurring on the planet earth (living and dead); not some omnipresent old dude with a beard sitting watching over us all. The indigineous peoples of this continent had the right idea.[/quote6bfd751626]
So would you consider yourself a pantheist? And yeah, creation will never be proven, nor will evolution. I just want to know what you guys thing about the "first cause." Did the universe always exist, or did something (usually believed to be God) cause it with something like the [i6bfd751626]big bang[/i6bfd751626]? I tend to believe that science EXPLAINS the creation account. Obviously Moses (the claimed author of genesis) wasn't around in the beginning. So his story is going to be mythological in its explanation. Science (except for evolution from lower life) seems to make a good attempt at explaining how things got here. My question is, couldn't God have caused it all?
Cash4Cookies
03-11-2005 06:51:58
Hehehe, I had to.
![]("d099f09c56)
http/" alt=""/img381.imageshack.us/img="381/4002/church18eg.jpg[" alt=""/imgd099f09c56]
D D lol lol lol
[quote0540bce810="Scudhawk007"]
So would you consider yourself a pantheist?
[/quote0540bce810]
I am a Buddhist in terms of a philosophy on life. I also believe that all life is sacred and that no life form is more important than any other (this includes humans). The Earth contains all that is sacred, IMHO. We should treasure it.
[quote0540bce810="Scudhawk007"]
And yeah, creation will never be proven, nor will evolution.
[/quote0540bce810]
There is more proof that life forms evolved in some manner from a more primitive form than there is for creation.
[quote0540bce810="Scudhawk007"]
I just want to know what you guys thing about the "first cause." Did the universe always exist, or did something (usually believed to be God) cause it with something like the [i0540bce810]big bang[/i0540bce810]?
[/quote0540bce810]
That is a deep philosophical question that we will undoubtedly spend the rest of our existence as a race determining.
[quote0540bce810="Scudhawk007"]
I tend to believe that science EXPLAINS the creation account. Obviously Moses (the claimed author of genesis) wasn't around in the beginning. So his story is going to be mythological in its explanation.
[/quote0540bce810]
Please elaborate on the first sentence. I'd like to understand your point of view a bit better.
[quote0540bce810="Scudhawk007"]
Science (except for evolution from lower life) seems to make a good attempt at explaining how things got here. My question is, couldn't God have caused it all?[/quote0540bce810]
Science is more inclusive than religion is in terms of its explanation. The explanation that some omnipresent supreme being made everything is mythological at best. Keep in mind that cultures throughout the history of the human race all had their creation myths. Every single culture had some story about how everything was created (from indigineous peoples to modern human religions). So if this is the case, what makes the Christian explanation of Genesis more valid than the Ancient Greek explanation that the gods from Mount Olympus created everything? There isn't any proof of one than there is for the other.
tracemhunter
03-11-2005 07:01:38
hahaha i should do that sign thing.
jake, what kind of buddhist are you? we are studying buddhism in my religion class and i would like to know.
hairyferry
03-11-2005 07:07:34
[quoted1def97443="Cash4Cookies"][quoted1def97443="hairyferry"]tanniyn (dragon) before 1400 BC dinosaur 1841 AD
The Dragon was the Dinosaur they just didn't call them dinosaurs until the mid 1800's.
lol, that's a lot of stars bro... Honestly I live by what the Bible says. It doesn't talk about aliens or anything like that so I don't believe in things like that. The closest thing to an alien I believe in is an Angel. When it comes to the stars God is amazing, and if He can make all the amazing super complex things here on earth, making trillions of stars with nothing on them in space is cake.[/quoted1def97443]
It says its a dinosaur, but they describe a dragon. The bible is there to keep you in check, and thats good that you belive it, so you don't go and murder children. So you are honeslty telling me, looking at those ACTUAL pictures of our solar system, it is impossible for there to be other life? I mean come on, if you don't see the glaring fact that we aren't the only people out here, you must be very ignorant. I mean, come on, they are saying there might be a form of life on mars, and thats in OUR SOLAR SYSTEM. Do you understand how many other solar systems there are? No one can even count them, there are an almost infinite amount. Its impossible for us to be the only ones out there. I am not trying to discourage you or call you stupid, but you are very closed minded. You are close minded because ever since you could walk, talk, and listen you have been fed the bible and all its bullshit, and its not your fault. I don't expect you to realize that there are other ways to think. Honestly, I can't even understand why people try to ignore science. Just looking at the other solar systems, it is actually ignorant to say there can't be life out there.[/quoted1def97443]
Show me proof of life beyond us here on earth that can do and live like we do then I'll think about it but as of right now my belief hold water.
[quote31bbd29d6c="tracemhunter"]hahaha i should do that sign thing.
jake, what kind of buddhist are you? we are studying buddhism in my religion class and i would like to know.[/quote31bbd29d6c]
I don't really classify myself as belonging to any particular school right now. I have read about them all and I take a bit from everything that I have read about.
tracemhunter
03-11-2005 07:11:23
it will be found hairyferry. all science takes a long time to prove, we just dont have the capabilities as of now. to me it sounds like you are one of the people who would have thought the sun revolves around the earth a long time ago.
nofxowl
03-11-2005 07:11:41
[quote694508ae23="hairyferry"]wtf, why would you have a tat like that???[/quote694508ae23]
obviously because i am privledged to be out of Plato's cave and into the light...
if anyone else gets it, i applaud you for your intelligence
hairyferry
03-11-2005 07:15:33
[quotee7528868b6="Brok3n_Sword"][quotee7528868b6="hairyferry"]yeah definately Creationist.... I have a problem with thinking I came from an ape.... We don't even look like those things.. hmm then again look at FON...
THis world/galaxy/universe whatever can't of just happened. Based on what the Bible says I believe the world isn't much over 10,000 years old. Faith is the evidence of things not seen but the things hoped for. Kinda like you having faith in the chair you're sitting on that it's gonna hold you up or not.[/quotee7528868b6]
Were you asleep in your science classes? Remember carbon dating? 10,000 years, lol...[/quotee7528868b6]
Did you ever hear about the flood?
Of the methods that have been used to estimate the age of the earth, 90 percent point to an age far less than the billions of years asserted by evolutionists. A few of them follow.
Evidence for a rapid formation of geological strata, as in the biblical flood. Some of the evidence are lack of erosion between rock layers supposedly separated in age by many millions of years; lack of disturbance of rock strata by biological activity (worms, roots, etc.); lack of soil layers; polystrate fossils (which traverse several rock layers vertically—these could not have stood vertically for eons of time while they slowly got buried); thick layers of ‘rock’ bent without fracturing, indicating that the rock was all soft when bent.
Red blood cells and hemoglobin have been found in some (unfossilized!) dinosaur bone. But these could not last more than a few thousand years—certainly not the 65 Ma since the last dinosaurs lived, according to evolutionists.
The earth’s magnetic field has been decaying so fast that it looks like it is less than 10,000 years old. Rapid reversals during the flood year and fluctuations shortly after would have caused the field energy to drop even faster.
Radioactive decay releases helium into the atmosphere, but not much is escaping. The total amount in the atmosphere is 1/2000th of that expected if the universe is really billions of years old. This helium originally escaped from rocks. This happens quite fast, yet so much helium is still in some rocks that it has not had time to escape—certainly not billions of years.
A supernova is an explosion of a massive star—the explosion is so bright that it briefly outshines the rest of the galaxy. The supernova remnants (SNRs) should keep expanding for hundreds of thousands of years, according to physical equations. Yet there are no very old, widely expanded (Stage 3) SNRs, and few moderately old (Stage 1) ones in our galaxy, the Milky Way, or in its satellite galaxies, the Magellanic Clouds. This is just what we would expect for ‘young’ galaxies that have not existed long enough for wide expansion.
The moon is slowly receding from the earth at about 4 centimeters (1.5 inches) per year, and this rate would have been greater in the past. But even if the moon had started receding from being in contact with the earth, it would have taken only 1.37 billion years to reach its present distance from the earth. This gives a maximum age of the moon, not the actual age. This is far too young for evolutionists who claim the moon is 4.6 billion years old. It is also much younger than the radiometric ‘dates’ assigned to moon rocks.
Salt is entering the sea much faster than it is escaping. The sea is not nearly salty enough for this to have been happening for billions of years. Even granting generous assumptions to evolutionists, the sea could not be more than 62 Ma years old—far younger than the billions of years believed by the evolutionists. Again, this indicates a maximum age, not the actual age.
nofxowl
03-11-2005 07:19:25
ha, it just amuses me when Christians want physical "proof" even though the basis of the Christian religion is all on faith.
3000 years ago, the Greeks believed that their system of God's were the real deal, that Zeus was really on Mt. Olympus overseeing everything that went on. Unfortunatly for them, it seems that millions of people spent their lives worshipping the wrong deity. Poor souls... Just the thing is humanity has grown nothing advantageous since then. there still is war, there still is poverty, and there still are massive amounts of greed running just about everything.
How are any of the religions different than the old Greek Pagan belief? Couldn't it be only a matter of time before newer religions come into play?
if you believe in something, thats fine, everyone is entitled to their own beliefs. But i strongly believe you cannot truly believe anything until you fully question everything that you claim to believe. for it can either break it or make it stronger... for me it broke.
[quote8187233279="hairyferry"]
Evidence for a rapid formation of geological strata, as in the biblical flood. Some of the evidence are lack of erosion between rock layers supposedly separated in age by many millions of years;
[/quote8187233279]
What would cause erosion of these rock layers if they weren't exposed to outside elements?
[quote8187233279="hairyferry"]
lack of disturbance of rock strata by biological activity (worms, roots, etc.)
[/quote8187233279]
Roots don't make their way through solid rock.
[quote8187233279="hairyferry"]
lack of soil layers;
[/quote8187233279]
Please elaborate.
[quote8187233279="hairyferry"] thick layers of ‘rock’ bent without fracturing, indicating that the rock was all soft when bent.[/quote8187233279]
So the rock was molten when it was bent. How does this prove that the earth is younger?
[quote8187233279="hairyferry"]
The earth’s magnetic field has been decaying so fast that it looks like it is less than 10,000 years old.
[/quote8187233279]
I have read that the earth's magnetic field is reversing and not disappearing.
[quote8187233279="hairyferry"]
Radioactive decay releases helium into the atmosphere, but not much is escaping. The total amount in the atmosphere is 1/2000th of that expected if the universe is really billions of years old. This helium originally escaped from rocks. This happens quite fast, yet so much helium is still in some rocks that it has not had time to escape—certainly not billions of years.
[/quote8187233279]
I don't understand the logic in the above statements.
[quote8187233279="hairyferry"]
The moon is slowly receding from the earth at about 4 centimeters (1.5 inches) per year, and this rate would have been greater in the past
[/quote8187233279]
How would this have been greater in the past?
[quote8187233279="hairyferry"]
But even if the moon had started receding from being in contact with the earth, it would have taken only 1.37 billion years to reach its present distance from the earth. [/quote8187233279]
This still doesn't prove that the Earth is 10,000 years old.
[quote8187233279="hairyferry"]
Salt is entering the sea much faster than it is escaping. The sea is not nearly salty enough for this to have been happening for billions of years. [/quote8187233279]
Did you ever think that this could be a recent phenomenon? That the seas are more salty because of our activity? We use salts in fertilizers for farms, to clear snow from roads and in plenty of other chemical processes. This all drains into the water eventually. Hence, the increased salinity of the oceans.
hairyferry
03-11-2005 08:15:06
Lack of soil layers meaning if the world was millions of years old there would be more layers of soil in the ground.
Also, there are layers where people and dinosaurs are both found in the same layer.
The oceans are huge/deep/giganto I have a hard time believing because we're using more salt on roads and in fertilizers it's becoming more salty. Also alot of the places in the world doesn't need salt because there is no snow or not much of it.
In evolution it is said that the earth is "upgrading," evolving, becoming "newer." All I see is everything dieing and wasting away. The OZone layer is breaking down, we are having horrid pollution problems, oceans and lakes are polluted and animals are dieing, we're using up the worlds natural resourses. All I see is the world declining not evolving.
[quote406002e37b="hairyferry"]Lack of soil layers meaning if the world was millions of years old there would be more layers of soil in the ground.
[/quote406002e37b]
How so?
[quote406002e37b="hairyferry"]
Also alot of the places in the world doesn't need salt because there is no snow or not much of it.[/quote406002e37b]
They still use fertilizers for agriculture in those places which are also salts.
[quote406002e37b="hairyferry"]
In evolution it is said that the earth is "upgrading," evolving, becoming "newer." All I see is everything dieing and wasting away. The OZone layer is breaking down, we are having horrid pollution problems, oceans and lakes are polluted and animals are dieing, we're using up the worlds natural resourses. All I see is the world declining not evolving.[/quote406002e37b]
This is all our fault and the fault of industrial society. We have disturbed the balance that the earth formed over its existence through industrial processes and the subsequent byproducts. The earth can't just adapt to these disruptions in a few years. It takes millenia to do so. Since we, as individuals, don't live for millenia, we wouldn't be able to see these changes take place or even if we did live for that long, it wouldn't be that obvious. For example, when we were teenagers, we all went through growth spurts. Those who saw us everyday wouldn't notice right away that we had grown. If we ran into someone who hadn't seen us for a while, they would notice the difference immediately and point it out.
hairyferry
03-11-2005 08:26:27
Lol, Jake we can go on and on. I've learned that if we continualey dook it out people just get bitter at each other... It's better just to agree to disagree.. PLus I don't wanna piss off the guy that can put me on hold. lol
[quotea27c5282dc="hairyferry"]Lol, Jake we can go on and on. I've learned that if we continualey dook it out people just get bitter at each other... It's better just to agree to disagree.. PLus I don't wanna piss off the guy that can put me on hold. lol[/quotea27c5282dc]
lol
I wouldn't put you on hold for this discussion.
Keep in mind, all cultures throughout civilization have had creation myths to explain how the world came to be.
There are people out there who believe in God and still consider evolution to be a valid explanation for how things came to be. The two beliefs aren't mutually exclusive.
hairyferry
03-11-2005 08:31:26
yeah you're right. I'm just debating what I think as you are. It's actually a healthy thing to do I think. Keeps you sound on what you believe
Cash4Cookies
03-11-2005 08:35:11
hairyferry, just out of curiousity, do you strongly beleive that there ISNT life outside of this planet?
hairyferry
03-11-2005 08:41:43
no I don't believe so... unless you can show me other wise. Tabloid articles don't count...
J4320
03-11-2005 08:45:24
I think that I've already contributed enough to this thread. And this arguing never changes anyone's mind anyway.
Cash4Cookies
03-11-2005 08:48:36
[quote0ae94cc4e3="J4320"]I think that I've already contributed enough to this thread. And this arguing never changes anyone's mind anyway.[/quote0ae94cc4e3]
Then why post? We arent arguing, we are debating. Leave it to people that want to have this discussion. Damn.
To hairyferry, don't you think its a little unreasonable to think that there is that much shit just out there, for it to mean nothing? I don't think you fully comprehend how large the universe is. You have to comprehend its uncomprehendable, lol. I mean, its so large, so many chances to have the exact same situations as earth. It is actually rediculous to me that someone can overlook that fact. Its just so big, why only us? Its just not possible.
Brok3n_Sword
03-11-2005 09:59:04
I think J4320 has a good point; no one will change their beliefs or viewpoints just because of some arguments made online. It is healthy to debate and think it out though. I think religion is the same in our times as it has always been really, and that's a matter of social conditioning. I mean if you're brought up in a church (or other religious establishment) and that's all you've been told your all life, of course it's hard to accept any contrary ideas as valid. What always gets me is when I hear a preacher or an older "christian" person refer to the 1950s as a time when America was "closer to God", or they go on about how our country was founded under christian principles. When our country was established, slavery went on for how many years? And calling the 50s a "righteous" time is just as bad; it was pre civil rights movement, and some churches held services and KKK meetings in the same building.
J4320
03-11-2005 10:38:59
[quotef01a1fed48="Cash4Cookies"][quotef01a1fed48="J4320"]I think that I've already contributed enough to this thread. And this arguing never changes anyone's mind anyway.[/quotef01a1fed48]
Then why post? We arent arguing, we are debating. Leave it to people that want to have this discussion. Damn.
To hairyferry, don't you think its a little unreasonable to think that there is that much shit just out there, for it to mean nothing? I don't think you fully comprehend how large the universe is. You have to comprehend its uncomprehendable, lol. I mean, its so large, so many chances to have the exact same situations as earth. It is actually rediculous to me that someone can overlook that fact. Its just so big, why only us? Its just not possible.[/quotef01a1fed48]
I'm just saying that I've contributed a lot to this thread and I learned from it. Settle down. roll
Cash4Cookies
03-11-2005 12:14:14
Oh im settled, I was just under the impression that you were saying that this debate should be done with just because you think it wont change anyones mind. My bad, but this debate isnt about trying to sway others from their religion, just havint a good ol fashoned debate. Anyone eles have any veiws they want to share?
lalalala
03-11-2005 12:32:04
My cat is shedding
Automag389
03-11-2005 13:05:29
[quoteb6d5c4c4fb="lalalala"]My cat is shedding[/quoteb6d5c4c4fb]
I strongly disagree.
J4320
03-11-2005 13:07:52
[quoteb4cfdabd0e="Automag389"][quoteb4cfdabd0e="lalalala"]My cat is shedding[/quoteb4cfdabd0e]
I strongly disagree.[/quoteb4cfdabd0e]
I strongly agree. I have photographic evidence.
![]("b4cfdabd0e)
http//sandtracker.tripod.com/catshed2.gif[" alt=""/imgb4cfdabd0e]
Automag389
03-11-2005 13:09:22
[quote919eb6aacc="J4320"][quote919eb6aacc="Automag389"][quote919eb6aacc="lalalala"]My cat is shedding[/quote919eb6aacc]
I strongly disagree.[/quote919eb6aacc]
I strongly agree. I have photographic evidence.
![]("919eb6aacc)
http//sandtracker.tripod.com/catshed2.gif[" alt=""/img919eb6aacc][/quote919eb6aacc]
Your argument is invalid. The photo shows "Hosted by Tripod."
lalalala
03-11-2005 13:13:40
His argument is valid, that is my cat.
Automag389
03-11-2005 13:16:00
But all I see is "Image hosted by Tripod", not a cat. Photobucket ftw? shrug
lalalala
03-11-2005 13:17:33
Exactly, I see the same thing. That is my cat.
Automag389
03-11-2005 13:23:32
Oh. Well... your face! -runs away-
lalalala
03-11-2005 13:37:18
If you run away like the guy in your avatar I'll give you my cat, cuse I mean, thats a nice run.
Scudhawk007
03-11-2005 13:40:03
[quote7138f00f17="Jake"][quote7138f00f17="Scudhawk007"]
And yeah, creation will never be proven, nor will evolution.
[/quote7138f00f17]
There is more proof that life forms evolved in some manner from a more primitive form than there is for creation.
[quote7138f00f17="Scudhawk007"]
I tend to believe that science EXPLAINS the creation account. Obviously Moses (the claimed author of genesis) wasn't around in the beginning. So his story is going to be mythological in its explanation.
[/quote7138f00f17]
Please elaborate on the first sentence. I'd like to understand your point of view a bit better.
[quote7138f00f17="Scudhawk007"]
Science (except for evolution from lower life) seems to make a good attempt at explaining how things got here. My question is, couldn't God have caused it all?[/quote7138f00f17]
Science is more inclusive than religion is in terms of its explanation. The explanation that some omnipresent supreme being made everything is mythological at best. Keep in mind that cultures throughout the history of the human race all had their creation myths. Every single culture had some story about how everything was created (from indigineous peoples to modern human religions). So if this is the case, what makes the Christian explanation of Genesis more valid than the Ancient Greek explanation that the gods from Mount Olympus created everything? There isn't any proof of one than there is for the other.[/quote7138f00f17]
[b7138f00f17]I'll begin with saying that macroevolution is pure speculation at this point. There are still no solid links between any species. Microevolution on the other hand has much evidence to support it.[/color7138f00f17]
As far as science explaining creation Scientific evidence and knowledge for how things may have come about were not available at the time of the writing of Genesis. Moses used a primitive explanation that holds true as to the point that it is getting across (that being God created the earth), that was put in terms that anyone from his time until the present and future will be able to conceive of how the world and creation came about.[/color7138f00f17]
I think it is unlikely that God created the earth in six 24 hour periods. Days in this instance could represent thousands, millions, or even the billions of years some scientists claim. I do believe that God was the mind behind guiding all of this creation according to his plan and including each individual species. I see no evidence to support species to species metamorphosis. So yeah, science...the modern-day way of explaining the original, intentionally simplistic truth.[/color7138f00f17]
Addressing the validity of the Christian God over ancient greek/roman gods or other gods The evidence that most Christians go on is undoubtedly from the Jewish Scriptures (old testament) and the Christian Scriptures (christian interpretation of the fulfillment of jewish scripture). To make it short, over the entire historical span from the time of Moses and Ancient Israel to the present day, the God of these scriptures has remained unchanged! His truth, moral attributes, justice, etc. are all grounded on the same backings given about him in the beginning of the bible to the end as far as all of the history records. This is incredible regarding the amount of people of ethnic, geographical, religious, and socioeconomical diversity that make up the writers of the Bible. From kings, to shepherds, to warriors, slaves, prisoners, fishermen etc. Somehow, these attributes and character traits of God have remained consistent where gods of other varieties typically change with ideologies and social movements of their day.[/color7138f00f17]
This is the best I can do without consulting any resources but, MAN could i go off if given the proper setting. So anyway, to all the readers, this is where i've come to so far in my research of the beliefs of the world that have been presented to me, tested with the best skepticism I could muster. I stand amazed. -Scud[/color7138f00f17][/b7138f00f17]
lalalala
03-11-2005 13:44:25
scudhawk, what the hell does that have to do with my cat?
STAY ON TOPIC.
Scudhawk007
03-11-2005 13:50:09
[quoteeeed782f85="hairyferry"]“Dinosaur” Names, Then and Now
Name and date first written in the Bible Scientific Name (best estimate) and date the name appeared
tanniyn (dragon) before 1400 BC dinosaur 1841 AD
behemoth before 1400 BC brachiosaurus 1903 AD
Leviathan before 1400 BC kronosaurus 1901 AD[/quoteeeed782f85]
[beeed782f85]The concepts of Behemoth and Leviathan are products of Jewish myth. They are ways of symbolically discussing chaos and evil. Interestingly enough, these myths play a big part in the interpretation of the book of Revelation involving the Beasts from the Earth (Behemoth) and Sea (Leviathan) which eventually interpret into the Antichrist and Satan as described by John of Patmos, the books author. [/coloreeed782f85]
I think it's jumping the gun to take these old testament accounts of the beasts literally. The Job interpretation of Behemoth is given as a poetical description of the pain and suffering he is enduring. I do believe dinosaurs existed however, seeing as we have pieced together a large number of fossils, but the question as to when they died off is unanswerable.[/coloreeed782f85][/beeed782f85]
Automag389
03-11-2005 13:57:16
[quotec08a71e102="lalalala"]If you run away like the guy in your avatar I'll give you my cat, cuse I mean, thats a nice run.[/quotec08a71e102]
That's how I always run. It takes years of practice, but I've managed to do it.
[quoted547cafcf7="Scudhawk007"]
As far as science explaining creation Scientific evidence and knowledge for how things may have come about were not available at the time of the writing of Genesis. Moses used a primitive explanation that holds true as to the point that it is getting across (that being God created the earth), that was put in terms that anyone from his time until the present and future will be able to conceive of how the world and creation came about.[/colord547cafcf7]
[/quoted547cafcf7]
That still isn't scientific proof. There still isn't any scientific proof now. All I see are inconsistencies in evolutionary theory which may or may not ever be proven. I still see no scientific proof of creation or god as people see him. If I hear a better idea than evolution, then I'll give it a listen. So far, that hasn't happened.
[quoted547cafcf7="Scudhawk007"]
I see no evidence to support species to species metamorphosis. So yeah, science...the modern-day way of explaining the original, intentionally simplistic truth.[/colord547cafcf7]
[/quoted547cafcf7]
I see no evidence pointing to an omnipresent being watching over us all.
[quoted547cafcf7="Scudhawk007"]
To make it short, over the entire historical span from the time of Moses and Ancient Israel to the present day, the God of these scriptures has remained unchanged! His truth, moral attributes, justice, etc. are all grounded on the same backings given about him in the beginning of the bible to the end as far as all of the history records. This is incredible regarding the amount of people of ethnic, geographical, religious, and socioeconomical diversity that make up the writers of the Bible. From kings, to shepherds, to warriors, slaves, prisoners, fishermen etc. Somehow, these attributes and character traits of God have remained consistent where gods of other varieties typically change with ideologies and social movements of their day.[/colord547cafcf7]
[/quoted547cafcf7]
How do you know that god hasn't changed? Over the years that christianity has existed, this god could have changed countless times in the writings that people consider holy. Don't forget, people wrote the bible and their influence went into it. Also, the the writers of history are the victors. So in reality, you can't be 100% certain that nothing has changed in this whole time.
Crynos
03-11-2005 14:22:50
[quote9f69b9acbd="lalalala"]scudhawk, what the hell does that have to do with my cat?
STAY ON TOPIC.[/quote9f69b9acbd]People were having a serious discussion before this...asshat
Scudhawk007
03-11-2005 14:30:04
[b9ad2c38d2d]Response to Jake[/color9ad2c38d2d] You are completely right. There is no proof for the existence of God, only evidence. And it is up to each person how they want to view that evidence. As far as God being unchanging, this is only a conclusion drawn based on the historical writings of the bible, in each writer's description his attributes remain the same. This does not prove that the actual God, if there is one, has remained unchanged...however I tend to believe this is so.
No proof! What do we do? In any instance faith is the outcome. And what is faith. Christianity calls it the evidence of things unseen. To anyone else, it is a belief in something without proof taking into account one's best understanding of a given criteria. Point being, belief in evolution or any other theories require faith if you claim to 'believe' in it. Good luck to everyone in their search of truth. Peace.[/b9ad2c38d2d]
lalalala
03-11-2005 15:02:14
Oh a serious discussion?? I thought you guys were going back and forth on a topic that cleary nobody is going to switch sides on. I thought you were just posting bullshit, damn I really must be an "asshat".
Give me a break douche bag.
Crynos
03-11-2005 15:17:53
[quoteac7c55ba65="lalalala"]Oh a serious discussion?? I thought you guys were going back and forth on a topic that cleary nobody is going to switch sides on. I thought you were just posting bullshit, damn I really must be an "asshat".
Give me a break douche bag.[/quoteac7c55ba65]The point isnt changing someones viewpoint, its debating it, like mature people...
Scudhawk007
03-11-2005 15:31:12
[quote9f386244c0="Crynos"]The point isnt changing someones viewpoint, its debating it, like mature people...[/quote9f386244c0]
Yeah i just like hearing other people's thoughts and then putting mine out there to be analyzed by others. I like to know where my thoughts stand with others. I think that is the goal for a debate.
Crynos
03-11-2005 15:37:16
[quote35cdc19a68="Scudhawk007"][quote35cdc19a68="Crynos"]The point isnt changing someones viewpoint, its debating it, like mature people...[/quote35cdc19a68]
Yeah i just like hearing other people's thoughts and then putting mine out there to be analyzed by others. I like to know where my thoughts stand with others. I think that is the goal for a debate.[/quote35cdc19a68]Yup, most intelligent people enjoy that
nofxowl
03-11-2005 15:56:34
[quote875d482cc6="Scudhawk007"][b875d482cc6]Response to Jake[/color875d482cc6] You are completely right. There is no proof for the existence of God, only evidence.[/b875d482cc6][/quote875d482cc6]
there is no "evidence" for the existence of God. There may be some for the man you may think was God's son, but there is NO evidence for God directly. If there is please enlighten me.
And please dont say that the evidence for God's existence is when "miracles" occur, or when you hear the laughter of a young infant, and please, please, please, dont refer to anything from the Bible, because that was completely and utterly a man-made creation.
And it is just as likely that the Torah or the Koran is just as correct theologically (perhaps more) as the Bible
lalalala
03-11-2005 16:11:31
[quote4ed3bb3daf="Crynos"][quote4ed3bb3daf="Scudhawk007"][quote4ed3bb3daf="Crynos"]The point isnt changing someones viewpoint, its debating it, like mature people...[/quote4ed3bb3daf]
Yeah i just like hearing other people's thoughts and then putting mine out there to be analyzed by others. I like to know where my thoughts stand with others. I think that is the goal for a debate.[/quote4ed3bb3daf]Yup, most intelligent people enjoy that[/quote4ed3bb3daf]
Let me know when you graduate high school.
Scudhawk007
03-11-2005 16:17:25
[quotef09f8a86b6="nofxowl"][quotef09f8a86b6="Scudhawk007"][bf09f8a86b6]Response to Jake[/colorf09f8a86b6] You are completely right. There is no proof for the existence of God, only evidence.[/bf09f8a86b6][/quotef09f8a86b6]
there is no "evidence" for the existence of God. There may be some for the man you may think was God's son, but there is NO evidence for God directly. If there is please enlighten me.
And please dont say that the evidence for God's existence is when "miracles" occur, or when you hear the laughter of a young infant, and please, please, please, dont refer to anything from the Bible, because that was completely and utterly a man-made creation.
And it is just as likely that the Torah or the Koran is just as correct theologically (perhaps more) as the Bible[/quotef09f8a86b6]
To me, the fact that anything exists at all is some evidence that could lead one to believe in God--especially the order of it all. Other evidence could be the changes i've seen in people's lives when they follow the way of life that is outlined in scripture--that would be improvements.
And the Torah is [if09f8a86b6]in[/if09f8a86b6] the Bible.
hairyferry
03-11-2005 16:58:08
[quoted7d83474a3="Jake"][quoted7d83474a3="Scudhawk007"]
As far as science explaining creation Scientific evidence and knowledge for how things may have come about were not available at the time of the writing of Genesis. Moses used a primitive explanation that holds true as to the point that it is getting across (that being God created the earth), that was put in terms that anyone from his time until the present and future will be able to conceive of how the world and creation came about.[/colord7d83474a3]
[/quoted7d83474a3]
That still isn't scientific proof. There still isn't any scientific proof now. All I see are inconsistencies in evolutionary theory which may or may not ever be proven. I still see no scientific proof of creation or god as people see him. If I hear a better idea than evolution, then I'll give it a listen. So far, that hasn't happened.
[quoted7d83474a3="Scudhawk007"]
I see no evidence to support species to species metamorphosis. So yeah, science...the modern-day way of explaining the original, intentionally simplistic truth.[/colord7d83474a3]
[/quoted7d83474a3]
I see no evidence pointing to an omnipresent being watching over us all.
[quoted7d83474a3="Scudhawk007"]
To make it short, over the entire historical span from the time of Moses and Ancient Israel to the present day, the God of these scriptures has remained unchanged! His truth, moral attributes, justice, etc. are all grounded on the same backings given about him in the beginning of the bible to the end as far as all of the history records. This is incredible regarding the amount of people of ethnic, geographical, religious, and socioeconomical diversity that make up the writers of the Bible. From kings, to shepherds, to warriors, slaves, prisoners, fishermen etc. Somehow, these attributes and character traits of God have remained consistent where gods of other varieties typically change with ideologies and social movements of their day.[/colord7d83474a3]
[/quoted7d83474a3]
How do you know that god hasn't changed? Over the years that christianity has existed, this god could have changed countless times in the writings that people consider holy. Don't forget, people wrote the bible and their influence went into it. Also, the the writers of history are the victors. So in reality, you can't be 100% certain that nothing has changed in this whole time.[/quoted7d83474a3]
Malachi 36 is one of a few verses
"For I the LORD do not change."
Cash4Cookies
03-11-2005 17:08:34
[quoteb1d2eeb6c7="lalalala"]Oh a serious discussion?? I thought you guys were going back and forth on a topic that cleary nobody is going to switch sides on. I thought you were just posting bullshit, damn I really must be an "asshat".
Give me a break douche bag.[/quoteb1d2eeb6c7]
What is it with people that are so against a discussion??? WE ARE NOT TRYING TO CHANGE PEOPLES MIND!!! What don't you get about that, if you dont like it, dont post in this thread man.
Someone was talking about the dinosaur thing, doesn't it just not add up man? Dinosaurs were billions of years ago, way before any form of man. So whats the deal?
Brok3n_Sword
04-11-2005 07:22:53
Ever seen this? http//www.venganza.org/ It's great.
lalalala
04-11-2005 12:06:24
For being so rude earlier
![]("f21e23e822)
http//forum.freeipodguide.com/smilies_mod/upload/c8af86ddb33670a4f04259185d7d457b.gif[" alt=""/imgf21e23e822]
"The permanent lesson that the Galileo case represents pushes us to keep alive the dialogue between the various disciplines, and in particular between theology and the natural sciences, if we want to prevent similar episodes from repeating themselves in the future," Poupard said.
But he said science, too, should listen to religion.
"We know where scientific reason can end up by itself the atomic bomb and the possibility of cloning human beings are fruit of a reason that wants to free itself from every ethical or religious link," he said.
"But we also know the dangers of a religion that severs its links with reason and becomes prey to fundamentalism," he said.
"The faithful have the obligation to listen to that which secular modern science has to offer, just as we ask that knowledge of the faith be taken in consideration as an expert voice in humanity."
i believe there is some higher power above us that created all of this.. but how he did it? I will never know.
[quoteb791fa06e5="lalalala"]
"The faithful have the obligation to listen to that which secular modern science has to offer, just as we ask that knowledge of the faith be taken in consideration as an expert voice in humanity."[/quoteb791fa06e5]
Hear hear!
drummer_kew_03
04-11-2005 15:48:13
Believers in evolution and such always seem to assume that we christians are just following blindly without ever looking at others points of view and questioning what we believe. Evolutionists seem to get mad at christians for what they believe.
i have no specific religion, but i do respect all religions (with the exception of satanism or any religion that promotes evil rather than good)
KeithA
06-11-2005 19:48:21
Darth Bittner
06-11-2005 20:00:35
I have been touched by his noodly appendage...
Here is an interesting link for this debate.
http//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051104/ap_on_sc/vatican_science
The Vatican says that faithful should listen to science to keep themselves grounded and rational while still being faithful to the moral teachings of the church. It essentially goes along the lines of what lalalala wrote.
jtball33
01-12-2005 11:47:35
wow this is a heated discussion. As it always is. So I grew up a creationist but even that in its self has issues to debate. Is the earth old or young. how did God actually create this thing.
I saw that we we talking about the catholic church a little above. Its funny that we have an idea that God some how clashes against what science has discovered. (there are a few scriptures that don't line up with science like the when it says that the sun stood still in the OT and also if you get stuck on the literal 7 days in genesis which doesn't match science) BUT lets look away from that.
What if God made the eaarth my means of a big bang ? This fits the genesis story if the "days" in genesis were time periods not 24 hours. No for both evoltion and creation a beginning must happen. SO i guess for me it fits that God set it all up to be what the world is today, .
U.C Berkeley astronomer Marc Davis said that the universes expansion rate was so finetuned at the beginining that the chances it would happen like it is now was one part in 10^60. kinda crazy.
agroman
01-12-2005 11:58:51
I live in Kansas and belong to the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. shrug I don't know what the rest of the state's problem is.
Oh yeah, and Phuck Phred Phelps!
Aurelius
01-12-2005 15:44:02
well i think there's a little bit of both involved but i voted evolution! i think that there is a god but he doesn't really meddle with human affairs and he just set the big bang into motion and that's all... just a nudge... and isn't the belief that humans are somehow so much better than other animals and should be superior over them kinda biased and self-serving? just a thought...
nofxowl
29-12-2005 22:12:12
REVIVE!!!!!!!!!! ) haha i'm a jerk
nofxowl
29-12-2005 22:13:57
i was watching this story on the history channel about the "Bible Code" and how in hebrew the bible has lead people to find evidence that predicted 9/11 and Bin Laden with Airplanes and other crazy stuff. I guess theres going to be a huge earthquake in Cali in 2010 or something. It was pretty far'fetched, but it was really interesting say the least.
Nonja
29-12-2005 22:17:47
None of that is rock solid, it's all how you interpret the words.
ajasax
29-12-2005 22:33:51
![]("453461a4fa)
http//forum.freeipodguide.com/smilies_mod/upload/66c834fa2239077ac828df474e9d6cfa.gif[" alt=""/img453461a4fa]
nofxowl, I watched the show before that one about Dante, etc. and I thought the commercials were saying that Nostradamus predicted that?
nofxowl
30-12-2005 11:29:28
i just really dont know anymore then.... i wish i could predict the future
tracemhunter
30-12-2005 12:23:12
nofxowl, i noticed your userbar with south park. did you catch the episode where god ended up being a platipus looking thing?
J4320
24-01-2007 20:26:36
lololol jeez tsj
(
OldManWrigley
24-01-2007 21:11:48
Evolution..... evolution. Let's explain why it suddenly stopped? IMO if evolution was all true and all then why would there still be monkeys if we evolved from them? When's the last time something "evolved"? It's all monkey business (no pun intended)....again, that's just IMO.
condra
24-01-2007 21:14:36
[quote4b36b936b0="nofxowl"]i was watching this story on the history channel about the "Bible Code" and how in hebrew the bible has lead people to find evidence that predicted 9/11 and Bin Laden with Airplanes and other crazy stuff. I guess theres going to be a huge earthquake in Cali in 2010 or something. It was pretty far'fetched, but it was really interesting say the least.[/quote4b36b936b0]
ok, i'll join the discussion.
I heard too about the bible code, actually read a book about it...well basically they take the original version of the bible, not translated or anything, and they ''analyze'' it, don't ask me how. indeed, there was stuff like predictions of assassinations of lkings, the long iraq war, and other...but since the book was written after those events, i don't know...
do you imagine what that would mean? if it were true....
yeah, anyways.
nofxowl, why do you want to predict the future? I seriously think you'll get bored if you knew all, or you'll find it too much of a burden. no uncalculated risks, no anxiety, no ''butterflies'' D
i am sort of in between, but not quite. I used to be very religious at smting like 13, praying, going to church 2-3 times a week, but now that i have reached a certain (i'm nt sure how high, but anyways P ) level of consciouness and i know much more of the real world, i find religion provokes too much harm. actually, i mean religion taken to extreme, or The Church
just a couple ex just think about the croisades, made in the name of ''GOD'', whici actually was the same for all, just had different names. it served political purposes.
think about all the ''witches'' and ''wizards" that were burnt, not so long ago.
think about all the women that were considered for such a long time ''not pure'', not even human, inferior...
think about all the priests that proclaimed themselves pure, but drank as hell and had affairs. there was a time redemption could have been bought for an amount of money from such priests.
yeah,lots of examples.
however, i think FAITH is necessary for survival, but it doesn't have to be in the christian, buddhist or any other god. you can simply believe in life, be hones with ureself and with others and try to live your life without regrets.
D
phriq
24-01-2007 21:44:45
the big bang theory is basically there was a blob of matter slow dense that it sudenly just "banged" and there was the universe....genisis is that God spoke one word, and "Bang" there was light.....maybe scientist figured out the science behind what God did....
Creation is what i believe.
J4320
24-01-2007 21:58:45
liNOTEli
My comments will be in bold.
[quote85cb501fbc="zr2152"][quote85cb501fbc="J4320"]How could Adam and Eve's offspring survive off of each other? Family members with similar DNA cannot mix like that without having problems. How does that work?
Oh and doesn't something similar to that happen on Noah's Ark? It's just Noah and his sons and their wives - a little more broad than Adam and Eve but their genotypes cannot mix like that without causing problems.
Speaking of Noah's ark... do you really think it could hold THAT MANY different types of species? Do you think that you can just put them all in cages and everything will work out for 40 days and 40 nights? What aboutthe "dinosaurs" that lived during this time that they mention in the Bible?
There are just too many things that don't make sense to me in the old testament.[/quote85cb501fbc]
To me, its all about faith. I have no doubt that there is a God and that he did do all the things mentioned in the bible but sometimes people have to understand that the bible was written within a culture and that it cannot be interpreted with what we know today about science and what not.
[b85cb501fbc]Alright, fair enough. But here's my take on that - if it is messed up then why should we take it literally?[/b85cb501fbc]
I cant really answer any of your questions and i wish i could. The dinosaurs are mentioned in the bible and I personally believe that they died in the flood.
Does the lochness monster really exist?
[b85cb501fbc]Who knows, it could. I don't see how that would prove evolution wrong. [/b85cb501fbc]
What lies deep down in the ocean?
Animals that we haven't discovered yet. D
Personally i believe that dinosaurs really exist (the water dwelling ones)
Of course they did; we have the fossils of them.
Look at this
http//www.gennet.org/facts/nessie.html
[b85cb501fbc]I saw this in like 3rd grade. Interesting isn't it? Some speculate that it's a pleiosaurus carcass. I don't see how it disproves evolution or helps creationism. Check this out ---
http//today.reuters.com/tv/videoChannel.aspx?storyid=1a194f615fd608c0c94bfeb678aed35b5d30e013
This really rare shark that lives deep down in the sea was found recently.
[/b85cb501fbc]
I learned about this in a creation seminar at church and just googled it.
I dont know what to believe sometimes but its fun talking about it and debating. I believe in God and God made us to not be able to comprehend Heaven or how he created the universe. Just my 2 cents. )
[b85cb501fbc]Yeah I like debating too. I'm not sure what I am right now. I'm trying to discover that for myself. )[/b85cb501fbc]
Edit [quote85cb501fbc="J4320"]You know it's a nice thing to say "yeah there's a greater power" and all but do you guys have any types of evidence to back it or is it all just personal belief? Drawing evidence from the Bible really doesn't help.
You can't draw evidence from something that isn't even proven; you have to build on what you know and draw conclusions from that.
I'm off to class but I'd like to see someone answer my fucking questions and not ignore them.[/quote85cb501fbc]
Science itself points to a higher power, that Someone created the universe.
[b85cb501fbc]Yeah people say that all of the time. It's a nice thing to say but science also points towards evolution. There seem to be faults in both and we humans are still learning about our origins and we have a long way to go. [/b85cb501fbc]
I tried to answer them but it seems that type faster than me, sorry it took me a little longer. (
[b85cb501fbc]
It's fine man. )
When you go back to your seminar keep my comments in mind. Ask about them. I'm not an ignorant bigot and I'm a learning human being and I'd love it if you could keep debating about it[/b85cb501fbc]
[/quote85cb501fbc]
[quote85cb501fbc="TFOAF"]Do you have evidence of your belief? No. Fucking scientists have no idea what they talk about when creating theories on how the universe was formed and such.
[b85cb501fbc]Who said evolution was my belief? You are trying to make up your own view of my unstated assumptions.
Oh and at least scientists build off of the evidence instead of trying to make evidence that supports a book that doesn't even fit together right.[/b85cb501fbc]
[/quote85cb501fbc]
[quote85cb501fbc="TryingToGetPaid"]But is there evidence of evolution? Yes.
Adam and Eve was a story told to the people of that time (these people had no formal education and probably were equal to todays kindergardeners) so they told them a story that the world was created in 7 days and that God magically put people on this earth. The moral of the story was simple God created everything.
[b85cb501fbc]Exactly. I'm starting to believe that the Bible is taken WAY too literally.[/b85cb501fbc][/quote85cb501fbc]
[quote85cb501fbc="tylerc"]How do you know, 100%, without a doubt, there is a god or higher power? You don't, so don't say you do. That's why I'm agnostic, there isn't enough proof one way or the other. Just because there isn't enough proof to prove one doesn't exist, doesn't mean one doesn't.
Don't honestly be arrogant or ignorant enough to know that a higher power exists. Believing with all of your heart and knowing beyond a doubt are two completely different things.
[b85cb501fbc]
Agreed. If God loves us so much then I'd think he'd reveal himself to us instead of not interacting with humanity at all. Oh wait, he did do that. He was all over the place in the Bible doing things. My bad. Why isn't he here today? Did he get bored with us?[/b85cb501fbc]
[/quote85cb501fbc]
[quote85cb501fbc="tylerc"]That's my point on creation. If the higher power created everything, who created the higher power? Did the power create himself? If he/she/it did, whose to say that everything else couldn't create itself?
[b85cb501fbc]Yes exactly. I said the same thing earlier. You people try to act all smart and say "oh well where did the particles come from???" well... where did God come from? And don't bother answering this question because I already know what it'll be. "He's infinite, it's too hard for us to comprehend."[/b85cb501fbc]
[/quote85cb501fbc]
EatChex89
24-01-2007 23:26:59
It seems to me that J4320 totally changed his views from earlier in the thread.
[quote1f5f6426a7="J4320"]Yeah I'm a Christian and a Creationist believer. I've been brought up Christian and I know almost everything there is to know about Creation VS Evolution. I've been raised in a Christian school since 1st grade. I'm kind of bumping this thread. I didn't notice it and it's a good one. In my opinion, Evolution makes no sense. We couldn't happen by accident.[/quote1f5f6426a7]
[quote1f5f6426a7="J4320"]
Lol, well what I was trying to say at first was that life is too complicated to happen by accident(as I talked about the "Big Bang" theory). That's what I was saying. I mean life itself is a HUGE feat. How did it happen? God made life. But some wonder- when was God created? Well Christians believe that he was never started, but he was always here. He was never born. He is never-ending. It's hard to comprehend for a man's small mind. That's why you need faith. And if you have any questions about Evolution VS Creation just ask me and I'll try to answer you as best as I can.[/quote1f5f6426a7]
[quote1f5f6426a7="J4320"]
Lol, God made the world in 6 days and slept on the 7th. He slept on the seventh day to show man to rest on the 7th-not because he was tired. And yes, the world isn't millions of years old. It's thousands. Dinosaurs were made in the beginning of earth's creation. When it came time for the flood though, Noah(Noah's Ark) could only take two of each species on the ark(male and female). But dinosaurs were VERY big for the ark so they took them in the ark as eggs or babies. After the flood when the animals were set free, many dinos didn't survive. And the ones that did were hunted by man such as dragon slayers in the medieval times.
And idrinklisterine, scientists have done carbon dating on fossils and rocks but noone knows exactly how old the earth is. Through scientific research though it shows that earth is only thousands-not millions- of years old. Evolutionists don't want to admit this because it doesn't go along with there theory of Evolution as they say it took millions of years to evolve.
Evolution has been proven faulty in many ways, yet people are trying to take God out of the world in every way, including science. So public schools stick with teaching Evolution. Have you've ever seen those diagrams of skeletal bones of a creature evolving a bit by a time? Well those were made up and aren't even true. They haven't even found this "missing link" and they still put it in textbooks. Nothing has yet been proven to show the evolving of a creature in skeletal bones.[/quote1f5f6426a7]
lol. just had to bring that up.. P
J4320
24-01-2007 23:35:49
[quoteb0ceb740bc="OldManWrigley"]Evolution..... evolution. Let's explain why it suddenly stopped? IMO if evolution was all true and all then why would there still be monkeys if we evolved from them? When's the last time something "evolved"? It's all monkey business (no pun intended)....again, that's just IMO.[/quoteb0ceb740bc]
Our recorded human history is only in the thousands (roughly 5,000-5,500 I believe). Evolution takes millions of years. That's the plain and simple answer.
By the way I'm not saying I'm a creationist or an evolutionist, but my views have definitely changed since the last time I've been in this thread (as chex mentioned).
lieditli
Woah... I'm reading Chex's post and I'm definitely laughing at what I said. I was so confident about that stuff. Wow, how things can change.
lieditli
How could Adam and Eve's offspring survive off of each other? Family members with similar DNA cannot mix like that without having problems. How does that work?
Oh and doesn't something similar to that happen on Noah's Ark? It's just Noah and his sons and their wives - a little more broad than Adam and Eve but their genotypes cannot mix like that without causing problems.
Speaking of Noah's ark... do you really think it could hold THAT MANY different types of species? Do you think that you can just put them all in cages and everything will work out for 40 days and 40 nights? What about the "dinosaurs" that lived during this time that they mention in the Bible?
There are just too many things that don't make sense to me in the old testament.
EatChex89
25-01-2007 10:22:51
[quote0a0541f14a="J4320"][quote0a0541f14a="OldManWrigley"]Evolution..... evolution. Let's explain why it suddenly stopped? IMO if evolution was all true and all then why would there still be monkeys if we evolved from them? When's the last time something "evolved"? It's all monkey business (no pun intended)....again, that's just IMO.[/quote0a0541f14a]
Our recorded human history is only in the thousands (roughly 5,000-5,500 I believe). Evolution takes millions of years. That's the plain and simple answer.
By the way I'm not saying I'm a creationist or an evolutionist, but my views have definitely changed since the last time I've been in this thread (as chex mentioned).
lieditli
Woah... I'm reading Chex's post and I'm definitely laughing at what I said. I was so confident about that stuff. Wow, how things can change.
lieditli
How could Adam and Eve's offspring survive off of each other? Family members with similar DNA cannot mix like that without having problems. How does that work?
Remember, God made them perfectly so their kids although less perfect than them because of the sin and fall and corruption of man, were still far more perfect than we are. Ever since the fall there has only been degeneration, which is why we cannot have sex with family members and expect to get well-functioning kids. Also, God put a stop to the inter-family marriages during the time of Exodus.. [/color0a0541f14a]
Oh and doesn't something similar to that happen on Noah's Ark? It's just Noah and his sons and their wives - a little more broad than Adam and Eve but their genotypes cannot mix like that without causing problems.
Speaking of Noah's ark... do you really think it could hold THAT MANY different types of species? Do you think that you can just put them all in cages and everything will work out for 40 days and 40 nights? What about the "dinosaurs" that lived during this time that they mention in the Bible?
Yes, I do. People have measured out the dimensions in the Bible and have come to realize how huge the ark actually was. I have this book that has a drawing of the ark next to a semi-truck and a human, and the truck/human look like toys. Granted it's a drawing, but yes the ark was huge. Also, to prove the flood, the grand canyon. Yeah,maybe it could have been formed over billions and billions and billions of years.. but it's more proof of a huge flood than a stream or river etching into it for billions of years. Also, they've found fossils of sea creatures in places where there is no water present, I can't remember where, but I saw it on a video. A bunch of sea creature fossils that were no where near the sea. How do you explain that? Actually, I take back that question, because someone will try to come up with some lame ass excuse.[/color0a0541f14a]
There are just too many things that don't make sense to me in the old testament.[/quote0a0541f14a]
TFOAF
25-01-2007 10:28:23
[quote5d732acc5b="stackmjwiz"][quote5d732acc5b]i say creation cause it doesn't make sence that all this just happend by chance.[/quote5d732acc5b]
Exactly. The Universe is comprised of atoms. Who put them there? Who created the bits of matter?
Evolution doesn't explain this. Nor does the Big Bang theory. Science cannot explain the creation of the universe, or the earth.[/quote5d732acc5b]
^^^, though I believe a bit of evolution too, because how WE evolved, and other animals evolve. Otherwise, I lean towards creationism. ;)
zr2152
25-01-2007 10:35:35
[quote958f3250b0="EatChex89"][quote958f3250b0="J4320"][quote958f3250b0="OldManWrigley"]Evolution..... evolution. Let's explain why it suddenly stopped? IMO if evolution was all true and all then why would there still be monkeys if we evolved from them? When's the last time something "evolved"? It's all monkey business (no pun intended)....again, that's just IMO.[/quote958f3250b0]
Our recorded human history is only in the thousands (roughly 5,000-5,500 I believe). Evolution takes millions of years. That's the plain and simple answer.
By the way I'm not saying I'm a creationist or an evolutionist, but my views have definitely changed since the last time I've been in this thread (as chex mentioned).
lieditli
Woah... I'm reading Chex's post and I'm definitely laughing at what I said. I was so confident about that stuff. Wow, how things can change.
lieditli
How could Adam and Eve's offspring survive off of each other? Family members with similar DNA cannot mix like that without having problems. How does that work?
Remember, God made them perfectly so their kids although less perfect than them because of the sin and fall and corruption of man, were still far more perfect than we are. Ever since the fall there has only been degeneration, which is why we cannot have sex with family members and expect to get well-functioning kids. Also, God put a stop to the inter-family marriages during the time of Exodus.. [/color958f3250b0]
Oh and doesn't something similar to that happen on Noah's Ark? It's just Noah and his sons and their wives - a little more broad than Adam and Eve but their genotypes cannot mix like that without causing problems.
Speaking of Noah's ark... do you really think it could hold THAT MANY different types of species? Do you think that you can just put them all in cages and everything will work out for 40 days and 40 nights? What about the "dinosaurs" that lived during this time that they mention in the Bible?
Yes, I do. People have measured out the dimensions in the Bible and have come to realize how huge the ark actually was. I have this book that has a drawing of the ark next to a semi-truck and a human, and the truck/human look like toys. Granted it's a drawing, but yes the ark was huge. Also, to prove the flood, the grand canyon. Yeah,maybe it could have been formed over billions and billions and billions of years.. but it's more proof of a huge flood than a stream or river etching into it for billions of years. Also, they've found fossils of sea creatures in places where there is no water present, I can't remember where, but I saw it on a video. A bunch of sea creature fossils that were no where near the sea. How do you explain that? Actually, I take back that question, because someone will try to come up with some lame ass excuse.[/color958f3250b0]
There are just too many things that don't make sense to me in the old testament.[/quote958f3250b0][/quote958f3250b0]
you couldnt have put it much better. This is not an arguement that one person is going to win. Its just fun to talk about.
I'm a creationist. The earth and the univese is just way too perfect.
J4320,
My point about that picture of the dinosaur carcass was to point out the fact that dinosaurs are not extinct like evolutionist say they are due to a meteor. This image to me is proof of the great flood (and Noah's Ark) and how the underwater dinosaurs were able to survive for the 40 days that they were underwater and the others dying on land because they were too big to fit on the Ark.
theycallmescout
25-01-2007 12:45:48
I can understand someone not wanting to believe in anything including a higher power. What I can't understand is people saying that evolution has been proved. Nothing could be further from the truth. All species adapt minimally to surroundings but fish cannot become men. frogs cannot become elephants. There is no evidence supporting any of that rubbish.
It was only a theory and theory used to tell us the world was flat. So if anyone would like to have a civil discussion using intellect and intelligence about such a subject it would be fantastic. Mythology and fairy tales have no place in theology, and no place in creationism, they belong in the flat earth realm of thought.
Crouching Tiger Hidden Ga
25-01-2007 13:28:47
Creationism. It's the only way that makes sense.
And no offense but I think the worst people are the people who say both. They're just trying to get along with everybody.
[quote6f76337e4d]
It was only a theory and theory used to tell us the world was flat.[/quote6f76337e4d]
More like a hypothesis, a theory has to have evidence.
YourGiftsFree
25-01-2007 13:35:20
[quoted3774d29bf="TFOAF"][quoted3774d29bf="stackmjwiz"][quoted3774d29bf]i say creation cause it doesn't make sence that all this just happend by chance.[/quoted3774d29bf]
Exactly. The Universe is comprised of atoms. Who put them there? Who created the bits of matter?
Evolution doesn't explain this. Nor does the Big Bang theory. Science cannot explain the creation of the universe, or the earth.[/quoted3774d29bf]
^^^, though I believe a bit of evolution too, because how WE evolved, and other animals evolve. Otherwise, I lean towards creationism. ;)[/quoted3774d29bf]
That is how I see it, as well. Who put the first particle or 'thing" out there that started everything?
Also, I'd hate to get into a debate, but I thought I heard recently didnt't 2 scientist find peices of wood that could have been from noahs ark? I thought I heard that somewhere.
phriq
25-01-2007 13:37:48
It has to be creationism.....there is no way "nature" coudl just put everything together so delicataly. how could a giant "BooM" of atams breath life into organism so unique and intricly built. that makes no sence. somehting had to design everytyhing and put life into it. God. besides....if i were to put all religious beliefs aside. christianity is still way cooler. would you rather believe a big boom made us. or believe that there are sweet angels and demons fighting in some spiritual realm with flaming swords...thats way sweeter.
Crouching Tiger Hidden Ga
25-01-2007 13:39:50
[quote1541444553="YourGiftsFree"][quote1541444553="TFOAF"][quote1541444553="stackmjwiz"][quote1541444553]i say creation cause it doesn't make sence that all this just happend by chance.[/quote1541444553]
Exactly. The Universe is comprised of atoms. Who put them there? Who created the bits of matter?
Evolution doesn't explain this. Nor does the Big Bang theory. Science cannot explain the creation of the universe, or the earth.[/quote1541444553]
^^^, though I believe a bit of evolution too, because how WE evolved, and other animals evolve. Otherwise, I lean towards creationism. ;)[/quote1541444553]
That is how I see it, as well. Who put the first particle or 'thing" out there that started everything?
Also, I'd hate to get into a debate, but I thought I heard recently didnt't 2 scientist find peices of wood that could have been from noahs ark? I thought I heard that somewhere.[/quote1541444553]I'm a creationist but I still think that sounds stupid I mean Catholics are selling enough fragments of the cross to make a building lol.
J4320
25-01-2007 14:43:15
[quote7f40ec2c27="phriq"]It has to be creationism.....there is no way "nature" coudl just put everything together so delicataly. how could a giant "BooM" of atams breath life into organism so unique and intricly built. that makes no sence. somehting had to design everytyhing and put life into it. God. besides....if i were to put all religious beliefs aside. christianity is still way cooler. would you rather believe a big boom made us. or believe that there are sweet angels and demons fighting in some spiritual realm with flaming swords...thats way sweeter.[/quote7f40ec2c27]
LMAO
That's hilarious. Are you trying to prove Chex's little downgrading theory correct? lol
You should have stopped at your first sentence because I wouldn't have thought less of you there; although the "where did God come from question" still stands.
Anyway, let me just let everyone know that I'm not a firm believer in Evolution. I do think there is a spiritual side to this world and I think that you have to determine your spirituality for yourself instead of blindly following what your parents teach you. That said, if my spiritual quest leads me to Christianity then so be it. Over the recent year (maybe years) I have gradually believed less and less of some things that are stated in the Bible.
I'll reply to Chex's statements first -
[quote7f40ec2c27]Remember, God made them perfectly so their kids although less perfect than them because of the sin and fall and corruption of man, were still far more perfect than we are. Ever since the fall there has only been degeneration, which is why we cannot have sex with family members and expect to get well-functioning kids. Also, God put a stop to the inter-family marriages during the time of Exodus..[/quote7f40ec2c27]
Is there any evidence for this? I don't recall this being stated anywhere in the Bible and I believe it's just a theory. Keep in mind that Evolution is just a theory as well.
This thinking and Evolution are completely opposite.
[u7f40ec2c27]Evolutionist Thinking[/u7f40ec2c27]
Early humans --------> Improve
[u7f40ec2c27]Creationist Thinking[/u7f40ec2c27]
Early humans --------> Get Worse
Here's another difference I see -
[u7f40ec2c27]Evolutionist Thinking[/u7f40ec2c27]
-Based on ideas and evidence
-Builds on evidence and forms a theory
-Is open to correction if something seems to be scientifically PROVEN wrong
-Still a theory
[u7f40ec2c27]Creationist Thinking[/u7f40ec2c27]
-Tries to find evidence to support their belief, not a building upon theory type of process.
-Even though there are problems in the Bible, everything spoken about creation in Genesis must be true because it says it, so we are going to find whatever we can to support that
-We are right no matter what, everything we believe that's in the Bible is absolutely true.
So are we getting better or worse? I've heard the argument that people could do better calculations in their head and stuff like that in ancient times than we could and that we're getting more stupid as we progress. I don't believe that this is us actually getting more stupid; we tend to rely on technology to do these things for us so there is not that much of a need to keep stuff like this in our heads. The human mind is incredible and I believe we could be just as smart as they were in older times. By older times I'm talking 5,000-6,000 years. Keep in mind this is how old Creationists think the world is. The majority of scientists believe the earth is 4.5 billion years old. A measly 6,000 years would not be enough time for Evolution to occur. So all of you saying "why haven't we changed at all lol evolution is so dumb" you need get your facts straight and consider both sides of the argument. licoughli OMW licoughli
There really isn't much of a difference between us nowadays and 5,000-6,000 years ago. I'm sure that the smart people of the ancient times had a greater memory and intelligence simply because they didn't have the technology (which we use as a crutch) that we rely on today.
[quote7f40ec2c27]Yes, I do. People have measured out the dimensions in the Bible and have come to realize how huge the ark actually was. I have this book that has a drawing of the ark next to a semi-truck and a human, and the truck/human look like toys. Granted it's a drawing, but yes the ark was huge. Also, to prove the flood, the grand canyon. Yeah,maybe it could have been formed over billions and billions and billions of years.. but it's more proof of a huge flood than a stream or river etching into it for billions of years. Also, they've found fossils of sea creatures in places where there is no water present, I can't remember where, but I saw it on a video. A bunch of sea creature fossils that were no where near the sea. How do you explain that? Actually, I take back that question, because someone will try to come up with some lame ass excuse. [/quote7f40ec2c27]
Even if the ark could hold every animal in existence, do you really think they would behave and just sit in their cages for 40 days and 40 nights? Do you think all of the dinosaurs could sit restless and be held in cages for 40 days and 40 nights? How did Noah feed these animals?
How many people in the ark were there (I'm too lazy to look it up)? I believe 5 or 6. Now think of it this way. Could 5 or 6 people take care of a zoo with even LESS animals in it for 40 days and 40 nights? Even better yet - there is only 2 of each animal (1 female and one male) so imagine taking care of every endangered species in a zoo with 5 other people for 40 days in a confined space. Do you think you could pull it off? Animals have enormous needs and I'm sure many of these animals would die from depression.
So let's look at Noah's ark - 5 or 6 people taking care of EVERY ANIMAL IN EXISTENCE and THEY ARE ALL ENDANGERED SPECIES - the last of their kind. They are held in cages for 40 day sand 40 nights. It just seems impossible to me. I really do think that there would be TONS of them dying from depression, and all you need is 1 of the 2 to die to kill off the entire species.
I could go on and on about Noah's Ark and this is just my thinking and reasoning, I haven't even looked up anything about it on Google.
Now on to zr -
[quote7f40ec2c27="zr2152"]you couldnt have put it much better. This is not an arguement that one person is going to win. Its just fun to talk about.
I'm a creationist. The earth and the univese is just way too perfect.
[b7f40ec2c27]J4320,
My point about that picture of the dinosaur carcass was to point out the fact that dinosaurs are not extinct like evolutionist say they are due to a meteor. This image to me is proof of the great flood (and Noah's Ark) and how the underwater dinosaurs were able to survive for the 40 days that they were underwater and the others dying on land because they were too big to fit on the Ark.[/b7f40ec2c27][/quote7f40ec2c27]
You really don't know what Evolutionists believe about the meteor incident do you? That statement that you made is a logical fallacy.
Evolutionists believe that the meteor hit did not instantly kill everything. The meteor hit - killing many dinosaurs - but it didn't instantly kill everything. It caused total devastation that drove the dinosaurs to extinction. This does not mean that every single dinosaur died. In fact, I would assume that the meteor caused less problems in water than on land. So I can see how something like that would survive according to Evolution.
[quote7f40ec2c27="YourGiftsFree"][quote7f40ec2c27="TFOAF"][quote7f40ec2c27="stackmjwiz"][quote7f40ec2c27]i say creation cause it doesn't make sence that all this just happend by chance.[/quote7f40ec2c27]
Exactly. The Universe is comprised of atoms. Who put them there? Who created the bits of matter?
Evolution doesn't explain this. Nor does the Big Bang theory. Science cannot explain the creation of the universe, or the earth.[/quote7f40ec2c27]
^^^, though I believe a bit of evolution too, because how WE evolved, and other animals evolve. Otherwise, I lean towards creationism. ;)[/quote7f40ec2c27]
That is how I see it, as well. Who put the first particle or 'thing" out there that started everything?
Also, I'd hate to get into a debate, but I thought I heard recently didnt't 2 scientist find peices of wood that could have been from noahs ark? I thought I heard that somewhere.[/quote7f40ec2c27]
You and TFOAF need to know the difference between macroevolution and microevolution.
As for pieces of wood from the ark being found... pieces of wood? What the hell? Please elaborate. Did some Creationist scientists find some wood on a mountain and then claim that it was from the ark? ?
samz465
25-01-2007 14:52:44
[quoted9f66ac1c7="J4320"][quoted9f66ac1c7="phriq"]It has to be creationism.....there is no way "nature" coudl just put everything together so delicataly. how could a giant "BooM" of atams breath life into organism so unique and intricly built. that makes no sence. somehting had to design everytyhing and put life into it. God. besides....if i were to put all religious beliefs aside. christianity is still way cooler. would you rather believe a big boom made us. or believe that there are sweet angels and demons fighting in some spiritual realm with flaming swords...thats way sweeter.[/quoted9f66ac1c7]
LMAO
That's hilarious. Are you trying to prove Chex's little downgrading theory correct? lol
You should have stopped at your first sentence because I wouldn't have thought less of you there; although the "where did God come from question" still stands.
Anyway, let me just let everyone know that I'm not a firm believer in Evolution. I do think there is a spiritual side to this world and I think that you have to determine your spirituality for yourself instead of blindly following what your parents teach you. That said, if my spiritual quest leads me to Christianity then so be it. Over the recent year (maybe years) I have gradually believed less and less of some things that are stated in the Bible.
I'll reply to Chex's statements first -
[quoted9f66ac1c7]Remember, God made them perfectly so their kids although less perfect than them because of the sin and fall and corruption of man, were still far more perfect than we are. Ever since the fall there has only been degeneration, which is why we cannot have sex with family members and expect to get well-functioning kids. Also, God put a stop to the inter-family marriages during the time of Exodus..[/quoted9f66ac1c7]
Is there any evidence for this? I don't recall this being stated anywhere in the Bible and I believe it's just a theory. Keep in mind that Evolution is just a theory as well.
This thinking and Evolution are completely opposite.
[ud9f66ac1c7]Evolutionist Thinking[/ud9f66ac1c7]
Early humans --------> Improve
[ud9f66ac1c7]Creationist Thinking[/ud9f66ac1c7]
Early humans --------> Get Worse
Here's another difference I see -
[ud9f66ac1c7]Evolutionist Thinking[/ud9f66ac1c7]
-Based on ideas and evidence
-Builds on evidence and forms a theory
-Is open to correction if something seems to be scientifically PROVEN wrong
-Still a theory
[ud9f66ac1c7]Creationist Thinking[/ud9f66ac1c7]
-Tries to find evidence to support their belief, not a building upon theory type of process.
-Even though there are problems in the Bible, everything spoken about creation in Genesis must be true because it says it, so we are going to find whatever we can to support that
-We are right no matter what, everything we believe that's in the Bible is absolutely true.
So are we getting better or worse? I've heard the argument that people could do better calculations in their head and stuff like that in ancient times than we could and that we're getting more stupid as we progress. I don't believe that this is us actually getting more stupid; we tend to rely on technology to do these things for us so there is not that much of a need to keep stuff like this in our heads. The human mind is incredible and I believe we could be just as smart as they were in older times. By older times I'm talking 5,000-6,000 years. Keep in mind this is how old Creationists think the world is. The majority of scientists believe the earth is 4.5 billion years old. A measly 6,000 years would not be enough time for Evolution to occur. So all of you saying "why haven't we changed at all lol evolution is so dumb" you need get your facts straight and consider both sides of the argument. licoughli OMW licoughli
There really isn't much of a difference between us nowadays and 5,000-6,000 years ago. I'm sure that the smart people of the ancient times had a greater memory and intelligence simply because they didn't have to rely on technology like we do today.
[quoted9f66ac1c7]Yes, I do. People have measured out the dimensions in the Bible and have come to realize how huge the ark actually was. I have this book that has a drawing of the ark next to a semi-truck and a human, and the truck/human look like toys. Granted it's a drawing, but yes the ark was huge. Also, to prove the flood, the grand canyon. Yeah,maybe it could have been formed over billions and billions and billions of years.. but it's more proof of a huge flood than a stream or river etching into it for billions of years. Also, they've found fossils of sea creatures in places where there is no water present, I can't remember where, but I saw it on a video. A bunch of sea creature fossils that were no where near the sea. How do you explain that? Actually, I take back that question, because someone will try to come up with some lame ass excuse. [/quoted9f66ac1c7]
Even if the ark could hold every animal in existence, do you really think they would behave and just sit in their cages for 40 days and 40 nights? Do you think all of the dinosaurs could sit restless be held in cages for 40 days and 40 nights? How did Noah feed these animals?
How many people in the ark were there (I'm too lazy to look it up)? I believe 5 or 6. Now think of it this way. Could 5 or 6 people take care of a zoo with even LESS animals in it for 40 days and 40 nights? Even better yet - there is only 2 of each animal (1 female and one male) so imagine taking care of every endangered species in a zoo with 5 other people for 40 days in a confined space. Do you think you could pull it off? Animals have enormous needs and I'm sure many of these animals would die from depression.
So let's look at Noah's ark - 5 or 6 people taking care of EVERY ANIMAL IN EXISTENCE and THEY ARE ALL ENDANGERED SPECIES - the last of their kind. They are held in cages for 40 day sand 40 nights. It just seems impossible to me. Most of these animals would probably die from depression.
I could go on and on about Noah's Ark and this is just my thinking and reasoning, I haven't even looked up anything about it on Google.
Now on to zr -
[quoted9f66ac1c7="zr2152"]you couldnt have put it much better. This is not an arguement that one person is going to win. Its just fun to talk about.
I'm a creationist. The earth and the univese is just way too perfect.
[bd9f66ac1c7]J4320,
My point about that picture of the dinosaur carcass was to point out the fact that dinosaurs are not extinct like evolutionist say they are due to a meteor. This image to me is proof of the great flood (and Noah's Ark) and how the underwater dinosaurs were able to survive for the 40 days that they were underwater and the others dying on land because they were too big to fit on the Ark.[/bd9f66ac1c7][/quoted9f66ac1c7]
You really don't know what Evolutionists believe about the meteor incident do you? That statement that you made is a logical fallacy.
Evolutionists believe that the meteor hit did not instantly kill everything. The meteor hit - killing many dinosaurs - but it didn't instantly kill everything. It caused total devastation that drove the dinosaurs to extinction. This does not mean that every single dinosaur died. In fact, I would assume that the meteor caused less problems in water than on land. So I can see how something like that would survive according to Evolution.
[quoted9f66ac1c7="YourGiftsFree"][quoted9f66ac1c7="TFOAF"][quoted9f66ac1c7="stackmjwiz"][quoted9f66ac1c7]i say creation cause it doesn't make sence that all this just happend by chance.[/quoted9f66ac1c7]
Exactly. The Universe is comprised of atoms. Who put them there? Who created the bits of matter?
Evolution doesn't explain this. Nor does the Big Bang theory. Science cannot explain the creation of the universe, or the earth.[/quoted9f66ac1c7]
^^^, though I believe a bit of evolution too, because how WE evolved, and other animals evolve. Otherwise, I lean towards creationism. ;)[/quoted9f66ac1c7]
That is how I see it, as well. Who put the first particle or 'thing" out there that started everything?
Also, I'd hate to get into a debate, but I thought I heard recently didnt't 2 scientist find peices of wood that could have been from noahs ark? I thought I heard that somewhere.[/quoted9f66ac1c7]
You and TFOAF need to know the difference between macroevolution and microevolution.
As for pieces of wood from the ark being found... pieces of wood? What the hell? Please elaborate. Did some Creationist scientists find some wood on a mountain and then claim that it was from the ark? ?[/quoted9f66ac1c7]
The only explanation would be a miracle...and you'd need faith to believe in that...
Thats the whole basis of faith.
J4320
25-01-2007 14:59:45
^ I know it is. I really don't want to hear it right now. I've heard it 23507329065093609230968 other times in this thread already. Why can't anyone provide me with some logic instead of telling me to just forget about logic and believe in something that doesn't even make sense?
J4320
25-01-2007 15:04:39
This whole argument really tells me a lot about the three ancient types of argument and persuasion - ethos, logos, and pathos.
I can see that the Bible applies to pathos mostly which is emotional persuasion. People are scared of going to hell so their emotions drive them to join Christianity. Does the Bible appeal to logos (which is evidence and logic)? It hasn't from what I've seen.
Does it appeal to ethos (credibility)? Well how can we see the Bible as a credible source when there are so many problems with it?
Once again let me just tell you guys, I'm not Googling any of this so please feel free to enhance my argument with more knowledge from Google if you wish. Or go ahead and stand against my argument using Google. I don't care; as long as I see some good arguing and logic.
Oh and since we're on a new page, here's my recent post answering questions ---
[quote174d665417="phriq"]It has to be creationism.....there is no way "nature" coudl just put everything together so delicataly. how could a giant "BooM" of atams breath life into organism so unique and intricly built. that makes no sence. somehting had to design everytyhing and put life into it. God. besides....if i were to put all religious beliefs aside. christianity is still way cooler. would you rather believe a big boom made us. or believe that there are sweet angels and demons fighting in some spiritual realm with flaming swords...thats way sweeter.[/quote174d665417]
LMAO
That's hilarious. Are you trying to prove Chex's little downgrading theory correct? lol
You should have stopped at your first sentence because I wouldn't have thought less of you there; although the "where did God come from question" still stands.
Anyway, let me just let everyone know that I'm not a firm believer in Evolution. I do think there is a spiritual side to this world and I think that you have to determine your spirituality for yourself instead of blindly following what your parents teach you. That said, if my spiritual quest leads me to Christianity then so be it. Over the recent year (maybe years) I have gradually believed less and less of some things that are stated in the Bible.
I'll reply to Chex's statements first -
[quote174d665417]Remember, God made them perfectly so their kids although less perfect than them because of the sin and fall and corruption of man, were still far more perfect than we are. Ever since the fall there has only been degeneration, which is why we cannot have sex with family members and expect to get well-functioning kids. Also, God put a stop to the inter-family marriages during the time of Exodus..[/quote174d665417]
Is there any evidence for this? I don't recall this being stated anywhere in the Bible and I believe it's just a theory. Keep in mind that Evolution is just a theory as well.
This thinking and Evolution are completely opposite.
[u174d665417]Evolutionist Thinking[/u174d665417]
Early humans --------> Improve
[u174d665417]Creationist Thinking[/u174d665417]
Early humans --------> Get Worse
Here's another difference I see -
[u174d665417]Evolutionist Thinking[/u174d665417]
-Based on ideas and evidence
-Builds on evidence and forms a theory
-Is open to correction if something seems to be scientifically PROVEN wrong
-Still a theory
[u174d665417]Creationist Thinking[/u174d665417]
-Tries to find evidence to support their belief, not a building upon theory type of process.
-Even though there are problems in the Bible, everything spoken about creation in Genesis must be true because it says it, so we are going to find whatever we can to support that
-We are right no matter what, everything we believe that's in the Bible is absolutely true.
So are we getting better or worse? I've heard the argument that people could do better calculations in their head and stuff like that in ancient times than we could and that we're getting more stupid as we progress. I don't believe that this is us actually getting more stupid; we tend to rely on technology to do these things for us so there is not that much of a need to keep stuff like this in our heads. The human mind is incredible and I believe we could be just as smart as they were in older times. By older times I'm talking 5,000-6,000 years. Keep in mind this is how old Creationists think the world is. The majority of scientists believe the earth is 4.5 billion years old. A measly 6,000 years would not be enough time for Evolution to occur. So all of you saying "why haven't we changed at all lol evolution is so dumb" you need get your facts straight and consider both sides of the argument. licoughli OMW licoughli
There really isn't much of a difference between us nowadays and 5,000-6,000 years ago. I'm sure that the smart people of the ancient times had a greater memory and intelligence simply because they didn't have the technology (which we use as a crutch) that we rely on today.
[quote174d665417]Yes, I do. People have measured out the dimensions in the Bible and have come to realize how huge the ark actually was. I have this book that has a drawing of the ark next to a semi-truck and a human, and the truck/human look like toys. Granted it's a drawing, but yes the ark was huge. Also, to prove the flood, the grand canyon. Yeah,maybe it could have been formed over billions and billions and billions of years.. but it's more proof of a huge flood than a stream or river etching into it for billions of years. Also, they've found fossils of sea creatures in places where there is no water present, I can't remember where, but I saw it on a video. A bunch of sea creature fossils that were no where near the sea. How do you explain that? Actually, I take back that question, because someone will try to come up with some lame ass excuse. [/quote174d665417]
Even if the ark could hold every animal in existence, do you really think they would behave and just sit in their cages for 40 days and 40 nights? Do you think all of the dinosaurs could sit restless and be held in cages for 40 days and 40 nights? How did Noah feed these animals?
How many people in the ark were there (I'm too lazy to look it up)? I believe 5 or 6. Now think of it this way. Could 5 or 6 people take care of a zoo with even LESS animals in it for 40 days and 40 nights? Even better yet - there is only 2 of each animal (1 female and one male) so imagine taking care of every endangered species in a zoo with 5 other people for 40 days in a confined space. Do you think you could pull it off? Animals have enormous needs and I'm sure many of these animals would die from depression.
So let's look at Noah's ark - 5 or 6 people taking care of EVERY ANIMAL IN EXISTENCE and THEY ARE ALL ENDANGERED SPECIES - the last of their kind. They are held in cages for 40 day sand 40 nights. It just seems impossible to me. I really do think that there would be TONS of them dying from depression, and all you need is 1 of the 2 to die to kill off the entire species.
I could go on and on about Noah's Ark and this is just my thinking and reasoning, I haven't even looked up anything about it on Google.
Now on to zr -
[quote174d665417="zr2152"]you couldnt have put it much better. This is not an arguement that one person is going to win. Its just fun to talk about.
I'm a creationist. The earth and the univese is just way too perfect.
[b174d665417]J4320,
My point about that picture of the dinosaur carcass was to point out the fact that dinosaurs are not extinct like evolutionist say they are due to a meteor. This image to me is proof of the great flood (and Noah's Ark) and how the underwater dinosaurs were able to survive for the 40 days that they were underwater and the others dying on land because they were too big to fit on the Ark.[/b174d665417][/quote174d665417]
You really don't know what Evolutionists believe about the meteor incident do you? That statement that you made is a logical fallacy.
Evolutionists believe that the meteor hit did not instantly kill everything. The meteor hit - killing many dinosaurs - but it didn't instantly kill everything. It caused total devastation that drove the dinosaurs to extinction. This does not mean that every single dinosaur died. In fact, I would assume that the meteor caused less problems in water than on land. So I can see how something like that would survive according to Evolution.
[quote174d665417="YourGiftsFree"][quote174d665417="TFOAF"][quote174d665417="stackmjwiz"][quote174d665417]i say creation cause it doesn't make sence that all this just happend by chance.[/quote174d665417]
Exactly. The Universe is comprised of atoms. Who put them there? Who created the bits of matter?
Evolution doesn't explain this. Nor does the Big Bang theory. Science cannot explain the creation of the universe, or the earth.[/quote174d665417]
^^^, though I believe a bit of evolution too, because how WE evolved, and other animals evolve. Otherwise, I lean towards creationism. ;)[/quote174d665417]
That is how I see it, as well. Who put the first particle or 'thing" out there that started everything?
Also, I'd hate to get into a debate, but I thought I heard recently didnt't 2 scientist find peices of wood that could have been from noahs ark? I thought I heard that somewhere.[/quote174d665417]
You and TFOAF need to know the difference between macroevolution and microevolution.
As for pieces of wood from the ark being found... pieces of wood? What the hell? Please elaborate. Did some Creationist scientists find some wood on a mountain and then claim that it was from the ark? ?
phriq
25-01-2007 15:06:12
Man this is almost to much for the forums....we should have a skype debate or something.
many poeple have probloms with the "holes" in the bible. but if you look (not to say names to anyone, please dont take offense) but many poeple who say that have no biblical knowledge, and only use what they hear from others, who also have no biblical knowledge. What holes do you see in the bible? and for the things taht you call holes...(how could god live forever, etc.) its faith. the thing is you think faith is blindly following, yet every evolutionist has faith too. it is just a matter of where you put that faith. faith is believing without seeing. you believe evolution yet have not scene it,. yet you have faith in it.
also, if you look at historians and researches. many of them use the bible for how incredibly historically accurate it is.
the last thing i wanna quick say, is how many of us have been lied to or tricked? it's very easy....tom green fooled a nation with his monica lewinsky thing.....now look at the devil who has exsited before earth was created.....and he has been tricking man and women (to be pc, lol) from the start. now if tom green can fool a nation and was like 30 years old when he did it. that means the devil, who has thousands and thousands of years to practice,,,could very very very easily fool the entire world....besides, he is what we all are atracted to for he is the angel of light.
J4320
25-01-2007 15:09:23
[quote0c0d4be9d9="phriq"]Man this is almost to much for the forums....we should have a skype debate or something.
many poeple have probloms with the "holes" in the bible. but if you look (not to say names to anyone, please dont take offense) but many poeple who say that have no biblical knowledge, and only use what they hear from others, who also have no biblical knowledge. What holes do you see in the bible? and for the things taht you call holes...(how could god live forever, etc.) its faith. the thing is you think faith is blindly following, yet every evolutionist has faith too. it is just a matter of where you put that faith. faith is believing without seeing. you believe evolution yet have not scene it,. yet you have faith in it.
also, if you look at historians and researches. many of them use the bible for how incredibly historically accurate it is.
the last thing i wanna quick say, is how many of us have been lied to or tricked? it's very easy....tom green fooled a nation with his monica lewinsky thing.....now look at the devil who has exsited before earth was created.....and he has been tricking man and women (to be pc, lol) from the start. now if tom green can fool a nation and was like 30 years old when he did it. that means the devil, who has thousands and thousands of years to practice,,,could very very very easily fool the entire world....besides, he is what we all are atracted to for he is the angel of light.[/quote0c0d4be9d9]
I read the first paragraph of your post and I don't even feel like reading the rest. I've read the entire Bible, grown up in a Christian home, gone to church every week, have gone to a Christian school (with a Bible class every day) from grades 1-10. Judging from your posts, I know more about the Bible than you do. The teachings of the Bible have been drilled into my mind.
You want me to explain the holes? Go read my posts.
J4320
25-01-2007 15:16:15
Oh no I did it. I read the rest of your post. Wow.
Okay first of all, yes, the Bible does have information that is historically accurate. Thanks to the Bible I know the Romans existed. roll
But seriously, I know what you mean by it having true historical facts. So do all kinds of other ancient books. The writers were living back then and describing their surroundings and what was going on. Of course it has historically accurate information. Does that mean we should believe the entire thing to be the truth though?
Oh and I'm debating with myself if I should even bother arguing with you about the Tom Green thing. I don't think I'll waste my time though.
phriq
25-01-2007 15:16:44
[quote447f47396a="J4320"]
I read the first paragraph of your post and I don't even feel like reading the rest. I've read the entire Bible, grown up in a Christian home, gone to church every week, have gone to a Christian school (with a Bible class every day) from grades 1-10. Judging from your posts, I know more about the Bible than you do. The teachings of the Bible have been drilled into my mind.
You want me to explain the holes? Go read my posts.[/quote447f47396a]
Well as for you knowing more, could be....but my background is that i am a pastors kid, growing up in the chruch went to a christian school and then did studing of every other religion out there. have been a bible councelor for 3 summers and lead church worship for 4 years. i know the bible.
another thing poeple need to realize, is that your faith in god, you wont see it if your not part of it. its like love,,,you dont understnad how someone else feels for someone until you actually expierience it.
god is giving us his gift, and when you accept it you will realize it and feel and and truley understand,,,but only,, ONLY if you really accept it. in order to truly understand faith,.,,,you need to expierience it.
as for holes....science alot of times proves the bible....i think it was gallileo who said the more he studdied the universe, the more he believed in a higher power... as many other scientist as well (i.e. einstien)
J4320
25-01-2007 15:18:17
Fix your quote please. It's messed up and it's making my statements look like yours.
[quote94491ecb1b="phriq"]Well as for you knowing more, could be....but my background is that i am a pastors kid, growing up in the chruch went to a christian school and then did studing of every other religion out there. have been a bible councelor for 3 summers and lead church worship for 4 years. i know the bible.
another thing poeple need to realize, is that your faith in god, you wont see it if your not part of it. its like love,,,you dont understnad how someone else feels for someone until you actually expierience it.
god is giving us his gift, and when you accept it you will realize it and feel and and truley understand,,,but only,, ONLY if you really accept it. in order to truly understand faith,.,,,you need to expierience it.
as for holes....science alot of times proves the bible....i think it was gallileo who said the more he studdied the universe, the more he believed in a higher power... as many other scientist as well (i.e. einstien)[/quote94491ecb1b]
Okay it's good to know you know about the Bible at least. This way you'll have better discernment. Now I challenge you to go read up on Evolution and know a lot about it before trying to argue for either side.
So now I just did a Google search and I found something interesting. You say God is all about love right? Read this ---
[quote94491ecb1b]"Author Paul Alan Laughlin, a liberal Christian, drew an analogy between the story of Genesis 3 and "a more modern scenario." The following parable is based on his tale
A woman bakes a batch of cookies for a party. She warns her twins, aged 3, to not eat any. She explained to them, deceitfully, that if they did, then she would kill them. Not thinking things through carefully, she placed the cookies on a table, easily accessible to the twins. A brother who was older, wiser and more mature than the twins asked whether their mother had forbidden them to eat anything in the house. The girl twin, Edna, said that mother had only forbidden them to eat the cookies -- on pain of death. The older brother chuckled and told his sister that parents did that a lot. He said "Of course she wouldn't kill you. She simply wants to deny you the pleasure of munching on the cookies. She doesn't want to share the cookies. She wants to keep them all to herself." Edna does exactly what any adult could predict she eats one. Then, she persuades her twin brother Albert to eat another.
The mother returns, not aware of the twin's disobedience. She notices crumbs on the table and on the twins' lips. She correctly concludes that the twins have eaten cookies. She flies into a rage, beats them, and throws them out of the house to fend for themselves. She cuts them out of her will. She does all she can to make the lives of any future descendents of the twins miserable."
By OCRT, "GENESIS 3 The fall/rise of humanity"
Any parent who acts like this lacks love, compassion, intelligence or morals, yet this is exactly how God acts in the Genesis story of Adam and Eve. A possible Christian defence, in order to try and keep God as the good guy, would be that God then rectified the situation by sending his son out to retrieve his children. But this could all have been averted if God was simply a better parent in the first place![/quote94491ecb1b]
Source -
http//www.vexen.co.uk/religion/christianity_adamandeve.html
Also, I have tried connecting with God for my entire life. If he cared about me he'd return the phone call. I'm starting to give up. I'm starting to believe that Christians experience intense feelings during worship and such that enhance their zeal towards God.
EatChex89
25-01-2007 15:57:08
[quote143ec9112d="J4320"][quote143ec9112d="phriq"]It has to be creationism.....there is no way "nature" coudl just put everything together so delicataly. how could a giant "BooM" of atams breath life into organism so unique and intricly built. that makes no sence. somehting had to design everytyhing and put life into it. God. besides....if i were to put all religious beliefs aside. christianity is still way cooler. would you rather believe a big boom made us. or believe that there are sweet angels and demons fighting in some spiritual realm with flaming swords...thats way sweeter.[/quote143ec9112d]
LMAO
That's hilarious. Are you trying to prove Chex's little downgrading theory correct? lol
You should have stopped at your first sentence because I wouldn't have thought less of you there; although the "where did God come from question" still stands.
Anyway, let me just let everyone know that I'm not a firm believer in Evolution. I do think there is a spiritual side to this world and I think that you have to determine your spirituality for yourself instead of blindly following what your parents teach you. That said, if my spiritual quest leads me to Christianity then so be it. Over the recent year (maybe years) I have gradually believed less and less of some things that are stated in the Bible.
I'll reply to Chex's statements first -
[quote143ec9112d]Remember, God made them perfectly so their kids although less perfect than them because of the sin and fall and corruption of man, were still far more perfect than we are. Ever since the fall there has only been degeneration, which is why we cannot have sex with family members and expect to get well-functioning kids. Also, God put a stop to the inter-family marriages during the time of Exodus..[/quote143ec9112d]
Is there any evidence for this? I don't recall this being stated anywhere in the Bible and I believe it's just a theory. Keep in mind that Evolution is just a theory as well.
[quote143ec9112d="J4320"]How could Adam and Eve's offspring survive off of each other? Family members with similar DNA cannot mix like that without having problems. How does that work? [/quote143ec9112d]
[b143ec9112d]
You are talking about Adam and Eve. I don't have to solid evidence. You took characters from the Bible, I took evidence from the Bible. If you mean evidence from the Bible, then yes I do. Why were Adam and Eve kicked out of the garden? Because they fell, sinned and were imperfect in the sight of God. Which means that before their sin, they were perfect. Also, their "falling" didn't inhibit their physical perfection, just spiritual. They were still physically perfect as God didn't change their physical structure. However, the curse is what caused the degeneration which is why later inter-family sexual relationships were prohibited.
[/color143ec9112d][/b143ec9112d]
This thinking and Evolution are completely opposite.
[u143ec9112d]Evolutionist Thinking[/u143ec9112d]
Early humans --------> Improve
[u143ec9112d]Creationist Thinking[/u143ec9112d]
Early humans --------> Get Worse
Here's another difference I see -
[u143ec9112d]Evolutionist Thinking[/u143ec9112d]
-Based on ideas and evidence
[b143ec9112d]There is no more evidence for evolution than there is creation.[/color143ec9112d][/b143ec9112d]
-Builds on evidence and forms a theory
[b143ec9112d]Once again. What evidence? And creationism does the same..[/color143ec9112d][/b143ec9112d]
-Is open to correction if something seems to be scientifically PROVEN wrong
[b143ec9112d]Yeah, to which another false assumption is created. Thus evolution is constantly shifting around trying to find the solid ground it never will. I don't see creationism changing views.[/color143ec9112d][/b143ec9112d]
-Still a theory
[u143ec9112d]Creationist Thinking[/u143ec9112d]
-Tries to find evidence to support their belief, not a building upon theory type of process.
[b143ec9112d]We don't try to find evidence. The evidence is already there for us. Evolutionists are constantly scrounging to find any shred of evidence to support their theory.[/color143ec9112d][/b143ec9112d]
-Even though there are problems in the Bible, everything spoken about creation in Genesis must be true because it says it, so we are going to find whatever we can to support that
-We are right no matter what, everything we believe that's in the Bible is absolutely true.
So are we getting better or worse? I've heard the argument that people could do better calculations in their head and stuff like that in ancient times than we could and that we're getting more stupid as we progress. I don't believe that this is us actually getting more stupid; we tend to rely on technology to do these things for us so there is not that much of a need to keep stuff like this in our heads. The human mind is incredible and I believe we could be just as smart as they were in older times. By older times I'm talking 5,000-6,000 years. Keep in mind this is how old Creationists think the world is. The majority of scientists believe the earth is 4.5 billion years old. A measly 6,000 years would not be enough time for Evolution to occur. So all of you saying "why haven't we changed at all lol evolution is so dumb" you need get your facts straight and consider both sides of the argument. licoughli OMW licoughli
[b143ec9112d]So monkeys appear to be very similar to humans. What proof is that? I mean, if we have so many fossils of all these animals and whatnot, why can't we find any of some "missing links"?[/color143ec9112d][/b143ec9112d]
There really isn't much of a difference between us nowadays and 5,000-6,000 years ago. I'm sure that the smart people of the ancient times had a greater memory and intelligence simply because they didn't have the technology (which we use as a crutch) that we rely on today.
[quote143ec9112d]Yes, I do. People have measured out the dimensions in the Bible and have come to realize how huge the ark actually was. I have this book that has a drawing of the ark next to a semi-truck and a human, and the truck/human look like toys. Granted it's a drawing, but yes the ark was huge. Also, to prove the flood, the grand canyon. Yeah,maybe it could have been formed over billions and billions and billions of years.. but it's more proof of a huge flood than a stream or river etching into it for billions of years. Also, they've found fossils of sea creatures in places where there is no water present, I can't remember where, but I saw it on a video. A bunch of sea creature fossils that were no where near the sea. How do you explain that? Actually, I take back that question, because someone will try to come up with some lame ass excuse. [/quote143ec9112d]
Even if the ark could hold every animal in existence, do you really think they would behave and just sit in their cages for 40 days and 40 nights? Do you think all of the dinosaurs could sit restless and be held in cages for 40 days and 40 nights? How did Noah feed these animals?
[b143ec9112d]It doesn't matter how Noah fed them, that has nothing to do with anything. Of course they were restless, but they were in cages. What do animals at the zoo do? They become domesticated and sit there. The ark didn't have every animal in existence. Why? Because there weren't that many species of animals. Take the dog for instance, Noah didn't take Poodles, and German Shepherds and all those. He probalby only had a few species of dogs that interbred after getting off the ark which caused the wide variety of species. Same with other animals like birds, cats.. etc.[/color143ec9112d][/b143ec9112d]
How many people in the ark were there (I'm too lazy to look it up)? I believe 5 or 6. Now think of it this way. Could 5 or 6 people take care of a zoo with even LESS animals in it for 40 days and 40 nights? Even better yet - there is only 2 of each animal (1 female and one male) so imagine taking care of every endangered species in a zoo with 5 other people for 40 days in a confined space. Do you think you could pull it off? Animals have enormous needs and I'm sure many of these animals would die from depression.
[b143ec9112d]You're thinking about all this from too much of a scientific approach. If you want to believe in the Bible do it. If not don't. But the only reason that the animals lived was through God taking care of them, etc. Please don't try to prove everything Scientifically as that cannot be done with everything, especially Bible facts.[/color143ec9112d][/b143ec9112d]
So let's look at Noah's ark - 5 or 6 people taking care of EVERY ANIMAL IN EXISTENCE and THEY ARE ALL ENDANGERED SPECIES - the last of their kind. They are held in cages for 40 day sand 40 nights. It just seems impossible to me. I really do think that there would be TONS of them dying from depression, and all you need is 1 of the 2 to die to kill off the entire species.
I could go on and on about Noah's Ark and this is just my thinking and reasoning, I haven't even looked up anything about it on Google.
[/quote143ec9112d]
My final say for now is this
Evolution is a religion, just like Creationism. Evolution is a belief, just like Creationism; and, just like Creationism, Evolution requires faith. And my biggest pet peeve is how people are so hypocritical. They would like to take God out of everything and quote "Freedom of Religion." While they replace Creationism with Evolution. It's ridiculous. I'm going off on a rant here, I know. But I believe that the creation of the world, the beginning of the world, and all that is related to that, should be left up to the parents to teach to the kids, and should not be discussed as a "Science" since in fact, neither are. Both are religions, beliefs, faith.
That is all for now.
samz465
25-01-2007 16:24:23
[quote197320df41="J4320"]^ I know it is. I really don't want to hear it right now. I've heard it 23507329065093609230968 other times in this thread already. Why can't anyone provide me with some logic instead of telling me to just forget about logic and believe in something that doesn't even make sense?[/quote197320df41]
B/c obviously the only person who could actually comprehend or be capable of such a thing would be god...
Thats why you'd have to forget about logic.
And thats what the definition of faith is...
Crouching Tiger Hidden Ga
25-01-2007 17:07:48
[quoteca50cef1de="samz465"][quoteca50cef1de="J4320"]^ I know it is. I really don't want to hear it right now. I've heard it 23507329065093609230968 other times in this thread already. Why can't anyone provide me with some logic instead of telling me to just forget about logic and believe in something that doesn't even make sense?[/quoteca50cef1de]
B/c obviously the only person who could actually comprehend or be capable of such a thing would be god...
Thats why you'd have to forget about logic.
And thats what the definition of faith is...[/quoteca50cef1de]
Actually faith isn't just believing in something with no evidence. There is plenty of evidence that there is a God and definitely a lot more than evolution. Faith is whenever you trust something to hold you up. For instance whenever you sit in a chair you have faith that the chair is gonna hold you up. And you have faith because you have evidence such as how it's held you up before. Also having faith in something doesn't make something work. Nowadays you hear people saying stuff like "if you just have enough faith you can do anything" or something like that. Well faith doesn't do anything it's what you have faith in. If you have faith that the thin ice will hold you up it won't make it any more likely to hold you up.
phriq
25-01-2007 17:36:31
[quote87108c909c="J4320"]
So now I just did a Google search and I found something interesting. You say God is all about love right? Read this ---
[quote87108c909c]"Author Paul Alan Laughlin, a liberal Christian, drew an analogy between the story of Genesis 3 and "a more modern scenario." The following parable is based on his tale
A woman bakes a batch of cookies for a party. She warns her twins, aged 3, to not eat any. She explained to them, deceitfully, that if they did, then she would kill them. Not thinking things through carefully, she placed the cookies on a table, easily accessible to the twins. A brother who was older, wiser and more mature than the twins asked whether their mother had forbidden them to eat anything in the house. The girl twin, Edna, said that mother had only forbidden them to eat the cookies -- on pain of death. The older brother chuckled and told his sister that parents did that a lot. He said "Of course she wouldn't kill you. She simply wants to deny you the pleasure of munching on the cookies. She doesn't want to share the cookies. She wants to keep them all to herself." Edna does exactly what any adult could predict she eats one. Then, she persuades her twin brother Albert to eat another.
The mother returns, not aware of the twin's disobedience. She notices crumbs on the table and on the twins' lips. She correctly concludes that the twins have eaten cookies. She flies into a rage, beats them, and throws them out of the house to fend for themselves. She cuts them out of her will. She does all she can to make the lives of any future descendents of the twins miserable."
By OCRT, "GENESIS 3 The fall/rise of humanity"
Any parent who acts like this lacks love, compassion, intelligence or morals, yet this is exactly how God acts in the Genesis story of Adam and Eve. A possible Christian defence, in order to try and keep God as the good guy, would be that God then rectified the situation by sending his son out to retrieve his children. But this could all have been averted if God was simply a better parent in the first place![/quote87108c909c]
Source -
http//www.vexen.co.uk/religion/christianity_adamandeve.html
Also, I have tried connecting with God for my entire life. If he cared about me he'd return the phone call. I'm starting to give up. I'm starting to believe that Christians experience intense feelings during worship and such that enhance their zeal towards God.[/quote87108c909c]
i never said god was all about love. it says in the bible our god is a jelous God who HATES sin. He gets Angry, he can, he is God.
Crouching Tiger Hidden Ga
25-01-2007 18:06:48
[quote21d7f6e2a2="J4320"]
So now I just did a Google search and I found something interesting. You say God is all about love right? Read this ---
[quote21d7f6e2a2]"Author Paul Alan Laughlin, a liberal Christian, drew an analogy between the story of Genesis 3 and "a more modern scenario." The following parable is based on his tale
A woman bakes a batch of cookies for a party. She warns her twins, aged 3, to not eat any. She explained to them, deceitfully, that if they did, then she would kill them. Not thinking things through carefully, she placed the cookies on a table, easily accessible to the twins. A brother who was older, wiser and more mature than the twins asked whether their mother had forbidden them to eat anything in the house. The girl twin, Edna, said that mother had only forbidden them to eat the cookies -- on pain of death. The older brother chuckled and told his sister that parents did that a lot. He said "Of course she wouldn't kill you. She simply wants to deny you the pleasure of munching on the cookies. She doesn't want to share the cookies. She wants to keep them all to herself." Edna does exactly what any adult could predict she eats one. Then, she persuades her twin brother Albert to eat another.
The mother returns, not aware of the twin's disobedience. She notices crumbs on the table and on the twins' lips. She correctly concludes that the twins have eaten cookies. She flies into a rage, beats them, and throws them out of the house to fend for themselves. She cuts them out of her will. She does all she can to make the lives of any future descendents of the twins miserable."
By OCRT, "GENESIS 3 The fall/rise of humanity"
Any parent who acts like this lacks love, compassion, intelligence or morals, yet this is exactly how God acts in the Genesis story of Adam and Eve. A possible Christian defence, in order to try and keep God as the good guy, would be that God then rectified the situation by sending his son out to retrieve his children. But this could all have been averted if God was simply a better parent in the first place![/quote21d7f6e2a2]
Source -
http//www.vexen.co.uk/religion/christianity_adamandeve.html
Also, I have tried connecting with God for my entire life. If he cared about me he'd return the phone call. I'm starting to give up. I'm starting to believe that Christians experience intense feelings during worship and such that enhance their zeal towards God.[/quote21d7f6e2a2]
If God said that Adam and Eve could do WHATEVER they want than it would be impossible to do wrong which would have been like making robots. Also God made humans to give glory to himself by saving them. You think that's jealousy, and pride? Yes, it is. Although God has a right to be.
J4320
25-01-2007 18:28:40
[quote6dfaca352f="EatChex89"][quote6dfaca352f="J4320"][quote6dfaca352f="phriq"]It has to be creationism.....there is no way "nature" coudl just put everything together so delicataly. how could a giant "BooM" of atams breath life into organism so unique and intricly built. that makes no sence. somehting had to design everytyhing and put life into it. God. besides....if i were to put all religious beliefs aside. christianity is still way cooler. would you rather believe a big boom made us. or believe that there are sweet angels and demons fighting in some spiritual realm with flaming swords...thats way sweeter.[/quote6dfaca352f]
LMAO
That's hilarious. Are you trying to prove Chex's little downgrading theory correct? lol
You should have stopped at your first sentence because I wouldn't have thought less of you there; although the "where did God come from question" still stands.
Anyway, let me just let everyone know that I'm not a firm believer in Evolution. I do think there is a spiritual side to this world and I think that you have to determine your spirituality for yourself instead of blindly following what your parents teach you. That said, if my spiritual quest leads me to Christianity then so be it. Over the recent year (maybe years) I have gradually believed less and less of some things that are stated in the Bible.
I'll reply to Chex's statements first -
[quote6dfaca352f]Remember, God made them perfectly so their kids although less perfect than them because of the sin and fall and corruption of man, were still far more perfect than we are. Ever since the fall there has only been degeneration, which is why we cannot have sex with family members and expect to get well-functioning kids. Also, God put a stop to the inter-family marriages during the time of Exodus..[/quote6dfaca352f]
Is there any evidence for this? I don't recall this being stated anywhere in the Bible and I believe it's just a theory. Keep in mind that Evolution is just a theory as well.
[quote6dfaca352f="J4320"]How could Adam and Eve's offspring survive off of each other? Family members with similar DNA cannot mix like that without having problems. How does that work? [/quote6dfaca352f]
[b6dfaca352f]
You are talking about Adam and Eve. I don't have to solid evidence. You took characters from the Bible, I took evidence from the Bible. If you mean evidence from the Bible, then yes I do. Why were Adam and Eve kicked out of the garden? Because they fell, sinned and were imperfect in the sight of God. Which means that before their sin, they were perfect. Also, their "falling" didn't inhibit their physical perfection, just spiritual. They were still physically perfect as God didn't change their physical structure. However, the curse is what caused the degeneration which is why later inter-family sexual relationships were prohibited.
[/color6dfaca352f][/b6dfaca352f]
[b6dfaca352f]Actually I was talking about the degeneration of man. There is no proof of it. I know you can't prove something like Adam and Eve. I was talking about proof for degeneration. [/b6dfaca352f]
This thinking and Evolution are completely opposite.
[u6dfaca352f]Evolutionist Thinking[/u6dfaca352f]
Early humans --------> Improve
[u6dfaca352f]Creationist Thinking[/u6dfaca352f]
Early humans --------> Get Worse
Here's another difference I see -
[u6dfaca352f]Evolutionist Thinking[/u6dfaca352f]
-Based on ideas and evidence
[b6dfaca352f]There is no more evidence for evolution than there is creation.[/color6dfaca352f][/b6dfaca352f]
[b6dfaca352f]I actually think you're wrong here. I'm pretty sure that there are more things that seem to make Evolution possible than Creation. That doesn't mean that Creationism is wrong or Evolution is right though. If Creationism had the same amount of proof then we would treat Evolution and Creationism equally but that's not what you see in museums and such.[/b6dfaca352f]
-Builds on evidence and forms a theory
[b6dfaca352f]Once again. What evidence? And creationism does the same..[/color6dfaca352f][/b6dfaca352f]
[b6dfaca352f]No it doesn't, Creationism builds on the "theory" which technically isn't even a theory since they believe it's true no matter what.
Evolution builds on evidence to form a conclusion while Creationism looks for evidence to support their cause.[/b6dfaca352f]
-Is open to correction if something seems to be scientifically PROVEN wrong
[b6dfaca352f]Yeah, to which another false assumption is created. Thus evolution is constantly shifting around trying to find the solid ground it never will. I don't see creationism changing views.[/color6dfaca352f][/b6dfaca352f]
[b6dfaca352f]
Of course Creationism isn't changing views. They already believe in their view no matter what and will take any type of evidence they can and use that to try and support it.
Evolution modifies its theory (yes, theory) based on evidence and learning, so yes, it does shift around. At least they're admitting that they don't know what fully went on and they are willing to go with changes.[/b6dfaca352f]
-Still a theory
[u6dfaca352f]Creationist Thinking[/u6dfaca352f]
-Tries to find evidence to support their belief, not a building upon theory type of process.
[b6dfaca352f]We don't try to find evidence. The evidence is already there for us. Evolutionists are constantly scrounging to find any shred of evidence to support their theory.[/color6dfaca352f][/b6dfaca352f]
[b6dfaca352f]It all depends on how the evidence is interpreted. Creationists interpret the evidence to their side while Evolutionists use it to their side. The difference is Evolutionists use science to base their determination while Creationists try to take there evidence and make it fit in with what the Bible says.[/b6dfaca352f]
-Even though there are problems in the Bible, everything spoken about creation in Genesis must be true because it says it, so we are going to find whatever we can to support that
-We are right no matter what, everything we believe that's in the Bible is absolutely true.
So are we getting better or worse? I've heard the argument that people could do better calculations in their head and stuff like that in ancient times than we could and that we're getting more stupid as we progress. I don't believe that this is us actually getting more stupid; we tend to rely on technology to do these things for us so there is not that much of a need to keep stuff like this in our heads. The human mind is incredible and I believe we could be just as smart as they were in older times. By older times I'm talking 5,000-6,000 years. Keep in mind this is how old Creationists think the world is. The majority of scientists believe the earth is 4.5 billion years old. A measly 6,000 years would not be enough time for Evolution to occur. So all of you saying "why haven't we changed at all lol evolution is so dumb" you need get your facts straight and consider both sides of the argument. licoughli OMW licoughli
[b6dfaca352f]So monkeys appear to be very similar to humans. What proof is that? I mean, if we have so many fossils of all these animals and whatnot, why can't we find any of some "missing links"?[/color6dfaca352f][/b6dfaca352f]
[b6dfaca352f]
The missing links are extremely hard to determine. They have found plenty of things that look like the missing links between monkeys and men but it's really hard to determine. Humans have deformations so if they found a fossil of a deformed human from a few thousand years ago it would be hard to tell if it was really a missing link or a human with some sort of distorted bones. That's how I think they see it. I'd have to Google it to find out more.[/b6dfaca352f]
There really isn't much of a difference between us nowadays and 5,000-6,000 years ago. I'm sure that the smart people of the ancient times had a greater memory and intelligence simply because they didn't have the technology (which we use as a crutch) that we rely on today.
[quote6dfaca352f]Yes, I do. People have measured out the dimensions in the Bible and have come to realize how huge the ark actually was. I have this book that has a drawing of the ark next to a semi-truck and a human, and the truck/human look like toys. Granted it's a drawing, but yes the ark was huge. Also, to prove the flood, the grand canyon. Yeah,maybe it could have been formed over billions and billions and billions of years.. but it's more proof of a huge flood than a stream or river etching into it for billions of years. Also, they've found fossils of sea creatures in places where there is no water present, I can't remember where, but I saw it on a video. A bunch of sea creature fossils that were no where near the sea. How do you explain that? Actually, I take back that question, because someone will try to come up with some lame ass excuse. [/quote6dfaca352f]
Even if the ark could hold every animal in existence, do you really think they would behave and just sit in their cages for 40 days and 40 nights? Do you think all of the dinosaurs could sit restless and be held in cages for 40 days and 40 nights? How did Noah feed these animals?
[b6dfaca352f]It doesn't matter how Noah fed them, that has nothing to do with anything. Of course they were restless, but they were in cages. What do animals at the zoo do? They become domesticated and sit there. The ark didn't have every animal in existence. Why? Because there weren't that many species of animals. Take the dog for instance, Noah didn't take Poodles, and German Shepherds and all those. He probalby only had a few species of dogs that interbred after getting off the ark which caused the wide variety of species. Same with other animals like birds, cats.. etc.[/color6dfaca352f][/b6dfaca352f]
[b6dfaca352f]Yeah it does matter how he fed them. It matters how he took care of them. Even if there were just the ancestors of our common types of animals today there would still be WAY too many to take care of and the only way you'd be able to make any sense of it would be to conclude that God took care of them and kept them from getting restless.[/b6dfaca352f]
How many people in the ark were there (I'm too lazy to look it up)? I believe 5 or 6. Now think of it this way. Could 5 or 6 people take care of a zoo with even LESS animals in it for 40 days and 40 nights? Even better yet - there is only 2 of each animal (1 female and one male) so imagine taking care of every endangered species in a zoo with 5 other people for 40 days in a confined space. Do you think you could pull it off? Animals have enormous needs and I'm sure many of these animals would die from depression.
[b6dfaca352f]You're thinking about all this from too much of a scientific approach. If you want to believe in the Bible do it. If not don't. But the only reason that the animals lived was through God taking care of them, etc. Please don't try to prove everything Scientifically as that cannot be done with everything, especially Bible facts.[/color6dfaca352f][/b6dfaca352f]
[b6dfaca352f]I'm not looking at it too scientifically. I'm looking at it logically. So you're saying that if something in the Bible doesn't logically make sense we shouldn't worry about it and just say that it's the Bible so it must have happened and it must have been true? God must have just taken care of the issue? I can't really argue with that so whatever. [/b6dfaca352f]
So let's look at Noah's ark - 5 or 6 people taking care of EVERY ANIMAL IN EXISTENCE and THEY ARE ALL ENDANGERED SPECIES - the last of their kind. They are held in cages for 40 day sand 40 nights. It just seems impossible to me. I really do think that there would be TONS of them dying from depression, and all you need is 1 of the 2 to die to kill off the entire species.
I could go on and on about Noah's Ark and this is just my thinking and reasoning, I haven't even looked up anything about it on Google.
[/quote6dfaca352f]
My final say for now is this
Evolution is a religion, just like Creationism. Evolution is a belief, just like Creationism; and, just like Creationism, Evolution requires faith. And my biggest pet peeve is how people are so hypocritical. They would like to take God out of everything and quote "Freedom of Religion." While they replace Creationism with Evolution. It's ridiculous. I'm going off on a rant here, I know. But I believe that the creation of the world, the beginning of the world, and all that is related to that, should be left up to the parents to teach to the kids, and should not be discussed as a "Science" since in fact, neither are. Both are religions, beliefs, faith.
[b6dfaca352f]Exactly. Schools should not be teaching Evolution as a fact because it's just a theory. I think they should present both sides and let the students decide for themselves. Students should not be taught to blindly accept what they are told. [/b6dfaca352f]
That is all for now.[/quote6dfaca352f]
I have problems with things in the Bible because they don't seem to make sense to me. Take for example when God wanted to completely destroy Sodom and Gomorrah but Abraham "convinced" God not to. He was convinced not to? That doesn't make any sense because he wouldn't have even have done it in the first place because he knows all things - the future being one of those things. So he would have already known about what Abraham was about to say and he wouldn't have even brought it up at all. And it wasn't even like a test to Abraham. The Bible says God got so mad at the sin he became enraged and just wanted to kill all of them. Abraham then steps in and tries to convince him not to and God changes his thinking and then asks him to find a certain amount of holy people in the city.
That story just makes God look like a fickle being. Those are the kinds of things that I don't like. They seem more like a nice story than the truth.
Also, like I said earlier, read this -
[quote6dfaca352f]"Author Paul Alan Laughlin, a liberal Christian, drew an analogy between the story of Genesis 3 and "a more modern scenario." The following parable is based on his tale
A woman bakes a batch of cookies for a party. She warns her twins, aged 3, to not eat any. She explained to them, deceitfully, that if they did, then she would kill them. Not thinking things through carefully, she placed the cookies on a table, easily accessible to the twins. A brother who was older, wiser and more mature than the twins asked whether their mother had forbidden them to eat anything in the house. The girl twin, Edna, said that mother had only forbidden them to eat the cookies -- on pain of death. The older brother chuckled and told his sister that parents did that a lot. He said "Of course she wouldn't kill you. She simply wants to deny you the pleasure of munching on the cookies. She doesn't want to share the cookies. She wants to keep them all to herself." Edna does exactly what any adult could predict she eats one. Then, she persuades her twin brother Albert to eat another.
The mother returns, not aware of the twin's disobedience. She notices crumbs on the table and on the twins' lips. She correctly concludes that the twins have eaten cookies. She flies into a rage, beats them, and throws them out of the house to fend for themselves. She cuts them out of her will. She does all she can to make the lives of any future descendents of the twins miserable."
By OCRT, "GENESIS 3 The fall/rise of humanity"
Any parent who acts like this lacks love, compassion, intelligence or morals, yet this is exactly how God acts in the Genesis story of Adam and Eve. A possible Christian defence, in order to try and keep God as the good guy, would be that God then rectified the situation by sending his son out to retrieve his children. But this could all have been averted if God was simply a better parent in the first place![/quote6dfaca352f]
Source -
http//www.vexen.co.uk/religion/christianity_adamandeve.html
That's not even a scientific problem with the Bible, it's a logical problem.
J4320
25-01-2007 18:40:23
[quoteb4de669049="Crouching Tiger Hidden Ga"][quoteb4de669049="J4320"]
So now I just did a Google search and I found something interesting. You say God is all about love right? Read this ---
[quoteb4de669049]"Author Paul Alan Laughlin, a liberal Christian, drew an analogy between the story of Genesis 3 and "a more modern scenario." The following parable is based on his tale
A woman bakes a batch of cookies for a party. She warns her twins, aged 3, to not eat any. She explained to them, deceitfully, that if they did, then she would kill them. Not thinking things through carefully, she placed the cookies on a table, easily accessible to the twins. A brother who was older, wiser and more mature than the twins asked whether their mother had forbidden them to eat anything in the house. The girl twin, Edna, said that mother had only forbidden them to eat the cookies -- on pain of death. The older brother chuckled and told his sister that parents did that a lot. He said "Of course she wouldn't kill you. She simply wants to deny you the pleasure of munching on the cookies. She doesn't want to share the cookies. She wants to keep them all to herself." Edna does exactly what any adult could predict she eats one. Then, she persuades her twin brother Albert to eat another.
The mother returns, not aware of the twin's disobedience. She notices crumbs on the table and on the twins' lips. She correctly concludes that the twins have eaten cookies. She flies into a rage, beats them, and throws them out of the house to fend for themselves. She cuts them out of her will. She does all she can to make the lives of any future descendents of the twins miserable."
By OCRT, "GENESIS 3 The fall/rise of humanity"
Any parent who acts like this lacks love, compassion, intelligence or morals, yet this is exactly how God acts in the Genesis story of Adam and Eve. A possible Christian defence, in order to try and keep God as the good guy, would be that God then rectified the situation by sending his son out to retrieve his children. But this could all have been averted if God was simply a better parent in the first place![/quoteb4de669049]
Source -
http//www.vexen.co.uk/religion/christianity_adamandeve.html
Also, I have tried connecting with God for my entire life. If he cared about me he'd return the phone call. I'm starting to give up. I'm starting to believe that Christians experience intense feelings during worship and such that enhance their zeal towards God.[/quoteb4de669049]
If God said that Adam and Eve could do WHATEVER they want than it would be impossible to do wrong which would have been like making robots. Also God made humans to give glory to himself by saving them. You think that's jealousy, and pride? Yes, it is. Although God has a right to be.[/quoteb4de669049]
Making them like robots eh? But keep in mind that they aren't even educated. It's like putting poison next to a 3 year old and telling him to leave it alone.
"Oh I didn't want him to have the poison but I don't want to be a strict nazi so I decided to leave it up to him to have the free will to get killed by the poison if he really wanted to."
Also, why was God so active back in Bible times but now he's nowhere to be found? (this is more of a question that I want to learn about than a question to point out a fault)
Crouching Tiger Hidden Ga
25-01-2007 18:45:27
[quote17c1d5d43c="J4320"][quote17c1d5d43c="Crouching Tiger Hidden Ga"][quote17c1d5d43c="J4320"]
So now I just did a Google search and I found something interesting. You say God is all about love right? Read this ---
[quote17c1d5d43c]"Author Paul Alan Laughlin, a liberal Christian, drew an analogy between the story of Genesis 3 and "a more modern scenario." The following parable is based on his tale
A woman bakes a batch of cookies for a party. She warns her twins, aged 3, to not eat any. She explained to them, deceitfully, that if they did, then she would kill them. Not thinking things through carefully, she placed the cookies on a table, easily accessible to the twins. A brother who was older, wiser and more mature than the twins asked whether their mother had forbidden them to eat anything in the house. The girl twin, Edna, said that mother had only forbidden them to eat the cookies -- on pain of death. The older brother chuckled and told his sister that parents did that a lot. He said "Of course she wouldn't kill you. She simply wants to deny you the pleasure of munching on the cookies. She doesn't want to share the cookies. She wants to keep them all to herself." Edna does exactly what any adult could predict she eats one. Then, she persuades her twin brother Albert to eat another.
The mother returns, not aware of the twin's disobedience. She notices crumbs on the table and on the twins' lips. She correctly concludes that the twins have eaten cookies. She flies into a rage, beats them, and throws them out of the house to fend for themselves. She cuts them out of her will. She does all she can to make the lives of any future descendents of the twins miserable."
By OCRT, "GENESIS 3 The fall/rise of humanity"
Any parent who acts like this lacks love, compassion, intelligence or morals, yet this is exactly how God acts in the Genesis story of Adam and Eve. A possible Christian defence, in order to try and keep God as the good guy, would be that God then rectified the situation by sending his son out to retrieve his children. But this could all have been averted if God was simply a better parent in the first place![/quote17c1d5d43c]
Source -
http//www.vexen.co.uk/religion/christianity_adamandeve.html
Also, I have tried connecting with God for my entire life. If he cared about me he'd return the phone call. I'm starting to give up. I'm starting to believe that Christians experience intense feelings during worship and such that enhance their zeal towards God.[/quote17c1d5d43c]
If God said that Adam and Eve could do WHATEVER they want than it would be impossible to do wrong which would have been like making robots. Also God made humans to give glory to himself by saving them. You think that's jealousy, and pride? Yes, it is. Although God has a right to be.[/quote17c1d5d43c]
Making them like robots eh? But keep in mind that they aren't even educated. It's like putting poison next to a 3 year old and telling him to leave it alone.
"Oh I didn't want him to have the poison but I don't want to be a strict nazi so I decided to leave it up to him to have the free will to get killed by the poison if he really wanted to."[/quote17c1d5d43c]
Um, he told them that they would die if they ate it.
[quote17c1d5d43c]
I have problems with things in the Bible because they don't seem to make sense to me. Take for example when God wanted to completely destroy Sodom and Gomorrah but Abraham "convinced" God not to. He was convinced not to? That doesn't make any sense because he wouldn't have even have done it in the first place because he knows all things - the future being one of those things. So he would have already known about what Abraham was about to say and he wouldn't have even brought it up at all. And it wasn't even like a test to Abraham. The Bible says God got so mad at the sin he became enraged and just wanted to kill all of them. Abraham then steps in and tries to convince him not to and God changes his thinking and then asks him to find a certain amount of holy people in the city.
That story just makes God look like a fickle being. Those are the kinds of things that I don't like. They seem more like a nice story than the truth. [/quote17c1d5d43c]
and God did destroy Sodom and Gomorrah there wasn't enough righteous people but he let Lot Abraham's nephew live.
J4320
25-01-2007 18:48:57
[quote6b12d4bd67="Crouching Tiger Hidden Ga"][quote6b12d4bd67="J4320"][quote6b12d4bd67="Crouching Tiger Hidden Ga"][quote6b12d4bd67="J4320"]
So now I just did a Google search and I found something interesting. You say God is all about love right? Read this ---
[quote6b12d4bd67]"Author Paul Alan Laughlin, a liberal Christian, drew an analogy between the story of Genesis 3 and "a more modern scenario." The following parable is based on his tale
A woman bakes a batch of cookies for a party. She warns her twins, aged 3, to not eat any. She explained to them, deceitfully, that if they did, then she would kill them. Not thinking things through carefully, she placed the cookies on a table, easily accessible to the twins. A brother who was older, wiser and more mature than the twins asked whether their mother had forbidden them to eat anything in the house. The girl twin, Edna, said that mother had only forbidden them to eat the cookies -- on pain of death. The older brother chuckled and told his sister that parents did that a lot. He said "Of course she wouldn't kill you. She simply wants to deny you the pleasure of munching on the cookies. She doesn't want to share the cookies. She wants to keep them all to herself." Edna does exactly what any adult could predict she eats one. Then, she persuades her twin brother Albert to eat another.
The mother returns, not aware of the twin's disobedience. She notices crumbs on the table and on the twins' lips. She correctly concludes that the twins have eaten cookies. She flies into a rage, beats them, and throws them out of the house to fend for themselves. She cuts them out of her will. She does all she can to make the lives of any future descendents of the twins miserable."
By OCRT, "GENESIS 3 The fall/rise of humanity"
Any parent who acts like this lacks love, compassion, intelligence or morals, yet this is exactly how God acts in the Genesis story of Adam and Eve. A possible Christian defence, in order to try and keep God as the good guy, would be that God then rectified the situation by sending his son out to retrieve his children. But this could all have been averted if God was simply a better parent in the first place![/quote6b12d4bd67]
Source -
http//www.vexen.co.uk/religion/christianity_adamandeve.html
Also, I have tried connecting with God for my entire life. If he cared about me he'd return the phone call. I'm starting to give up. I'm starting to believe that Christians experience intense feelings during worship and such that enhance their zeal towards God.[/quote6b12d4bd67]
If God said that Adam and Eve could do WHATEVER they want than it would be impossible to do wrong which would have been like making robots. Also God made humans to give glory to himself by saving them. You think that's jealousy, and pride? Yes, it is. Although God has a right to be.[/quote6b12d4bd67]
Making them like robots eh? But keep in mind that they aren't even educated. It's like putting poison next to a 3 year old and telling him to leave it alone.
"Oh I didn't want him to have the poison but I don't want to be a strict nazi so I decided to leave it up to him to have the free will to get killed by the poison if he really wanted to."[/quote6b12d4bd67]
Um, he told them that they would die if they ate it.
[quote6b12d4bd67]
I have problems with things in the Bible because they don't seem to make sense to me. Take for example when God wanted to completely destroy Sodom and Gomorrah but Abraham "convinced" God not to. He was convinced not to? That doesn't make any sense because he wouldn't have even have done it in the first place because he knows all things - the future being one of those things. So he would have already known about what Abraham was about to say and he wouldn't have even brought it up at all. And it wasn't even like a test to Abraham. The Bible says God got so mad at the sin he became enraged and just wanted to kill all of them. Abraham then steps in and tries to convince him not to and God changes his thinking and then asks him to find a certain amount of holy people in the city.
That story just makes God look like a fickle being. Those are the kinds of things that I don't like. They seem more like a nice story than the truth. [/quote6b12d4bd67]
and God did destroy Sodom and Gomorrah there wasn't enough righteous people but he let Lot Abraham's nephew live.[/quote6b12d4bd67]
I know he told him they'd die if they ate it. It's just an analogy to show how naive they were. If God was all knowing and all present he could have just stopped the serpent from easily conning Adam and Eve but he went ahead and let them get conned. They were extremely naive, what do you expect?
And about Sodom and Gomorrah, yes he did destroy it. But still, he went from wanting to instantly destroy all of it to changing his mind and letting Abraham go look for holy people in the city.
jordan90
25-01-2007 20:22:16
[quotecab8bff7fa="J4320"]I've read the entire Bible, grown up in a Christian home, gone to church every week, have gone to a Christian school (with a Bible class every day) from grades 1-10. Judging from your posts, I know more about the Bible than you do. The teachings of the Bible have been drilled into my mind.[/quotecab8bff7fa]
Just curious, what Bible curriculum did you learn from at your school? Also, I know this has been said before, but you are trying to use logic to debate between evolution and creation. That's your problem right there. Without faith, you will never believe evolution or creation.
J4320
25-01-2007 20:32:54
[quote1585537a90="jordan90"][quote1585537a90="J4320"]I've read the entire Bible, grown up in a Christian home, gone to church every week, have gone to a Christian school (with a Bible class every day) from grades 1-10. Judging from your posts, I know more about the Bible than you do. The teachings of the Bible have been drilled into my mind.[/quote1585537a90]
Just curious, what Bible curriculum did you learn from at your school? Also, I know this has been said before, but you are trying to use logic to debate between evolution and creation. That's your problem right there. Without faith, you will never believe evolution or creation.[/quote1585537a90]
ACSI type of stuff. That's all I know.
My problem is that I'm using logic? So you're basically telling me to forget reasoning and just accept something that doesn't make sense? I understand how some things cannot be explained but I wish my questions would be treated more seriously.
I know what faith is, and it's nice that you guys are telling me all of this, but I see nothing wrong with my statements and questions.
Most of you are basically ignoring my questions and just telling me I need faith. Yes, I am aware of that, but I would rather look towards something that doesn't have internal faults and then place my faith in that. Right now I'm not sure what to place my faith in. It's not like I have no faith.
So far Chex has done the best job, even though I've already heard those types of answers before. I'm looking for Chex's types of answers, not "oh yeah you need faith you're using way too much logic."
I can't stress this enough, [b1585537a90]I am aware of that - please don't tell me that again.[/b1585537a90]
Somehow in this debate I always end up against the masses. I first argued for Creationism and I was ridiculed by people who believed in Evolution. Now I'm giving Evolution a chance and I'm being repeatedly told about the faith bullshit answer. I do not want to hear it. I want a valuable Creation vs Evolution debate that I can come out of with more knowledge.
You say faith because you don't know how to answer my questions.
phriq
25-01-2007 20:39:14
[quotee631049726="J4320"]
You say faith because you don't know how to answer my questions.[/quotee631049726]
you say evolution becuase you don't know understand our beliefs
J4320
25-01-2007 20:55:41
[quotedb3ecc22f3="phriq"][quotedb3ecc22f3="J4320"]
You say faith because you don't know how to answer my questions.[/quotedb3ecc22f3]
you say evolution becuase you don't know understand our beliefs[/quotedb3ecc22f3]
I understand your beliefs perfectly. I'm trying to look at this from another angle but all you guys can give me is "faith."
If Creationism is so much more credible than Evolution, then why can't any of you provide any evidence? All I get is the "faith" answer which does not hold water in this debate. Yes, faith is your belief, but you believe it because you believe it happened. You can't answer any of my questions about it happening?
What's wrong here? All it takes is a Google search. Why don't you stand up for what you believe in?
jordan90
25-01-2007 20:58:41
[quoted11a5db437="J4320"]I want a valuable Creation vs Evolution debate that I can come out of with more knowledge.
You say faith because you don't know how to answer my questions.[/quoted11a5db437]
I'm taking a guess I know as much about the Bible as you do, maybe a little less, maybe a little more, it doesn't really matter all that much. I've gone to church since before I can remember and I've gone to a Christian school all my life.
I've been reading through your posts. If you really want answers, why are you looking for them on a free iPod forum? You should go to a Biblical pastor and do some research.
And I can answer your questions, or I can tell you why they can't be if they're unreasonable. The reason I told you that you need faith is because of this Biblical passage
http//bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=Deuteronomy+32&version=9[]http//bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=Deuteronomy+32&version=9
There's answers to some of your questions in that passage. Check out verses 17-20, especially 20.
[quoted11a5db437="Matthew 826"]And he saith unto them, Why are ye fearful, O ye of little faith? Then he arose, and rebuked the winds and the sea; and there was a great calm.[/quoted11a5db437]
You said you have faith, but do you have enough faith to believe that God can do anything? That's what it really comes down to. If you believe that God created this world, then you should be able to believe that He can do absolutely whatever He wants with and to this world because it belongs to Him.
[quoted11a5db437]What's wrong here? All it takes is a Google search. Why don't you stand up for what you believe in?[/quoted11a5db437]
I use the Bible. Not Google.
J4320
25-01-2007 21:16:59
[quote702189bca3="jordan90"][quote702189bca3="J4320"]I want a valuable Creation vs Evolution debate that I can come out of with more knowledge.
You say faith because you don't know how to answer my questions.[/quote702189bca3]
I'm taking a guess I know as much about the Bible as you do, maybe a little less, maybe a little more, it doesn't really matter all that much. I've gone to church since before I can remember and I've gone to a Christian school all my life.
I've been reading through your posts. If you really want answers, why are you looking for them on a free iPod forum? You should go to a Biblical pastor and do some research.
[b702189bca3]
I like debating. Is there something wrong with that? The users here are normal people just like you and I. I have talked to other people about this subject and I like debating it.[/b702189bca3]
And I can answer your questions, or I can tell you why they can't be if they're unreasonable. The reason I told you that you need faith is because of this Biblical passage
http//bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=Deuteronomy+32&version=9[]http//bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=Deuteronomy+32&version=9
There's answers to some of your questions in that passage. Check out verses 17-20, especially 20.
[quote702189bca3="Matthew 826"]And he saith unto them, Why are ye fearful, O ye of little faith? Then he arose, and rebuked the winds and the sea; and there was a great calm.[/quote702189bca3]
You said you have faith, but do you have enough faith to believe that God can do anything? That's what it really comes down to. If you believe that God created this world, then you should be able to believe that He can do absolutely whatever He wants with and to this world because it belongs to Him.
I'm wanting people to present scientific facts instead of just taking the easy answer and saying faith. You may have the faith and that's great, so does that justify you to not bother researching creationism or evolutionism? This is a debate thread on creationism vs evolution. Present scientific facts. I don't care if you say you have faith, but don't use it as a crutch to avoid providing scientific evidence and facts. It's not like there is no info on creationism on the internet. Don't be unreasonable.
As for my faith, I've tried to connect and believe for my entire life but I am starting to give up because I feel nothing from God.
[quote702189bca3]What's wrong here? All it takes is a Google search. Why don't you stand up for what you believe in?[/quote702189bca3]
I use the Bible. Not Google.
[b702189bca3]
I'm talking about finding scientific evidence to support creationism. Why not use both? If you use 1 source on research you'll be frowned upon, why should that be any different here?[/b702189bca3]
[/quote702189bca3]
jordan90
25-01-2007 21:35:21
There's nothing wrong with debating, but if you are truly looking for answers, they're out there for you to find. You just have to find them instead of looking here for them.
I do use sources other than the Bible, but I believe the Bible over anything else. If you're looking for scientific evidence for creation, take a look at the book "The Lie Evolution" by Ken Ham. You've probably heard of him if you attended a Christian school. Also, a helpful website where you'll find lots of answers to your questions is AnswersinGenesis.com (look in the "Get Answers" part of the website). Here's a good article for you to check out
http//www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v22/i1/creation.asp[]http//www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v22/i1/creation.asp.
You wanted answers, and there they are.
Also, did you read that Bible passage in my last post? No offense, but it's kinda talkin' about you.
J4320
25-01-2007 22:32:00
[quoteb18c632433="jordan90"]There's nothing wrong with debating, but if you are truly looking for answers, they're out there for you to find. You just have to find them instead of looking here for them.
I do use sources other than the Bible, but I believe the Bible over anything else. If you're looking for scientific evidence for creation, take a look at the book "The Lie Evolution" by Ken Ham. You've probably heard of him if you attended a Christian school. Also, a helpful website where you'll find lots of answers to your questions is AnswersinGenesis.com (look in the "Get Answers" part of the website). Here's a good article for you to check out
http//www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v22/i1/creation.asp[]http//www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v22/i1/creation.asp.
You wanted answers, and there they are.
Also, did you read that Bible passage in my last post? No offense, but it's kinda talkin' about you.[/quoteb18c632433]
No offense taken. Yeah I read it. I know what it's talking about. You could also take that verse from Psalms or Proverbs (not sure which one it was) about how the more knowledge a man receives while keeping God out will corrupt him and his own wisdom will turn him against God. Let me tell you this though, quoting from the Bible and using it as facts isn't going to persuade an audience who doesn't even believe in the Bible in the first place.
Also, I'm kind of debating more than I am searching for my own personal answers. I know both sides extremely well. I could start arguing for Creationism right now and you would think of me as a diehard Creationist. I'm just trying to look at this from both sides.
zr2152
25-01-2007 23:56:27
j4320,
When you mentioned that "The human mind is incredible and I believe we could be just as smart as they were in older times. By older times I'm talking 5,000-6,000 years. Keep in mind this is how old Creationists think the world is. The majority of scientists believe the earth is 4.5 billion years old. A measly 6,000 years would not be enough time for Evolution to occur. So all of you saying "why haven't we changed at all lol evolution is so dumb" you need get your facts straight and consider both sides of the argument. licoughli OMW licoughli " i seriously laughed!!!
Not all creationists believe that the worl is 5000-6000 yrs. old. Actually my professor (who is the professor of the History of Science here at my Christian School), believes that the Earth is bilions of yrs old. I can guarentee you that many creationisits believe that the earth is billions of yrs ols.
I still dont get people who try to say that evolution was the only thing that created our universe. THINK ABOUT IT!!!
If the universe was created by a "BIG BANG" then where did the molecules come from. Its freaking common sense ppl. You have to be ignorant to not believe that. Something cannot come from nothing. Try to prove that wrong will ya?
EatChex89
26-01-2007 00:39:18
[quote789a71622e="J4320"][quote789a71622e="EatChex89"][quote789a71622e="J4320"][quote789a71622e="phriq"]It has to be creationism.....there is no way "nature" coudl just put everything together so delicataly. how could a giant "BooM" of atams breath life into organism so unique and intricly built. that makes no sence. somehting had to design everytyhing and put life into it. God. besides....if i were to put all religious beliefs aside. christianity is still way cooler. would you rather believe a big boom made us. or believe that there are sweet angels and demons fighting in some spiritual realm with flaming swords...thats way sweeter.[/quote789a71622e]
LMAO
That's hilarious. Are you trying to prove Chex's little downgrading theory correct? lol
You should have stopped at your first sentence because I wouldn't have thought less of you there; although the "where did God come from question" still stands.
Anyway, let me just let everyone know that I'm not a firm believer in Evolution. I do think there is a spiritual side to this world and I think that you have to determine your spirituality for yourself instead of blindly following what your parents teach you. That said, if my spiritual quest leads me to Christianity then so be it. Over the recent year (maybe years) I have gradually believed less and less of some things that are stated in the Bible.
I'll reply to Chex's statements first -
[quote789a71622e]Remember, God made them perfectly so their kids although less perfect than them because of the sin and fall and corruption of man, were still far more perfect than we are. Ever since the fall there has only been degeneration, which is why we cannot have sex with family members and expect to get well-functioning kids. Also, God put a stop to the inter-family marriages during the time of Exodus..[/quote789a71622e]
Is there any evidence for this? I don't recall this being stated anywhere in the Bible and I believe it's just a theory. Keep in mind that Evolution is just a theory as well.
[quote789a71622e="J4320"]How could Adam and Eve's offspring survive off of each other? Family members with similar DNA cannot mix like that without having problems. How does that work? [/quote789a71622e]
[b789a71622e]
You are talking about Adam and Eve. I don't have to solid evidence. You took characters from the Bible, I took evidence from the Bible. If you mean evidence from the Bible, then yes I do. Why were Adam and Eve kicked out of the garden? Because they fell, sinned and were imperfect in the sight of God. Which means that before their sin, they were perfect. Also, their "falling" didn't inhibit their physical perfection, just spiritual. They were still physically perfect as God didn't change their physical structure. However, the curse is what caused the degeneration which is why later inter-family sexual relationships were prohibited.
[/color789a71622e][/b789a71622e]
[b789a71622e]Actually I was talking about the degeneration of man. There is no proof of it. I know you can't prove something like Adam and Eve. I was talking about proof for degeneration. [/b789a71622e]
This thinking and Evolution are completely opposite.
[u789a71622e]Evolutionist Thinking[/u789a71622e]
Early humans --------> Improve
[u789a71622e]Creationist Thinking[/u789a71622e]
Early humans --------> Get Worse
Here's another difference I see -
[u789a71622e]Evolutionist Thinking[/u789a71622e]
-Based on ideas and evidence
[b789a71622e]There is no more evidence for evolution than there is creation.[/color789a71622e][/b789a71622e]
[b789a71622e]I actually think you're wrong here. I'm pretty sure that there are more things that seem to make Evolution possible than Creation. That doesn't mean that Creationism is wrong or Evolution is right though. If Creationism had the same amount of proof then we would treat Evolution and Creationism equally but that's not what you see in museums and such.[/b789a71622e]
-Builds on evidence and forms a theory
[b789a71622e]Once again. What evidence? And creationism does the same..[/color789a71622e][/b789a71622e]
[b789a71622e]No it doesn't, Creationism builds on the "theory" which technically isn't even a theory since they believe it's true no matter what.
Evolution builds on evidence to form a conclusion while Creationism looks for evidence to support their cause.[/b789a71622e]
-Is open to correction if something seems to be scientifically PROVEN wrong
[b789a71622e]Yeah, to which another false assumption is created. Thus evolution is constantly shifting around trying to find the solid ground it never will. I don't see creationism changing views.[/color789a71622e][/b789a71622e]
[b789a71622e]
Of course Creationism isn't changing views. They already believe in their view no matter what and will take any type of evidence they can and use that to try and support it.
Evolution modifies its theory (yes, theory) based on evidence and learning, so yes, it does shift around. At least they're admitting that they don't know what fully went on and they are willing to go with changes.[/b789a71622e]
-Still a theory
[u789a71622e]Creationist Thinking[/u789a71622e]
-Tries to find evidence to support their belief, not a building upon theory type of process.
[b789a71622e]We don't try to find evidence. The evidence is already there for us. Evolutionists are constantly scrounging to find any shred of evidence to support their theory.[/color789a71622e][/b789a71622e]
[b789a71622e]It all depends on how the evidence is interpreted. Creationists interpret the evidence to their side while Evolutionists use it to their side. The difference is Evolutionists use science to base their determination while Creationists try to take there evidence and make it fit in with what the Bible says.[/b789a71622e]
-Even though there are problems in the Bible, everything spoken about creation in Genesis must be true because it says it, so we are going to find whatever we can to support that
-We are right no matter what, everything we believe that's in the Bible is absolutely true.
So are we getting better or worse? I've heard the argument that people could do better calculations in their head and stuff like that in ancient times than we could and that we're getting more stupid as we progress. I don't believe that this is us actually getting more stupid; we tend to rely on technology to do these things for us so there is not that much of a need to keep stuff like this in our heads. The human mind is incredible and I believe we could be just as smart as they were in older times. By older times I'm talking 5,000-6,000 years. Keep in mind this is how old Creationists think the world is. The majority of scientists believe the earth is 4.5 billion years old. A measly 6,000 years would not be enough time for Evolution to occur. So all of you saying "why haven't we changed at all lol evolution is so dumb" you need get your facts straight and consider both sides of the argument. licoughli OMW licoughli
[b789a71622e]So monkeys appear to be very similar to humans. What proof is that? I mean, if we have so many fossils of all these animals and whatnot, why can't we find any of some "missing links"?[/color789a71622e][/b789a71622e]
[b789a71622e]
The missing links are extremely hard to determine. They have found plenty of things that look like the missing links between monkeys and men but it's really hard to determine. Humans have deformations so if they found a fossil of a deformed human from a few thousand years ago it would be hard to tell if it was really a missing link or a human with some sort of distorted bones. That's how I think they see it. I'd have to Google it to find out more.[/b789a71622e]
There really isn't much of a difference between us nowadays and 5,000-6,000 years ago. I'm sure that the smart people of the ancient times had a greater memory and intelligence simply because they didn't have the technology (which we use as a crutch) that we rely on today.
[quote789a71622e]Yes, I do. People have measured out the dimensions in the Bible and have come to realize how huge the ark actually was. I have this book that has a drawing of the ark next to a semi-truck and a human, and the truck/human look like toys. Granted it's a drawing, but yes the ark was huge. Also, to prove the flood, the grand canyon. Yeah,maybe it could have been formed over billions and billions and billions of years.. but it's more proof of a huge flood than a stream or river etching into it for billions of years. Also, they've found fossils of sea creatures in places where there is no water present, I can't remember where, but I saw it on a video. A bunch of sea creature fossils that were no where near the sea. How do you explain that? Actually, I take back that question, because someone will try to come up with some lame ass excuse. [/quote789a71622e]
Even if the ark could hold every animal in existence, do you really think they would behave and just sit in their cages for 40 days and 40 nights? Do you think all of the dinosaurs could sit restless and be held in cages for 40 days and 40 nights? How did Noah feed these animals?
[b789a71622e]It doesn't matter how Noah fed them, that has nothing to do with anything. Of course they were restless, but they were in cages. What do animals at the zoo do? They become domesticated and sit there. The ark didn't have every animal in existence. Why? Because there weren't that many species of animals. Take the dog for instance, Noah didn't take Poodles, and German Shepherds and all those. He probalby only had a few species of dogs that interbred after getting off the ark which caused the wide variety of species. Same with other animals like birds, cats.. etc.[/color789a71622e][/b789a71622e]
[b789a71622e]Yeah it does matter how he fed them. It matters how he took care of them. Even if there were just the ancestors of our common types of animals today there would still be WAY too many to take care of and the only way you'd be able to make any sense of it would be to conclude that God took care of them and kept them from getting restless.[/b789a71622e]
How many people in the ark were there (I'm too lazy to look it up)? I believe 5 or 6. Now think of it this way. Could 5 or 6 people take care of a zoo with even LESS animals in it for 40 days and 40 nights? Even better yet - there is only 2 of each animal (1 female and one male) so imagine taking care of every endangered species in a zoo with 5 other people for 40 days in a confined space. Do you think you could pull it off? Animals have enormous needs and I'm sure many of these animals would die from depression.
[b789a71622e]You're thinking about all this from too much of a scientific approach. If you want to believe in the Bible do it. If not don't. But the only reason that the animals lived was through God taking care of them, etc. Please don't try to prove everything Scientifically as that cannot be done with everything, especially Bible facts.[/color789a71622e][/b789a71622e]
[b789a71622e]I'm not looking at it too scientifically. I'm looking at it logically. So you're saying that if something in the Bible doesn't logically make sense we shouldn't worry about it and just say that it's the Bible so it must have happened and it must have been true? God must have just taken care of the issue? I can't really argue with that so whatever. [/b789a71622e]
So let's look at Noah's ark - 5 or 6 people taking care of EVERY ANIMAL IN EXISTENCE and THEY ARE ALL ENDANGERED SPECIES - the last of their kind. They are held in cages for 40 day sand 40 nights. It just seems impossible to me. I really do think that there would be TONS of them dying from depression, and all you need is 1 of the 2 to die to kill off the entire species.
I could go on and on about Noah's Ark and this is just my thinking and reasoning, I haven't even looked up anything about it on Google.
[/quote789a71622e]
My final say for now is this
Evolution is a religion, just like Creationism. Evolution is a belief, just like Creationism; and, just like Creationism, Evolution requires faith. And my biggest pet peeve is how people are so hypocritical. They would like to take God out of everything and quote "Freedom of Religion." While they replace Creationism with Evolution. It's ridiculous. I'm going off on a rant here, I know. But I believe that the creation of the world, the beginning of the world, and all that is related to that, should be left up to the parents to teach to the kids, and should not be discussed as a "Science" since in fact, neither are. Both are religions, beliefs, faith.
[b789a71622e]Exactly. Schools should not be teaching Evolution as a fact because it's just a theory. I think they should present both sides and let the students decide for themselves. Students should not be taught to blindly accept what they are told. [/b789a71622e]
That is all for now.[/quote789a71622e]
I have problems with things in the Bible because they don't seem to make sense to me. Take for example when God wanted to completely destroy Sodom and Gomorrah but Abraham "convinced" God not to. He was convinced not to? That doesn't make any sense because he wouldn't have even have done it in the first place because he knows all things - the future being one of those things. So he would have already known about what Abraham was about to say and he wouldn't have even brought it up at all. And it wasn't even like a test to Abraham. The Bible says God got so mad at the sin he became enraged and just wanted to kill all of them. Abraham then steps in and tries to convince him not to and God changes his thinking and then asks him to find a certain amount of holy people in the city.
That story just makes God look like a fickle being. Those are the kinds of things that I don't like. They seem more like a nice story than the truth.
Also, like I said earlier, read this -
[quote789a71622e]"Author Paul Alan Laughlin, a liberal Christian, drew an analogy between the story of Genesis 3 and "a more modern scenario." The following parable is based on his tale
A woman bakes a batch of cookies for a party. She warns her twins, aged 3, to not eat any. She explained to them, deceitfully, that if they did, then she would kill them. Not thinking things through carefully, she placed the cookies on a table, easily accessible to the twins. A brother who was older, wiser and more mature than the twins asked whether their mother had forbidden them to eat anything in the house. The girl twin, Edna, said that mother had only forbidden them to eat the cookies -- on pain of death. The older brother chuckled and told his sister that parents did that a lot. He said "Of course she wouldn't kill you. She simply wants to deny you the pleasure of munching on the cookies. She doesn't want to share the cookies. She wants to keep them all to herself." Edna does exactly what any adult could predict she eats one. Then, she persuades her twin brother Albert to eat another.
The mother returns, not aware of the twin's disobedience. She notices crumbs on the table and on the twins' lips. She correctly concludes that the twins have eaten cookies. She flies into a rage, beats them, and throws them out of the house to fend for themselves. She cuts them out of her will. She does all she can to make the lives of any future descendents of the twins miserable."
By OCRT, "GENESIS 3 The fall/rise of humanity"
Any parent who acts like this lacks love, compassion, intelligence or morals, yet this is exactly how God acts in the Genesis story of Adam and Eve. A possible Christian defence, in order to try and keep God as the good guy, would be that God then rectified the situation by sending his son out to retrieve his children. But this could all have been averted if God was simply a better parent in the first place![/quote789a71622e]
Source -
http//www.vexen.co.uk/religion/christianity_adamandeve.html
That's not even a scientific problem with the Bible, it's a logical problem.[/quote789a71622e]
God still destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, so He was never "convinced" by Abraham not to destroy it. He just saved Lot and his wife, who later disobeyed and killed her self basically, from the destruction. Please get your facts straight.
That's a terrible diagram/comparison with the cookies and the kids. Yes, it would be wrong for us to do such a thing, because we would do it sinfully, out of anger, and it isn't something we are supposed to do. So why can God do it? Because He is Holy and Perfect and knows what's best for us. He commanded Adam and Eve not to eat the fruit, yet Satan decided to deceive Eve into eating it by telling her that God didn't want her to be like Him or whatever. It was Eve's fault for eating the fruit, and Satans as well. She should have known better. You can't place the blame of sin on God.
God didn't "fly into a rage" and beat Adam and Eve. He kicked them out of the garden disapppointingly so.
Crouching Tiger Hidden Ga
26-01-2007 08:18:22
If you want logic than, isn't it logic that when you see something amazing to consider it the work of intelligent design? Like when people found those statues on Easter Island, Chile they immediately knew that they were made by some natives or something they didn't think that the waves and the wind and crap just happened by chance to make those things. Why don't people think the same thing about the world? Because if they did they would have to acknowledge that there is something in the universe more powerful than them and people are too prideful to do that.
ilanbg
26-01-2007 12:21:26
I was not going to join this debate, as it usually comprises of semantics, but I'll bring up a few points I don't think have been mentioned.
First, I'll say that I believe in evolution, and that I don't think evolution is an indication that there [i86ff5a778f]wasn't[/i86ff5a778f] an intelligent design, but there is as much evidence against intelligent design as there is for it. So I don't really consider that.
I want to ask people here why they believe in creationism. I don't mean summarizing your argument, but when both ideas are flawed, why do you
believe in creationism? I read several people in this thread believe in it because nothing can explain it otherwise. To those people isn't it likelier that science just hasn't explained it yet? There was a time the only way to explain rain and weather was through gods. We didn't know about convection cycles or dehydration or anything that made the world go round, and all these things were attributed to direct acts of God, or god. Now we know that is not the case. How do you know that same situation does not apply to things like the beginning of the universe, or the afterlife? How do you know science will not answer those questions? Why must a lack of an answer from science automatically point to God?
And why do you believe in one omnipotent God? What evidence is there that there aren't several gods?
Secondly, it might be worth mention that America is second only to Lithuania as a democratic country that believes in creationism (40% of Americans believe in intelligent design). Every other democratic country in the world has more atheists. I mention this only because our beliefs are influenced by our surroundings; there is chance all you creationists would be atheists if you were born in, say, GB (where there is a measly 11% belief in creationism).
I also want to ask all the creationists this question How much scientific evidence would it take for you to believe in evolution? And Do you currently have an equal amount of evidence that points towards creationism?
Addressing whether or not evolution occurred First, if we were to take the Bible's argument that people were perfect, and grew more and more 'tainted,' we would need an explanation for all the genetic differentiation that occurs. In 6000 years, people would still be almost exactly the same, genetically, as they were during their conception. It takes several generations not only for a new trait to come into existence, but for it to be introduced into our species would take longer. (Never mind the fact that claiming people were genetically different 6000 years ago is in and of itself an admittance of evolution.)
Genetic changes are introduced through mutations, and 6000 years is not enough to introduce all the variances that exist in humans. Then there is the indication that we came from monkeys, and reptiles, and fish; as rare is it is, people are sometimes born with hair on their face, scales on parts of their bodies, or tails. People are [i86ff5a778f]never[/i86ff5a778f] born with wings. This is because they did not evolve from birds. In our DNA, these traits are still retained from our ancestors. Explain this to me, theologically.
Personally, I think within our lifetime our knowledge of genetics will grow enough to solve many of the currently unanswerable questions, such as nature vs. nurture, evolution vs. creationism, chicken vs. egg, and maybe even the meaning of life. Who knows?
J4320
26-01-2007 12:21:28
[quotee9a85d331f="zr2152"]j4320,
When you mentioned that "The human mind is incredible and I believe we could be just as smart as they were in older times. By older times I'm talking 5,000-6,000 years. Keep in mind this is how old Creationists think the world is. The majority of scientists believe the earth is 4.5 billion years old. A measly 6,000 years would not be enough time for Evolution to occur. So all of you saying "why haven't we changed at all lol evolution is so dumb" you need get your facts straight and consider both sides of the argument. licoughli OMW licoughli " i seriously laughed!!!
Not all creationists believe that the worl is 5000-6000 yrs. old. Actually my professor (who is the professor of the History of Science here at my Christian School), believes that the Earth is bilions of yrs old. I can guarentee you that many creationisits believe that the earth is billions of yrs ols.
I still dont get people who try to say that evolution was the only thing that created our universe. THINK ABOUT IT!!!
If the universe was created by a "BIG BANG" then where did the molecules come from. Its freaking common sense ppl. You have to be ignorant to not believe that. Something cannot come from nothing. Try to prove that wrong will ya?[/quotee9a85d331f]
lol
I'm glad you got a laugh out of it. )
First of all, let me tell you that I am not a firm believer in Evolution. I agree with you about the molecules in the beginning. Where [ie9a85d331f]did[/ie9a85d331f] they come from?
Right now I'm arguing for Evolution but this does not mean I believe it. I'm using empathetic reasoning to see the side of Evolution from an Evolutionists view. Just because I'm arguing for it does not mean I believe it. Personally I believe some sort of greater being simply created the earth like a clock and set our clock into time and left us. Maybe he used Evolution to create the earth, I don't know. I think that part of this greater being may occasionally reside within the world; this would explain paranormal events.
Right now I'm questioning Creationism and pointing out the problems that occur with it.
Anyway, from your "try to prove that wrong will ya" statement, unfortunately arguing with a Creationist like yourself about this issue is nearly impossible.
You say "where did the molecules come from?"
I say "where did God come from?"
You say "faith" or "it's too much to comprehend"
How am I suppose to argue with that? It's what you believe, neither of us can prove it.
I will say that that kind of reasoning doesn't hold much water in a scientific debate. It's more of a belief as is the belief of all kinds of other theories explaining why the molecules were there.
Also, I'm not trying to be mean to you or bash you (I really like your arguments and evidence you put out) but I wouldn't call other people's beliefs that aren't your own on the [ie9a85d331f]very very[/ie9a85d331f] beginning of time ignorant.
Their different beliefs of particles existing from another source is just as far fetched as some God creating the earth and not bothering to reveal himself to us (I'm expecting a rebuttal on this statement and I'm willing to go on with my point if you wish).
[quotee9a85d331f="EatChex89"]
God still destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, so He was never "convinced" by Abraham not to destroy it. He just saved Lot and his wife, who later disobeyed and killed her self basically, from the destruction. Please get your facts straight.
[be9a85d331f]He was convinced by Abraham not to destroy it at that very moment. My facts are straight. God was shown as being fickle in that story, don't beat around the bush. The only possible way God could not look fickle in that story would be if he was trying to prove a point to Abraham by showing him that there were in fact no holy people at all. Maybe he [ie9a85d331f]was[/ie9a85d331f] doing that; it's open to interpretation like SO MANY other stories in the Bible.[/be9a85d331f]
That's a terrible diagram/comparison with the cookies and the kids. Yes, it would be wrong for us to do such a thing, because we would do it sinfully, out of anger, and it isn't something we are supposed to do. So why can God do it? Because He is Holy and Perfect and knows what's best for us. He commanded Adam and Eve not to eat the fruit, yet Satan decided to deceive Eve into eating it by telling her that God didn't want her to be like Him or whatever. It was Eve's fault for eating the fruit, and Satans as well. She should have known better. You can't place the blame of sin on God.
[be9a85d331f]You're missing the point of this analogy. This story stresses the fact that Adam and Eve were far too naive to be held accountable for their actions. It's like punishing a 3 year old for eating poison near him after telling him not to.[/be9a85d331f]
God didn't "fly into a rage" and beat Adam and Eve. He kicked them out of the garden disapppointingly so.
[be9a85d331f]So would you like me to make it a little less violent? Alright, hows this? --[/be9a85d331f]
[be9a85d331f]I put out a plate of poisonous candy near my 3 year old son. I told him not to eat any or else I'll disown you. His older brother hates the 3 year old so he tells him that I just don't want him to enjoy some good candy. The 3 year old is easily convinced of this so he eats some. I'm extremely disappointed with him so I take him and throw him out of my house. Now this 3 year old can go live on the streets for himself because he disobeyed me.[/be9a85d331f]
[/quotee9a85d331f]
[quotee9a85d331f="Crouching Tiger Hidden Ga"]If you want logic than, isn't it logic that when you see something amazing to consider it the work of intelligent design? Like when people found those statues on Easter Island, Chile they immediately knew that they were made by some natives or something they didn't think that the waves and the wind and crap just happened by chance to make those things. Why don't people think the same thing about the world? Because if they did they would have to acknowledge that there is something in the universe more powerful than them and people are too prideful to do that.[/quotee9a85d331f]
Yes you can look at it that way also but the existence of these things doesn't prove Creationism to be true. It is your opinion on what you think is evidence that proves Creationism. There are too many factors and different things that could have caused these things to occur.
Automatically assuming that because it's too hard to figure out we should just think that God did it seems ignorant to me. Of course it's a possibility but it is not a fact. So not considering God doing it would be ignorant, but not considering other things would also be ignorant.
Crymson
26-01-2007 12:41:37
I'm reminded of the South Park where Cartman freezes himself for a Wii, they teach evolution in the school, and Stan says
Stan Couldn't evolution be the answer to how and not the answer to why?
and another good quote
I think science without religion is lame and, conversely, religion without science is blind.
-Einstein
findme
26-01-2007 12:57:20
well now... science is just amazing! all those other planets out there and galaxies... i dedicate my life to science. i would like to see in my generation traveling to other planets and finding life out there. i wonder what they believe in...
mind boggling...
EatChex89
26-01-2007 13:06:42
As a quick response to you before I go to work, J4320. Adam and Eve were not too naive. Remember they were made perfect, therefore they knew better. They weren't like little children, and you can't make them to be like that. They were full grown adults when they were created, and had the mentality of adults, and far beyond that. God didn't just create some people that had no idea of what to do. He created them with full inteligence, how do you think Adam was able to name all the creatures in the garden? Therefore, the analogy doesn't do the story of what happened in the garden of Eden just.
More to come when I get home.
jordan90
26-01-2007 13:13:19
[quote99e3d82f89="ilanbg"]Genetic changes are introduced through mutations, and 6000 years is not enough to introduce all the variances that exist in humans. Then there is the indication that we came from monkeys, and reptiles, and fish; as rare is it is, people are sometimes born with hair on their face, scales on parts of their bodies, or tails. People are [i99e3d82f89]never[/i99e3d82f89] born with wings. This is because they did not evolve from birds. In our DNA, these traits are still retained from our ancestors. Explain this to me, theologically.[/quote99e3d82f89]
4.5 billion years isn't long enough for the amount of ligoodli mutations needed for us to evolve into humans. In 6000 years, there has not been one recorded good mutation; they all make things worse.
And there is just as much evidence for creation as there is for evolution. There is actually more scientific evidence against evolution than there is creation, simply because there's not one solid piece of evidence that proves evolution to be true. All of the supposed ape-men that were found, such as lucy, were either frauds or just humans with diseases.
[quote99e3d82f89]And why do you believe in one omnipotent God? What evidence is there that there aren't several gods? [/quote99e3d82f89]
The Bible is the reason I believe in one God. There's no evidence to prove that there are god beside the Creator, therefore, people look foolish by just assuming there are more than one when that fact is based upon nothing.
ilanbg
26-01-2007 13:32:16
[quote049f46d24e="jordan90"][quote049f46d24e="ilanbg"]Genetic changes are introduced through mutations, and 6000 years is not enough to introduce all the variances that exist in humans. Then there is the indication that we came from monkeys, and reptiles, and fish; as rare is it is, people are sometimes born with hair on their face, scales on parts of their bodies, or tails. People are [i049f46d24e]never[/i049f46d24e] born with wings. This is because they did not evolve from birds. In our DNA, these traits are still retained from our ancestors. Explain this to me, theologically.[/quote049f46d24e]
4.5 billion years isn't long enough for the amount of ligoodli mutations needed for us to evolve into humans. In 6000 years, there has not been one recorded good mutation; they all make things worse.[/quote049f46d24e]
Why isn't 4.5 billion years long enough for humans to be evolved? The changes are more drastic earlier on, and develop exponentially smaller as we better adapt to our surroundings.
Actually, in 6000 years, I can only think of one mutation, and that is the change in pigmentation, in which people from Africa with light pigment were able to survive because they moved farther north where the sun was not as strong. But that is assuming you believe we started out in North Africa (do you?), and also assuming that this pigmentation is a mutation, and not just an easily introduced genome variation that was never otherwise expressed.
What other mutations have humans had, worse or otherwise?
[quote049f46d24e]And there is just as much evidence for creation as there is for evolution. There is actually more scientific evidence against evolution than there is creation, simply because there's not one solid piece of evidence that proves evolution to be true. All of the supposed ape-men that were found, such as lucy, were either frauds or just humans with diseases.[/quote049f46d24e]
Again, the lack of scientific proof is not proof in god. You ask me to have faith in God, I ask you to have faith in science (except that I don't have faith in science, so that's just semantics).
[quote049f46d24e][quote049f46d24e]And why do you believe in one omnipotent God? What evidence is there that there aren't several gods? [/quote049f46d24e]
The Bible is the reason I believe in one God. There's no evidence to prove that there are god beside the Creator, therefore, people look foolish by just assuming there are more than one when that fact is based upon nothing.[/quote049f46d24e]
There is no evidence that proves there [i049f46d24e]aren't[/i049f46d24e] multiple gods. Isn't this the same argument you use against evolution? No facts = not true. But I am trying to explain to you that sometimes no facts = facts have not been discovered yet.
zr2152
26-01-2007 13:39:47
[quote9e85bb31da="J4320"][quote9e85bb31da="zr2152"]j4320,
When you mentioned that "The human mind is incredible and I believe we could be just as smart as they were in older times. By older times I'm talking 5,000-6,000 years. Keep in mind this is how old Creationists think the world is. The majority of scientists believe the earth is 4.5 billion years old. A measly 6,000 years would not be enough time for Evolution to occur. So all of you saying "why haven't we changed at all lol evolution is so dumb" you need get your facts straight and consider both sides of the argument. licoughli OMW licoughli " i seriously laughed!!!
Not all creationists believe that the worl is 5000-6000 yrs. old. Actually my professor (who is the professor of the History of Science here at my Christian School), believes that the Earth is bilions of yrs old. I can guarentee you that many creationisits believe that the earth is billions of yrs ols.
I still dont get people who try to say that evolution was the only thing that created our universe. THINK ABOUT IT!!!
If the universe was created by a "BIG BANG" then where did the molecules come from. Its freaking common sense ppl. You have to be ignorant to not believe that. Something cannot come from nothing. Try to prove that wrong will ya?[/quote9e85bb31da]
lol
I'm glad you got a laugh out of it. )
First of all, let me tell you that I am not a firm believer in Evolution. I agree with you about the molecules in the beginning. Where [i9e85bb31da]did[/i9e85bb31da] they come from?
Right now I'm arguing for Evolution but this does not mean I believe it. I'm using empathetic reasoning to see the side of Evolution from an Evolutionists view. Just because I'm arguing for it does not mean I believe it. Personally I believe some sort of greater being simply created the earth like a clock and set our clock into time and left us. Maybe he used Evolution to create the earth, I don't know. I think that part of this greater being may occasionally reside within the world; this would explain paranormal events.
Right now I'm questioning Creationism and pointing out the problems that occur with it.
Anyway, from your "try to prove that wrong will ya" statement, unfortunately arguing with a Creationist like yourself about this issue is nearly impossible.
You say "where did the molecules come from?"
I say "where did God come from?"
You say "faith" or "it's too much to comprehend"
How am I suppose to argue with that? It's what you believe, neither of us can prove it.
I will say that that kind of reasoning doesn't hold much water in a scientific debate. It's more of a belief as is the belief of all kinds of other theories explaining why the molecules were there.
Also, I'm not trying to be mean to you or bash you (I really like your arguments and evidence you put out) but I wouldn't call other people's beliefs that aren't your own on the [i9e85bb31da]very very[/i9e85bb31da] beginning of time ignorant.
Their different beliefs of particles existing from another source is just as far fetched as some God creating the earth and not bothering to reveal himself to us (I'm expecting a rebuttal on this statement and I'm willing to go on with my point if you wish).
[quote9e85bb31da="EatChex89"]
God still destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, so He was never "convinced" by Abraham not to destroy it. He just saved Lot and his wife, who later disobeyed and killed her self basically, from the destruction. Please get your facts straight.
[b9e85bb31da]He was convinced by Abraham not to destroy it at that very moment. My facts are straight. God was shown as being fickle in that story, don't beat around the bush. The only possible way God could not look fickle in that story would be if he was trying to prove a point to Abraham by showing him that there were in fact no holy people at all. Maybe he [i9e85bb31da]was[/i9e85bb31da] doing that; it's open to interpretation like SO MANY other stories in the Bible.[/b9e85bb31da]
That's a terrible diagram/comparison with the cookies and the kids. Yes, it would be wrong for us to do such a thing, because we would do it sinfully, out of anger, and it isn't something we are supposed to do. So why can God do it? Because He is Holy and Perfect and knows what's best for us. He commanded Adam and Eve not to eat the fruit, yet Satan decided to deceive Eve into eating it by telling her that God didn't want her to be like Him or whatever. It was Eve's fault for eating the fruit, and Satans as well. She should have known better. You can't place the blame of sin on God.
[b9e85bb31da]You're missing the point of this analogy. This story stresses the fact that Adam and Eve were far too naive to be held accountable for their actions. It's like punishing a 3 year old for eating poison near him after telling him not to.[/b9e85bb31da]
God didn't "fly into a rage" and beat Adam and Eve. He kicked them out of the garden disapppointingly so.
[b9e85bb31da]So would you like me to make it a little less violent? Alright, hows this? --[/b9e85bb31da]
[b9e85bb31da]I put out a plate of poisonous candy near my 3 year old son. I told him not to eat any or else I'll disown you. His older brother hates the 3 year old so he tells him that I just don't want him to enjoy some good candy. The 3 year old is easily convinced of this so he eats some. I'm extremely disappointed with him so I take him and throw him out of my house. Now this 3 year old can go live on the streets for himself because he disobeyed me.[/b9e85bb31da]
[/quote9e85bb31da]
[quote9e85bb31da="Crouching Tiger Hidden Ga"]If you want logic than, isn't it logic that when you see something amazing to consider it the work of intelligent design? Like when people found those statues on Easter Island, Chile they immediately knew that they were made by some natives or something they didn't think that the waves and the wind and crap just happened by chance to make those things. Why don't people think the same thing about the world? Because if they did they would have to acknowledge that there is something in the universe more powerful than them and people are too prideful to do that.[/quote9e85bb31da]
Yes you can look at it that way also but the existence of these things doesn't prove Creationism to be true. It is your opinion on what you think is evidence that proves Creationism. There are too many factors and different things that could have caused these things to occur.
Automatically assuming that because it's too hard to figure out we should just think that God did it seems ignorant to me. Of course it's a possibility but it is not a fact. So not considering God doing it would be ignorant, but not considering other things would also be ignorant.[/quote9e85bb31da]
[quote9e85bb31da="J4320"][quote9e85bb31da="zr2152"]j4320,
When you mentioned that "The human mind is incredible and I believe we could be just as smart as they were in older times. By older times I'm talking 5,000-6,000 years. Keep in mind this is how old Creationists think the world is. The majority of scientists believe the earth is 4.5 billion years old. A measly 6,000 years would not be enough time for Evolution to occur. So all of you saying "why haven't we changed at all lol evolution is so dumb" you need get your facts straight and consider both sides of the argument. licoughli OMW licoughli " i seriously laughed!!!
Not all creationists believe that the worl is 5000-6000 yrs. old. Actually my professor (who is the professor of the History of Science here at my Christian School), believes that the Earth is bilions of yrs old. I can guarentee you that many creationisits believe that the earth is billions of yrs ols.
I still dont get people who try to say that evolution was the only thing that created our universe. THINK ABOUT IT!!!
If the universe was created by a "BIG BANG" then where did the molecules come from. Its freaking common sense ppl. You have to be ignorant to not believe that. Something cannot come from nothing. Try to prove that wrong will ya?[/quote9e85bb31da]
lol
I'm glad you got a laugh out of it. )
First of all, let me tell you that I am not a firm believer in Evolution. I agree with you about the molecules in the beginning. Where [i9e85bb31da]did[/i9e85bb31da] they come from?
Right now I'm arguing for Evolution but this does not mean I believe it. I'm using empathetic reasoning to see the side of Evolution from an Evolutionists view. Just because I'm arguing for it does not mean I believe it. Personally I believe some sort of greater being simply created the earth like a clock and set our clock into time and left us. Maybe he used Evolution to create the earth, I don't know. I think that part of this greater being may occasionally reside within the world; this would explain paranormal events.
Right now I'm questioning Creationism and pointing out the problems that occur with it.
Anyway, from your "try to prove that wrong will ya" statement, unfortunately arguing with a Creationist like yourself about this issue is nearly impossible.
You say "where did the molecules come from?"
I say "where did God come from?"
You say "faith" or "it's too much to comprehend"
How am I suppose to argue with that? It's what you believe, neither of us can prove it.
I will say that that kind of reasoning doesn't hold much water in a scientific debate. It's more of a belief as is the belief of all kinds of other theories explaining why the molecules were there.
Also, I'm not trying to be mean to you or bash you (I really like your arguments and evidence you put out) but I wouldn't call other people's beliefs that aren't your own on the [i9e85bb31da]very very[/i9e85bb31da] beginning of time ignorant.
Their different beliefs of particles existing from another source is just as far fetched as some God creating the earth and not bothering to reveal himself to us (I'm expecting a rebuttal on this statement and I'm willing to go on with my point if you wish).[/quote9e85bb31da]
J4320,
Sorry if the "i laughed" part came over as me being a dick, I wasnt trying to be.
OKay youre right, we will never know the truth about how the world was truly created. I dont think that science will prove or disprove anything EVER. I thikn that this is going to be a debate for the rest of the histoy of the universe.
We have seen that science provides just two fundamental alternatives for the formative history of the universe-either it has always been here or it began at some point in the past-but NEITHER gives an explanation for ultimate origins. Both explanations fail to answer the greatest question of all Where did matter and energy come from.
Now i didnt say that to prove creationism, i just want you to realize that the true question is where did the matter come from (or in your case-where did God come from) I feel that I am repeating myself and I apolozgize for that.
Modern science has no laws or observations to show how something could have come from nothing it doesnt even have a theory to propose such an event. It is cheif tenet of science that while it studies formation, ultimate origins fall outside of that domain.
there is no way of obtaining evidence concerning a prior existence.
So with all of that we will never know where this universe came from. Im calling evoultionists arguments ignorant because they are backed by science, and mine by faith and science. I apologize if i seem ignotant here but im trying to be as forward as possible. I love talking about this.
J4320, can you promise me one thing. Purchas a book titled A Case for Creation, be Lee Strobal. Read it if you have sometime and if you dont enjoy it, i will reimburse you for the book. You have my word. Its a great book and discusses creation/evolution from a Christian perspectives and athists perspective. It provides some interesting points.
Do you have an AIM that we could discuss this more in? I would love it if we could talk some more one on one. Let me know. )
jordan90
26-01-2007 14:29:52
[quote539324ef16="ilanbg"]Why isn't 4.5 billion years long enough for humans to be evolved? The changes are more drastic earlier on, and develop exponentially smaller as we better adapt to our surroundings.
Actually, in 6000 years, I can only think of one mutation, and that is the change in pigmentation, in which people from Africa with light pigment were able to survive because they moved farther north where the sun was not as strong. But that is assuming you believe we started out in North Africa (do you?), and also assuming that this pigmentation is a mutation, and not just an easily introduced genome variation that was never otherwise expressed.
What other mutations have humans had, worse or otherwise?
[quote539324ef16]And there is just as much evidence for creation as there is for evolution. There is actually more scientific evidence against evolution than there is creation, simply because there's not one solid piece of evidence that proves evolution to be true. All of the supposed ape-men that were found, such as lucy, were either frauds or just humans with diseases.[/quote539324ef16]
Again, the lack of scientific proof is not proof in god. You ask me to have faith in God, I ask you to have faith in science (except that I don't have faith in science, so that's just semantics).[/quote539324ef16]
4.5 billion years isn't long enough because you would have to have hundreds of good mutations every minute to a single celled organism since the beginning of time. When a creationist who was in a debate with an evolutionist was asked how he believes all the varieties of animals and people on this earth came from one boat (Noah's ark). The creationist replied, "You believe all of them came from a rock!"
I'm not talking about mutations to humans. I'm talking about mutations to other organisms, which according to you led to the existence of humans. There hasn't been a good mutation to anything, animals or humans, in the last 6000 years. The truth is, we are degrading, we have been since the beginning of time. That fact can be proved, unlike evolution which claims we evolve into something better.
The problem that I have with having faith in science is that man makes science. Man can error.. and often does. Our science has had and continues to have many, many errors, which has led some people to the false assumption that we evolved from a lesser being.
ilanbg
26-01-2007 15:18:52
[quote59c23f3e35="jordan90"]4.5 billion years isn't long enough because you would have to have hundreds of good mutations every minute to a single celled organism since the beginning of time.
...
I'm not talking about mutations to humans. I'm talking about mutations to other organisms, which according to you led to the existence of humans. There hasn't been a good mutation to anything, animals or humans, in the last 6000 years. The truth is, we are degrading, we have been since the beginning of time. That fact can be proved, unlike evolution which claims we evolve into something better.[/quote59c23f3e35]
6000 years is not long enough to notice any evolutionary changes. Are you aware of how great a difference there is in those two timelines, and what could have happened in between?
As for evolution not occurring of course it is. Mosquitos today are immune to DDT because when we used it we killed off all the ones that weren't immune to it; mosquitos are stronger now than they were 100 years ago as a result of evolution. For more complex speices, like humans, it takes longer to notice. And even longer when they change their environment so severely, like we do.
And devolution takes just as long as evolution, so your argument falls apart.
[quote59c23f3e35]The problem that I have with having faith in science is that man makes science. Man can error.. and often does. Our science has had and continues to have many, many errors, which has led some people to the false assumption that we evolved from a lesser being.[/quote59c23f3e35]
Man makes errors, yes. And it was man that made copies of the Bible up until the printing press was invented. Do you know how many errors are in the Bible? Errors have to be accepted as variance when dealing with any issue, but they are not reason enough to discount ideas entirely.
Crouching Tiger Hidden Ga
26-01-2007 16:56:08
[quotecaf1a9b141]As for evolution not occurring of course it is. Mosquitos today are immune to DDT because when we used it we killed off all the ones that weren't immune to it; mosquitos are stronger now than they were 100 years ago as a result of evolution. For more complex speices, like humans, it takes longer to notice. And even longer when they change their environment so severely, like we do. [/quotecaf1a9b141]That's called micro evolution which is change within the DNA. What's impossible is macro evolution which is change not in the DNA like if a fish turned into an amphibian.
ilanbg
26-01-2007 17:12:32
I'll refer to wikipedia for my rebuttal, and if you don't think the information is posed legitimately, I'll find the same information elsewhere
[quotead1a79e88d]Macroevolution is controversial in two ways
It is disputed among biologists whether there are macroevolutionary processes that are not described by strictly gradual phenotypic change, of the type studied by classical population genetics. Within the Modern Synthesis school of thought, microevolution is thought to be the only mode of evolution (i.e. what is sometimes thought of as "macroevolution" actually consists of the compounded effects of microevolution - the only difference between them is one of time and scale).
A misunderstanding about this biological controversy has allowed the concept of macroevolution to be coopted by creationists. They use this controversy as a supposed "hole" in the evidence for deep-time evolution.[/quotead1a79e88d]
Crouching Tiger Hidden Ga
26-01-2007 17:35:19
Well if you want wikipedia...
[quote3671394acd]Macroevolution refers to evolution that occurs above the level of species, in contrast with microevolution, which refers to smaller evolutionary changes (typically described as changes in allele frequencies) within a species or population.
[/quote3671394acd]
Macro evolution is impossible. For instance a fish might have in it's DNA different types of fins, gills, or color that it's offspring might have according to it's surroundings but there is nothing in the genetic code of fish to enable it to grow feet and become an amphibian. So no amount of micro evolutionary changes will change a monkey into a human.
And to those who believe in theistic evolution (God made a single cell than it evolved) doesn't it make sense that God to show off his power would have made his creation fully completed to begin with?
ilanbg
26-01-2007 17:43:44
[quote1a7ddbde7f="Crouching Tiger Hidden Ga"]No, micro and macro evolution are completely different. Micro evolution is change within the specie's DNA. Macro evolution is change outside of DNA something that's not in the DNA is impossible to change into. For instance a fish might have in it's DNA different types of fins, gills, or color that it's offspring might have according to it's surroundings but there is nothing in the genetic code of fish to enable it to grow feet and become an amphibian. So no amount of micro evolutionary changes will change a monkey into a human.[/quote1a7ddbde7f]
This is a fairly solid argument except that it doesn't answer the fact that we [i1a7ddbde7f]do[/i1a7ddbde7f] have that DNA. We haven't accessed it in terms of genotype but as a phenotype it gets expressed rarely as a tail, excess hair, scales, gills, and webbed feet. This answers the bit about macroevolution; we still have bits of ancestors from in our DNA. And the chances of our own mutation developing all these problems is quite literally zero, and as God supposedly made us perfect, there is no theistic answer for these anomalies.
J4320
26-01-2007 17:52:27
[quotef921f9b263="jordan90"][quotef921f9b263="ilanbg"]Genetic changes are introduced through mutations, and 6000 years is not enough to introduce all the variances that exist in humans. Then there is the indication that we came from monkeys, and reptiles, and fish; as rare is it is, people are sometimes born with hair on their face, scales on parts of their bodies, or tails. People are [if921f9b263]never[/if921f9b263] born with wings. This is because they did not evolve from birds. In our DNA, these traits are still retained from our ancestors. Explain this to me, theologically.[/quotef921f9b263]
4.5 billion years isn't long enough for the amount of ligoodli mutations needed for us to evolve into humans. In 6000 years, there has not been one recorded good mutation; they all make things worse.
And there is just as much evidence for creation as there is for evolution. There is actually more scientific evidence against evolution than there is creation, simply because there's not one solid piece of evidence that proves evolution to be true. All of the supposed ape-men that were found, such as lucy, were either frauds or just humans with diseases.
[quotef921f9b263]And why do you believe in one omnipotent God? What evidence is there that there aren't several gods? [/quotef921f9b263]
The Bible is the reason I believe in one God. There's no evidence to prove that there are god beside the Creator, therefore, people look foolish by just assuming there are more than one when that fact is based upon nothing.[/quotef921f9b263]
What your saying has many fallacies in it. I'm sorry but I couldn't help but cringe while reading that. I'll brake it down ---
[quotef921f9b263="jordan90"]4.5 billion years isn't long enough for the amount of ligoodli mutations needed for us to evolve into humans. In 6000 years, there has not been one recorded good mutation; they all make things worse.[/quotef921f9b263]
How do you know that 4.5 isn't enough? Have you been watching for 4.5 billion years? Creationists do not properly apply the probabilities involved with genetic mutation in Evolution. I'll explain
The probability of winning a 6 ball lotto with 10 numbers is 1 in a million. However, if after each ball comes up, it stays and progresses from there, you will win much faster.
Say we have -
2
4
8
2
9
7
Only 9 is correct. So 9 stays (natural selection).
1
3
4
7
9
2
Now the 4 at the end is correct, so it stays. This will keep building and building until the correct number is eventually reached. The odds are EXTREMELY better than just a 6 digit guess which would be a 1 in a million chance of getting the correct combination.
Natural selection keeps the good digits and gets rid of the bad digits. This speeds up the whole process. Creationists look at Evolution and they say look at the odds; they're 1 in a million. This however is an incorrect calculation of probability. The odds are much better than this and since we have 4.5 billion years on our hands and there is plenty of time to evolve and keep the good and get rid of the bad. Mutation may be random, but the selection is not.
[quotef921f9b263]In 6000 years, there has not been one recorded good mutation; they all make things worse.[/quotef921f9b263]
roll
Read my earlier quote.
[quotef921f9b263="J4320"]The human mind is incredible and I believe we could be just as smart as they were in older times. By older times I'm talking 5,000-6,000 years. Keep in mind this is how old Creationists think the world is. The majority of scientists believe the earth is 4.5 billion years old. A measly 6,000 years would not be enough time for Evolution to occur. So all of you saying "why haven't we changed at all lol evolution is so dumb" you need get your facts straight and consider both sides of the argument. licoughli OMW licoughli[/quotef921f9b263]
Now I should add a licoughli jordan90 licoughli in there.
[quotef921f9b263="jordan90"]And there is just as much evidence for creation as there is for evolution. There is actually more scientific evidence against evolution than there is creation, simply because there's not one solid piece of evidence that proves evolution to be true. All of the supposed ape-men that were found, such as lucy, were either frauds or just humans with diseases. [/quotef921f9b263]
Are you kidding me? You could not be any more wrong. I can go on further on about this if you wish but use your head. What is the more accepted theory in modern science? Evolution. If there was more evidence to support Creationism then modern science would make that the most accepted theory. Thousands upon thousands of scholars agree that there is more evidence that supports Evolution than Creationism.
Now I'm going to start reading and replying to zr.
J4320
26-01-2007 18:05:47
[quoteb8595f79a5="zr2152"][quoteb8595f79a5="J4320"][quoteb8595f79a5="zr2152"]j4320,
When you mentioned that "The human mind is incredible and I believe we could be just as smart as they were in older times. By older times I'm talking 5,000-6,000 years. Keep in mind this is how old Creationists think the world is. The majority of scientists believe the earth is 4.5 billion years old. A measly 6,000 years would not be enough time for Evolution to occur. So all of you saying "why haven't we changed at all lol evolution is so dumb" you need get your facts straight and consider both sides of the argument. licoughli OMW licoughli " i seriously laughed!!!
Not all creationists believe that the worl is 5000-6000 yrs. old. Actually my professor (who is the professor of the History of Science here at my Christian School), believes that the Earth is bilions of yrs old. I can guarentee you that many creationisits believe that the earth is billions of yrs ols.
I still dont get people who try to say that evolution was the only thing that created our universe. THINK ABOUT IT!!!
If the universe was created by a "BIG BANG" then where did the molecules come from. Its freaking common sense ppl. You have to be ignorant to not believe that. Something cannot come from nothing. Try to prove that wrong will ya?[/quoteb8595f79a5]
lol
I'm glad you got a laugh out of it. )
First of all, let me tell you that I am not a firm believer in Evolution. I agree with you about the molecules in the beginning. Where [ib8595f79a5]did[/ib8595f79a5] they come from?
Right now I'm arguing for Evolution but this does not mean I believe it. I'm using empathetic reasoning to see the side of Evolution from an Evolutionists view. Just because I'm arguing for it does not mean I believe it. Personally I believe some sort of greater being simply created the earth like a clock and set our clock into time and left us. Maybe he used Evolution to create the earth, I don't know. I think that part of this greater being may occasionally reside within the world; this would explain paranormal events.
Right now I'm questioning Creationism and pointing out the problems that occur with it.
Anyway, from your "try to prove that wrong will ya" statement, unfortunately arguing with a Creationist like yourself about this issue is nearly impossible.
You say "where did the molecules come from?"
I say "where did God come from?"
You say "faith" or "it's too much to comprehend"
How am I suppose to argue with that? It's what you believe, neither of us can prove it.
I will say that that kind of reasoning doesn't hold much water in a scientific debate. It's more of a belief as is the belief of all kinds of other theories explaining why the molecules were there.
Also, I'm not trying to be mean to you or bash you (I really like your arguments and evidence you put out) but I wouldn't call other people's beliefs that aren't your own on the [ib8595f79a5]very very[/ib8595f79a5] beginning of time ignorant.
Their different beliefs of particles existing from another source is just as far fetched as some God creating the earth and not bothering to reveal himself to us (I'm expecting a rebuttal on this statement and I'm willing to go on with my point if you wish).
[quoteb8595f79a5="EatChex89"]
God still destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, so He was never "convinced" by Abraham not to destroy it. He just saved Lot and his wife, who later disobeyed and killed her self basically, from the destruction. Please get your facts straight.
[bb8595f79a5]He was convinced by Abraham not to destroy it at that very moment. My facts are straight. God was shown as being fickle in that story, don't beat around the bush. The only possible way God could not look fickle in that story would be if he was trying to prove a point to Abraham by showing him that there were in fact no holy people at all. Maybe he [ib8595f79a5]was[/ib8595f79a5] doing that; it's open to interpretation like SO MANY other stories in the Bible.[/bb8595f79a5]
That's a terrible diagram/comparison with the cookies and the kids. Yes, it would be wrong for us to do such a thing, because we would do it sinfully, out of anger, and it isn't something we are supposed to do. So why can God do it? Because He is Holy and Perfect and knows what's best for us. He commanded Adam and Eve not to eat the fruit, yet Satan decided to deceive Eve into eating it by telling her that God didn't want her to be like Him or whatever. It was Eve's fault for eating the fruit, and Satans as well. She should have known better. You can't place the blame of sin on God.
[bb8595f79a5]You're missing the point of this analogy. This story stresses the fact that Adam and Eve were far too naive to be held accountable for their actions. It's like punishing a 3 year old for eating poison near him after telling him not to.[/bb8595f79a5]
God didn't "fly into a rage" and beat Adam and Eve. He kicked them out of the garden disapppointingly so.
[bb8595f79a5]So would you like me to make it a little less violent? Alright, hows this? --[/bb8595f79a5]
[bb8595f79a5]I put out a plate of poisonous candy near my 3 year old son. I told him not to eat any or else I'll disown you. His older brother hates the 3 year old so he tells him that I just don't want him to enjoy some good candy. The 3 year old is easily convinced of this so he eats some. I'm extremely disappointed with him so I take him and throw him out of my house. Now this 3 year old can go live on the streets for himself because he disobeyed me.[/bb8595f79a5]
[/quoteb8595f79a5]
[quoteb8595f79a5="Crouching Tiger Hidden Ga"]If you want logic than, isn't it logic that when you see something amazing to consider it the work of intelligent design? Like when people found those statues on Easter Island, Chile they immediately knew that they were made by some natives or something they didn't think that the waves and the wind and crap just happened by chance to make those things. Why don't people think the same thing about the world? Because if they did they would have to acknowledge that there is something in the universe more powerful than them and people are too prideful to do that.[/quoteb8595f79a5]
Yes you can look at it that way also but the existence of these things doesn't prove Creationism to be true. It is your opinion on what you think is evidence that proves Creationism. There are too many factors and different things that could have caused these things to occur.
Automatically assuming that because it's too hard to figure out we should just think that God did it seems ignorant to me. Of course it's a possibility but it is not a fact. So not considering God doing it would be ignorant, but not considering other things would also be ignorant.[/quoteb8595f79a5]
[quoteb8595f79a5="J4320"][quoteb8595f79a5="zr2152"]j4320,
When you mentioned that "The human mind is incredible and I believe we could be just as smart as they were in older times. By older times I'm talking 5,000-6,000 years. Keep in mind this is how old Creationists think the world is. The majority of scientists believe the earth is 4.5 billion years old. A measly 6,000 years would not be enough time for Evolution to occur. So all of you saying "why haven't we changed at all lol evolution is so dumb" you need get your facts straight and consider both sides of the argument. licoughli OMW licoughli " i seriously laughed!!!
Not all creationists believe that the worl is 5000-6000 yrs. old. Actually my professor (who is the professor of the History of Science here at my Christian School), believes that the Earth is bilions of yrs old. I can guarentee you that many creationisits believe that the earth is billions of yrs ols.
I still dont get people who try to say that evolution was the only thing that created our universe. THINK ABOUT IT!!!
If the universe was created by a "BIG BANG" then where did the molecules come from. Its freaking common sense ppl. You have to be ignorant to not believe that. Something cannot come from nothing. Try to prove that wrong will ya?[/quoteb8595f79a5]
lol
I'm glad you got a laugh out of it. )
First of all, let me tell you that I am not a firm believer in Evolution. I agree with you about the molecules in the beginning. Where [ib8595f79a5]did[/ib8595f79a5] they come from?
Right now I'm arguing for Evolution but this does not mean I believe it. I'm using empathetic reasoning to see the side of Evolution from an Evolutionists view. Just because I'm arguing for it does not mean I believe it. Personally I believe some sort of greater being simply created the earth like a clock and set our clock into time and left us. Maybe he used Evolution to create the earth, I don't know. I think that part of this greater being may occasionally reside within the world; this would explain paranormal events.
Right now I'm questioning Creationism and pointing out the problems that occur with it.
Anyway, from your "try to prove that wrong will ya" statement, unfortunately arguing with a Creationist like yourself about this issue is nearly impossible.
You say "where did the molecules come from?"
I say "where did God come from?"
You say "faith" or "it's too much to comprehend"
How am I suppose to argue with that? It's what you believe, neither of us can prove it.
I will say that that kind of reasoning doesn't hold much water in a scientific debate. It's more of a belief as is the belief of all kinds of other theories explaining why the molecules were there.
Also, I'm not trying to be mean to you or bash you (I really like your arguments and evidence you put out) but I wouldn't call other people's beliefs that aren't your own on the [ib8595f79a5]very very[/ib8595f79a5] beginning of time ignorant.
Their different beliefs of particles existing from another source is just as far fetched as some God creating the earth and not bothering to reveal himself to us (I'm expecting a rebuttal on this statement and I'm willing to go on with my point if you wish).[/quoteb8595f79a5]
J4320,
Sorry if the "i laughed" part came over as me being a dick, I wasnt trying to be.
OKay youre right, we will never know the truth about how the world was truly created. I dont think that science will prove or disprove anything EVER. I thikn that this is going to be a debate for the rest of the histoy of the universe.
We have seen that science provides just two fundamental alternatives for the formative history of the universe-either it has always been here or it began at some point in the past-but NEITHER gives an explanation for ultimate origins. Both explanations fail to answer the greatest question of all Where did matter and energy come from.
Now i didnt say that to prove creationism, i just want you to realize that the true question is where did the matter come from (or in your case-where did God come from) I feel that I am repeating myself and I apolozgize for that.
Modern science has no laws or observations to show how something could have come from nothing it doesnt even have a theory to propose such an event. It is cheif tenet of science that while it studies formation, ultimate origins fall outside of that domain.
there is no way of obtaining evidence concerning a prior existence.
So with all of that we will never know where this universe came from. Im calling evoultionists arguments ignorant because they are backed by science, and mine by faith and science. I apologize if i seem ignotant here but im trying to be as forward as possible. I love talking about this.
J4320, can you promise me one thing. Purchas a book titled A Case for Creation, be Lee Strobal. Read it if you have sometime and if you dont enjoy it, i will reimburse you for the book. You have my word. Its a great book and discusses creation/evolution from a Christian perspectives and athists perspective. It provides some interesting points.
Do you have an AIM that we could discuss this more in? I would love it if we could talk some more one on one. Let me know. )[/quoteb8595f79a5]
No you didn't come off as being a dick at all. It was quite the opposite. I like it when people can have humor and fun while debating instead of resorting to name calling and other unappreciated things.
)
[quoteb8595f79a5="zr"]So with all of that we will never know where this universe came from. Im calling evoultionists arguments ignorant because they are backed by science, and mine by faith and science. I apologize if i seem ignotant here but im trying to be as forward as possible. I love talking about this. [/quoteb8595f79a5]
See the problem with that is you're not looking at the most raw form of it.
Evolution ---> based off of evidence and builds a theory
Creationism ---> has a theory and tries to find evidence to support it
If I did this -
[spoilerb8595f79a5]Evolution[/spoilerb8595f79a5] ---> based off of evidence and builds a theory
[spoilerb8595f79a5]Creationism[/spoilerb8595f79a5] ---> has a theory and tries to find evidence to support it
Which one would make more sense to you? Which one would you view as ignorant? Be honest.
[quoteb8595f79a5]J4320, can you promise me one thing. Purchas a book titled A Case for Creation, be Lee Strobal. Read it if you have sometime and if you dont enjoy it, i will reimburse you for the book. You have my word. Its a great book and discusses creation/evolution from a Christian perspectives and athists perspective. It provides some interesting points.
Do you have an AIM that we could discuss this more in? I would love it if we could talk some more one on one. Let me know.[/quoteb8595f79a5]
Sure, link me to it on Amazon or something.
Sure, my AIM is -
I J4320 I
jordan90
26-01-2007 20:26:15
[quote3eedf2bf3e="J4320"]Are you kidding me? You could not be any more wrong. I can go on further on about this if you wish but use your head. What is the more accepted theory in modern science? Evolution. If there was more evidence to support Creationism then modern science would make that the most accepted theory. Thousands upon thousands of scholars agree that there is more evidence that supports Evolution than Creationism. [/quote3eedf2bf3e]
It's not because there's more evidence. The fact that creationism is being pushed out of our schools and God is being pushed out of our government is because man doesn't want to have to answer to anyone for their sin. If someone or something did create us, then man would have to answer to that creator, but you and anyone else arguing for evolution doesn't want to answer to anyone.
[quote3eedf2bf3e]What your saying has many fallacies in it. I'm sorry but I couldn't help but cringe while reading that. I'll brake it down --- [/quote3eedf2bf3e]
No, actually it doesn't. That is a fact that has been proven by scientists. I'll ask my pastor for the video that libreaksli (not "brake") it down for you.
Also, what grade did you get in your Bible class, J4320? Did you actually want to learn about God and the Bible or were you just doing it because you had to?
The reason I believe in a Creator is ironically because of science. I have doubted creation in the past... At one point I really began to wonder if it was possible that we all came from a "big bang" or some other phenomena. Then I started learning about genes, cells, and things as simple as a blade of grass. To think that all of what I see right now happened by chance is foolish. I just don't see how anyone can really believe that everything, being incredibly intricate and complex, happened by chance. This is something that I've always wondered, how do you evolutionists believe this?
[quote3eedf2bf3e]Evolution ---> based off of evidence and builds a theory
Creationism ---> has a theory and tries to find evidence to support it [/quote3eedf2bf3e]
What evidence?
J4320
28-01-2007 00:07:21
[quotee536a031ea="jordan90"][quotee536a031ea="J4320"]Are you kidding me? You could not be any more wrong. I can go on further on about this if you wish but use your head. What is the more accepted theory in modern science? Evolution. If there was more evidence to support Creationism then modern science would make that the most accepted theory. Thousands upon thousands of scholars agree that there is more evidence that supports Evolution than Creationism. [/quotee536a031ea]
It's not because there's more evidence. The fact that creationism is being pushed out of our schools and God is being pushed out of our government is because man doesn't want to have to answer to anyone for their sin. If someone or something did create us, then man would have to answer to that creator, but you and anyone else arguing for evolution doesn't want to answer to anyone.
[be536a031ea]
Do you really think that the only reason they are pushing God out of schools is because they don't want to be accountable for their sin? Maybe that might have a little effect on them but the real reason why they are doing it is because they don't even think of Creationism as a credible science so they don't want it to be in the classroom. Personally I think both sides should be taught.[/be536a031ea]
[quotee536a031ea]What your saying has many fallacies in it. I'm sorry but I couldn't help but cringe while reading that. I'll brake it down --- [/quotee536a031ea]
No, actually it doesn't. That is a fact that has been proven by scientists. I'll ask my pastor for the video that libreaksli (not "brake") it down for you.
[be536a031ea]You're getting on me for my grammar? Get over it. I don't have all day to read over my sentences and people make mistakes, especially when typing their mind like I am. Would you like me to go back through all of your posts and bitch about tiny errors? And yes, your statements did have problems with them.[/be536a031ea]
Also, what grade did you get in your Bible class, J4320? Did you actually want to learn about God and the Bible or were you just doing it because you had to?
[be536a031ea]I wanted to learn. At the time I was a Christian.[/be536a031ea]
The reason I believe in a Creator is ironically because of science. I have doubted creation in the past... At one point I really began to wonder if it was possible that we all came from a "big bang" or some other phenomena. Then I started learning about genes, cells, and things as simple as a blade of grass. To think that all of what I see right now happened by chance is foolish. I just don't see how anyone can really believe that everything, being incredibly intricate and complex, happened by chance. This is something that I've always wondered, how do you evolutionists believe this?
[be536a031ea]I'm not an Evolutionist. Did you even read what I said earlier?[/be536a031ea]
[quotee536a031ea]Evolution ---> based off of evidence and builds a theory
Creationism ---> has a theory and tries to find evidence to support it [/quotee536a031ea]
What evidence?
[be536a031ea]I could go find a bunch of stuff but I'd rather have you watch this video -
http//video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3022272500017915172&q=richard+dawkins+lynchburg
It's EXTREMELY long but it covers TONS of good points. I watched the entire thing. [/be536a031ea]
[/quotee536a031ea]
jordan90
28-01-2007 10:03:49
[quotec9b0198b43]Do you really think that the only reason they are pushing God out of schools is because they don't want to be accountable for their sin? Maybe that might have a little effect on them but the real reason why they are doing it is because they don't even think of Creationism as a credible science so they don't want it to be in the classroom. Personally I think both sides should be taught.[/quotec9b0198b43]
No I don't think it's the only reason, I just think it's a big part of it. Think about it for a second. If there was never anything that created us, there is absolutely no reason not to do wrong and sin except for what man made law has laid down. If, after we die, we will face no consequences for our sins, then why not sin? This is why many people don't want to believe in creation.
[quotec9b0198b43]I'm not an Evolutionist. Did you even read what I said earlier? [/quotec9b0198b43]
Well then I wasn't talking to you when I directed my question to evolutionists then, was I? I'll watch that video a little bit later today. And I'm with you on the fact that both evolution and creation should both be taught in public schools.
J4320
28-01-2007 17:50:28
[quote931f1cd2aa]No I don't think it's the only reason, I just think it's a big part of it. Think about it for a second. If there was never anything that created us, there is absolutely no reason not to do wrong and sin except for what man made law has laid down. If, after we die, we will face no consequences for our sins, then why not sin? This is why many people don't want to believe in creation.[/quote931f1cd2aa]
Yeah I've heard it before. That seems to be brought up a lot in arguments like this.
[quote931f1cd2aa]Well then I wasn't talking to you when I directed my question to evolutionists then, was I?[/quote931f1cd2aa]
This is what you said -
"This is something that I've always wondered, how do [b931f1cd2aa]you evolutionists[/b931f1cd2aa] believe this?"
That's the only thing that prompted me to say that. Anyway, I know it's probably a lot to ask of you to watch that video because it's almost 2 hours long but whatever, it's up to you.
KnightTrader
28-01-2007 18:06:58
Not reading the whole topic, but those naysayers who say "who created those atoms / universe people"
Heres your scientific answer.
In a large vacum of nothingness prior to universe existing, subparticles actually appear into existence from nothing. These subparticles last mere nanoseconds, but they can combine with other subparticles to form permanent gases and elements. Through billions of years, the universe, and stars were creted, then the big bang, etc etc. Look it up, I'm not going to describe the whole thing. Isaac Isamov explained it in one of his books. Science wins.
TFOAF
28-01-2007 18:14:09
[quote2da90a60a1="KnightTrader"]Not reading the whole topic, but those naysayers who say "who created those atoms / universe people"
Heres your scientific answer.
In a large vacum of nothingness prior to universe existing, subparticles actually appear into existence from nothing. These subparticles last mere nanoseconds, but they can combine with other subparticles to form permanent gases and elements. Through billions of years, the universe, and stars were creted, then the big bang, etc etc. Look it up, I'm not going to describe the whole thing. Isaac Isamov explained it in one of his books. Science wins.[/quote2da90a60a1]
Yeah, but where did this [i2da90a60a1]nothing[/i2da90a60a1] come from? ;)
Science...FTL. D
JUNIOR6886
28-01-2007 18:26:18
[quote0741a58ce3]
No I don't think it's the only reason, I just think it's a big part of it. Think about it for a second. If there was never anything that created us, there is absolutely no reason not to do wrong and sin except for what man made law has laid down. If, after we die, we will face no consequences for our sins, then why not sin? This is why many people don't want to believe in creation.[/quote0741a58ce3]
Thats why many atheist and agnostic people see religion as a cage meant to control the weak minded masses... its possible for someone to develop a good sense of right and wrong and morals without being threatened with a lake of fire and brimstone... Does one follow god because they really love him or do they do it because they think they're getting some kinda divine reward out of it. Seems comparable to super rich people giving to charity for the sake of tax breaks.... lol
geej86
28-01-2007 18:26:40
i'm not sober so i shouldn't go too deep into this but... hasn't the world/civilization/[b6f52f07ab1]people/technology[/b6f52f07ab1] changed dramatically over 6000 yrs? I can't pick out 1 bird like the african whitetopped crane or some shit (made up bird) that changed its beak to suit its environment. But Direct evidense like this exists
creationism..uh
jordan90
28-01-2007 18:37:29
[quotea986e95eab="KnightTrader"]In a large vacum of nothingness prior to universe existing, subparticles actually appear into existence from nothing. These subparticles last mere nanoseconds, but they can combine with other subparticles to form permanent gases and elements. Through billions of years, the universe, and stars were creted, then the big bang, etc etc. Look it up, I'm not going to describe the whole thing. Isaac Isamov explained it in one of his books. Science wins.[/quotea986e95eab]
Isaac Isamov or Isaac Asimov? Isaac Asimov was mainly a science fiction writer, so that's not saying much.
jordan90
28-01-2007 18:43:54
[quote33b0593021="JUNIOR6886"]Thats why many atheist and agnostic people see religion as a cage meant to control the weak minded masses... its possible for someone to develop a good sense of right and wrong and morals without being threatened with a lake of fire and brimstone... Does one follow god because they really love him or do they do it because they think they're getting some kinda divine reward out of it. Seems comparable to super rich people giving to charity for the sake of tax breaks.... lol[/quote33b0593021]
A true follower of God does it because he enjoys it, and he wants to bring glory to his God. That's something a lot of people are unable to understand. And contrary to what you might think, a lot of people give to charity because they enjoy it, not just for the tax breaks.
KnightTrader
29-01-2007 04:41:59
Asimov, http//www.amazon.com/Isaac-Asimovs-Guide-Earth-Space/dp/0449220591
He's a well known author, and he writes both fiction and non-fiction. You're free to look up the theorys and facts that he presents in the story, I doubt he's risking his status as a respected author by "making things up".
TFOAF, What do you mean where does nothing come from? When there is nothing in existence, "nothing" is a word to describe the state of no matter in the universe. You're free to believe in creationism. When you admit to creationism, you pretty much surrender the pursuit of answers. Who created god? How did he come into "existence"? You ask how matter came to be, I answered, how did "god" come into existence? If you don't have a logical answer, which I know none of you do, don't give me C&P From a religious website.
Also, Superrich giving out to charities for tax breaks? No. People give to charities some people are morally good people. This includes the Rich. Bill Gates has given countless billions to his own private charity, and Warren Buffet also sent 37 billion to the same charity. Fact is, giving 500$ to charity, is 500$ deducatable on certain taxes, Why trade CASH for a TAX DEDUCT of equivelent value. Infact, spending CASH while waiting for the deduction you have to factor in oppurtunity cost, because you no longer have the cash on hand. No one just donates to charity for "tax deductions" as CASH on hand can be used to pay your taxes AND much much more. Tax deductions are an incentive to donate, but thats it. I Just don't like it when people criticize the rich for silly reasons.
J4320
26-02-2007 11:19:18
winkie
26-02-2007 11:36:40
I think I agree with my physiology prof... Religion explains WHY we are here, evolution explains HOW we are here. Evolution doesnt attempt to explain creationism. Who is to say that God didnt orchestrate evolution? I believe in God, but we have recorded history of evolution. example eohippus to horse, wolf to chihuahua.... things change.
thatmama
26-02-2007 22:02:05
Now that this can of worms is open, mind if I wiggle my toes in it? Woo hoo! Put my tally down on the creation side. I do believe microevolution plays a role, not because I want to get along with everyone (although that’s a nice bonus) but because I think of God as the original Artist, and of evolution as part of His creative process…How’s that for fruity?
J4320
26-02-2007 22:04:26
[quote3ab978e5cf="thatmama"]Now that this can of worms is open, mind if I wiggle my toes in it? Woo hoo! Put my tally down on the creation side. I do believe microevolution plays a role, not because I want to get along with everyone (although that’s a nice bonus) but because I think of God as the original Artist, and of evolution as part of His creative process…How’s that for fruity?[/quote3ab978e5cf]
That's not possible according to the Bible.
zr2152
26-02-2007 22:42:05
[quote633f4020b9="J4320"][quote633f4020b9="thatmama"]Now that this can of worms is open, mind if I wiggle my toes in it? Woo hoo! Put my tally down on the creation side. I do believe microevolution plays a role, not because I want to get along with everyone (although that’s a nice bonus) but because I think of God as the original Artist, and of evolution as part of His creative process…How’s that for fruity?[/quote633f4020b9]
That's not possible according to the Bible.[/quote633f4020b9]
ohh man, who the heck bumped this thread.
Okay Im not going to go on a rampage because i just dont feel liek it.
All i want to say is that both creation and evoltion are threories and always will be. I agree with SOME of the article that you place J4320 and its good that you shared that. But I just want you to know that I could probably find just as good of if not a better article arguing for creation, so then again there is a bias.
Second, did you get that book yet?! I think not..lol love youuu <3
J4320
27-02-2007 13:52:04
[quote8c2b0ec03d="zr2152"][quote8c2b0ec03d="J4320"][quote8c2b0ec03d="thatmama"]Now that this can of worms is open, mind if I wiggle my toes in it? Woo hoo! Put my tally down on the creation side. I do believe microevolution plays a role, not because I want to get along with everyone (although that’s a nice bonus) but because I think of God as the original Artist, and of evolution as part of His creative process…How’s that for fruity?[/quote8c2b0ec03d]
That's not possible according to the Bible.[/quote8c2b0ec03d]
ohh man, who the heck bumped this thread.
Okay Im not going to go on a rampage because i just dont feel liek it.
All i want to say is that both creation and evoltion are threories and always will be. I agree with SOME of the article that you place J4320 and its good that you shared that. But I just want you to know that I could probably find just as good of if not a better article arguing for creation, so then again there is a bias.
Second, did you get that book yet?! I think not..lol love youuu <3[/quote8c2b0ec03d]
nononono i've been too lazy to order either of them
I kind of don't want to at all anymore. Anyway, I thought this was interesting -
[quote8c2b0ec03d]4. Increasingly, scientists doubt the truth of evolution.
No evidence suggests that evolution is losing adherents. Pick up any issue of a peer-reviewed biological journal, and you will find articles that support and extend evolutionary studies or that embrace evolution as a fundamental concept.
Conversely, serious scientific publications disputing evolution are all but nonexistent. In the mid-1990s George W. Gilchrist of the University of Washington surveyed thousands of journals in the primary literature, seeking articles on intelligent design or creation science. Among those hundreds of thousands of scientific reports, he found none. In the past two years, surveys done independently by Barbara Forrest of Southeastern Louisiana University and Lawrence M. Krauss of Case Western Reserve University have been similarly fruitless.
Creationists retort that a closed-minded scientific community rejects their evidence. Yet according to the editors of Nature, Science and other leading journals, few antievolution manuscripts are even submitted. Some antievolution authors have published papers in serious journals. Those papers, however, rarely attack evolution directly or advance creationist arguments; at best, they identify certain evolutionary problems as unsolved and difficult (which no one disputes). In short, creationists are not giving the scientific world good reason to take them seriously. [/quote8c2b0ec03d]
thatmama
27-02-2007 16:47:34
Can I ask, how would that not be possible according to the Bible? And shouldn't you be more set in your ways, being 96 and all?! )
petieroman
27-02-2007 17:11:03
Oh, I might stay out of this one. But what about the aliens, from space?
J4320
27-02-2007 19:06:29
[quoteb8c50eda4b="thatmama"]Can I ask, how would that not be possible according to the Bible? And shouldn't you be more set in your ways, being 96 and all?! )[/quoteb8c50eda4b]
If you read through the thread than I'm sure you'll figure it out. My old hands are far too aged to type it up again. ;)
Anyway, I saw this earlier ---
![]("b8c50eda4b)
http//stupidevilbastard.com/Images2/sciencevsfaith.png[" alt=""/imgb8c50eda4b]
I thought it was kind of funny.
FreeOffersNow
27-02-2007 20:21:49
Anyone see the 11PM EST Simpsons tonight?
zr2152
27-02-2007 21:20:22
j4320, read the book and then you can post what you want. Its not biased towards christianity. Just freaking read it...its really interesting.
findme
27-02-2007 22:14:05
[quote7d8688064b="jordan90"][quote7d8688064b="JUNIOR6886"]Thats why many atheist and agnostic people see religion as a cage meant to control the weak minded masses... its possible for someone to develop a good sense of right and wrong and morals without being threatened with a lake of fire and brimstone... Does one follow god because they really love him or do they do it because they think they're getting some kinda divine reward out of it. Seems comparable to super rich people giving to charity for the sake of tax breaks.... lol[/quote7d8688064b]
A true follower of God does it because he enjoys it, and he wants to bring glory to his God. That's something a lot of people are unable to understand. And contrary to what you might think, a lot of people give to charity because they enjoy it, not just for the tax breaks.[/quote7d8688064b]
hmm... reminds me of the time for valentines day I didn't get my girlfriend anything and gave my money to someone who actually needed it. Give your money to someone off the street that you see who actually needs it and not to charity because somehow someone puts their hands in the money and the charity stays.... a charity.
nuff said.
[quote7d8688064b="J4320"][quote7d8688064b="thatmama"]Can I ask, how would that not be possible according to the Bible? And shouldn't you be more set in your ways, being 96 and all?! )[/quote7d8688064b]
If you read through the thread than I'm sure you'll figure it out. My old hands are far too aged to type it up again. ;)
Anyway, I saw this earlier ---
I thought it was kind of funny.[/quote7d8688064b]
the picture tells the truth. I don't believe in god but just in case he actually exists i do good things just because thats how i am.
people who give money to charity's do it for tax breaks, if they didn't they would have given it people to help other people or help people help themselves.
thatmama
28-02-2007 05:28:48
I don't know where the Bible would disagree with the theory that God created the universe and everything in it in 7 days AND built speciation right in with it. As good as science as been to us, we humans have some mighty limitations. At an atomic level, matter is in constant motion, but our physical limits dictate we perceive some matter as solid (like this chair I'm warming RIGHT NOW!). There is usually more going on than what meets the eye...
Armstrong
28-02-2007 08:37:32
evolution rocks!
J4320
01-04-2007 19:10:06
If you have 30 minutes to waste, check out this video ---
http//video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8092395371217203993&hl=en
zr2152
01-04-2007 19:47:51
Good video, nice post although I dont agree with one thing that they said
"Creationism has no scientific evidence"
There is plenty of science that does point towards creationism. Im not going to get into this thread because it seems that some ppl are not open minded and just are blatently rude when it comes to religion/creation-evolution.
Tholek
01-04-2007 20:20:37
Let's agree to disagree. ;)
Bhall3
01-04-2007 22:32:03
I'd rather live like there is a God and die to find out there isn't, than to live like there isn't a God and die to find out there is...
J4320
01-04-2007 22:46:01
[quotec1616fbe59="zr2152"]Good video, nice post although I dont agree with one thing that they said
"Creationism has no scientific evidence"
There is plenty of science that does point towards creationism. Im not going to get into this thread because it seems that some ppl are not open minded and just are blatently rude when it comes to religion/creation-evolution.[/quotec1616fbe59]
Yeah I don't like how people can be disrespectful about this kind of stuff but that's just how it ends up. (
zr2152
01-04-2007 23:15:40
[quotecfa7fa7642="J4320"][quotecfa7fa7642="zr2152"]Good video, nice post although I dont agree with one thing that they said
"Creationism has no scientific evidence"
There is plenty of science that does point towards creationism. Im not going to get into this thread because it seems that some ppl are not open minded and just are blatently rude when it comes to religion/creation-evolution.[/quotecfa7fa7642]
Yeah I don't like how people can be disrespectful about this kind of stuff but that's just how it ends up. ([/quotecfa7fa7642]
Except for me and you, cause we are the shit. )
Bhall3
01-04-2007 23:36:25
You're right. That's why I choose not to participate in some of these "heated" discussions. A person shouldn't have to constantly defend what they choose to believe, though they should be willing to stand up for it when necessary. I stand for Jesus Christ.
Tholek
02-04-2007 05:06:58
[quote9f81baaef1="Bhall3"]I'd rather live like there is a God and die to find out there isn't, than to live like there isn't a God and die to find out there is...[/quote9f81baaef1]
I feel the opposite way.
Living life not believing in the existence of God doesn't mean you automatically rape or kill etc. You can easily live a fulfilled virtuous life without that.
I just hate to hear people say that the "More you suffer in this life, the bigger your reward in the next". I feel so sad for people who take this to heart. You can, and [i9f81baaef1]should[/i9f81baaef1] be a good person, while living your life as if there is no afterlife. That way, if there's the kind of judgment you are expecting, you'll have nothing to worry about. ;)
nytrate
02-04-2007 05:41:47
38% believe in creationism?
I think I'm on the wrong forum.
Personally, the only thing I have against creationists is that they are trying to get it taught in public schools.
As I said on the religious/God thread...that is the only reason I ever get worked up about it. If people just were happy believing what they believe I wouldn't care. However, when they try to force those opinions down others' throats (like legislating their morality or teaching creationism it in public schools) the other side HAS to get angry.
If they want to talk about it in a literature class, fine. If they want to talk about it in a philosophy class as a possible theory...fine. It just has no place in science.
Why can't they just teach their kids about it if they want to? WHY MUST THEY FORCE IT ON EVERYONE ELSE? That is why I have zero respect for most bible thumpers. Not because of what they believe but because how they want everyone else to believe it too.
38%?!?!?!?! WOWZERS....that blows my mind apart. 38% of strict creationism...not even a little of both!
nytrate
02-04-2007 06:27:16
[quotea67c80b247="BHall3"]I'd rather live like there is a God and die to find out there isn't, than to live like there isn't a God and die to find out there is...[/quotea67c80b247]
If God does exist and is some all-powerful omnipotent anthropomorphic being as most people on here tend to believe... I don't think "belief" will get anybody anywhere.
I think if you've been a good person in your life, that's all that will matter. How have you helped your fellow man (and help as in, selfless, ulterior-less help on a purely humanitarian level...not help as in introducing people to God or faith)
If anything, I'd think God would be pissed at all organized religions for murdering and waging wars under the pretense of religion. Think about the history of the world and all the destruction religious wars/feuds have created. Think about how the Catholic church actually protects known pedophiles. The list goes on...
You think God will like that? No...not at all. If God exists he will like those who live their lives as best they can, who help a fellow human when they can, who are spiritual in their own unique way not the way they are simply told.
Do you think your God is so mean and vengeful that he'll only accept those with blind faith? I think it's the exact opposite. I think people that adhere to a strict organized religion have a better chance of being smitten by God because by sticking to an organized religion you are supporting the actions of that religion in the past and present. Those actions aren't so pretty.
CollidgeGraduit
02-04-2007 06:42:25
[quote727095c1f6="nytrate"][quote727095c1f6="BHall3"]I'd rather live like there is a God and die to find out there isn't, than to live like there isn't a God and die to find out there is...[/quote727095c1f6]
If God does exist and is some all-powerful omnipotent anthropomorphic being as most people on here tend to believe... I don't think "belief" will get anybody anywhere.
I think if you've been a good person in your life, that's all that will matter. How have you helped your fellow man (and help as in, selfless, ulterior-less help on a purely humanitarian level...not help as in introducing people to God or faith)
If anything, I'd think God would be pissed at all organized religions for murdering and waging wars under the pretense of religion. Think about the history of the world and all the destruction religious wars/feuds have created. Think about how the Catholic church actually protects known pedophiles. The list goes on...
You think God will like that? No...not at all. If God exists he will like those who live their lives as best they can, who help a fellow human when they can, who are spiritual in their own unique way not the way they are simply told.
Do you think your God is so mean and vengeful that he'll only accept those with blind faith? I think it's the exact opposite. I think people that adhere to a strict organized religion have a better chance of being smitten by God because by sticking to an organized religion you are supporting the actions of that religion in the past and present. Those actions aren't so pretty.[/quote727095c1f6]
Well, now it sounds like you're arguing Christian salvation, and how one becomes "saved". The New Testament says several times that the only way to go to Heaven is through faith in Jesus... but my question is how you are arguing the point?
[quote727095c1f6="nytrate"]All my knowledge comes from reading, and as I said before, I stopped after the Old Testament[/quote727095c1f6]
[quote727095c1f6="nytrate"]That's just a big pet peeve of mine...feigning knowledge because the majority of the audience doesn't know any better.[/quote727095c1f6]
JUNIOR6886
02-04-2007 06:59:40
[quotefab64ebe39="nytrate"] 38%?!?!?!?! WOWZERS....that blows my mind apart. 38% of strict creationism...not even a little of both![/quotefab64ebe39]
38% isnt that bad especially when you compare that to the percentage of creationists in the country.... remember creationists will always be in the majority because the majority of the nation (and world?) is either christian, muslim or jewish. Personally, i expected it to be above %50
I agree with whoever said that accepting creationisim is giving up the pursuit of real answers. I mean really[/colorfab64ebe39] some being full of "win" and "pwn" just created everything out of nothing? geez...
tpkenter
02-04-2007 07:19:41
[quote62b6f74573="nytrate"]Personally, the only thing I have against creationists is that they are trying to get it taught in public schools.[/quote62b6f74573]
It is a shame when people are so close-minded that they refuse to have alternate theories taught in school. If creationism is so unbelievable, then wouldn't the students be able to see that for themselves? If only one theory is presented, then how can they make up their own minds?
You might want to check out this site http//www.creationworldview.org/
This is from their website
At Creation Worldview Ministries we reintroduce fact and perspective into debates which have been dominated by pseudoscience and, thus, help to improve public understanding of the Bible's incredibly accurate perspective on the origins and history of our world.
tpkenter
02-04-2007 07:24:34
[quote83ae04a609="JUNIOR6886"]I agree with whoever said that accepting creationisim is giving up the pursuit of real answers. I mean really[/color83ae04a609] some being full of "win" and "pwn" just created everything out of nothing? geez...[/quote83ae04a609]
You find it easier to believe that there was just some big bang and then everything just evolved in a logical way?
tpkenter
02-04-2007 07:31:15
[quote7337e82bf8="CollidgeGraduit"][quote7337e82bf8="nytrate"][quote7337e82bf8="BHall3"]I'd rather live like there is a God and die to find out there isn't, than to live like there isn't a God and die to find out there is...[/quote7337e82bf8]
If God does exist and is some all-powerful omnipotent anthropomorphic being as most people on here tend to believe... I don't think "belief" will get anybody anywhere.
I think if you've been a good person in your life, that's all that will matter. How have you helped your fellow man (and help as in, selfless, ulterior-less help on a purely humanitarian level...not help as in introducing people to God or faith)
If anything, I'd think God would be pissed at all organized religions for murdering and waging wars under the pretense of religion. Think about the history of the world and all the destruction religious wars/feuds have created. Think about how the Catholic church actually protects known pedophiles. The list goes on...
You think God will like that? No...not at all. If God exists he will like those who live their lives as best they can, who help a fellow human when they can, who are spiritual in their own unique way not the way they are simply told.
Do you think your God is so mean and vengeful that he'll only accept those with blind faith? I think it's the exact opposite. I think people that adhere to a strict organized religion have a better chance of being smitten by God because by sticking to an organized religion you are supporting the actions of that religion in the past and present. Those actions aren't so pretty.[/quote7337e82bf8]
Well, now it sounds like you're arguing Christian salvation, and how one becomes "saved". The New Testament says several times that the only way to go to Heaven is through faith in Jesus... but my question is how you are arguing the point?
[quote7337e82bf8="nytrate"]All my knowledge comes from reading, and as I said before, I stopped after the Old Testament[/quote7337e82bf8]
[quote7337e82bf8="nytrate"]That's just a big pet peeve of mine...feigning knowledge because the majority of the audience doesn't know any better.[/quote7337e82bf8][/quote7337e82bf8]
If you never read the New Testament, how can you comment on it? Wouldn't that be feigning knowledge?
nytrate
02-04-2007 07:36:11
If that's how you want to read into it buddy, sure. Go for it.
I'm commenting on my opinion of God. Leave it to the nuts to condemn that too.
andyhflo
02-04-2007 07:36:18
I believe in creation. Can I prove creation to anyone? No, but God can. Here is how I see it
God created the universe and everything including us. He is all power and all love. He created us with a will which we can either exercise to follow his principles or our own. He is big enough that he is not intimidated by what we believe. He could strike anyone with lightning or heart failure but he is slow to anger. He is always just but patient and merciful at the same time. He says "What you sow you reap." He means it. In his time we will receive the consequences of our actions. I am looking for a good reward.
God has set up our will as the final authority in each of us. Just as I am not willing to believe in evolution, others are not willing to believe in creation. But more important, are you and I willing to obey God and live by his principles today. God will not over power our choice to acknowledge him or not. Some have died never believing even though there were many blessings in their life if they had only seen them. Others have died believing even through torture and injustice.
nytrate
02-04-2007 07:39:42
tpkenter...I don't think you really want a philosophy argument with me. You quoted me out of context...typical. Somehow I'm not surprised.
I said it has no place in SCIENCE...you just quoted the part where I didn't mention I didn't mind it being discussed in philosophy.
Way to go. Everything you said after that quote of mine proves you didn't even read what I wrote!
and it really doesn't shock me.
BTW I'm arguing my point from my own perspective. I'm not quoting the New Testament. I'm giving my liopinionli. God forbid!
tpkenter
02-04-2007 09:52:00
[quoteba1f6877e1="nytrate"]tpkenter...I don't think you really want a philosophy argument with me. You quoted me out of context...typical. Somehow I'm not surprised.
I said it has no place in SCIENCE...you just quoted the part where I didn't mention I didn't mind it being discussed in philosophy.
Way to go. Everything you said after that quote of mine proves you didn't even read what I wrote!
and it really doesn't shock me.
BTW I'm arguing my point from my own perspective. I'm not quoting the New Testament. I'm giving my liopinionli. God forbid![/quoteba1f6877e1]
No, I don't want to get into a philosophy argument with you.
I WAS talking about SCIENCE, just because YOU don't believe it has a place in science, doesn't mean that everyone believes that. I am talking about presenting the scientific facts, not just Biblical philosophy.
I'm not shocked, either. Many people are so willing to believe what they've been told that they won't even listen to any other theory, opinion or argument.
You said you relied on what you had read and that you only read the Old Testament. That is only part of the story. Again, you will not look at all sides of an issue.
You also said that all that matters is that you be a good person in your life. Is this your opinion only, or your opinion based on what you've read? If it is your opinion only, do you have any basis?
tpkenter
02-04-2007 09:56:38
[quotec5492a1b64="nytrate"]If that's how you want to read into it buddy, sure. Go for it.
I'm commenting on my opinion of God. Leave it to the nuts to condemn that too.[/quotec5492a1b64]
If I am a nut simply because I do not believe what you believe, then I guess I AM a nut. I prefer to look at both sides of an issue before I give my opinion. I have learned about this issue from both sides and have made my decision. I'm sorry you're not willing to do the same.
Tholek
02-04-2007 10:07:51
Deep breaths....
tpkenter
02-04-2007 10:49:37
[quote538e424761="Tholek"]Deep breaths....[/quote538e424761]
OK. Now I'm hyperventalating! lol Where is my brown paper bag! lol
I know I usually don't post much on this forum, but this is an important issue to me.
I remember when I was in college, I thought they were teaching me to think for myself. But, I realized they were just teaching me to think the way they think. I have learned in my (too) many years of experience to listen to everyone, but do my own research and come up with my own opinion. There are also things I will never know for sure on this earth and I just have to accept that.
Please don't tell my children I don't really know everything! lol
nytrate
02-04-2007 11:03:07
[quotec1aa48296d="tpkenter"]You also said that all that matters is that you be a good person in your life. Is this your opinion only, or your opinion based on what you've read? If it is your opinion only, do you have any basis?
[/quotec1aa48296d]
It's my opinion as well as the basis for many world religions and philosophies. However, I base my opinion on my own personal thoughts and feelings, not these other philosophies.
and I called you a nut because you brought up the New Testament in comparing "feigning knowledge" (my words) about an opinion. It just doesn't make sense. If anyone is being close-minded here, it's you. What does my liopinionli on fate have to do with the New Testament? Nothing. Absolutely nothing, and saying I was feigning knowledge of it is ridiculous when I never even referenced it or mentioned it.
So creationism belongs in science and not philosophy? Does that include the age of the world? Mankind?
I believe that creationism is partially faith based. Is there anything wrong with faith-based beliefs? No...of course not. It's a free country. Freedom of religion is a wonderful thing. However, anything that involves faith has no place in science. Most creationists will admit that their point of view does require a little bit of faith and there is nothing wrong with that. It just doesn't belong in public schools as science.
Evolution, as a big picture, may be a theory. However, smaller pieces of that picture are scientific fact. This is why it is science.
The evolution/creationism argument can go on forever. Fact of the matter is, there are a million different points of view amongst the creationists and a million amongst evolutionists. It's hard to argue one specific view against another because of this.
I'm actually very open minded. I have several friends who are religious and the only times I have ever opened my mouth is when provoked about my beliefs.
What it comes down to is that I stated an opinion on supposed "salvation" and you immediately jumped on it saying I was uneducated in the New Testament. It's irrelevant...my opinion had nothing to do with the New Testament. How many religious texts have you studied outside of Christianity? I'm not saying your opinions are unfounded because you aren't well educated in world religion and philosophy, am I? Opinions are a beautiful thing.
I'm done here.
tpkenter
02-04-2007 11:15:19
[quote95070c811b="nytrate"]So creationism belongs in science and not philosophy? Does that include the age of the world? Mankind?[/quote95070c811b]
Is it impossible for creationism to be both in science and philosophy?
Yes, it includes the age of the world and mankind.
tpkenter
02-04-2007 11:43:40
[quote65a76c35a7="nytrate"]I believe that creationism is partially faith based. Is there anything wrong with faith-based beliefs? No...of course not. It's a free country. Freedom of religion is a wonderful thing. However, anything that involves faith has no place in science. Most creationists will admit that their point of view does require a little bit of faith and there is nothing wrong with that. It just doesn't belong in public schools as science.
Evolution, as a big picture, may be a theory. However, smaller pieces of that picture are scientific fact. This is why it is science.
The evolution/creationism argument can go on forever. Fact of the matter is, there are a million different points of view amongst the creationists and a million amongst evolutionists. It's hard to argue one specific view against another because of this.
I'm actually very open minded. I have several friends who are religious and the only times I have ever opened my mouth is when provoked about my beliefs.
What it comes down to is that I stated an opinion on supposed "salvation" and you immediately jumped on it saying I was uneducated in the New Testament. It's irrelevant...my opinion had nothing to do with the New Testament. How many religious texts have you studied outside of Christianity? I'm not saying your opinions are unfounded because you aren't well educated in world religion and philosophy, am I? Opinions are a beautiful thing.
I'm done here.[/quote65a76c35a7]
You believe that creationism is partly faith based, that doesn't mean it is true. I believe it is scientifically based. I know creation scientists who used to believe in evolution, but when following the scientific facts had to admit that creationism is right.
It's the same old story. People are afraid that if the facts of creationism were to be taught in public school, many people would realize that it is true. It's easier to just call us nuts.
What do you have against the scientific facts of creationism being taught in public school? We are only talking about the scientific facts, not teaching about religion or the Bible. I think all children should have ALL of the scientific facts, not just the ones some people think they should be taught. Who is really open-minded? The ones who believe both theories should be taught, or the ones who believe only evolution should be taught?
Christianity and "salvation" are in the New Testament of the Bible. I thought you had commented on Christianity. That is why I was saying you had no knowledge if you hadn't read the New Testament. If this is incorrect, then I am sorry. I am a little confused because I thought you said your opinions were based on what you had read.
It does appear that you are saying that my beliefs are unfounded because I'm not well educated in world religions. I have read about many religions, probably not all of them, but the major ones. I also took classes in world religions in college. I also have personal experience with people from several different religions.
Have you ever checked out any of the scientific facts of creationism, or just evolution? I have checked out the facts from both. That is why I say that I am open-minded. I have checked out both sides and made a decision, but it seems you are unwilling to check out the other side. You have simply made a decision and developed an opinion without checking out both sides. How is that open-minded?
zr2152
20-05-2007 20:42:08
whatever happened to nytrate....
ha ha youre all going to hate me for this bump )
Tholek
21-05-2007 01:22:45
lisighli
MyungChunHa
22-05-2007 07:09:18
I'm too lazy to spill out my opinions on how religion only contradicts itself and I've had too many arguements already, so I just wanted the chance to spread some good music with FiPG..
http//www.myspace.com/greydonsquare
He's an aethiest rapper with some great opinions, hip-hop heads give him a chance.
zr2152
06-06-2007 15:49:23
[quotefabb9d065f="MyungChunHa"]I'm too lazy to spill out my opinions on how religion only contradicts itself and I've had too many arguements already, so I just wanted the chance to spread some good music with FiPG..
http//www.myspace.com/greydonsquare
He's an aethiest rapper with some great opinions, hip-hop heads give him a chance.[/quotefabb9d065f]
Okay guys..
The reason that I am bumping this agian is beacause I just read a book that [bfabb9d065f]SOMEWHAT[/bfabb9d065f] had changed my opinion on a lot of things. As suprising as it may sound...if you all read this thread you will know why....my opinon on creation/evolution has changed in an indirec way.
Im not going to explain my view on it before but the book, "The Language Of God"totally changed my view. This book is written by Francis S. Collins who is a geneticist (dont know if that is how you say it)/biolgist whom is a Christian. He is head of the human genome project (if you dont know it, google it). Basically, this book talks about evolution and how it is pretty freaking real.
Im not going to keep on going with how I came to my "New opinion"but just realize that it has somewhat changed. I do believe tha God did do all the marvelous work that is here in the universe BUT he did it differently than I thought before.
So if I could take my vote back, it would be "A little bit of both"
so say what you want.
I recommed (especially for all you stern creationist of which I once was), that you read this book. J4320...this one you would like. )
gnznroses
06-06-2007 16:05:42
lidoesn't want into another religion debateli
i'm tellin ya tho, the Flying Spaghetti Monster created us all....
MyungChunHa
06-06-2007 16:52:39
Just one thing though...
What most Christians fail to realize, in the biggest contradiction of them all is that if there was a God and he created our mind in such a way that an aethist was able to be born, then he himself should know that humans are essentially flawed, therefore he can not damn us for not believing in him because it is his OWN fault for making us without the pre-knowledge of his existence.
Therefore, if God damns you for not believing in him, that would make him evil (contradiction), because he would then be creating beings to be damned from the beginning, making it possible for someone to never have a chance and always be on the verge of torture, directly a fault of God.
Really, in a nutshell, it doesn't make sense that God wants us to know he exists and yet doesn't give us the knowledge of his existence already instilled in our brains, it would only be his fault if I don't believe or want to waste my whole life on something that I can't be sure on, even he could understand that.
JUNIOR6886
06-06-2007 17:17:38
you could fill an ocean with the amount of contradictions contained in the bible and the very concept of god. however I've come to realize that the hope that some guy in the sky is in control of everything brings people is more important than whether god really exists or not.
think about all those stories you hear of drug addicts "finding god" and turning their lives around.
How any person with a shred of logic can be a believer is beyond me but if it lets them sleep at night..... shrug
aviendha47
06-06-2007 17:37:33
The only way I can see this as a little bit of both is that I grew up going to catholic school up until 9th grade when I just couldn't take it any more and got myself switched to public school. Any strict interpretation of any religious dogma is bound to be flawed. I can see the idea of their being at least something out there that effects the world in some way but that is because I want to. I spent a lot of time being atheist/agnostic and looking into numerous other religions. The overall impression of all religions is of an outside force. I can somewhat go for that. As far as science and evolution, I can see the logic of scientific methods but I have no problem thinking that something had something to do with evolution. Sometimes I think it's terribly naive of me to believe any of this but as selfish as it is, I like to think there's more to it than science, we just can't prove it yet.
J4320
06-06-2007 17:46:40
[quote27d6ed66b3="gnznroses"]lidoesn't want into another religion debateli
i'm tellin ya tho, the Flying Spaghetti Monster created us all....[/quote27d6ed66b3]
We are all touched by his noodly appendage.
ilanbg
06-06-2007 19:22:49
[quoted61dba7b42="zr2152"]Im not going to explain my view on it before but the book, "The Language Of God"totally changed my view. This book is written by Francis S. Collins who is a geneticist (dont know if that is how you say it)/biolgist whom is a Christian. He is head of the human genome project (if you dont know it, google it). Basically, this book talks about evolution and how it is pretty freaking real. [/quoted61dba7b42]
One question no one has ever been able to answer is how people could have 'devolved' if God made man perfect at first. It doesn't seem like Collins thinks that is the case, but, based on the summary on his book on Wikipedia, what does he base his belief in God on? The only thing mentioned in the wiki article is that people abide by Moral Law and that they have searched for God throughout the ages, but I don't see how either of those is indicative of God.
[quoted61dba7b42="MyungChunHa"]Therefore, if God damns you for not believing in him, that would make him evil (contradiction), because he would then be creating beings to be damned from the beginning, making it possible for someone to never have a chance and always be on the verge of torture, directly a fault of God.[/quoted61dba7b42]
But God also gave man free will, thus making it possible for man to believe in God.
Hence this is not a good argument against the existence of God.
The best argument I've been able to create in favor of God is that God transcends logic and exists in the fourth dimension, making our attempts to understand His existence moot and fundamentally based on our limited perspectives. But that's based on as little evidence as anything else.
zr2152
07-06-2007 00:25:11
[quoteef7548d9d1="ilanbg"][quoteef7548d9d1="zr2152"]Im not going to explain my view on it before but the book, "The Language Of God"totally changed my view. This book is written by Francis S. Collins who is a geneticist (dont know if that is how you say it)/biolgist whom is a Christian. He is head of the human genome project (if you dont know it, google it). Basically, this book talks about evolution and how it is pretty freaking real. [/quoteef7548d9d1]
One question no one has ever been able to answer is how people could have 'devolved' if God made man perfect at first. It doesn't seem like Collins thinks that is the case, but, based on the summary on his book on Wikipedia, what does he base his belief in God on? The only thing mentioned in the wiki article is that people abide by Moral Law and that they have searched for God throughout the ages, but I don't see how either of those is indicative of God.
[quoteef7548d9d1="MyungChunHa"]Therefore, if God damns you for not believing in him, that would make him evil (contradiction), because he would then be creating beings to be damned from the beginning, making it possible for someone to never have a chance and always be on the verge of torture, directly a fault of God.[/quoteef7548d9d1]
But God also gave man free will, thus making it possible for man to believe in God.
Hence this is not a good argument against the existence of God.
The best argument I've been able to create in favor of God is that God transcends logic and exists in the fourth dimension, making our attempts to understand His existence moot and fundamentally based on our limited perspectives. But that's based on as little evidence as anything else.[/quoteef7548d9d1]
Free Will, that what I was going to say but you beat me to it. I dont have time right now but when I get back from class and sometime later on this evening, im going to quote some things from this book that I read that will answer all of these questions.
THis is why I liked the book so much because he covers all these topics that come along with the creation/evolution theory.
In the famous words of Arnold...Ill be back
MyungChunHa
07-06-2007 05:53:28
[quoteed17ed214e="ilanbg"][quoteed17ed214e="MyungChunHa"]Therefore, if God damns you for not believing in him, that would make him evil (contradiction), because he would then be creating beings to be damned from the beginning, making it possible for someone to never have a chance and always be on the verge of torture, directly a fault of God.[/quoteed17ed214e]
But God also gave man free will, thus making it possible for man to believe in God.
Hence this is not a good argument against the existence of God.
The best argument I've been able to create in favor of God is that God transcends logic and exists in the fourth dimension, making our attempts to understand His existence moot and fundamentally based on our limited perspectives. But that's based on as little evidence as anything else.[/quoteed17ed214e]
Well, my argument was never for or against God, my argument was to say that if someone was an aethiest than it could not be held against them and that person should not be punished for his non-belief.
The Bible basically says that if you don't have the faith (belief) in God, then you will be damned in Hell, this goes against the very nature of everyone's so-called God because he made us, therefore making us limited and logical, given these traits, nobody should believe in God because of the limited evidence of It.
I believe the intentions are good and it's very healthy for people to believe in Hope (which is what religion boils down to), but I'm not going to devout and waste my life worshipping God, because if there is one and he is completely Holy, then he would never damn me for such perfect logic, which It gave me.
I personally don't believe in the Bible, I believe in some force that has always been, whether it is knowledgeable of us or not is beyond me and not for my control of others (religion)
J4320
08-06-2007 10:32:27
[quotef404becdff="J4320"]Yeah I'm a Christian and a Creationist believer. I've been brought up Christian and I know almost everything there is to know about Creation VS Evolution. I've been raised in a Christian school since 1st grade. I'm kind of bumping this thread. I didn't notice it and it's a good one. In my opinion, Evolution makes no sense. We couldn't happen by accident.[/quotef404becdff]
Hahahaha silly fool.
[quotef404becdff="J4320"][quotef404becdff="nicd.01"]Maybe you can post us some data that wasn't performed by a religious orginization but by a credible, unbiased source. It seriously blows my mind that people can so blindly accept something just because it's published on a .orgurl==http://=http:///url website. Here's another question that wasn't answered earlier. What do creationists think about other religions? Are all of their beliefs wrong just because they aren't congruent with your own? Accept it or not, there were religions before christianity that had completely different ideas and stories. Were they all wrong just because you don't believe them? As for doing a google search, I did one and all I found were sites for various religious orginizations. I'm sorry but they are not credible sources. [bf404becdff]It's the same thing as years of tobacco company studies proving their products don't cause cancer.[/bf404becdff][/quotef404becdff]
Pfff.... Lol... You guys can believe what you want. Many people who have studied this BECAME a Christian because of this. You can't blindly talk about this if you DON'T know the facts. Science itself [bf404becdff]PROVES[/bf404becdff] evolution wrong. But I guess we can see in the afterlife. I just can't seem to see how such a perfect place happened without a greater being behind it. Evolution is a lie. And the world is following it because-dare I say this- the world doesn't want to follow a code. They don't want to follow rules. They don't want to live up to the expectations of God, they'd rather live in their own little world without him. You cannot deny the spiritual presence in this world. If you deny it, you are a fool.
[quotef404becdff]Maybe you can post us some data that wasn't performed by a religious orginization but by a credible, unbiased source.[/quotef404becdff]
Who is a Creationist and not a Christian? All of these sources would be from Christians, yes. But [bf404becdff]MANY[/bf404becdff] of these Christians were Evolutionists but were turned to Creationism after deep study.
[quotef404becdff]What do creationists think about other religions? Are all of their beliefs wrong just because they aren't congruent with your own? [/quotef404becdff]
And what do we Creationists think about other religions? You mean by the way we believe earth came to be? Well, a lot of cultures support things that were mentioned in the Bible such as a flood and other things. [uf404becdff]And there was a flood.[/uf404becdff] And if their beliefs are different then ours in the way earth was created we don't accuse, we understand why they think that and we show them the truth. Christians are stereotyped, we aren't gonna damn all of you to hell. I just want to know- Who here believes in Evolution? And tell me why you do and back it up with evidence.
And Crynos, please.... You are basing your entire belief of how earth came to be because the BBC says so? If they supported Christian views, they wouldn't be as popular so they support Evolution. Mostly every atheist supports Evolution. And every normal Christian supports creationism. Creationism takes faith to believe that a God made this, yet it is also backed up by science.[/quotef404becdff]
oops
Oh boy. Reading my old posts is embarrassing. I guess that's what happens to your mind when you are indoctrinated. Now I wish I was back in those classrooms once again with my current understandings. It would be fun to challenge the teachers.
MyungChunHa
08-06-2007 10:35:07
So you've changed to the logical side?
Good for you )
Seriously though, what made you change your opinion?
J4320
08-06-2007 11:02:42
Well those statements of mine were from the beginning of the thread back in 2005. I've looked into a lot of it and it eventually led me to Evolution due to many things.
MyungChunHa
08-06-2007 12:32:32
[quote72d88c5cea="J4320"]Well those statements of mine were from the beginning of the thread back in 2005. I've looked into a lot of it and it eventually led me to Evolution due to many things.[/quote72d88c5cea]
Oh that makes sense, I forgot this thread was that old...
Are your still Christian believing in a God or pure evolution?
J4320
08-06-2007 12:54:14
I don't know about the Christian/Judaic god anymore. I'm starting to lean towards agnosticism.
ILoveToys
08-06-2007 12:58:10
Why do people even bother with this argument anymore??? Personally, I believe everything had to be created, but since then I definitely believe that life has evolved, but I not to the extent that evolution tries to claim.
Oh well, though....Everyone is entitled to believe what they want.
J4320
08-06-2007 13:07:40
We aren't arguing. Some of us like discussing these things. I hate it when people just come in here and say that we are arguing and it's stupid. Some of us take interest in human origins.
ILoveToys
08-06-2007 13:18:01
Whatever dude...I meant topic/issue/argument, get your panties in a bunch if you must.
MyungChunHa
08-06-2007 14:24:49
[quote92e09b4466="J4320"]We aren't arguing. Some of us like discussing these things. I hate it when people just come in here and say that we are arguing and it's stupid. Some of us take interest in human origins.[/quote92e09b4466]
Agreed 100%
It's not so much an argument/debate (which are fun too anyways) it's a discussion in order to further our understanding, something to do when your bored basically
TFOAF
08-06-2007 14:28:32
Creationism for one reason only. Where the did first thing that started it all come from? And where did that come from? Etc. The only thing that gets me, is, (I believe in G-d), but where did he/she come from? And where did that thing come from? Etc.
Crouching Tiger Hidden Ga
08-06-2007 22:38:59
[quote2124e7bc34="nytrate"]
I believe that creationism is partially faith based. Is there anything wrong with faith-based beliefs? No...of course not. It's a free country. Freedom of religion is a wonderful thing. However, anything that involves faith has no place in science. Most creationists will admit that their point of view does require a little bit of faith and there is nothing wrong with that. It just doesn't belong in public schools as science.
Evolution, as a big picture, may be a theory. However, smaller pieces of that picture are scientific fact. This is why it is science.
The evolution/creationism argument can go on forever. Fact of the matter is, there are a million different points of view amongst the creationists and a million amongst evolutionists. It's hard to argue one specific view against another because of this.
I'm actually very open minded. I have several friends who are religious and the only times I have ever opened my mouth is when provoked about my beliefs.
What it comes down to is that I stated an opinion on supposed "salvation" and you immediately jumped on it saying I was uneducated in the New Testament. It's irrelevant...my opinion had nothing to do with the New Testament. How many religious texts have you studied outside of Christianity? I'm not saying your opinions are unfounded because you aren't well educated in world religion and philosophy, am I? Opinions are a beautiful thing.
I'm done here.[/quote2124e7bc34]
Um, yes but one still has to have faith to believe in evolution because there is obviously no solid proof for it.
About proof for evolution the only proof I see for evolution is the fact that species can change slightly within its genetic code. And that's called micro evolution. Completely different from macro evolution which is changing from one kind into another.
And about theistic evolution. If God was all powerfull why would he make his creation incomplete? The Bible says that God made people to bring glory to himself kind of to show off. Making some sludge and then having it turn into life after millions of years is stupid when he could have just made life instantly which he did.
zr2152
09-06-2007 00:07:55
dont worry, she is not around anymore and its hard for her to have a civil discussion online
wasabe
09-06-2007 10:08:11
[quoted0007a02ea="Crouching Tiger Hidden Ga"]And about theistic evolution. If God was all powerfull why would he make his creation incomplete? The Bible says that God made people to bring glory to himself kind of to show off. Making some sludge and then having it turn into life after millions of years is stupid when he could have just made life instantly which he did.[/quoted0007a02ea]
If God is such an all-powerful creator, why do we fart?
[quoted0007a02ea="TFOAF"]Creationism for one reason only. Where the did first thing that started it all come from? And where did that come from? Etc. The only thing that gets me, is, (I believe in G-d), but where did he/she come from? And where did that thing come from? Etc.[/quoted0007a02ea]
This is pretty simple. Who created God? Super God. Who created Super God? Super Duper God. Who created Super Duper God? Super Duper Mega God. Who created Super Duper Mega God? Super Duper Mega Hyper God. Who created Super Duper Mega Hyper God? Super Duper Mega Hyper Ultra God. And who created Super Duper Mega Hyper Ultra God?
Chuck Norris.
QED.
ilanbg
09-06-2007 10:54:14
[quote4cf40bf90f="ilanbg"]Well, my argument was never for or against God, my argument was to say that if someone was an aethiest than it could not be held against them and that person should not be punished for his non-belief.
The Bible basically says that if you don't have the faith (belief) in God, then you will be damned in Hell, this goes against the very nature of everyone's so-called God because he made us, therefore making us limited and logical, given these traits, nobody should believe in God because of the limited evidence of It.[/quote4cf40bf90f]
The Bible says that God gave man free will and also told him to have faith in Him. Since you can obviously see that there are plenty of people who believe in God entirely, you can conclude that it's possible to believe in God regardless of logic (unless all religious zealots are incapable of understanding logic—which is not the case); and since everyone has the ability to believe in God, and some choose not to, those that don't can be held accountable for it.
[quote4cf40bf90f]I believe the intentions are good and it's very healthy for people to believe in Hope (which is what religion boils down to), but I'm not going to devout and waste my life worshipping God, because if there is one and he is completely Holy, then he would never damn me for such perfect logic, which It gave me.[/quote4cf40bf90f]
You're not supposed to worship because you're scared of what will happen otherwise; you're supposed to worship because you're grateful for the life God gave you. Since you obviously believe in God, or some manifestation thereof, don't you think it's incredibly arrogant to claim you don't owe God anything? Can there be any greater arrogance than claiming you're not in debt to God?
[quote4cf40bf90f]Creationism for one reason only. Where the did first thing that started it all come from? And where did that come from? Etc. The only thing that gets me, is, (I believe in G-d), but where did he/she come from? And where did that thing come from? Etc.[/quote4cf40bf90f]
I highly suggest the book [u4cf40bf90f]Zero[/u4cf40bf90f]; it better explains the concept of infinity. But even better is that it shows how the concept of zero, the void, and infinity have affected religion over the years.
Er, but my point is that infinity is entirely possible; there doesn't need to have been a "first thing."
KeithA
09-06-2007 11:52:55
I've stayed out of this thread for so long, but I'm really, really sad to see that Creationism is actually beating evolution in the poll. -(
J4320
09-06-2007 13:08:45
[quote1e03f58c0c="KeithA"]I've stayed out of this thread for so long, but I'm really, really sad to see that Creationism is actually beating evolution in the poll. -([/quote1e03f58c0c]
That's how it is in the US. They're happy with believing in what they want to believe in. Ignorance is bliss.
KeithA
09-06-2007 13:21:10
[quoted584b0b3aa="bruman"][quoted584b0b3aa="J4320"][quoted584b0b3aa="KeithA"]I've stayed out of this thread for so long, but I'm really, really sad to see that Creationism is actually beating evolution in the poll. -([/quoted584b0b3aa]
That's how it is in the US. They're happy with believing in what they want to believe in. Ignorance is bliss.[/quoted584b0b3aa]
That's a way more ignorant statement than the belief of creationism.[/quoted584b0b3aa]
I'm not sure what you mean by that, but depending on which poll or study you trust, it is true that almost half of Americans seem to believe that life as we know it has existed since the beginning of time.
http//pewforum.org/docs/index.php?DocID=115#1[]http//pewforum.org/docs/index.php?DocID=115#1
http//www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm[]http//www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm
Disregarding for the time being the logical arguments for or against creationism, there is also evidence that the average religious American is not particularly well-informed about his beliefs
[quoted584b0b3aa="USA TODAY"][bd584b0b3aa]Americans get an 'F' in religion[/bd584b0b3aa]
By Cathy Lynn Grossman, USA TODAY
Sometimes dumb sounds cute Sixty percent of Americans can't name five of the Ten Commandments, and 50% of high school seniors think Sodom and Gomorrah were married.
Stephen Prothero, chairman of the religion department at Boston University, isn't laughing. Americans' deep ignorance of world religions — their own, their neighbors' or the combatants in Iraq, Darfur or Kashmir — is dangerous, he says.
His new book, Religious Literacy What Every American Needs to Know — and Doesn't, argues that everyone needs to grasp Bible basics, as well as the core beliefs, stories, symbols and heroes of other faiths.
Belief is not his business, says Prothero, who grew up Episcopalian and now says he's a spiritually "confused Christian." He says his argument is for empowered citizenship.
"More and more of our national and international questions are religiously inflected," he says, citing President Bush's speeches laden with biblical references and the furor when the first Muslim member of Congress chose to be sworn in with his right hand on Thomas Jefferson's Quran.
"If you think Sunni and Shia are the same because they're both Muslim, and you've been told Islam is about peace, you won't understand what's happening in Iraq. If you get into an argument about gay rights or capital punishment and someone claims to quote the Bible or the Quran, do you know it's so?
"If you want to be involved, you need to know what they're saying. We're doomed if we don't understand what motivates the beliefs and behaviors of the rest of the world. We can't outsource this to demagogues, pundits and preachers with a political agenda."
Scholars and theologians who agree with him say Americans' woeful level of religious illiteracy damages more than democracy.
"You're going to make assumptions about people out of ignorance, and they're going to make assumptions about you," says Philip Goff of the Center for the Study of Religion and American Culture at Indiana University in Indianapolis.
Goff cites a widely circulated claim on the Internet that the Quran foretold American intervention in the Middle East, based on a supposed passage "that simply isn't there. It's an entire argument for war based on religious ignorance."
"We're impoverished by ignorance," says the Rev. Joan Brown Campbell, former general secretary of the National Council of Churches. "You can't draw on the resources of faith if you only have an emotional understanding, not a sense of the texts and teachings."
But if people don't know Sodom and Gomorrah were two cities destroyed for their sinful ways, Campbell blames Sunday schools that "trivialized religious education. If we want people to have serious knowledge, we have to get serious about teaching our own faith."
Prothero's solution is to require middle-schoolers to take a course in world religions and high schoolers to take one on the Bible. Biblical knowledge also should be melded into history and literature courses where relevant. He wants all college undergrads to take at least one course in religious studies.
He calls for time-pressed adults to sample holy books and history texts. His book includes a 90-page dictionary of key words and concepts from Abraham to Zen. There's also a 15-question quiz — which his students fail every year.
But it's the controversial, though constitutional, push into schools that draws the most attention.
In theory, everyone favors children knowing more. The National Education Association handbook says religious instruction "in doctrines and practices belongs at home or religious institutions," while schools should teach world religions' history, heritage, diversity and influence.
Only 8% of public high schools offer an elective Bible course, according to a study in 2005 by the Bible Literacy Project, which promotes academic Bible study in public schools. The project is supported by Freedom Forum's First Amendment Center, a Washington, D.C., non-profit that promotes free speech.
The study surveyed 1,000 high schoolers and found that just 36% know Ramadan is the Islamic holy month; 17% said it was the Jewish day of atonement.
Goff says schools are not wholly to blame for religious illiteracy. "There are simply more groups, more players. Students didn't know Ramadan any better in 1965, but now there are as many Muslims as Jews in America. It's more important to know who's who."
Also today, "there is more emphasis on religious experience as a mark of true religion and less emphasis on doctrine and knowledge of the faith."
Still, it's the widely misunderstood 1963 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that may have been the tipping point It removed devotional Bible reading from the schools but spelled out that it should not have been removed from literature and history.
"The decision clearly states you can't be educated without it, but it scared schools so much they dropped it all," Goff says.
"Schools are terrified of this," says Joy Hakim, author of several U.S. history textbooks. She's in her 70s but remembers well as a Jewish child how she felt like an outsider in schools that pushed Christianity in the curriculum.
But she says the backlash went too far. "Now, you can't use biblical characters or narrative in anything. We've stopped teaching stories. We teach facts, and the characters are lost."
Religion, like the arts, has become an afterthought in an education climate driven by "the fixation on literacy and numeracy — math and reading," says Bob Schaeffer of the National Center for Fair & Open Testing, a group critical of the standards-based education movement. "If the ways schools, teachers, principals and superintendents are judged all depend on math and reading scores, that's what you're going to teach," he says.
Still, it's a tough tightrope to walk between those who say the Bible can be just another book, albeit a valuable one, and those who say it is inherently devotional.
The First Amendment Center also published a guide to "The Bible and the Public Schools," which praised a ninth-grade world religions course in Modesto, Calif., and cited a study finding students were able to learn about other faiths without altering their own beliefs. But it also said the class may not be easily replicated and required knowledgeable, unbiased teachers.
Leland Ryken, an English professor at evangelical Wheaton College in Wheaton, Ill., tested a 2006 textbook, The Bible and Its Influence, underwritten by the Bible Literacy Project. Ryken favors adding classes in the Bible and literature and social studies. But he cautions, "Religious literacy and world religions are not the same as the Bible as literature. It's a much more loaded subject, and I really question if high school students can get much knowledge beyond a sense of the importance of religion."
The Bible and Its Influence has been blasted by conservative Christians such as the Rev. John Hagee, pastor of the 18,000-member Cornerstone Church in San Antonio. Hagee calls it "a masterful work of deception, distortion and outright falsehoods" planting "concepts in the minds of children which are contrary to biblical teaching."
Hagee wrote to the Alabama legislature opposing adoption of the text, citing points such as discussion questions that could lead children away from a belief in God. Example Asking students to ponder if Adam and Eve got "a fair deal as described in Genesis" would plant the seed that "since God is the author of the deal, God is unfair."
Hagee prefers the Bible itself as a textbook for Bible classes, used with a curriculum created by a group of conservative evangelicals, the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools, based in Greensboro, N.C. The council says its curriculum is being offered in more than 300 schools.
Sheila Weber, a spokeswoman for The Bible Literacy project, says their textbook has been revised in the second printing issued last month with the examples cited by Hagee removed. The teachers' edition was reissued in August. The first printing was approved by numerous Christian scholars and seminaries and is already in use in 82 school districts.
Mark Chancey, professor of religious studies at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, looked last year at how Texas public school districts taught Bible classes. His two studies, sponsored by the Texas Freedom Network, a civil liberties group, found only 25 of more than 1,000 districts offered such a class.
"And 22 of them, including several using the Greensboro group's curriculum, were clearly over the line," teaching Christianity as the norm, and the Bible as inspired by God, says Chancey. One teacher even showed students a proselytizing Power Point titled, "God's road map for your life" that was clearly unconstitutional, he says.
The controversies, costs and competing demands in the schools have prompted many to turn instead to character education.
But classes promoting pluralism and tolerance fail on the religious literacy front because they "reduce religion to morality," Prothero says, or they promote a call for universal compassion as if it were the only value that matters.
"We are not all on the same one path to the same one God," he says. "Religions aren't all saying the same thing. That's presumptuous and wrong. They start with different problems, solve the problems in different ways, and they have different goals."
Contributing Greg Toppo
[/quoted584b0b3aa]
aviendha47
26-06-2007 02:57:48
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zwbhAXe5yk
Atheist's nightmare
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HW06Wz_R74
Response
box86rowh
26-06-2007 09:15:27
The second guy is funny looking...
mikedb
26-06-2007 18:09:24
[quote66486368d5="aviendha47"]http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zwbhAXe5yk
Atheist's nightmare
[/quote66486368d5]
Is it wrong that I find this really funny?
[quote66486368d5]
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HW06Wz_R74
Response[/quote66486368d5]
This response is absolutely HILARIOUS!
And I've really tried to refrain from responding, but I must say that I'm pretty disgusted that creationism is beating evolution...
zr2152
26-06-2007 18:24:22
[quotedadc4b3ea9="mikedb"][quotedadc4b3ea9="aviendha47"]http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zwbhAXe5yk
Atheist's nightmare
[/quotedadc4b3ea9]
Is it wrong that I find this really funny?
[quotedadc4b3ea9]
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HW06Wz_R74
Response[/quotedadc4b3ea9]
This response is absolutely HILARIOUS!
And I've really tried to refrain from responding, but I must say that I'm pretty disgusted that creationism is beating evolution...[/quotedadc4b3ea9]
Just like J4320, im going back and looking at some of the post ive made and realizing how dumb they were.
jordan90
29-06-2007 07:55:58
[quotef6e68bd796="J4320"]All Creationists please take 5 minutes out of your day and read this article ---
click[=http//www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa003&articleID=000D4FEC-7D5B-1D07-8E49809EC588EEDF&pageNumber=2&catID=2]click
or
easier to read version[=http//www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa003&articleID=000D4FEC-7D5B-1D07-8E49809EC588EEDF&pageNumber=2&catID=2]easier to read version[/quotef6e68bd796]
I never saw this post way back, but I gotta bring it up. This article is full of the usual evolutionist round-a-bout arguments. Here's a quote from the article
[quotef6e68bd796]The origin of life remains very much a mystery, but biochemists have learned about how primitive nucleic acids, amino acids and other building blocks of life could have formed and organized themselves into self-replicating, self-sustaining units, laying the foundation for cellular biochemistry. Astrochemical analyses hint that quantities of these compounds might have originated in space and fallen to earth in comets, a scenario that may solve the problem of how those constituents arose under the conditions that prevailed when our planet was young. [/quotef6e68bd796]
Biochemists have NEVER learned about how primitive nucleic acids, amino acids, and other building blocks of life could have formed to self-sustaining unites, because those experiments were done in CONTROLLED environments. I can tell you right now that after a big bang, nothing would be controlled. There was no oxygen (as well as many other ingredients needed for life) when those experiments were performed, and guess what we need to live.
This is what evolutionists and creationists are always trying to do, prove something that cannot be proved. Evolutionists base their stuff on false science, while creationists tend to just believe, because neither can be proved. You show me one solid piece of evidence (documented, not some rambling post) that shows evolution is true. You can't. So tell me, nytrate, why shouldn't creationism be taught in public schools when you cannot prove evolution or creation? Why can't we just leave it up to the students to decide instead of teaching them that evolution is fact by using fake science (
http//video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3954156199145885147[]http//video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3954156199145885147)?
missdee212
29-06-2007 08:39:04
I say a bit of both because, Of you go the evolution route you still have the question of "Well, how did that get here?" Then the whole creation thing I think some of it is B.S. there are so many parts of the bible removed that it's rediculous. But I'm a christian and I love science so I believe in both. which means I have a few christian beliefs and a few athiest tendecies.
KnightTrader
29-06-2007 09:25:15
Creationism has NO basis. Anything we don't understand about evolution is NOT an argument for CREATIONISM. There is a lot of data and research supporting Evolution, but there are areas that are gray, and we don't know the answers to. Those areas are not an argument FOR creationism. Evolution is Science, there is NO data backing up CREATIONISM at all. This sort of "God of the gaps" argument is childish. [God of the Gaps = anything we don't understand, God created it. 200 years ago we didn't understand lightning and we said god created it, and after we learned about it we throw god in another gap that we don't fully understand]. Even the late Pope John Paul accepted evolution. Theologists also agree with evolution. People who study religion accept evolution. There is no debate on this issue, amongst scientists of theologists, debate only exists amongst fundamentalists, those who take the bible literally word for word. Who believe the Grand Canyon was formed by Noah's flood, and the earth is only 6000 Years old.
MyungChunHa
29-06-2007 09:46:17
[quote954a187853="jordan90"]Biochemists have NEVER learned about how primitive nucleic acids, amino acids, and other building blocks of life could have formed to self-sustaining unites, because those experiments were done in CONTROLLED environments. I can tell you right now that after a big bang, nothing would be controlled. There was no oxygen (as well as many other ingredients needed for life) when those experiments were performed, and guess what we need to live.
This is what evolutionists and creationists are always trying to do, prove something that cannot be proved. Evolutionists base their stuff on false science, while creationists tend to just believe, because neither can be proved. You show me one solid piece of evidence (documented, not some rambling post) that shows evolution is true. You can't. So tell me, nytrate, why shouldn't creationism be taught in public schools when you cannot prove evolution or creation? Why can't we just leave it up to the students to decide instead of teaching them that evolution is fact by using fake science (
http//video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3954156199145885147[]http//video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3954156199145885147)?[/quote954a187853]
While I agree with a lot of what you say, [/size954a187853]Darwin did fantastic research regarding evolution and it is pretty much an accepted fact that evolution exists.
Creationism and Evolution can thrive together, I don't support one much more than the other, although if I had to pick just one it would be evolutionism, by the fact that a being could have put the primitive things here and they would have evolved by themselves.
I'm not going to waste my time listing facts of evolution, but they are out there, and if you go to your library I'm sure there are plenty of scientific reports with solid evidence.
liEdit
I'm going to edit this, because I've read your post again, and I dont' agree with most of what you say.
KeithA
29-06-2007 09:46:28
[quote045c3a728e="jordan90"]This is what evolutionists and creationists are always trying to do, prove something that cannot be proved. Evolutionists base their stuff on false science, while creationists tend to just believe, because neither can be proved. You show me one solid piece of evidence (documented, not some rambling post) that shows evolution is true. You can't. So tell me, nytrate, why shouldn't creationism be taught in public schools when you cannot prove evolution or creation? Why can't we just leave it up to the students to decide instead of teaching them that evolution is fact by using fake science (
http//video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3954156199145885147[]http//video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3954156199145885147)?[/quote045c3a728e]
The theory of evolution (and every evolutionist will concede that it is indeed a theory) is based on the careful study of a multitude of available facts. It is taught in science classes because it was was formed in accordance with the scientific method, which develops rational hypotheses and tests them against evidence. The theory of evolution has its critics even among scientists, but it is by far the most illuminating (and beautiful) explanation for how life as we know it came to be.
Creationism (intelligent design) is a theory based on a literal interpretation of a book that is thousands of years old. It is not supported by any evidence outside of that book, and its strongest argument against evolution is that evolution "has not been proved."
One theory arose from critical thinking based on observable facts and evidence, and will change (and has changed) as new facts become available. The other depends on the subversion of critical thought and a conscious rejection of facts (both old and new).
So why do some of us feel very strongly about which is taught to students in science classes, and why do we shudder at the thought of "leaving it to students to decide"?
Because teaching the "theory" of creationism alongside the theory of evolution asks the student to suspend his intelligence for the sake of sensitivity to religious beliefs and to ignore everything else he has been taught about science for the sake of including "a different perspective." The creationist believes that because his wholly unsubstantiated theory cannot be disproved, it is just as valid as the theory with a virtual mountain of evidence behind it. If his were not a "religious" theory, it would be summarily rejected in any serious scientific forum. Unfortunately, our judgment in many cases remains clouded by an inexplicable sensitivity to any behavior or claim labeled "religious."
aviendha47
29-06-2007 14:17:48
Creationism shouldn't be taught in school because of what KeithA just said that I agree with but also God's world made in 7 days theory isn't the only religious theory out there. It would be an interesting theology class maybe to explore different faiths and cultures individual creation stories but to actually teach Creationism in a classroom setting is irresponsible.
jordan90
29-06-2007 21:00:06
[quote3608e59afb]Creationism (intelligent design) is a theory based on a literal interpretation of a book that is thousands of years old. It is not supported by any evidence outside of that book, and its strongest argument against evolution is that evolution "has not been proved."
[/quote3608e59afb]
Here's what you do. Go to your local Barnes and Nobles (or whatever book store is close to you, find a [i3608e59afb]New Defender's Study Bible[/i3608e59afb], look in the back where there is information about the Bible, and go the the "Sciences and the Bible" section. I can tell you right now that there is science, right in the Bible, that was unknown until thousands of years later. And don't deny that until you have actually done your research. So many people have a quick mouth without facts to back it up.
Check out this web page. It has many of the exact arguments that you guys are bringing up -
http//www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2007/06/29/feedback-childish-belief[]http//www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2007/06/29/feedback-childish-belief
And here's another really interesting article you should check out -
http//www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v22/i1/creation.asp[]http//www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v22/i1/creation.asp
[quote3608e59afb]Creationism (intelligent design) is a theory based on a literal interpretation of a book that is thousands of years old. It is not supported by any evidence outside of that book, and its strongest argument against evolution is that evolution "has not been proved." [/quote3608e59afb]
Here's where you're wrong. Creationism has just as much evidence as evolution (see article above). The difference is, we have a Book that backs it up. Evolution doesn't even have that.
zdub08
29-06-2007 21:54:07
[quote81b7be2dd3="jordan90"][quote81b7be2dd3]Creationism (intelligent design) is a theory based on a literal interpretation of a book that is thousands of years old. It is not supported by any evidence outside of that book, and its strongest argument against evolution is that evolution "has not been proved."
[/quote81b7be2dd3]
Here's what you do. Go to your local Barnes and Nobles (or whatever book store is close to you, find a [i81b7be2dd3]New Defender's Study Bible[/i81b7be2dd3], look in the back where there is information about the Bible, and go the the "Sciences and the Bible" section. I can tell you right now that there is science, right in the Bible, that was unknown until thousands of years later. And don't deny that until you have actually done your research. So many people have a quick mouth without facts to back it up.
Check out this web page. It has many of the exact arguments that you guys are bringing up -
http//www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2007/06/29/feedback-childish-belief[]http//www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2007/06/29/feedback-childish-belief
And here's another really interesting article you should check out -
http//www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v22/i1/creation.asp[]http//www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v22/i1/creation.asp
[quote81b7be2dd3]Creationism (intelligent design) is a theory based on a literal interpretation of a book that is thousands of years old. It is not supported by any evidence outside of that book, and its strongest argument against evolution is that evolution "has not been proved." [/quote81b7be2dd3]
Here's where you're wrong. Creationism has just as much evidence as evolution (see article above). The difference is, we have a Book that backs it up. Evolution doesn't even have that.[/quote81b7be2dd3]
I read both of those articles, and I would first like to comment on theological writing in general. I go to a Catholic high school, so I'm constantly reading this kind of shit. That might sound harsh, but that's really all this stuff is. None of this writing ever flows. The writer carefully builds up his/her beautiful deductive argument, but when you realize all the premises rely on the Bible it becomes a big ugly circular argument. Personally, I can't believe something just because it's old, and most people that believe in evolution won't believe the Bible either. It always comes down to faith, and without tangible (as stated, an old book doesn't count) evidence, you're not changing anyone's mind Jordan.
Saying that creationism has just as much evidence as evolution is outrageous. The writer of that article says everything in the Bible must be true, because God is not capable of lying (and we know that from where else than...). So if we prove one thing in the Bible is false, does that mean everything in it is highly questionable? For example, we all know the earth is older than 6,000 years old. Doesn't that mean the Bible lies, which shouldn't be possible, because it is inspired by God?
Another big problem I have with the Bible is that it is the only piece of writing that talks about Jesus' miraculous acts. I know that he existed because he is mentioned in other pieces of writing from that time... but how could a writer talk about Jesus without talking about all the crazy shit he did?
Remember, the original question in the second link you posted is something like "Without the Bible, how can I convince people to believe in Creationism?" Did anyone have a problem with how much the Bible is mentioned in his rather short response.
So I ask the same question to you, what evidence is there that God created the Earth in a week?
MyungChunHa
30-06-2007 07:12:10
I think it's funny that a lot of people backing up creationism has changed their mind in a little under a year...more mature I guess?
TFOAF
30-06-2007 07:20:10
[quoted91702b0f9="MyungChunHa"]I think it's funny that a lot of people backing up creationism has changed their mind in a little under a year...more mature I guess?[/quoted91702b0f9]
I'm still sticking with Creationism. Just think about this one question -- where did the first [thing] come from?
jordan90
30-06-2007 07:55:17
[quote6c13f46dc7="MyungChunHa"]I think it's funny that a lot of people backing up creationism has changed their mind in a little under a year...more mature I guess?[/quote6c13f46dc7]
Actually I think you're referring to one or two people. Not "a lot."
[quote6c13f46dc7]we all know the earth is older than 6,000 years old. Doesn't that mean the Bible lies, which shouldn't be possible, because it is inspired by God?
[/quote6c13f46dc7]
I agree. I believe the earth is more than 6,000 years old, but no more than probably 12,000. Here's another great article showing how current dating methods are inaccurate -
http//www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2007/05/11/feedback-devoid-of-evidence[]http//www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2007/05/11/feedback-devoid-of-evidence. And the Bible doesn't say that the earth is 6,000 years old, it gives a broad time line since the creation of Adam, which isn't real specific.
And I'm still waiting to see how life came to be according to evolution, because no one has talked about the fact that I brought up ten posts ago - evolutionists have never proven that life can create and sustain itself.
And how about all of your "missing links" that you've never found? You know why you can't find them? Because they don't exist. That's why evolution is still struggling against every other belief, because there's no solid evidence for it. I never understand how evolutionists say that there's all this evidence, when I've never seen any solid evidence. If you have it, I'd really like to see it. I forgot which organization does this, but they are offering hundreds of thousands of dollars to the first person who can give them this evidence. And the offer is still standing. So until you can provide this information, please stop telling me about how evolution has been proved or has a ton of proof, and that there's no question that it's true.
jordan90
30-06-2007 08:03:36
[quote01e82f046f]Another big problem I have with the Bible is that it is the only piece of writing that talks about Jesus' miraculous acts. I know that he existed because he is mentioned in other pieces of writing from that time... but how could a writer talk about Jesus without talking about all the crazy shit he did?
[/quote01e82f046f]
And here's another time when you're wrong. The Bible isn't one Book. The Bible is a compilation of many books from thousands of years ago. There's a lot of books that weren't even put into the Bible. So again, check your facts.
[quote01e82f046f]So I ask the same question to you, what evidence is there that God created the Earth in a week?[/quote01e82f046f]
What evidence is there that God didn't? Take a look at your computer. Can you tell me how many seconds it took to make?
Quick question, do you believe that a world wide flood did occur on this earth?
J4320
01-07-2007 13:39:55
[quoteb7852f921f="jordan90"]What evidence is there that God didn't? Take a look at your computer. Can you tell me how many seconds it took to make?[/quoteb7852f921f]
So just because it's complex then that means that something must have created it?
[quoteb7852f921f="jordan90"]Quick question, do you believe that a world wide flood did occur on this earth?[/quoteb7852f921f]
Not really. Do you know of something that proves that it happened?
jordan90
01-07-2007 19:44:48
[quote731b3c7888]So just because it's complex then that means that something must have created it?[/quote731b3c7888]
I think you're finally catching on ) because as of the first human (whether you're an evolutionist or creationist), that's how things have been, and it hasn't been proven otherwise yet. I believe it's always been that way in our universe.
[quote731b3c7888]Another big problem I have with the Bible is that it is the only piece of writing that talks about Jesus' miraculous acts. I know that he existed because he is mentioned in other pieces of writing from that time... but how could a writer talk about Jesus without talking about all the crazy shit he did? [/quote731b3c7888]
Actually this is why I was asking if some of you believe in the flood or not, because his excuse for not believing Jesus' miraculous acts is because they are mentioned only in "one" Book. If you read my previous post, you would realize the Bible is a compilation of many books. But anyway, my point is that stories of a world wide flood existed in many great (and even not so great) ancient civilizations (
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deluge_%28mythology%29[]http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deluge_%28mythology%29).
zdub08
01-07-2007 20:07:57
Since you didn't answer me, I'll ask you again. What evidence do you have that the earth was created in a week by God? (excluding the Bible, of course)
jordan90
01-07-2007 21:50:33
[quote529f1094f9="zdub08"]Since you didn't answer me, I'll ask you again. What evidence do you have that the earth was created in a week by God? (excluding the Bible, of course)[/quote529f1094f9]
None. But if you read my other posts you would understand the Bible is not just one Book (as I think I've stated 3 times now). But to more thoroughly answer your question, God, according to the Bible, created a mature earth, as mentioned earlier several times in this thread.
The only reason evolutionists ask this question is because they already know the answer, they just want to make creationists appear stupid (I know you're probably laughing right now, zdub -P ).
Now how about you answer a couple of my questions in my post five above this one so you can appear as stupid as me shrug
wasabe
01-07-2007 23:15:58
[quotefaf8540fbb="jordan90"]And how about all of your "missing links" that you've never found? You know why you can't find them? Because they don't exist. That's why evolution is still struggling against every other belief, because there's no solid evidence for it. I never understand how evolutionists say that there's all this evidence, when I've never seen any solid evidence. If you have it, I'd really like to see it. I forgot which organization does this, but they are offering hundreds of thousands of dollars to the first person who can give them this evidence. And the offer is still standing. So until you can provide this information, please stop telling me about how evolution has been proved or has a ton of proof, and that there's no question that it's true.[/quotefaf8540fbb]
The idea of a "missing link" is something of a misnomer every new transitional fossil (of which there are plenty) is what most people would think of as a "missing link," ie an evolutionary link between one (earlier) species and another.
To say that there would simply be one overarching "missing link" example that perfectly encapsulates the midpoint between one species and another is quite clearly a reductio ad absurdum, as you have to then find a missing link for the missing link (and then a missing link for that) and so on. Zeno's paradox in fossil form.
Anyway, I was going to say more, but my file just finished downloading, so instead I'll just give Wikipedia's
list of transitional fossils[=http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils]list of transitional fossils.
li Fish to Amphibians
o Tiktaalik roseae
o Osteolepis
o Eusthenopteron
o Panderichthys
o Elginerpeton
o Obruchevichthys
o Hynerpeton
o Tulerpeton
o Acanthostega
o Ichthyostega
o Pederpes finneyae
o Eryops
li Amphibians to Amniotes (early reptiles)
o Proterogyrinus
o Limnoscelis
o Tseajaia
o Solenodonsaurus
o Hylonomus
o Paleothyris
li Synapsid (mammal-like "reptiles") to mammals
o Protoclepsydrops
o Clepsydrops
o Dimetrodon
o Procynosuchus
o Thrinaxodon
o Yanoconodon
li Diapsid reptiles to birds
o Yixianosaurus
o Pedopenna
o Archeopteryx
o Changchengornis
o Confuciusornis
o Ichthyornis
li Evolution of whales
o Pakicetus
o Ambulocetus
o Kutchicetus
o Artiocetus
o Dorudon
o Basilosaurus
o Eurhinodelphis
o Mammalodon
li Evolution of the horse
o Hyracotherium
o Mesohippus
o Parahippus
o Merychippus
o Pliohippus
o Equus
li Non-human apes to modern humans
o Pierolapithecus catalaunicus
o Ardipithecus
o Australopithecus
o Homo rudolfensis
o Homo habilis
o Homo erectus
zdub08
01-07-2007 23:55:48
[quote37cf572168="jordan90"][quote37cf572168="zdub08"]Since you didn't answer me, I'll ask you again. What evidence do you have that the earth was created in a week by God? (excluding the Bible, of course)[/quote37cf572168]
None. But if you read my other posts you would understand the Bible is not just one Book (as I think I've stated 3 times now). But to more thoroughly answer your question, God, according to the Bible, created a mature earth, as mentioned earlier several times in this thread.
The only reason evolutionists ask this question is because they already know the answer, they just want to make creationists appear stupid (I know you're probably laughing right now, zdub -P ).
Now how about you answer a couple of my questions in my post five above this one so you can appear as stupid as me shrug[/quote37cf572168]
I'm not laughing at you, it's just weird knowing that some people think God created the Earth and everything on it in days. It's almost selfish, in a way. I believe in some sort of higher power, but you can't just pick one very specific creation story and think it's better than all the others. It's funny that I even said "pick" because almost everyone's religion comes from their parents. It's scary... being baptized before you have any choice and being essentially brainwashed from a very young age.
I guess I'll attempt to respond to some of your questions and comments. You're right, scientists haven't proven that life can create and sustain itself. Then again, not a single thing in science is proven. Everything you think you know about the universe comes from laws and theories. I guess we are more certain about something like gravity, but evolution is the best scientific explanation we have. One things for sure, it makes a hell of a lot more sense than the Earth being magically created by God. I guess, by your reasoning, because evolution may not be a perfect, proven theory, God must have made Earth.
I apologize for my mistake about the Bible, but there has to be more writing from that time. Is there anything outside of the Bible that talks about Jesus' miracles? (I'm not trying to be an ass with a rhetorical question; I have no idea, but it seems like these writings would be mentioned if they exist)
Also, asking "what evidence is there that God didn't?" isn't very persuasive... is there any evidence that life hasn't evolved?
J4320
02-07-2007 00:51:29
[quote8076d24cd3="jordan90"][quote8076d24cd3]So just because it's complex then that means that something must have created it?[/quote8076d24cd3]
I think you're finally catching on ) because as of the first human (whether you're an evolutionist or creationist), that's how things have been, and it hasn't been proven otherwise yet. I believe it's always been that way in our universe.
[quote8076d24cd3]Another big problem I have with the Bible is that it is the only piece of writing that talks about Jesus' miraculous acts. I know that he existed because he is mentioned in other pieces of writing from that time... but how could a writer talk about Jesus without talking about all the crazy shit he did? [/quote8076d24cd3]
Actually this is why I was asking if some of you believe in the flood or not, because his excuse for not believing Jesus' miraculous acts is because they are mentioned only in "one" Book. If you read my previous post, you would realize the Bible is a compilation of many books. But anyway, my point is that stories of a world wide flood existed in many great (and even not so great) ancient civilizations (
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deluge_%28mythology%29[]http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deluge_%28mythology%29).[/quote8076d24cd3]
My question was rhetorical. It's foolish to assume that just because we don't know how something works it must have been made by a creator or higher being. It sounds more to me like replacing logic with a shot in the dark. Sure, it's a possibility, but just because something is complex it doesn't mean that it had to have a creator. There have always been mysteries that man has tried to explain by saying that a higher being or a creator was responsible - and many of them can be easily explained because of scientific research (e.g. the man in the sky hammering lightning bolts - ilanbg mentioned this earlier). This kind of reminds me of how creationists bring up the human eye. "It's so complex that it must have had a human creator." The origin of the eye didn't have to start out complex; but rather with simple light sensitive cells.
Oh and about the flood stories - I'm not really surprised that there are multiple flood stories. Floods occur all over the earth and it doesn't surprise me that there are multiple civilizations with folklore about floods. There are also many stories about a savior sacrificing himself for mankind in many stories from ancient civilizations.
[quote8076d24cd3="jordan90"][quote8076d24cd3]Creationism (intelligent design) is a theory based on a literal interpretation of a book that is thousands of years old. It is not supported by any evidence outside of that book, and its strongest argument against evolution is that evolution "has not been proved."
[/quote8076d24cd3]
Here's what you do. Go to your local Barnes and Nobles (or whatever book store is close to you, find a [i8076d24cd3]New Defender's Study Bible[/i8076d24cd3], look in the back where there is information about the Bible, and go the the "Sciences and the Bible" section. I can tell you right now that there is science, right in the Bible, that was unknown until thousands of years later. And don't deny that until you have actually done your research. So many people have a quick mouth without facts to back it up.
Check out this web page. It has many of the exact arguments that you guys are bringing up -
http//www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2007/06/29/feedback-childish-belief[]http//www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2007/06/29/feedback-childish-belief
And here's another really interesting article you should check out -
http//www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v22/i1/creation.asp[]http//www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v22/i1/creation.asp
[quote8076d24cd3]Creationism (intelligent design) is a theory based on a literal interpretation of a book that is thousands of years old. It is not supported by any evidence outside of that book, and its strongest argument against evolution is that evolution "has not been proved." [/quote8076d24cd3]
[b8076d24cd3]Here's where you're wrong. Creationism has just as much evidence as evolution (see article above). The difference is, we have a Book that backs it up. Evolution doesn't even have that.[/b8076d24cd3][/quote8076d24cd3]
Yeah, it has a mountain of scientific evidence as opposed to a book written by a bunch of Bronze Age men in tents.
It doesn't have just as much evidence as evolution. Try finding a scholarly, factually correct, peer reviewed scientific journal on creationism - good luck. If creationism had just as much evidence as creationism you'd think it'd be more popular amongst modern scientists. The only people who support creationism are Christian scientists who desperately attempt to poke holes in evolution and find "evidence" that fits into the wild stories that the Bible has to tell. Oh and AnswersInGenesis is the organization that is behind the new opening of the creationism museum which has plenty of absurdities and factually incorrect things in it.
zr2152
02-07-2007 12:02:44
[quote035c2393cc="J4320"][quote035c2393cc="jordan90"][quote035c2393cc]So just because it's complex then that means that something must have created it?[/quote035c2393cc]
I think you're finally catching on ) because as of the first human (whether you're an evolutionist or creationist), that's how things have been, and it hasn't been proven otherwise yet. I believe it's always been that way in our universe.
[quote035c2393cc]Another big problem I have with the Bible is that it is the only piece of writing that talks about Jesus' miraculous acts. I know that he existed because he is mentioned in other pieces of writing from that time... but how could a writer talk about Jesus without talking about all the crazy shit he did? [/quote035c2393cc]
Actually this is why I was asking if some of you believe in the flood or not, because his excuse for not believing Jesus' miraculous acts is because they are mentioned only in "one" Book. If you read my previous post, you would realize the Bible is a compilation of many books. But anyway, my point is that stories of a world wide flood existed in many great (and even not so great) ancient civilizations (
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deluge_%28mythology%29[]http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deluge_%28mythology%29).[/quote035c2393cc]
My question was rhetorical. It's foolish to assume that just because we don't know how something works it must have been made by a creator or higher being. It sounds more to me like replacing logic with a shot in the dark. Sure, it's a possibility, but just because something is complex it doesn't mean that it had to have a creator. There have always been mysteries that man has tried to explain by saying that a higher being or a creator was responsible - and many of them can be easily explained because of scientific research (e.g. the man in the sky hammering lightning bolts - ilanbg mentioned this earlier). This kind of reminds me of how creationists bring up the human eye. "It's so complex that it must have had a human creator." The origin of the eye didn't have to start out complex; but rather with simple light sensitive cells.
Oh and about the flood stories - I'm not really surprised that there are multiple flood stories. Floods occur all over the earth and it doesn't surprise me that there are multiple civilizations with folklore about floods. There are also many stories about a savior sacrificing himself for mankind in many stories from ancient civilizations.
[quote035c2393cc="jordan90"][quote035c2393cc]Creationism (intelligent design) is a theory based on a literal interpretation of a book that is thousands of years old. It is not supported by any evidence outside of that book, and its strongest argument against evolution is that evolution "has not been proved."
[/quote035c2393cc]
Here's what you do. Go to your local Barnes and Nobles (or whatever book store is close to you, find a [i035c2393cc]New Defender's Study Bible[/i035c2393cc], look in the back where there is information about the Bible, and go the the "Sciences and the Bible" section. I can tell you right now that there is science, right in the Bible, that was unknown until thousands of years later. And don't deny that until you have actually done your research. So many people have a quick mouth without facts to back it up.
Check out this web page. It has many of the exact arguments that you guys are bringing up -
http//www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2007/06/29/feedback-childish-belief[]http//www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2007/06/29/feedback-childish-belief
And here's another really interesting article you should check out -
http//www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v22/i1/creation.asp[]http//www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v22/i1/creation.asp
[quote035c2393cc]Creationism (intelligent design) is a theory based on a literal interpretation of a book that is thousands of years old. It is not supported by any evidence outside of that book, and its strongest argument against evolution is that evolution "has not been proved." [/quote035c2393cc]
[b035c2393cc]Here's where you're wrong. Creationism has just as much evidence as evolution (see article above). The difference is, we have a Book that backs it up. Evolution doesn't even have that.[/b035c2393cc][/quote035c2393cc]
Yeah, it has a mountain of scientific evidence as opposed to a book written by a bunch of Bronze Age men in tents.
It doesn't have just as much evidence as evolution. Try finding a scholarly, factually correct, peer reviewed scientific journal on creationism - good luck. [b035c2393cc]If creationism had just as much evidence as creationism you'd think it'd be more popular amongst modern scientists. The only people who support creationism are Christian scientists who desperately attempt to poke holes in evolution and find "evidence" that fits into the wild stories that the Bible has to tell.[/b035c2393cc] Oh and AnswersInGenesis is the organization that is behind the new opening of the creationism museum which has plenty of absurdities and factually incorrect things in it.[/quote035c2393cc]
I wasnt reading throught the entire thread but this just caught my eye so im going to say something about it.
As much as I hate to say it now, I agree with a lot of things now than I did before (probably because I swallowed my pride and read a few books).
I have to disagree with you on this one though J. It is not merely Christian Scientist who believe in creationism (well maybe the word creationism yes) but there are many many scientist who are not necessarily Christians that do believe that there was something called theistic evolution (a term not widely known by many ousiders of the scientific world). I was reading about this in a book that I recently picked up called "The Language of God" which has totally changed my view on creationism and evolution.
Some of you advant 7 dayers might want to pick this book up quickly before you make more of a fool of yourself here on this forum like I was doing earlier. Its really silly when Christians like ourselved try to fight science with the bible (oh and that was also mentioned in the book) because you will lose the battle everytime.
PLease PLease get the book and read it, or just stop posting.
There is also an interesting section on Adam and Eve and how maybe that passage in Genesis can be interpreted Differently...but youll have to read it for youself.
J4320
02-07-2007 14:30:31
[quotee8301d73a8="zr2152"][quotee8301d73a8="J4320"][quotee8301d73a8="jordan90"][quotee8301d73a8]So just because it's complex then that means that something must have created it?[/quotee8301d73a8]
I think you're finally catching on ) because as of the first human (whether you're an evolutionist or creationist), that's how things have been, and it hasn't been proven otherwise yet. I believe it's always been that way in our universe.
[quotee8301d73a8]Another big problem I have with the Bible is that it is the only piece of writing that talks about Jesus' miraculous acts. I know that he existed because he is mentioned in other pieces of writing from that time... but how could a writer talk about Jesus without talking about all the crazy shit he did? [/quotee8301d73a8]
Actually this is why I was asking if some of you believe in the flood or not, because his excuse for not believing Jesus' miraculous acts is because they are mentioned only in "one" Book. If you read my previous post, you would realize the Bible is a compilation of many books. But anyway, my point is that stories of a world wide flood existed in many great (and even not so great) ancient civilizations (
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deluge_%28mythology%29[]http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deluge_%28mythology%29).[/quotee8301d73a8]
My question was rhetorical. It's foolish to assume that just because we don't know how something works it must have been made by a creator or higher being. It sounds more to me like replacing logic with a shot in the dark. Sure, it's a possibility, but just because something is complex it doesn't mean that it had to have a creator. There have always been mysteries that man has tried to explain by saying that a higher being or a creator was responsible - and many of them can be easily explained because of scientific research (e.g. the man in the sky hammering lightning bolts - ilanbg mentioned this earlier). This kind of reminds me of how creationists bring up the human eye. "It's so complex that it must have had a human creator." The origin of the eye didn't have to start out complex; but rather with simple light sensitive cells.
Oh and about the flood stories - I'm not really surprised that there are multiple flood stories. Floods occur all over the earth and it doesn't surprise me that there are multiple civilizations with folklore about floods. There are also many stories about a savior sacrificing himself for mankind in many stories from ancient civilizations.
[quotee8301d73a8="jordan90"][quotee8301d73a8]Creationism (intelligent design) is a theory based on a literal interpretation of a book that is thousands of years old. It is not supported by any evidence outside of that book, and its strongest argument against evolution is that evolution "has not been proved."
[/quotee8301d73a8]
Here's what you do. Go to your local Barnes and Nobles (or whatever book store is close to you, find a [ie8301d73a8]New Defender's Study Bible[/ie8301d73a8], look in the back where there is information about the Bible, and go the the "Sciences and the Bible" section. I can tell you right now that there is science, right in the Bible, that was unknown until thousands of years later. And don't deny that until you have actually done your research. So many people have a quick mouth without facts to back it up.
Check out this web page. It has many of the exact arguments that you guys are bringing up -
http//www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2007/06/29/feedback-childish-belief[]http//www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2007/06/29/feedback-childish-belief
And here's another really interesting article you should check out -
http//www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v22/i1/creation.asp[]http//www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v22/i1/creation.asp
[quotee8301d73a8]Creationism (intelligent design) is a theory based on a literal interpretation of a book that is thousands of years old. It is not supported by any evidence outside of that book, and its strongest argument against evolution is that evolution "has not been proved." [/quotee8301d73a8]
[be8301d73a8]Here's where you're wrong. Creationism has just as much evidence as evolution (see article above). The difference is, we have a Book that backs it up. Evolution doesn't even have that.[/be8301d73a8][/quotee8301d73a8]
Yeah, it has a mountain of scientific evidence as opposed to a book written by a bunch of Bronze Age men in tents.
It doesn't have just as much evidence as evolution. Try finding a scholarly, factually correct, peer reviewed scientific journal on creationism - good luck. [be8301d73a8]If creationism had just as much evidence as creationism you'd think it'd be more popular amongst modern scientists. The only people who support creationism are Christian scientists who desperately attempt to poke holes in evolution and find "evidence" that fits into the wild stories that the Bible has to tell.[/be8301d73a8] Oh and AnswersInGenesis is the organization that is behind the new opening of the creationism museum which has plenty of absurdities and factually incorrect things in it.[/quotee8301d73a8]
I wasnt reading throught the entire thread but this just caught my eye so im going to say something about it.
As much as I hate to say it now, I agree with a lot of things now than I did before (probably because I swallowed my pride and read a few books).
I have to disagree with you on this one though J. It is not merely Christian Scientist who believe in creationism (well maybe the word creationism yes) but there are many many scientist who are not necessarily Christians that do believe that there was something called theistic evolution (a term not widely known by many ousiders of the scientific world). I was reading about this in a book that I recently picked up called "The Language of God" which has totally changed my view on creationism and evolution.
Some of you advant 7 dayers might want to pick this book up quickly before you make more of a fool of yourself here on this forum like I was doing earlier. Its really silly when Christians like ourselved try to fight science with the bible (oh and that was also mentioned in the book) because you will lose the battle everytime.
PLease PLease get the book and read it, or just stop posting.
There is also an interesting section on Adam and Eve and how maybe that passage in Genesis can be interpreted Differently...but youll have to read it for youself.[/quotee8301d73a8]
I'm familiar with Theistic Evolution. I wasn't referring to that though. I was referring to Creationist scientists who take everything in the Bible literally. Maybe I should have clarified a little better. Sure there are many Theistic Evolutionists out there which doesn't bother me half as much as some of the literal interpretive Creationist scientists who ignore all of the facts. Still, Theistic Evolution (from the angle of the Judaic Creation in the Bible) seems kind of "pick and choose how to interpret it" to me.
ricopet
02-07-2007 16:23:46
I'd rather believe in God and be wrong than to believe in evolution and be wrong. 8)
KnightTrader
02-07-2007 19:54:16
[quotef73f905334="jordan90"][quotef73f905334]Another big problem I have with the Bible is that it is the only piece of writing that talks about Jesus' miraculous acts. I know that he existed because he is mentioned in other pieces of writing from that time... but how could a writer talk about Jesus without talking about all the crazy shit he did?
[/quotef73f905334]
And here's another time when you're wrong. The Bible isn't one Book. The Bible is a compilation of many books from thousands of years ago. There's a lot of books that weren't even put into the Bible. So again, check your facts.
[quotef73f905334]So I ask the same question to you, what evidence is there that God created the Earth in a week?[/quotef73f905334]
What evidence is there that God didn't? Take a look at your computer. Can you tell me how many seconds it took to make?
Quick question, do you believe that a world wide flood did occur on this earth?[/quotef73f905334]
What evidence is there that I'm not god? Your logic is flawed. Anything science can't prove, you assume GOD DID IT.
gnznroses
02-07-2007 23:21:54
[quotecfa51ff921="ricopet"]I'd rather believe in God and be wrong than to believe in evolution and be wrong. 8)[/quotecfa51ff921]
i'd rather believe what makes sense to me and not in something because i'm afraid of what will happen if i don't.
ShaneK
03-07-2007 00:15:27
I didn't read this entire thread, hell I barely read this last page, but I just had to post in it.
To the guy that talked about the orginization that gives money to someone that would find evidence of evolution. I have heard this "group" brought up in discussions many times, if a scientist was to show them concrete evidence, they would just brush it off like it had no meaning. Go to a zoo, look at some animals, crack a book, look around. Evolution is all around us. Just look at what we see today, I understand it is sort of different, but think about, 10,000 years ago or so, there are tribes. Fast forward some thousands of years, there are cities, fast forward again there is the industrial revolution, now look at today, we have computers that sit in our hands, stuff evolves. It is just the nature of everything, evolution is part of the universes code.
This was most definatly already posted, but if not, watch this http//www.zeitgeistmovie.com/ please. Now I don't know if ALL these guys facts check out, but I know most of the religion part is correct. They also talk about a 9/11 conspiracy, so if you don't buy into that, just skip it and watch about the Federal Reserve, crazy stuff.
Also, if you ever take a religion class, you will find that Christianity is a STRAIGH rip off of other religions, mainly Zoroastrism(which is a rip off of religions before it). I am talking, word for word, script for script, religious jacking.
Christians, the book your blindly follow is REALLY not what you think it is. There were many different types of christians back in the day, and they would fight and kill each other (amazingly christian) until the nicene creed. Which honestly was, a group of people (political) got together, and decided what EVERY christian was going to beleive. Like one god(monotheistic) death/resurection, baptism, and the Virgin Mary(Young Woman mis-translation).
This isnt an attack on Christianity, I strongly feel ALL ORGANIZED religion is nothing but dangerous to society. Please religious people, open your minds, and open your eyes. You should find your own personal god, and worship him how you want. Whatever god is(univrse creator, whether its judeo/christan "god", a huge explosion, or a scientist messing with shit in a lab) the only way to truely find out for you, is to find out for yourself. "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutly", and to think the religious institution is the only institution that isn't corrupt is just... not logical. Don't let an institution with dollar signs in its eyes, think for you.
If I ruffled anyones feathers, or got off topic, I am truely sorry, but I am pretty passionate about this subject, and I hope we can get into some more deep discussion.
Damn, I have to go on...
If you look at all the ancient religions, you will find that they are all centered around humans. Think about living 10,000 years ago, they knew about stars, and the sun, but beyond that, to them, that was it. So of course, their thinking is going to be, God, created them, just them, in the univrse. In reality, Earth isn't special. Go look at a picture the Hubble Teliscope takes. Considering the amount of stars in this galaxy, all having the possibility of an "earth" the odds are enormous there is life out there. But then you take a look at the Deep Field picture, where at least 500 GALAXIES are in ONE picture, then you realize, we aren't special. To honestly beleive there isn't life out there is OBSURD. So let me ask you this, what would happen to religion if alien life is discovered? It most definatly would have an effect on modern religions. What I am trying to say is, with the pictures we see from space, and the exploration they are doing, it just DOESN'T line up with what PEOPLE wrote thousands of years ago.
ShaneK
03-07-2007 00:46:48
[quote7f64034c8f="ilanbg"]The best argument I've been able to create in favor of God is that [b7f64034c8f]God transcends logic and exists in the fourth dimension[/b7f64034c8f], making our attempts to understand His existence moot and fundamentally based on our limited perspectives. But that's based on as little evidence as anything else.[/quote7f64034c8f]
God can't exist in the 4th dimension, thats is where time is! Get your mind blown > http//www.tenthdimension.com/
I love this thread!
If you guys really want to get deep into the origin and unexplained thing, we should talk about group mind, and the mechanical DMT elves.
jordan90
03-07-2007 01:05:36
[quote13ce48e958]The idea of a "missing link" is something of a misnomer every new transitional fossil (of which there are plenty) is what most people would think of as a "missing link," ie an evolutionary link between one (earlier) species and another.
To say that there would simply be one overarching "missing link" example that perfectly encapsulates the midpoint between one species and another is quite clearly a reductio ad absurdum, as you have to then find a missing link for the missing link (and then a missing link for that) and so on. Zeno's paradox in fossil form.
Anyway, I was going to say more, but my file just finished downloading, so instead I'll just give Wikipedia's list of transitional fossils.[/quote13ce48e958]
I had never seen that list before, but I went though it and here's what I think of it. How can you know that the fossils that they found are a transitional fossil, and not (as from a creationist point of view) their own species created by God? That is why you must have a true "missing link" for people to stop doubting evolution. And, if evolution did occur, and we came from an amoeba (or whatever organism...), then why aren't there millions, or at least thousands of those fossils from evolution still around?
[quote13ce48e958]I believe in some sort of higher power, but you can't just pick one very specific creation story and think it's better than all the others.[/quote13ce48e958]
That's good to know.. I thought you were an atheist.
[quote13ce48e958]I guess we are more certain about something like gravity, but evolution is the best scientific explanation we have. One things for sure, it makes a hell of a lot more sense than the Earth being magically created by God. I guess, by your reasoning, because evolution may not be a perfect, proven theory, God must have made Earth. [/quote13ce48e958]
From an evolutionist's perspective, it makes more sense, but not from a creationists, and that's really the difference. Believe me, I have had my times when I doubted God and really wondered if evolution was possible. The next week I started studying cells, dna, etc in my biology class. To me, it seems impossible, no matter how much time is involved, for us, and everything I see right now, to come from nothing without a higher power. That's why I'm a creationist. And evolution is far from a perfect, proven theory.
[quote13ce48e958]I apologize for my mistake about the Bible, but there has to be more writing from that time. Is there anything outside of the Bible that talks about Jesus' miracles? (I'm not trying to be an ass with a rhetorical question; I have no idea, but it seems like these writings would be mentioned if they exist) [/quote13ce48e958]
Yes, actually, which I did not know until several months ago. The History Channel was showing several shows on books that weren't put into the Bible. Actually, some have some very interesting and different ideas than what is in the Bible. The apostle Paul actually refers to one of the books in Acts.
I'm guessing you already know this, but Jesus is actually talked about in the Koran too (including Him rising form the dead) -
http//www.islam-101.org/[]http//www.islam-101.org/ and
http//www.islam-101.org/[]http//www.islam-101.org/http//www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/quran-jesus.html[]http//www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/quran-jesus.html
[quote13ce48e958]
Oh and about the flood stories - I'm not really surprised that there are multiple flood stories. Floods occur all over the earth and it doesn't surprise me that there are multiple civilizations with folklore about floods. There are also many stories about a savior sacrificing himself for mankind in many stories from ancient civilizations. [/quote13ce48e958]
Except the stories in that Wikipedia article are versions just like the one found in the Bible. Check out the Aztec story and you'll see what I mean. I believe that a deluge did happen, and that only one family survived.
[quote13ce48e958]What evidence is there that I'm not god? Your logic is flawed. Anything science can't prove, you assume GOD DID IT.[/quote13ce48e958]
No, umm, actually I believe God created it all.
[quote13ce48e958]
To the guy that talked about the orginization that gives money to someone that would find evidence of evolution. I have heard this "group" brought up in discussions many times, if a scientist was to show them concrete evidence, they would just brush it off like it had no meaning.[/quote13ce48e958]
No, actually they are still offering because that evidence does not exist. If it does, again, I ask that you show it to me.
[quote13ce48e958]
This isnt an attack on Christianity, I strongly feel ALL ORGANIZED religion is nothing but dangerous to society.[/quote13ce48e958]
Where have I heard that before? Oh yeah... [b13ce48e958]Karl Marx[/b13ce48e958] believed that too. And look at all the great things he's done for our world.
Look at the United States. A country founded by God-fearing men. We have all kinds of organized religion, and currently, we're the most powerful nation in the world, and we're pretty darn politically stable too. So what were you saying, Shane?
[quote13ce48e958]In reality, Earth isn't special.[/quote13ce48e958]
Water?
zdub08
03-07-2007 01:19:42
[quote79260c5777="ShaneK"][quote79260c5777="ilanbg"]The best argument I've been able to create in favor of God is that [b79260c5777]God transcends logic and exists in the fourth dimension[/b79260c5777], making our attempts to understand His existence moot and fundamentally based on our limited perspectives. But that's based on as little evidence as anything else.[/quote79260c5777]
God can't exist in the 4th dimension, thats is where time is! Get your mind blown > http//www.tenthdimension.com/
I love this thread!
If you guys really want to get deep into the origin and unexplained thing, we should talk about group mind, and the mechanical DMT elves.[/quote79260c5777]
ilanbg's comment reminds me of plato's allegory of the cave. imagine from the moment you exist that you face a blank wall inside of a cave, and you cannot move. behind you there is a fire. three-dimensional objects are put in front of the fire, but you only see their reflection on the cave's wall. basically, your life is two-dimensional.
![]("79260c5777)
http//www.people.cornell.edu/pages/gnl2/PlatoCave.jpg[" alt=""/img79260c5777]
the point is that you could never imagine three-dimensional life outside the cave. you have no sense of depth and no reason to even imagine it. we have no real idea of God, heaven, or the afterlife, and we should just wait until we're released from the cave...
ShaneK
03-07-2007 01:44:31
To the one guy, talking about water. The thing is, scientists think there was once water on Mars, MARS! We cannot even fathom getting out of our solor system, do you realize whats out there? http//zebu.uoregon.edu/images/hubbledeep.jpg My mind is BLOWN looking at that picture.
The thing is, I am not an atheist, becuase ultimatly, I just don't know. If you want to know what I really think, I beleive in creation, but I think "god" is a scientist. I watched a show on the Discovery channel, and at the end, they talked about actually making a universe in a lab. Scientists have theories about that, already, in the short time we have been around. Since time is infinite, whats to say that there wasn't a sophisticated planet WAY before us, and we are just created in a lab?
At the other guy, yeah, I have heard about the cave allegory, just never saw the picture. I think that is very possible. Think about it, at night, if it is pitch black, we as humans would not be able to see something 20 yards out. Now put Night Vision goggles on, and you can see that person. Through evolution, we have developed mental blocks, and physical blocks to help us survive. Hell, there could be shit flying all around us right now, just the way we perceive reality changes.
I didn't really want to get into this now, but I read this book called "Sex, Drugs, Einstein, and Elves" It is written by Clifford Pickover, he has written many science fiction, and science books, pretty interesting stuff in all his books. Anyways, in this particular book, he talks about the drug DMT a lot. The thing is, this chemical is found in the penial gland in the brain, and scientists think it is what causes us to dream. What is insteresting is, there are documented cases of people taking DMT all across the world, and seeing similar things. I know this sounds stupid and crazy, but many people see these devious mechanical elves. I am talking about people that don't have any contact with each other, but see the same things under the influence of this drug. It is pretty deep stuff, it goes deep into the way humans have evolved to perceive reality.
If you guys are interested in religion, space, time, science, math, art, philosopy, advanced thinking, and just all out crazy shit, look no furthur than a Pickover book. Check him out, he was written over 40 books, his books are science based, but they are interesting to read, and really make you think. I just realized he has two knew books, "The Mobius Strip," and "The Heaven Virus." We need a book freebie site. D
MyungChunHa
03-07-2007 08:24:46
jordan90 -- Just a few things...
Why do you keep insisting on evidence for evolution when there is no evidence for mass religions. In reality there is much more evidence in support of evolution (i.e. our complexities, animal similarities, fossils, etc.) then in support of God.
I am not saying there is a God or there is not one, I'm agnostic if anything, but I do believe it is not good to just settle into one belief, closing your mind off to other ideas. There are so many different religions, why would this one be the almighty winner. It's seems very nieve to think so, because it might very well be an evil God that created us and everyone who believes might be punished for their faith.
There's so many possiblilities, why settle on one, why not explore more and trust your creator that if you lived a good constructive life, helping others and doing good, that you will be rewarded for it. It seems silly to me that if you don't believe but your the ultimate in love and good nature, your still going to hell. [bbc2168a798]To me, faith is nothing more than a guilt-trip from your sins.[/bbc2168a798] You think that since you believe in his power that he will grant you enternity in some cloud and you are forced to believe because you feel bad for past actions and you want to "renew" yourself so to speak with faith.
If anything at all, your good = heaven, your bad = hell....Faith has nothing to do with it...that is, if God is a pure spirit
One more thing, Karl Marx was a great man and thinker, his ideas were very well-constructed and only had one flaw that is impossible to get around, human nature.
Also, I hate that term "God-Fearing", it's way too melodramatic. Why would a pure spirit ever want to entice fear upon it's own creation. Why would it want to punish us for not believing when he very well gave us "free will" and the ability to not believe because logic transcends the unknown. He never inserted the pre-knowledge of his existence, so how can he create an unperfect being and then punish us for his doing.
jordan90
03-07-2007 08:28:41
[quotee7043e8f9e]To the one guy, talking about water. The thing is, scientists think there was once water on Mars, MARS! We cannot even fathom getting out of our solor system, do you realize whats out there? http//zebu.uoregon.edu/images/hubbledeep.jpg My mind is BLOWN looking at that picture. [/quotee7043e8f9e]
Yeah, and you also [ie7043e8f9e]think[/ie7043e8f9e] that organized religion is a danger to society. And some people [ie7043e8f9e]think[/ie7043e8f9e] that a big bang happened, and some people [ie7043e8f9e]think[/ie7043e8f9e] that a higher power created us. The truth is they haven't found water.
And thanks for the pic link.. I love pictures like those.
[quotee7043e8f9e]The thing is, I am not an atheist, becuase ultimatly, I just don't know. If you want to know what I really think, I beleive in creation, but I think "god" is a scientist.[/quotee7043e8f9e]
That's one way to view it. I've been playing The Sims recently and i kind of think of it like that. God can just speak and have things done and created. Then I view Jesus' miracles, kind of as the Matrix, where Jesus is God's son, so He obviously knows every single detail about this earth, so He is able to manipulate it.
But I really don't know. I know a lot of you don't like the Bible, but I do believe what's in it.
jordan90
03-07-2007 08:53:18
[quote28625a2d6d]Why do you keep insisting on evidence for evolution when there is no evidence for mass religions. In reality there is much more evidence in support of evolution (i.e. our complexities, animal similarities, fossils, etc.) then in support of God. [/quote28625a2d6d]
Science cannot reach into the spiritual world.
[quote28625a2d6d]If anything at all, your good = heaven, your bad = hell....Faith has nothing to do with it...that is, if God is a pure spirit [/quote28625a2d6d]
I just said this right after you posted, but I do believe in the Bible, and what it says is that we need to have faith that Jesus died for our sins, and that we need to live our life for Him. The Bible states very clearly you don't get into heaven by works.
[quote28625a2d6d]
One more thing, Karl Marx was a great man and thinker, his ideas were very well-constructed and only had one flaw that is impossible to get around, human nature.
[/quote28625a2d6d]
Do you people not realized he was a socialist, the father of communism?!? Am I the only one that thinks that's bad? Look at the countries with socialism in them. They aren't doing so well. When they do, it's because they take a break from their ways and start to lean toward capitalism (as China currently is).
Does anyone remember Hitler? I'm sure you must know what he did. You know where some of his ideas came from? That's right, Karl Marx.
[quote28625a2d6d="Wikipedia.com"]One of the foundations of Hitler's and the NSDAP's social policies was the concept of racial hygiene. It was based on the ideas of Arthur de Gobineau, eugenics, and social Darwinism. Applied to human beings, "survival of the fittest" was interpreted as requiring racial purity and killing off "life unworthy of life." The first victims were crippled and retarded children in a program dubbed Action T4.[34] After a public outcry, Hitler made a show of ending this program, but the killings in fact continued.
Between 1939 and 1945, the SS, assisted by collaborationist governments and recruits from occupied countries, systematically killed somewhere between 11 and 14 million people, including about 6 million Jews,[35] in concentration camps, ghettos and mass executions, or through less systematic methods elsewhere. Besides being gassed to death, many also died as a result of starvation and disease while working as slave labourers (sometimes benefiting private German companies in the process, because of the low cost of such labour). Along with Jews, non-Jewish Poles (over 3 million of whom died), alleged communists or political opposition, members of resistance groups, resisting Roman Catholics and Protestants, homosexuals, Roma, the physically handicapped and mentally retarded, Soviet prisoners of war (possibly as many as 3 million), Jehovah's Witnesses, anti-Nazi clergy, trade unionists, and psychiatric patients were killed. One of the biggest centres of mass-killing was the extermination camp complex of Auschwitz-Birkenau. Hitler never visited the concentration camps and did not speak publicly about the killing in precise terms.[/quote28625a2d6d]
How about the Holocaust? The reason for that was, you guessed it, evolution. Hitler thought the Germans were a superior race, so the inferior others should be eliminated.
[quote28625a2d6d]
Also, I hate that term "God-Fearing", it's way too melodramatic. Why would a pure spirit ever want to entice fear upon it's own creation. Why would it want to punish us for not believing when he very well gave us "free will" and the ability to not believe because logic transcends the unknown. He never inserted the pre-knowledge of his existence, so how can he create an unperfect being and then punish us for his doing.[/quote28625a2d6d]
God-fearing doesn't mean actually fear, or be afraid of God. Anybody who's gone to a Baptist church should know this. It actually means to have reverence towards God. The English word "fear" just throws you off (they didn't pick the best word when they were translating).
And God gave us free will to see who wants to serve Him. Do you what the Bible says about demons? They're fallen angels, who went with Lucifer and left God. So according to the Bible, angels have free will too. To true Christians, this world is just a testing ground, to separate those who want to serve and believe in God, from those that don't want to serve and believe in God.
MyungChunHa
03-07-2007 09:58:28
This is a great thread BTW..
[quotecd80a829ad="jordan90"][quotecd80a829ad]Why do you keep insisting on evidence for evolution when there is no evidence for mass religions. In reality there is much more evidence in support of evolution (i.e. our complexities, animal similarities, fossils, etc.) then in support of God. [/quotecd80a829ad]
Science cannot reach into the spiritual world.[/quotecd80a829ad]
I view this as a "run-around", maybe I could just as easily say the spiritual world can not reach into science, either one doesn't really make sense to me.
[quotecd80a829ad="jordan90"][quotecd80a829ad]If anything at all, your good = heaven, your bad = hell....Faith has nothing to do with it...that is, if God is a pure spirit [/quotecd80a829ad]
I just said this right after you posted, but I do believe in the Bible, and what it says is that we need to have faith that Jesus died for our sins, and that we need to live our life for Him. The Bible states very clearly you don't get into heaven by works.[/quotecd80a829ad]
In my personal opinion, that would make God an asshole. If you follow the teachings (in the Bible, which I do believe is a great book teaching great things, giving people hope and love, although I don't think any of it is true) then he should reward you even though you have too much logic to accept other possibilities
On Karl Marx, don't blame his ideas or evolution for the mass-extinction of the Jewish people. Karl Marx was brillant in his simplified way of looking at society. Communism is a great system, but human nature corrupts the system because humans are naturally greedy. The Holocaust was not due to evolution, it was due to a very intellectual, manipulating mad-man. If anything, we can blame your "God" for "creating" Hitler in the first place.
The governments and humans corrupt Communism in it's pure form, if everyone was to agree to the "rules" then it would work for the better of mankind.
On "God-fearing", I never knew that. I guess I always took it far too literally. Thanks, because that does make sense.
gnznroses
03-07-2007 10:31:16
there are stories of a flood in nearly every ancient civilization, but there are also stories of dragons and bigfoot in nearly every ancient civilization. so do we conclude that dragons existed?
wasabe
03-07-2007 11:55:42
[quoted3c305dc1c="jordan90"]I had never seen that list before, but I went though it and here's what I think of it. How can you know that the fossils that they found are a transitional fossil, and not (as from a creationist point of view) their own species created by God? That is why you must have a true "missing link" for people to stop doubting evolution. And, if evolution did occur, and we came from an amoeba (or whatever organism...), then why aren't there millions, or at least thousands of those fossils from evolution still around?[/quoted3c305dc1c]
(To the first question the theory of evolution is not merely based on fossils. The answer is more involved than that, but I'm probably not the best qualified here to go into minute detail. As for the question of the number of fossils....)
Short answer not everything is fossilized. In fact, for fossilization to take place, a number of different circumstances must occur after the death of the organism; here's a flowchart explaining dinosaur fossiliztion
![]("d3c305dc1c)
http//www.enchantedlearning.com/fgifs/Fossilchart.GIF[" alt=""/imgd3c305dc1c]
And then remember that this is only for the [id3c305dc1c]formation[/id3c305dc1c] of fossils. Any number of things could subsequently destroy them or make them indistinguishable from everyday rocks. So, although there are tens of thousands of fossils that have been found in the past 100-150 years, this is only a fractional representation of the number of species that have existed, and an even smaller fraction of the actual total number of organisms themselves.
[quoted3c305dc1c][quoted3c305dc1c]To the guy that talked about the orginization that gives money to someone that would find evidence of evolution. I have heard this "group" brought up in discussions many times, if a scientist was to show them concrete evidence, they would just brush it off like it had no meaning.[/quoted3c305dc1c]
No, actually they are still offering because that evidence does not exist. If it does, again, I ask that you show it to me.[/quoted3c305dc1c]
What are the actual terms of the offer? Sounds to me like it's would be worded so as to be impossible to prove.
[quoted3c305dc1c][quoted3c305dc1c]This isnt an attack on Christianity, I strongly feel ALL ORGANIZED religion is nothing but dangerous to society.[/quoted3c305dc1c]
Where have I heard that before? Oh yeah... [bd3c305dc1c]Karl Marx[/bd3c305dc1c] believed that too. And look at all the great things he's done for our world.[/quoted3c305dc1c]
Hitler wore shores. I bet you're wearing shoes right now. Why do you like Hitler so much?
[quoted3c305dc1c]Look at the United States. A country founded by God-fearing men. We have all kinds of organized religion, and currently, we're the most powerful nation in the world, and we're pretty darn politically stable too. So what were you saying, Shane?
[quoted3c305dc1c]In reality, Earth isn't special.[/quoted3c305dc1c]
Water?[/quoted3c305dc1c]
Like the man said, we're [url==http//www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/mars_water_000620.html]not that special[=http//www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/mars_water_000620.html]not that special[/url]. Also, we've only explored an exceedingly tiny bit of the universe.
wasabe
03-07-2007 12:00:53
[quote2aaa09d346="gnznroses"]there are stories of a flood in nearly every ancient civilization, but there are also stories of dragons and bigfoot in nearly every ancient civilization. so do we conclude that dragons existed?[/quote2aaa09d346]
Are you saying dragons [i2aaa09d346]don't [/i2aaa09d346]exist? Listen to a Ronnie James Dio album and then we'll talk.
J4320
03-07-2007 12:17:50
jordan90 didn't reply back to my big post that was in response to him. (
P
[quotecbf45a13c1="ricopet"]I'd rather believe in God and be wrong than to believe in evolution and be wrong. 8)[/quotecbf45a13c1]
Whenever I hear this I say Wow, it sure is nice to view your god as an insurance policy.
[quotecbf45a13c1="gnznroses"][quotecbf45a13c1="ricopet"]I'd rather believe in God and be wrong than to believe in evolution and be wrong. 8)[/quotecbf45a13c1]
i'd rather believe what makes sense to me and not in something because i'm afraid of what will happen if i don't.[/quotecbf45a13c1]
Exactly. I wonder how long religion would last if there was no concept of heaven and hell.
[quotecbf45a13c1="jordan90"]I had never seen that list before, but I went though it and here's what I think of it. How can you know that the fossils that they found are a transitional fossil, and not (as from a creationist point of view) their own species created by God? That is why you must have a true "missing link" for people to stop doubting evolution. And, if evolution did occur, and we came from an amoeba (or whatever organism...), then why aren't there millions, or at least thousands of those fossils from evolution still around? [/quotecbf45a13c1]
Do you think fossils are really that easy to find in the first place? PLENTY of "missing link" fossils have been found but creationists just say things similar to what you said. When fossils of reptilian birds with feathers are found, creationists just say that it was probably an extinct species and they demand another missing link from the fossil that has just been discovered. It's an endless cycle. You can't just ignore molecular biology and demand that we find some sort of freak mix between two different species; it doesn't work that way. Also, just an interesting fact - did you know that whales have small hind limbs that do nothing on their skeleton? No, I'm not talking about the flippers, they have actual worthless hind limbs that do absolutely nothing. They are vestigial limbs. Many other organisms have vestigial body parts.
God must have put those there to test our faith. roll
[quotecbf45a13c1="jordan90"]From an evolutionist's perspective, it makes more sense, but not from a creationists, and that's really the difference. Believe me, I have had my times when I doubted God and really wondered if evolution was possible. The next week I started studying cells, dna, etc in my biology class. To me, it seems impossible, no matter how much time is involved, for us, and everything I see right now, to come from nothing without a higher power. That's why I'm a creationist. And evolution is far from a perfect, proven theory. [/quotecbf45a13c1]
Creationism shouldn't even be considered a theory. It's more like a hypothesis since most of the things in it are twisted facts that are crammed in to fit in with the Bible and faith-based beliefs. Look up the definition of theory then look up the definition of hypothesis. Many times Evolutionists don't even want to debate with Creationists because they can't be taken seriously. If they want to ignore the facts and they want to just have faith and believe it happened then that's fine; but I think it's really sad when a large percentage of people buy into the creationist ideas. I think it's hindering science.
Religion always tries to keep up with science. You can see it starting to try to catch up already with Theistic Evolution. People are trying to find ways to make the Bible fit in with Evolution now because it's hard to deny the facts. Think back to when the Catholic Church kept fighting the idea that we weren't in the center of the solar system. Once science and reason finally overcame it, they had no choice but to fit it in. This is probably what will happen with Evolution.
[quotecbf45a13c1="jordan90"]Except the stories in that Wikipedia article are versions just like the one found in the Bible. Check out the Aztec story and you'll see what I mean. I believe that a deluge did happen, and that only one family survived.[/quotecbf45a13c1]
^ [quotecbf45a13c1="gnznroses"]there are stories of a flood in nearly every ancient civilization, but there are also stories of dragons and bigfoot in nearly every ancient civilization. so do we conclude that dragons existed?[/quotecbf45a13c1]
Exactly. If he wants to believe in very old myths then he can go ahead and do it. There are TONS of myths and stories that overlap; that doesn't mean that they are true. What evidence is there that a worldwide flood even occurred? A lot of Creationists say the Grand Canyon but if you think that 40 days and nights of a flood will cause that kind of an erosion than I'm sorry but you're an idiot (not pointing fingers here).
[quotecbf45a13c1="jordan90"]No, actually they are still offering because that evidence does not exist. If it does, again, I ask that you show it to me. [/quotecbf45a13c1]
I wonder what their definition of "evidence" is. The sad thing is that they'll just refute everything because it doesn't fit their view of evidence.
[quotecbf45a13c1="jordan90"]Where have I heard that before? Oh yeah... Karl Marx believed that too. And look at all the great things he's done for our world.
Look at the United States. A country founded by God-fearing men. We have all kinds of organized religion, and currently, we're the most powerful nation in the world, and we're pretty darn politically stable too. So what were you saying, Shane?[/quotecbf45a13c1]
So we should refute all of Karl Marx's ideas just for the other things that he caused? How ignorant of you.
Oh and actually, if you looked into the founding of our country and our leaders philosophies and religious beliefs, you'd be surprised. Also - to assume that we are the most powerful nation because of religion is just stupid.
[quotecbf45a13c1="jordan90"]
[quotecbf45a13c1]In reality, Earth isn't special.[/quotecbf45a13c1]
Water?
[/quotecbf45a13c1]
http//marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/newsroom/pressreleases/20040323a.html
Also, even if there turns out to be no water on Mars after all, do you know how big the universe is? It'd be quite shallow for us to think we are the only ones with water. Of course it's a possibility, but I personally doubt the earth is the only place with water.
[quotecbf45a13c1="jordan90"]Yeah, and you also think that organized religion is a danger to society. And some people think that a big bang happened, and some people think that a higher power created us. The truth is they haven't found water.
And thanks for the pic link.. I love pictures like those.[/quotecbf45a13c1]
Yes jordan90, organized religion HAS been a danger to society - whether you like it or not. There's no denying it.
[quotecbf45a13c1="jordan90"]That's one way to view it. I've been playing The Sims recently and i kind of think of it like that. God can just speak and have things done and created. Then I view Jesus' miracles, kind of as the Matrix, where Jesus is God's son, so He obviously knows every single detail about this earth, so He is able to manipulate it.
But I really don't know. I know a lot of you don't like the Bible, but I do believe what's in it.[/quotecbf45a13c1]
Just to let you know, I don't hate the Bible or anything like that. I've read the entire thing. It has some great moral values and principles in it. The teachings of Jesus are very wise. However, there are many things in the Bible that shouldn't be taken so literally.
[quotecbf45a13c1="jordan90"]Science cannot reach into the spiritual world.[/quotecbf45a13c1]
O rly? Did St. Peter tell you that?
[quotecbf45a13c1="jordan90"]I just said this right after you posted, but I do believe in the Bible, and what it says is that we need to have faith that Jesus died for our sins, and that we need to live our life for Him. The Bible states very clearly you don't get into heaven by works.[/quotecbf45a13c1]
Yep, it does say that.
[quotecbf45a13c1="jordan90"]Do you people not realized he was a socialist, the father of communism?!? Am I the only one that thinks that's bad? Look at the countries with socialism in them. They aren't doing so well. When they do, it's because they take a break from their ways and start to lean toward capitalism (as China currently is).
Does anyone remember Hitler? I'm sure you must know what he did. You know where some of his ideas came from? That's right, Karl Marx.[/quotecbf45a13c1]
roll
I don't know why you are saying this. Google the phrase - "Ad Hominem" then get back to me.
[quotecbf45a13c1="jordan90"]How about the Holocaust? The reason for that was, you guessed it, evolution. Hitler thought the Germans were a superior race, so the inferior others should be eliminated.[/quotecbf45a13c1]
It's been debated that Hitler was a Catholic. You can't just generalize like that and say that Evolution was behind the Holocaust. That is just fucking ridiculous. If Evolution wasn't even in the picture then they'd still consider the Aryan race higher. There were a lot of different factors that led up to the Holocaust.
ShaneK
03-07-2007 14:44:52
Even if we are the only planet with water, what is to say a species didn't evolve on another planet without water? There could be ENDLESS possibilities of "water."
Just wanted to throw some more fuel on the fire, what about gill slits on a human embryo? When I learned about this in college, I asked my professor if that proves evolution, and she said yes, and gave me 3 other examples like the gill slits that never completely form in the womb. If anyone knows the other three I would love to hear them, I cannot beleive I forgot what they were, I beleive the tail bone was one of them.
How can a christian honestly beleive their book is right, and it is the only possibility of how it happened? Really, Christianity rips off most if not all from religions before it. If you are actually educated on the prior religion, there is so much that is taken.
In this movie I watched call Zeitgiest (I really recommend it, it will really have you thinking, the first part is all about how christianity is nothing more than astrology.) You can view the whole movie at http//www.zeitgeistmovie.com/ Basically, if you know about tribal religions, they were all about the sun, the sun was god. In this movie, basically, the whole immaculate conception scene goes somewhat as follows. The morning of December 25th. the sun is at its lowest point, if you look at the stars on the 24th, you have the "north star," sirius, and three bright stars in a row pointing to sirius, which are the three brightest stars in Orions Belt, which are called the three kings. So, the "Three Kings" follow the "North Star" to the place where Jesus was born (the sun). In the movie they go way deeper than that, but if you are interested in learning about Astrology/Christianity I really recommend it.
The fact that there are MANY other "gods" that were born on December 25th is a little strange, until you know about the sun.
mikedb
03-07-2007 14:46:57
[quote3d9c9492ee="jordan90"]Look at the countries with socialism in them. [/quote3d9c9492ee]
Can you name one that doesn't have socialism in it?
[quote3d9c9492ee]
They aren't doing so well. When they do, it's because they take a break from their ways and start to lean toward capitalism (as China currently is).[/quote3d9c9492ee]
J4320, I agree with many of your arguments, to varying degrees. Well said. It's kind of funny that you can refute many of religion's strong points in one post...
Mike
tylerc
03-07-2007 15:26:53
Guys, it's pretty obvious jordan90 is a die hard Christian who would kill a baby if God told him to. That's fine though, whatever floats his boat, not going to change my mind.
Evolution FTW!
gnznroses
03-07-2007 15:42:35
Shane, i had read (something incredibly short) about gills in developing fetuses. i believe we also start with a tail as well. but i can't think of a third characteristic.
but i'd make two other points that may or may not have been made already
1. regarding fossils, billions of creatures have walked the earth (not talking billions of different species - altho true, i'm just saying billions of individual creatures), yet how many fossils do we have. tens of thousands? hundreds of thousands? i dunno, but a very small percentage. we find new species of dinosaurs every year. the lack of a fossil of any type is not proof of anything.
2. it's not just fossils. the majority of our DNA has often been considered "junk" but actually turns out to contain lots of ancient, leftover DNA from our ancestors. we have genes in our DNA to perform functions that only exist in other species. you can also look at the genes contained in the "junk" dna, compare them to a gene in a mouse or other animal that still utilizes that gene, and by looking at how badly our copy has been mutated, and the mutation rate of dna, determine how long ago in our evolution that gene became disabled. so you might see that 50 million years ago this gene stopped functioning in humans.
ShaneK
03-07-2007 16:01:25
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vestigial_structure
interesting stuff. Of course, Creationist just shrug it off, yet they all go and get their wisdom teeth removed. Aparently the 3rd molars were for grinding down plant material, when the skulls were bigger.
J4320
03-07-2007 16:02:58
[quote7d50a1f0ca="ShaneK"]http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vestigial_structure
interesting stuff. Of course, Creationist just shrug it off, yet they all go and get their wisdom teeth removed. Aparently the 3rd molars were for grinding down plant material, when the skulls were bigger.[/quote7d50a1f0ca]
Yeah, you can see the whale thing in there as I mentioned earlier. This is also an interesting article ---
http//www.livescience.com/animals/top10_vestigial_organs.html
wasabe
03-07-2007 16:08:37
[quotec93a428298="ShaneK"]http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vestigial_structure
interesting stuff. Of course, Creationist just shrug it off, yet they all go and get their wisdom teeth removed. Aparently the 3rd molars were for grinding down plant material, when the skulls were bigger.[/quotec93a428298]
Are you telling me early man didn't know the joy of Cuisinart?
gnznroses
03-07-2007 17:44:45
that's really interesting about the "third eyelid"
jordan90
03-07-2007 19:26:05
[quotea7b7360e14]On Karl Marx, don't blame his ideas or evolution for the mass-extinction of the Jewish people. Karl Marx was brillant in his simplified way of looking at society. Communism is a great system, but human nature corrupts the system because humans are naturally greedy. The Holocaust was not due to evolution, it was due to a very intellectual, manipulating mad-man. If anything, we can blame your "God" for "creating" Hitler in the first place.
The governments and humans corrupt Communism in it's pure form, if everyone was to agree to the "rules" then it would work for the better of mankind.
[/quotea7b7360e14]
He was a smart guy, I'm not denying that. But his ideas haven't done much for our world. And actually, check your facts about the Holocaust. It was evolution. And Communism would work, if we were all robots, which were not, so why Marx thought it would, I have no idea. We all like freedom, some of us just take it for granted.
[quotea7b7360e14]there are stories of a flood in nearly every ancient civilization, but there are also stories of dragons and bigfoot in nearly every ancient civilization. so do we conclude that dragons existed?[/quotea7b7360e14]
I'm not ruling it out.
[quotea7b7360e14]And then remember that this is only for the formation of fossils. Any number of things could subsequently destroy them or make them indistinguishable from everyday rocks. So, although there are tens of thousands of fossils that have been found in the past 100-150 years, this is only a fractional representation of the number of species that have existed, and an even smaller fraction of the actual total number of organisms themselves. [/quotea7b7360e14]
Great point, but I still think that there would be overwhelming amounts of evidence if evolution did occur.
[quotea7b7360e14]
What are the actual terms of the offer? Sounds to me like it's would be worded so as to be impossible to prove.
[/quotea7b7360e14]
I forgot what organization is offering it. If I come across it I'll let you know.
[quotea7b7360e14]Hitler wore shores. I bet you're wearing shoes right now. Why do you like Hitler so much? [/quotea7b7360e14]
What?
[quotea7b7360e14]
Like the man said, we're not that special. Also, we've only explored an exceedingly tiny bit of the universe.[/quotea7b7360e14]
And like I said, they still haven't found water yet.
[quotea7b7360e14]jordan90 didn't reply back to my big post that was in response to him. Sad
Razz [/quotea7b7360e14]
I'm not totally sure which one you're referring to. If it's the one I think it is, zr2152 responded to it so I didn't feel the need to.
[quotea7b7360e14]Also, just an interesting fact - did you know that whales have small hind limbs that do nothing on their skeleton? No, I'm not talking about the flippers, they have actual worthless hind limbs that do absolutely nothing. They are vestigial limbs. Many other organisms have vestigial body parts.
God must have put those there to test our faith. Rolling Eyes [/quotea7b7360e14]
Yes, actually I did know that those "hind limbs." And you are extremely misled by if you think they do nothing. They actually serve a function to hold muscles together and they have nothing to do with whales once having legs.
[quotea7b7360e14]What evidence is there that a worldwide flood even occurred?[/quotea7b7360e14]
How about Noah's Ark on Mt Ararat?
http//www.stevequayle.com/Giants/Ancient.Civ_Technol/040426.Noahs.Ark.html[]http//www.stevequayle.com/Giants/Ancient.Civ_Technol/040426.Noahs.Ark.html
[quotea7b7360e14]Also - to assume that we are the most powerful nation because of religion is just stupid. [/quotea7b7360e14]
I never said that. I was refuting what Shane said about organized religion being a danger to society.
[quotea7b7360e14]what about gill slits on a human embryo?[/quotea7b7360e14]
That is what I like to call, a fraud. Don't believe me? Check out the facts...
http//www.rae.org/gillslit.html[]http//www.rae.org/gillslit.html
[quotea7b7360e14]
Can you name one that doesn't have socialism in it? [/quotea7b7360e14]
I was referring to countries such as North Vietnam, Russia, and China.
zdub08
03-07-2007 19:33:55
I love your sources jordan90... "revolution against evolution" 8)
that $250,000 isn't being offered by any organization; it's some slap named kent hovind. here is the offer and the problems with it http//www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind.html
jordan90
03-07-2007 19:51:49
[quote94cfc09532="zdub08"]I love your sources jordan90... "revolution against evolution" 8)
that $250,000 isn't being offered by any organization; it's some slap named kent hovind. here is the offer and the problems with it http//www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind.html[/quote94cfc09532]
I didn't think it was him that was offering it. And I'll be the first to tell you Kent Hovind ain't got a real bright light bulb.
jordan90
03-07-2007 19:54:10
I do have some questions that I would like to be answered. You don't have to answer all of them, just try whichever ones you want.
1. What is the best evidence that shows that the general theory of evolution is actually a fact?
2. What specific evidence supports the claim of a natural origin of the universe?
3. What specific evidence supports the claim of a natural origin of life? (life from non-life in contradiction to the law of biogenesis)
4. What evidence justifies the evolution proposal that life spontaneously arose from non-living material in spite of the calculations showing that such occurrence is astronomically improbable?
5. What evidence is there that mutation can or has produced unique, new structures rather than modified features?
6. What is the evidence that shows that mutations can supply an increase new information rather than just modifying existing genetic information?
7. What evidence suggests that mutation and natural selection changes have no limits?
8. What evidence shows a transitional form with partially developed, nonfunctional features (such as 10% of a wing)?
9. Why is Haeckel's "law of biogenesis" that ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny still used as evidence for evolution after being exposed as a fraudulent claim?
10. If fifty years of intensive research on mutant fruit flies has produced nothing but more fruit flies, why is it thought that other organisms can evolve into something else?
11. Why does Venus rotate backward, while Uranus rotates at a 98 degree angle to its vertical plane?
12. Why do 11 (almost 1/3) of the moons of various planets rotate backward?
13. Why aren't most of the planets composed of hydrogen and helium like the sun?
ShaneK
03-07-2007 20:13:23
Sorry for the lacklust responce, but just asking "1. What is the best evidence that shows that the general theory of evolution is actually a fact?" Is pretty rediculous. We have given you evidence, you just shrug it off like it is not evidence.
To be honest, I don't think anyone on this forum is actually qualified to give you really specific answers, at least I know I am not. If you want to get your creation theory wrecked, you should go talk to a professor, or Richard Dawkins.
When you say the Holocaust was because of evolution, I see a feeble attepmt to forget about the lovely time periods like The Dark Ages, and The Crusaides.
Lets say, the Holocaust was directly because of evolution, it would pale in comparison to the deaths that religion has on its hands.
That is hilarious to me, that you can sit back and confidently ask for proof, then when it is presented to you, its eronious.
11. Why does Venus rotate backward, while Uranus rotates at a 98 degree angle to its vertical plane? God? Please.
13. Why aren't most of the planets composed of hydrogen and helium like the sun? Confusing question, why aren't other planets like the sun? Good question.
It really is hard to prove something to someone, when their entire existense goes against that very thing.
What happeneds if alien life is discovered? Does the bible and religion spin their words, find some books, or add some pages, and just act like it doesn't have an effect?
The thing that really puts me off about the religious folk is, they look at the bible, and they just pick and choose what to take literal and figurativly.
If you HONESTLY beleive, a guy, got two of EVERY ANIMAL ON THE PLANET onto a boat, millions of species, to play nice, not eat each other, you are lost.
Also, to say that because we can't make a species evolve in 15-20 years doesn't disprove anything. Evolution is over millions/billions of years.
Look at the Grand Canyon. Is it easier for you to beleive that water eroded the bottom of a river over millions of years to make it, or a giant walked through with his axe on the ground?
Sorry this post is all over the place. Again, watch the 1st part of that movie I posted, it may open your eyes to the fraud that is religion.
zdub08
03-07-2007 20:13:26
you stumped me.
I now believe in intelligent design.
ShaneK
03-07-2007 20:20:43
lol.
I hate that term, "Intelligent Deisgn," you can see right through it, just trying to keep up in the science classroom, sounds great for little kids.
zr2152
03-07-2007 20:31:07
[quotec5813b7769="jordan90"]I do have some questions that I would like to be answered. You don't have to answer all of them, just try whichever ones you want.
1. What is the best evidence that shows that the general theory of evolution is actually a fact?
2. What specific evidence supports the claim of a natural origin of the universe?
3. What specific evidence supports the claim of a natural origin of life? (life from non-life in contradiction to the law of biogenesis)
4. What evidence justifies the evolution proposal that life spontaneously arose from non-living material in spite of the calculations showing that such occurrence is astronomically improbable?
5. What evidence is there that mutation can or has produced unique, new structures rather than modified features?
6. What is the evidence that shows that mutations can supply an increase new information rather than just modifying existing genetic information?
7. What evidence suggests that mutation and natural selection changes have no limits?
8. What evidence shows a transitional form with partially developed, nonfunctional features (such as 10% of a wing)?
9. Why is Haeckel's "law of biogenesis" that ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny still used as evidence for evolution after being exposed as a fraudulent claim?
10. If fifty years of intensive research on mutant fruit flies has produced nothing but more fruit flies, why is it thought that other organisms can evolve into something else?
11. Why does Venus rotate backward, while Uranus rotates at a 98 degree angle to its vertical plane?
12. Why do 11 (almost 1/3) of the moons of various planets rotate backward?
13. Why aren't most of the planets composed of hydrogen and helium like the sun?[/quotec5813b7769]
Where did you find these quetions from?
Second of all....I feel like it takes as much faith to believe in no God as it does to believe in a God.
Jordan..read this book "The Language Of God" then you can say all you want. I was like you months ago until I educated myself with science.
gnznroses
03-07-2007 20:42:28
the mt arafat thing is the biggest joke. yeah, i know it's a horrible environment, but if it was actually the freakin ark, it would have been brought down by now. why hasn't some multi-millionaire head of a church funded a great expedition to retrieve it? because it's more convenient to point at a crappy satellite image and say "there it is".
jordan90
03-07-2007 20:46:29
[quote34bb96880a="gnznroses"]the mt arafat thing is the biggest joke. yeah, i know it's a horrible environment, but if it was actually the freakin ark, it would have been brought down by now. why hasn't some multi-millionaire head of a church funded a great expedition to retrieve it? because it's more convenient to point at a crappy satellite image and say "there it is".[/quote34bb96880a]
Because the Turkish government won't allow it.
ShaneK
03-07-2007 20:50:19
[quotea7cbb4cc19="jordan90"][quotea7cbb4cc19="gnznroses"]the mt arafat thing is the biggest joke. yeah, i know it's a horrible environment, but if it was actually the freakin ark, it would have been brought down by now. why hasn't some multi-millionaire head of a church funded a great expedition to retrieve it? because it's more convenient to point at a crappy satellite image and say "there it is".[/quotea7cbb4cc19]
Because the Turkish government won't allow it.[/quotea7cbb4cc19]
Duh!
lol.
jordan90
03-07-2007 23:34:46
[quotec1ca0d6f50]Where did you find these quetions from? [/quotec1ca0d6f50]
A website I stumbled across..
http//www.uark.edu/~cdm/creation/questions4evol.htm[]http//www.uark.edu/~cdm/creation/questions4evol.htm. I figured I'd see if the questions could be answered or not.
[quotec1ca0d6f50]Second of all....I feel like it takes as much faith to believe in no God as it does to believe in a God. [/quotec1ca0d6f50]
I definitely agree with you on that.
[quotec1ca0d6f50]Jordan..read this book "The Language Of God" then you can say all you want. I was like you months ago until I educated myself with science.[/quotec1ca0d6f50]
I just put it on hold at my library. Can I ask that you read a book that will help you understand where I'm coming from? It's called "The Lie Evolution" by Ken Ham. I would send you my copy, but my brother already sent it to an atheist, who, after reading the book, actually believed that a higher power does exist.
And also, I don't think I mentioned this before, but my pastor is a science teacher who taught in the public school system for several years. I wish I had his knowledge of science.
[quotec1ca0d6f50]the mt arafat thing is the biggest joke. yeah, i know it's a horrible environment, but if it was actually the freakin ark, it would have been brought down by now. why hasn't some multi-millionaire head of a church funded a great expedition to retrieve it? because it's more convenient to point at a crappy satellite image and say "there it is".[/quotec1ca0d6f50]
Actually there are numerous accounts of people spotting a large, man-made, wooden object on Mt Ararat. Someone actually brought back a sample piece of gopher wood (which was used to build the ark, according to the Bible), and it dated correctly for the time period of the ark given in the Bible. And there's a reason the Turkish government doesn't want whatever is up there to be recovered.
[quotec1ca0d6f50]If you want to get your creation theory wrecked, you should go talk to a professor, or Richard Dawkins.
[/quotec1ca0d6f50]
And if you want your evolutionist theory wrecked, go talk to Ken Ham.
[quotec1ca0d6f50]
When you say the Holocaust was because of evolution, I see a feeble attepmt to forget about the lovely time periods like The Dark Ages, and The Crusaides. [/quotec1ca0d6f50]
The Crusades were horrible, but I would have to say the Holocaust was just as bad. And the Crusades were because of religion, but mainly the Catholic church, which has VERY different viewpoints from what I believe.
[quotec1ca0d6f50]
That is hilarious to me, that you can sit back and confidently ask for proof, then when it is presented to you, its eronious. [/quotec1ca0d6f50]
Proof has not been presented to me. Check your terminology.
[quotec1ca0d6f50]11. Why does Venus rotate backward, while Uranus rotates at a 98 degree angle to its vertical plane? God? Please. [/quotec1ca0d6f50]
You didn't give me an answer, so, Please. And I was sent an article talking about ideas of why Venus rotates backwards. What it came down to is they don't know.
[quotec1ca0d6f50]It really is hard to prove something to someone, when their entire existense goes against that very thing.[/quotec1ca0d6f50]
I could say the same thing. It's all about perspective.
[quotec1ca0d6f50]
The thing that really puts me off about the religious folk is, they look at the bible, and they just pick and choose what to take literal and figurativly.
[/quotec1ca0d6f50]
Some do. I don't. I take it literally.
[quotec1ca0d6f50]
If you HONESTLY beleive, a guy, got two of EVERY ANIMAL ON THE PLANET onto a boat, millions of species, to play nice, not eat each other, you are lost. [/quotec1ca0d6f50]
And no, you are lost, because there didn't have to be millions of species. You really just need the basic animals. I watched a movie on it once, which was really interesting. It showed how it is possible for all the different types of dogs we have to come from one main type of dog. This is micro evolution, which I believe has been proved. Macro evolution, however, has not been proved, and I don't believe in it.
J4320
03-07-2007 23:43:52
Why don't you ever reply to any of my posts? Anyway, I'll get on your latest one tomorrow. Oh and I'd love to see Richard Dawkins vs this "Ken Ham" guy.
ShaneK
04-07-2007 00:45:40
Don't tell me they used carbon dating to find out how old the arc wood was. You know that carbon dating is a joke. lol lol lol
I know everyone has seen this a billion times, but its fun just to look at the size of things in the universe. http//iwasjustcurious.blogspot.com/2007/07/we-are-tiny-in-scheme-of-things.html
jordan90
04-07-2007 07:30:44
[quote3199b36c78="J4320"]Why don't you ever reply to any of my posts? Anyway, I'll get on your latest one tomorrow. Oh and I'd love to see Richard Dawkins vs this "Ken Ham" guy.[/quote3199b36c78]
Actually I do reply to some of your comments. Look around. And the ones that I don't are because you rarely bring up anything new, don't show any references outside of your thought process, or you just make smart alec comments.
[quote3199b36c78]Don't tell me they used carbon dating to find out how old the arc wood was. You know that carbon dating is a joke. Laughing Laughing Laughing [/quote3199b36c78]
Carbon dating is a joke when used after a certain time period. It has been shown to be inaccurate. -
http//www.answersingenesis.org/assets/pdf/media/radio/Carbondating.pdf[]http//www.answersingenesis.org/assets/pdf/media/radio/Carbondating.pdf
J4320
04-07-2007 12:22:03
[quote07c8272cff="jordan90"][quote07c8272cff="J4320"]Why don't you ever reply to any of my posts? Anyway, I'll get on your latest one tomorrow. Oh and I'd love to see Richard Dawkins vs this "Ken Ham" guy.[/quote07c8272cff]
Actually I do reply to some of your comments. Look around. And the ones that I don't are because you rarely bring up anything new, don't show any references outside of your thought process, or you just make smart alec comments.
[quote07c8272cff]Don't tell me they used carbon dating to find out how old the arc wood was. You know that carbon dating is a joke. Laughing Laughing Laughing [/quote07c8272cff]
Carbon dating is a joke when used after a certain time period. It has been shown to be inaccurate. -
http//www.answersingenesis.org/assets/pdf/media/radio/Carbondating.pdf[]http//www.answersingenesis.org/assets/pdf/media/radio/Carbondating.pdf[/quote07c8272cff]
Smart alec comments? Some of your statements are way out of line and can be very offensive. Sorry if I come off a little touchy but you're very condescending and it in turn makes me condescending. Claiming that Evolution caused the Holocaust is just absurd. Anyway, I'll go ahead and go through some more of your comments. Of course you'll probably just ignore the comments of mine that end up biting you in the ass like you've done before.
References? I post interesting and r-e-p-u-t-a-b-l-e stuff on here all of the time. You get most of your stuff off of answersingenesis.
jordan90
04-07-2007 12:27:09
[quote0e29b0bf4f]References? I post interesting and r-e-p-u-t-a-b-l-e stuff on here all of the time. You get most of your stuff off of answersingenesis.[/quote0e29b0bf4f]
Which has a compilation of many different creation-evolution articles. If I can't find what I'm looking for on there, I use my best friend.. Google )
And I think you read over the part where I said you rarely bring up anything new, you just rephrase what people before you said, which is why I don't respond to something that I already have.
gnznroses
04-07-2007 12:45:05
[quote4d39dd161f]In 1955 French explorer Fernand Navarra reportedly found a 5-foot wooden beam on Mount Ararat some 40 feet under the Parrot Glacier on the northwest slope and well above the treeline. The Forestry Institute of Research and Experiments of the Ministry of Agriculture in Spain certified the wood to be about 5,000 years old. A claim that is disputed by Radio Carbon dating.[25] Navarra's guide later claimed the French explorer bought the beam from a nearby village and carried it up the mountain.[23] [/quote4d39dd161f]
- wikipedia
more information
http//www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CH/CH504_2.html
[quote4d39dd161f]Radiocarbon dates for Navarra's 1955 sample were obtained from five laboratories. One lab, whose sample size was insufficient, placed its age at 260 C.E. +/- 120 years. Three others dated it between 720 to 790 C.E. +/- about 90 years. The fifth apparently dated it to around 300-700 C.E. (There was no published report.)
Two labs have dated the 1969 samples, one at 650 C.E. +/- 50 years, the other at 630 C.E. +/- 95 years.
The dates are substantially consistent; the only two inconsistent dates are questionable to begin with. The wood is too young for Noah's ark.
The wood was also dated by other methods, namely degree of lignite formation, gain in wood density, cell modification, color change, and unspecified criteria. These methods yielded ages around 5000 years, but all these methods are highly subjective and variable. In particular, wood density analysis depends on the initial density of the wood, but different sources disagree what species of wood the samples are; one lab specifically rejects the lighter species of oak in favor of a denser species that would give a younger age. Control samples would be necessary to get useful results from lignite formation. The color change could have occurred in as little as 100 years (Bailey 1989). [/quote4d39dd161f]
J4320
04-07-2007 13:12:54
[quote88ebdaa497="jordan90"][quote88ebdaa497]References? I post interesting and r-e-p-u-t-a-b-l-e stuff on here all of the time. You get most of your stuff off of answersingenesis.[/quote88ebdaa497]
Which has a compilation of many different creation-evolution articles. If I can't find what I'm looking for on there, I use my best friend.. Google )
And I think you read over the part where I said you rarely bring up anything new, you just rephrase what people before you said, which is why I don't respond to something that I already have.[/quote88ebdaa497]
Please. I'm not rephrasing what others have said. Your statements have so many fallacies and quack things in them that it's hard not to get overlapping responses. I'm not copying anything from anyone. Oh and there's plenty of stuff from me that you have chosen to ignore.
I could go into detail about your "Noah's Ark" but you'll just ignore it so I guess I won't. Other members have already taken care of it for the most part. Anyway, you probably wouldn't make a good scientist. You can't just assume that that is the ark while throwing out all of the other possibilities. It's not scientific to run off of assumptions.
J4320
04-07-2007 14:33:28
First, let me say, that I'm not a scholarly expert on Evolution. I've tried my best to give a little input and link to resources that can explain a lot of these questions. As you can see, it is scholarly, peer reviewed, material that states its sources.
[b9b74ec4879]1. What is the best evidence that shows that the general theory of evolution is actually a fact?[/b9b74ec4879]
I'm not sure if I can come up with "the best evidence." I think all the evidence works together to point toward Evolution. You can't ignore molecular biology, the fossil records, the homologies and etc. If you look into the research, it'll point toward Evolution. Here is some random scholarly, peer reviewed, material that I came across (not expecting you to read it all) ---
http//www.journals.royalsoc.ac.uk/content/0164755512w92302/fulltext.pdf
http//www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=10438861
http//arjournals.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.genet.37.050503.084247
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12492145
http//jhered.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/96/3/185
[b9b74ec4879]2. What specific evidence supports the claim of a natural origin of the universe?[/b9b74ec4879]
http//www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CF/CF101.html
[b9b74ec4879]3. What specific evidence supports the claim of a natural origin of life? (life from non-life in contradiction to the law of biogenesis)[/b9b74ec4879]
http//www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB090.html
[b9b74ec4879]4. What evidence justifies the evolution proposal that life spontaneously arose from non-living material in spite of the calculations showing that such occurrence is astronomically improbable?[/b9b74ec4879]
http//www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB010.html
[b9b74ec4879]
5. What evidence is there that mutation can or has produced unique, new structures rather than modified features?[/b9b74ec4879]
Unique new structures rather than modified features? That's not even how it works. One organism does not simply jump into the next thing.
[b9b74ec4879]6. What is the evidence that shows that mutations can supply an increase new information rather than just modifying existing genetic information?[/b9b74ec4879]
I'm not quite sure what this question is asking - "can supply an increase new information" ? What?
[b9b74ec4879]7. What evidence suggests that mutation and natural selection changes have no limits?[/b9b74ec4879]
It's asking me to prove why mutation and natural selection changes have no limits? Who said they have no limits?
[b9b74ec4879]8. What evidence shows a transitional form with partially developed, nonfunctional features (such as 10% of a wing)?[/b9b74ec4879]
[quote9b74ec4879="wikipedia"]It is commonly stated by critics of evolution that there are no known transitional fossils.[1] This position is based on a misunderstanding of the nature of what represents a transitional feature. A common creationist argument is that no fossils are found with partially functional features. It is plausible, however, that a complex feature with one function can adapt a wholly different function through evolution. The precursor to, for example, a wing, might originally have only been meant for gliding, trapping flying prey, and/or mating display. Nowadays, wings can still have all of these functions, but they are also used in active flight.
Although transitional fossils elucidate the evolutionary transition of one life-form to another, they only exemplify snapshots of this process. Due to the special circumstances required for preservation of living beings, only a very small percentage of all life-forms that ever have existed can be expected to be discovered. Thus, the transition itself can only be illustrated and corroborated by transitional fossils, but it will never be known in detail. However, progressing research and discovery managed to fill in several gaps and continues to do so. Critics of evolution often cite this argument as being a convenient way to explain off the lack of 'snapshot' fossils that show crucial steps between species.
The theory of punctuated equilibrium developed by Stephen Jay Gould and Niles Eldredge is often mistakenly drawn into the discussion of transitional fossils. This theory, however, pertains only to well-documented transitions within taxa or between closely related taxa over a geologically short period of time. These transitions, usually traceable in the same geological outcrop, often show small jumps in morphology between periods of morphological stability. To explain these jumps, Gould and Eldredge envisaged comparatively long periods of genetic stability separated by periods of rapid evolution.[/quote9b74ec4879]
Source http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitional_fossil
[b9b74ec4879]9. Why is Haeckel's "law of biogenesis" that ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny still used as evidence for evolution after being exposed as a fraudulent claim?[/b9b74ec4879]
[quote9b74ec4879="wikipedia"]It has been claimed (Richardson 1998, Richardson and Keuck 2002) that some of Haeckel's embryo drawings of 1874 were fabricated.[7] [8] There were multiple versions of the embryo drawings, and Haeckel rejected the claims of fraud but did admit one error which he corrected. It was later said that "there is evidence of sleight of hand" on both sides of the feud between Haeckel and Wilhelm His, Sr..[9] The controversy involves several different issues (see more details at recapitulation theory).
Some creationists have claimed that Darwin relied on Haeckel's embryo drawings as proof of evolution[10] [11] [12] impling that Darwin's theory is therefore illegitimate and possibly fraudulent. This claim ignores the fact that the Darwin published the "Origin of the Species" in 1859, and "The Descent of Man" in 1871, whereas Haeckel's famous embryo drawings did not appear until 1874 (8 species). In "The Descent of Man" (1871) Darwin used only two embryo drawings, neither taken from Haeckel[13].
It has been claimed[citation needed] that Ernst Haeckel sent a letter to the January 9, 1909 publication of "Münchener Allegemeine Zeitung" (which is, roughly translated, "Munich general newspaper") which reads, translated "a small portion of my embryo-pictures (possibly 6 or 8 in a hundred) are really (in Dr Brass’s sense of the word) “falsified” — all those, namely, in which the disclosed material for inspection is so incomplete or insufficient that one is compelled in a restoration of a connected development series to fill up the gaps through hypotheses, and to reconstruct the missing members through comparative syntheses. What difficulties this task encounters, and how easily the draughts- man may blunder in it, the embryologist alone can judge."[/quote9b74ec4879]
Source http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Haeckel
[b9b74ec4879]10. If fifty years of intensive research on mutant fruit flies has produced nothing but more fruit flies, why is it thought that other organisms can evolve into something else?[/b9b74ec4879]
http//www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB910_1.html
[b9b74ec4879]11. Why does Venus rotate backward, while Uranus rotates at a 98 degree angle to its vertical plane?[/b9b74ec4879]
I'm not sure why this would disprove Evolution. Care to elaborate?
[b9b74ec4879]12. Why do 11 (almost 1/3) of the moons of various planets rotate backward?[/b9b74ec4879]
I'm not sure why this would disprove Evolution. Care to elaborate?
[b9b74ec4879]13. Why aren't most of the planets composed of hydrogen and helium like the sun?[/b9b74ec4879]
I'm not sure why this would disprove Evolution. Care to elaborate?
ShaneK
04-07-2007 15:28:54
Great post J4320.
jordan90
04-07-2007 16:03:43
[quote5f5298c42d]1. What is the best evidence that shows that the general theory of evolution is actually a fact? [/quote5f5298c42d]
All those, except the first one (too big to read) are micro evolution. Now how about macro evolution?
[quote5f5298c42d]
2. What specific evidence supports the claim of a natural origin of the universe?
http//www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CF/CF101.html[/quote5f5298c42d]
Doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Plus I like how they use they word "might." They actually admit they don't know. And the questions is asking for evidence.
[quote5f5298c42d]
3. What specific evidence supports the claim of a natural origin of life? (life from non-life in contradiction to the law of biogenesis)
http//www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB090.html [/quote5f5298c42d]
That just goes around the question. It assumes evolution is true, so life must have happened somehow. And again, the question is asking for evidence.
[quote5f5298c42d]
4. What evidence justifies the evolution proposal that life spontaneously arose from non-living material in spite of the calculations showing that such occurrence is astronomically improbable?
http//www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB010.html [/quote5f5298c42d]
Do you still realize the chances of us being here by that, are 1 in 10^113, times the amount of proteins in our dna? That article tries to make the numbers not look that bad, but the truth is, they are. Lets say you even cut that in half, or a fourth, it would still be astronomically improbable. And again, the question is asking for evidence
[quote5f5298c42d]
5. What evidence is there that mutation can or has produced unique, new structures rather than modified features?
Unique new structures rather than modified features? That's not even how it works. One organism does not simply jump into the next thing. [/quote5f5298c42d]
That's not what the question is asking. It's talking about evidence that a dog, for example, grows wings.
[quote5f5298c42d]
7. What evidence suggests that mutation and natural selection changes have no limits?
It's asking me to prove why mutation and natural selection changes have no limits? Who said they have no limits? [/quote5f5298c42d]
Because currently, as far as we know, they do have limits (as it appears you said in your "answer"), and for evolution to happen, they would have to have practically no limits.
[quote5f5298c42d]
8. What evidence shows a transitional form with partially developed, nonfunctional features (such as 10% of a wing)?
[/quote5f5298c42d]
You mistook the question, or couldn't find a good answer. It's talking evidence that a dolphin had 10% of a flipper while having 70% of a leg, because it was supposedly transitioning from water to land or vise versa.
[quote5f5298c42d]9. Why is Haeckel's "law of biogenesis" that ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny still used as evidence for evolution after being exposed as a fraudulent claim?
Source http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Haeckel [/quote5f5298c42d]
http//www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/17rec03.htm
[quote5f5298c42d]
10. If fifty years of intensive research on mutant fruit flies has produced nothing but more fruit flies, why is it thought that other organisms can evolve into something else?
http//www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB910_1.html [/quote5f5298c42d]
Good find, but not good enough. That page does not say the research has produced new species, just that there are 3000 species of fruit flies.
[quote5f5298c42d]
11. Why does Venus rotate backward, while Uranus rotates at a 98 degree angle to its vertical plane?
I'm not sure why this would disprove Evolution. Care to elaborate? [/quote5f5298c42d]
If the big bang theory was true, then Venus should be spinning in the same direction it is orbiting the sun, as the other planets are.
[quote5f5298c42d]
12. Why do 11 (almost 1/3) of the moons of various planets rotate backward?
I'm not sure why this would disprove Evolution. Care to elaborate? [/quote5f5298c42d]
Look at my last response.
[quote5f5298c42d]
13. Why aren't most of the planets composed of hydrogen and helium like the sun?
I'm not sure why this would disprove Evolution. Care to elaborate?[/quote5f5298c42d]
It's trying to ask, if all the planets and stars came from one main thing, then why are the planets and stars so different?
[quote5f5298c42d]
Please. I'm not rephrasing what others have said. Your statements have so many fallacies and quack things in them that it's hard not to get overlapping responses. I'm not copying anything from anyone. Oh and there's plenty of stuff from me that you have chosen to ignore. [/quote5f5298c42d]
A lot of the things you were saying had already been said. Check around in the thread and you'll see what I mean. And if you say my statements have fallacies, please, point them out. I already disproved your whale "limbs" and human embryo with gill slits.
ShaneK
04-07-2007 17:20:49
Okay Jordan, before I had at least a semi-respect for your posts, but this one lost me. You just brush of science like its nothing. You think they get the Big Bang theory from guys just trying to figure out a way to disprove religion, but they are theories from math (meaning a million times more reputable then just a book that has fairy tales, which aren't even ORIGINAL fairy tales). Once the math gets more refined, I am sure religion will attack math, and we will also have to teach "creationist math" in the text books.
Why would a planet spinning one way have ANYTHING to do with evolution? Or the Big Bang Theory? There is still so much to be known about the universe, the big bang theory to my knowledge doesn't say, it happened and all the planets spun the same way.
So you mean to tell me god put the planets there, spun them individually, made billions of galaxies, containing even more billions of stars, containing even more billions of planets, and put life only on this one? Do you ACTUALLY beleive that?
I don't think the general population can't even begin to understand what scientists working on multi-billion dollar projects are doing.
Check out http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider . Opening in May 2008, they plan to be able to recreat the conditions seconds after the big bang. Obviously these scientists working on String Theory and the like, are pioneers, and obviously there is a reason they spend billions of dollars on these projects. Basically, they can be backed up by math. Math is the language of the universe, and it pretty much wrecks todays religions, with thoughts of alternate dimensions, and whatnot.
I guess we will never really know until they make a time machine, which is actually physically possible, yet many many years away. They have it worked out as to where, they will be able to get particles from the future, as long as the machine was on, but not from the past. But I am sure if they get the time machine working, the technology will eventually evolve to being able to go back in the past. Either way, unfortunatly not in my lifetime.
You have to think, before the big bang, there was essentially space. Infinity one way, infinity the other way, it is hard for a human to understand the term infinity becuase it actually means, goes on FORVER. Now, in this "space" let's just say there are some particles out there, maybe "god" put them there, maybe he didn't. There are an infinite amount of these particles, who knows, they are fucking super powerful, and there are infinity of them. There are infinity of them, becuase there is an infinite amount of space for them to travel in, and they are traveling at an infinite speed. They are just cruising around FORVER, 524025824 trillion years, hell it doesnt matter. Then one time, 2 collide perfectly, and then the "big bang" happeneds. But nothing comes out of it, it is a dud big bang. 21451561435 trillion years later it happeneds again, but this time you get our big bang. Now from these particles going super fucking fast, hitting each other all types of shit comes out of there, and thats where we come from. These particles are outside of our universe, doing what they do, creating other big bangs, and whatnot. Thats just my little theory, its just how I see it possibly happening. You have to understand what infinity actually is, there is NO cap to the time, actually FOREVER. Not a billion gajillion million fuckillion trillion, not that times a quadtrillion, im talking, infity.
Again sorry for my rambling on, got a lot of thoughts going through my head and I am just typing them while they come.
Jordan, just answer this question please.
How can you honestly beleive without a doub that christianity is correct? You said you took religion classes, you KNOW that so much of christianity is taken from prior religions, you KNOW early christians had VERY different views of the same religion, and they ACTUALLY HAD GUYS SIT IN A ROOM AND MAKE THE NIECINE CREED. Guys actually made up what you will, and won't beleive. These were disciples, they weren't messiahs, they were the POLITCAL people. You know they just wrote out what they want people to beleive. If you actually did take a religion class, you know this, so how can you HONESTLY beleive that what those guys said is 100% right, without a doubt?
It can be proven that christianity has just blatently taken from other religions, so just please tell me how you can completely not look at that, and just blindly follow what your parents infused in your brain. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE don't mention faith in your answer.
J4320
04-07-2007 18:30:46
[quote0c558b5eec="jordan90"]All those, except the first one (too big to read) are micro evolution. Now how about macro evolution?[/quote0c558b5eec]
Alright, sure. Let me just ask you this - do you really think that all of those processes explained in those articles could occur under 6,000 years?
[quote0c558b5eec="jordan90"]
[quote0c558b5eec]3. What specific evidence supports the claim of a natural origin of life? (life from non-life in contradiction to the law of biogenesis)
http//www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB090.html[/quote0c558b5eec]
Doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Plus I like how they use they word "might." They actually admit they don't know. And the questions is asking for evidence. [/quote0c558b5eec]
It's simply saying that it doesn't go against the law of thermodynamics. Of course they'll say something like "might." We don't have all of the information. There are many different theories and speculations on the origins of earth. Do Creationists have any specific evidence that supports the claim of a greater being snapping his fingers and putting everything into place? No. It works both ways. There is a lot of speculation on both sides. Right now we can't go back and look. What we do know is that we have a robust, solid theory of Evolution that can be tested and confirmed. It explains the development of the species here on this earth. Now there are further theories on how life began, but just because we don't have die-hard evidence of life coming from non-existing life doesn't mean that it didn't happen or it doesn't prove that a greater being created everything. This goes for #3 as well since they both tie in together.
[quote0c558b5eec="jordan90"]Do you still realize the chances of us being here by that, are 1 in 10^113, times the amount of proteins in our dna? That article tries to make the numbers not look that bad, but the truth is, they are. Lets say you even cut that in half, or a fourth, it would still be astronomically improbable. And again, the question is asking for evidence [/quote0c558b5eec]
Time or probability is not an issue with Evolution. Take a look at this --
http//www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/
To all of the macro-related questions look at this -
http//www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/
Also take a look at this video ---
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nnu-O5x_pRU&mode=related&search=
Here's a part that I don't want you to miss ---
![]("0c558b5eec)
http/" alt=""/img66.imageshack.us/img="66/2487/slide1ny2.jpg[" alt=""/img0c558b5eec]
[img="0c558b5eec]http/" alt=""/img359.imageshack.us/img="359/2918/slide2ub8.jpg[" alt=""/img0c558b5eec]
[quote0c558b5eec="jordan90"]http//www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/17rec03.htm [/quote0c558b5eec]
Alright, so even if he did cheat at it, this doesn't disprove Evolution. Sure, if he was a dishonest scientist, then shame on him.
[quote0c558b5eec="jordan90"]If the big bang theory was true, then Venus should be spinning in the same direction it is orbiting the sun, as the other planets are.[/quote0c558b5eec]
That's quite an assumption.
[quote0c558b5eec]The assumption is made that if the solar system was formed by the coalescing of planetesimals, then it would not be possible for some planets to rotate backwards and some moons to revolve backwards. This assumption is completely wrong. If the solar system planets were formed by the coalescing of planetesimals, then the early stages would have to be characterized by catastrophic collisions of proto planets. For example, the moon is thought to have been formed from debris ejected when a Mars-sized object collided with the earth. Collisions of this magnitude could result in some planets rotating in an opposite direction. There is no evidence whatever that this could not have happened.
At least 6 moons revolve backwards around the larger planets. More than likely they are captured asteroids, and the direction of revolution would depend on which side of the planet was approached by the asteroid when it was captured into orbit. Three planets rotate backwards Venus, Uranus, and Pluto. The rotation period of Venus is almost the same as its period of revolution around the sun. The axis of Uranus is tilted 98 degrees; if it were not tilted to more than 90 degrees, it would not be rotating backwards. Pluto's axis is tilted 120 degrees! It is possible that Pluto may have once been a moon of Neptune.[/quote0c558b5eec]
Source http//chem.tufts.edu/science/FrankSteiger/questions.htm
[quote0c558b5eec="jordan90"]A lot of the things you were saying had already been said. Check around in the thread and you'll see what I mean. And if you say my statements have fallacies, please, point them out. I already disproved your whale "limbs" and human embryo with gill slits.[/quote0c558b5eec]
Wait, what? You just said that the bones were there to support muscle. I'd rather believe the myriad of other scientists than your empty claim. You didn't disprove that. Oh and I didn't even bring up the gill slits.
Also, like I said earlier, I'm not surprised that there are overlapping responses. Whatever. I just wish you could address some of my stuff more specifically. As for fallacies, I'd rather not go back through your posts and find them. I know it sounds like I'm just trying to avoid it because I won't find any but trust me, it's not like that. I really don't feel like doing it. I don't think I'd have to go through your posts and point them out to prove it. I'm sure other members have already seen plenty of them.
Let me just say this, none of us on here are experts on the matter so if we can't answer some of these things then I'm sorry. It's easy for Creationists because they can simply fall back and say "God did it."
Anyway, since I spent some time trying to answer your questions, try answering these without resorting to the supernatural -
#1 - The Genesis flood Where did all that water come from? Where did it go?
#2 - How could the Genesis flood form the Grand Canyon?
#3 - How do you explain the universally consistent radioactive dating results obtained with different radioactive elements, and the consistent correlation with objects of known age? more radioactive dating information
#4 - What scientifically factual information can you supply to support your contention that the universe is only a few thousand years old?
#5 - How do you explain the astronomical evidence that the universe is billions of years old, without resorting to the preposterous assumption that the speed of light was millions of times faster in the past than it is now?
#6 - What mathematical proof can you supply, based on the known equations of thermodynamics, that order can not spontaneously arise from disorder?
#7 - If your claim that thermodynamics will not permit the evolution of complex living structures is true, then how do you explain, without resorting to make-believe special mechanisms that have no basis in thermodynamics, the development of a chick in an egg?
#8 - If creationism is scientifically valid, then why is it necessary to emphasize that the sectarian religous dogma of the Book of Genesis is the ultimate scientific authority?
#9 - If you believe that God can override nature to create living things as described in the Book of Genesis, then what reasons do you have, other than your religious beliefs, that God could not have created living things through a process of evolution?
#10 - The standard creationist explanation for the distribution of fossils in geological strata, with most primitive life forms in the lower strata, and mammals and humans in the upper strata, is that clever mankind was smart enough to climb to higher ground to escape the rising flood waters. How do you explain the fact that thousands of persons drowned in the recent Central America floods, in an area contiguous to higher ground? How do you explain the position of the fossils in the geologic layers, with small fossils below large fossils, which is contrary to hydraulic sorting in which large objects settle deeper than small objects?
This is from a quick Google search. Here's the original link - http//www.fsteiger.com/questions-for-creationists.html
Also, look at this quick 4 minute video ---
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXdQRvSdLAs&mode=related&search=
Looks like God was being tricky with chromosome 2 to test our faith.
gnznroses
04-07-2007 21:07:24
[quote23f112c2bb="jordan90"]
Do you still realize the chances of us being here by that, are 1 in 10^113, times the amount of proteins in our dna?[/quote23f112c2bb]
i'll take this as fact for the sake of argument and then say this
low probability does not mean impossibility, and the fact that we are here to consider this means we did beat the odds.
either that or a magical being - whose probability of existing we'll ignore - "decided" to create us as a fun little experiment and/or teach us a lesson (for some reason)
jordan90
04-07-2007 22:01:52
[quote27033a1d20]
Wait, what? You just said that the bones were there to support muscle. I'd rather believe the myriad of other scientists than your empty claim. You didn't disprove that. Oh and I didn't even bring up the gill slits. [/quote27033a1d20]
Wow. Do your research (Google?). They are used to support muscle, evolutionists just try to ignore it.
[quote27033a1d20]Also, like I said earlier, I'm not surprised that there are overlapping responses. Whate it sounds like I'm just trying to avoid it because I won't find any but trustver. I just wish you could address some of my stuff more specifically. As for fallacies, I'd rather not go back through your posts and find them. I know me, it's not like that. I really don't feel like doing it. I don't think I'd have to go through your posts and point them out to prove it. I'm sure other members have already seen plenty of them.
[/quote27033a1d20]
Ok. I have now totally given up trying to talk to you. You say fallacies are in my posts, then when I ask you to show them, you say you don't want to because there's not need to.
Oh, and by the way, if you haven't noticed recently, creation is still leading in the poll. Just thought I'd point that out.
Edit I didn't even see your questions until after I posted this. I'll get to them later. Just for a preview though, here's a few links that will answer your question.
http//www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/AnswersBook/flood12.asp[]http//www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/AnswersBook/flood12.asp and
http//www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/tools/flood-waters.asp[]http//www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/tools/flood-waters.asp. They are very Biblical answers, but the science is in there too.
J4320
04-07-2007 22:25:46
^ What's up with my quote? It's all funky. Oh and I said I didn't want to do it because I didn't feel like doing it. Read the god damn post. I didn't say anything about not doing it because there's not a need to.
jordan90
04-07-2007 22:27:47
[quote97538300c3]Oh and I said I didn't want to do it because I didn't feel like doing it.[/quote97538300c3]
In other words you can't? Just wondering because you're saying you're not going to try at all.
J4320
04-07-2007 22:36:06
Just read the original post and don't try to take it out of context
"As for fallacies, I'd rather not go back through your posts and find them. I know it sounds like I'm just trying to avoid it because I won't find any but trust me, it's not like that. I really don't feel like doing it. I don't think I'd have to go through your posts and point them out to prove it. I'm sure other members have already seen plenty of them."
Seriously. I guess I could go look for a few later but I really don't want to use my time doing that. This doesn't mean that I'm too scared or I wouldn't be able to find any. A lot of your logic is flawed and it's not hard to tell.
tylerc
04-07-2007 22:38:22
I'll settle this now.
You cannot prove, beyond all reasonable doubt, that there is, or is not, a god. There is evidence that backs both evolution and creationism (moreso for evolution I think), but you, like many other Christians, come in here and attempt to force this shit down our throats. Nothing is more irritating to me than a Bible-thumping Christian who refuses to listen to anything other than the Bible, when in reality that could be complete bull shit.
People tried being receptive to your beliefs and your opinions/evidence, but you completely refuse to listen to anything anyone else has to say, instead discounting what could be a good point and saying "nope, Bible says otherwise."
ShaneK
05-07-2007 03:48:58
I think we all needs to leave this thread for a day, collect their thoughts and try again. It seems to be getting a little heated, remember guys we are debating for FUN, no need for the name calling and whatnot.
Sure no one is going change the others mind, but thats not the point of this thread.
zr2152
05-07-2007 09:12:01
[quote84901e4914="tylerc"]I'll settle this now.
You cannot prove, beyond all reasonable doubt, that there is, or is not, a god. There is evidence that backs both evolution and creationism (moreso for evolution I think), but you, like many other Christians, come in here and attempt to force this shit down our throats. Nothing is more irritating to me than a Bible-thumping Christian who refuses to listen to anything other than the Bible, when in reality that could be complete bull shit.
People tried being receptive to your beliefs and your opinions/evidence, but you completely refuse to listen to anything anyone else has to say, instead discounting what could be a good point and saying "nope, Bible says otherwise."[/quote84901e4914]
You couldnt have said it better tyler. This is why Christians get a bad rap....and I hate it.
You cant ignore science.
J4320
05-07-2007 12:14:12
[quote7b22d82c5b="jordan90"][quote7b22d82c5b]
Wait, what? You just said that the bones were there to support muscle. I'd rather believe the myriad of other scientists than your empty claim. You didn't disprove that. Oh and I didn't even bring up the gill slits. [/quote7b22d82c5b]
Wow. Do your research (Google?). They are used to support muscle, evolutionists just try to ignore it.
[quote7b22d82c5b]Also, like I said earlier, I'm not surprised that there are overlapping responses. Whate it sounds like I'm just trying to avoid it because I won't find any but trustver. I just wish you could address some of my stuff more specifically. As for fallacies, I'd rather not go back through your posts and find them. I know me, it's not like that. I really don't feel like doing it. I don't think I'd have to go through your posts and point them out to prove it. I'm sure other members have already seen plenty of them.
[/quote7b22d82c5b]
Ok. I have now totally given up trying to talk to you. You say fallacies are in my posts, then when I ask you to show them, you say you don't want to because there's not need to.
Oh, and by the way, if you haven't noticed recently, creation is still leading in the poll. Just thought I'd point that out.
Edit I didn't even see your questions until after I posted this. I'll get to them later. Just for a preview though, here's a few links that will answer your question.
http//www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/AnswersBook/flood12.asp[]http//www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/AnswersBook/flood12.asp and
http//www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/tools/flood-waters.asp[]http//www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/tools/flood-waters.asp. They are very Biblical answers, but the science is in there too.[/quote7b22d82c5b]
lmao
In those two answersingenesis articles it says ---
[quote7b22d82c5b]We need to remember that about 70% of the earth’s surface is still covered by water. Quite clearly, then, the waters of Noah’s Flood are in today’s ocean basins. [/quote7b22d82c5b]
Yeah quite clearly then, it must have been Noah's flood since we have all of this WATER left over on our planet!
[quote7b22d82c5b]If the waters are still here, why are the highest mountains not still covered with water, as they were in Noah’s day? Psalm 104 suggests an answer. After the waters covered the mountains (verse 6), God rebuked them and they fled (verse 7); the mountains rose, the valleys sank down (verse 8) and God set a boundary so that they will never again cover the earth (verse 9).18 They are the same waters![/quote7b22d82c5b]
Oh so that's the answer. God rebuked them. What was I thinking?!? Duh!
Anyway, I'm glad they are admitting the problems with the Canopy Theory.
I also like this from an article on there that I was reading ---
[quote7b22d82c5b]This is not our idea; God gave us His eyewitness account of His creative acts. So, why do you think that Jesus Christ’s written account of how and when He created is childish and ridiculous? Because of what some teacher, TV program, or textbook says? Your disagreement is not with us but with God and His Word.[/quote7b22d82c5b]
Yeah guys, just ignore what your textbooks and modern scientists are telling you - it directly contradicts our very very old book that we need to take completely literally. Those silly scientist freaks have no idea what they're doing.
Anyway, I don't want my other post to be forgotten about so I'll repost it here ---
[quote7b22d82c5b="jordan90"]All those, except the first one (too big to read) are micro evolution. Now how about macro evolution?[/quote7b22d82c5b]
Alright, sure. Let me just ask you this - do you really think that all of those processes explained in those articles could occur under 6,000 years?
[quote7b22d82c5b="jordan90"]
[quote7b22d82c5b]3. What specific evidence supports the claim of a natural origin of life? (life from non-life in contradiction to the law of biogenesis)
http//www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB090.html[/quote7b22d82c5b]
Doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Plus I like how they use they word "might." They actually admit they don't know. And the questions is asking for evidence. [/quote7b22d82c5b]
It's simply saying that it doesn't go against the law of thermodynamics. Of course they'll say something like "might." We don't have all of the information. There are many different theories and speculations on the origins of earth. Do Creationists have any specific evidence that supports the claim of a greater being snapping his fingers and putting everything into place? No. It works both ways. There is a lot of speculation on both sides. Right now we can't go back and look. What we do know is that we have a robust, solid theory of Evolution that can be tested and confirmed. It explains the development of the species here on this earth. Now there are further theories on how life began, but just because we don't have die-hard evidence of life coming from non-existing life doesn't mean that it didn't happen and it doesn't prove that a greater being created everything. This goes for #3 as well since they both tie in together.
[quote7b22d82c5b="jordan90"]Do you still realize the chances of us being here by that, are 1 in 10^113, times the amount of proteins in our dna? That article tries to make the numbers not look that bad, but the truth is, they are. Lets say you even cut that in half, or a fourth, it would still be astronomically improbable. And again, the question is asking for evidence [/quote7b22d82c5b]
Time or probability is not an issue with Evolution. Take a look at this --
http//www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/
Also, here's what I posted earlier about this (it was even in response to you) --
"How do you know that 4.5 isn't enough? Have you been watching for 4.5 billion years? Creationists do not properly apply the probabilities involved with genetic mutation in Evolution. I'll explain
The probability of winning a 6 ball lotto with 10 numbers is 1 in a million. However, if after each ball comes up, it stays and progresses from there, you will win much faster.
Say we have -
2
4
8
2
9
7
Only 9 is correct. So 9 stays (natural selection).
1
3
4
7
9
2
Now the 4 at the end is correct, so it stays. This will keep building and building until the correct number is eventually reached. The odds are EXTREMELY better than just a 6 digit guess which would be a 1 in a million chance of getting the correct combination.
Natural selection keeps the good digits and gets rid of the bad digits. This speeds up the whole process. Creationists look at Evolution and they say look at the odds; they're 1 in a million. This however is an incorrect calculation of probability. The odds are much better than this and since we have 4.5 billion years on our hands and there is plenty of time to evolve and keep the good and get rid of the bad. Mutation may be random, but the selection is not."
Also, if your little "statistical calculation" of 1 in 10^113 is in reference to before the earth forming, we have an infinite amount of time on our hands. Obviously, those odds don't really even matter when faced with an infinite amount of time.
To all of the macro-related questions look at this -
http//www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/
Also take a look at this video ---
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nnu-O5x_pRU&mode=related&search=
Here's a part that I don't want you to miss ---
![]("7b22d82c5b)
http/" alt=""/img66.imageshack.us/img="66/2487/slide1ny2.jpg[" alt=""/img7b22d82c5b]
[img="7b22d82c5b]http/" alt=""/img359.imageshack.us/img="359/2918/slide2ub8.jpg[" alt=""/img7b22d82c5b]
[quote7b22d82c5b="jordan90"]http//www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/17rec03.htm [/quote7b22d82c5b]
Alright, so even if he did cheat at it, this doesn't disprove Evolution. Sure, if he was a dishonest scientist, then shame on him. Oh and according to the link that you gave me, "p. 677; liRichard Leakey, Illustrated Origin (1971)." was the latest publication of the drawings that they gave. Maybe the book still is being used, but I'd like to see it first. It probably isn't even claiming that the drawings are true. Didn't Haeckel say that it was for the purpose of hypothesis? Are Creationists trying to twist this to their advantage?
[quote7b22d82c5b="jordan90"]If the big bang theory was true, then Venus should be spinning in the same direction it is orbiting the sun, as the other planets are.[/quote7b22d82c5b]
That's quite an assumption.
[quote7b22d82c5b]The assumption is made that if the solar system was formed by the coalescing of planetesimals, then it would not be possible for some planets to rotate backwards and some moons to revolve backwards. This assumption is completely wrong. If the solar system planets were formed by the coalescing of planetesimals, then the early stages would have to be characterized by catastrophic collisions of proto planets. For example, the moon is thought to have been formed from debris ejected when a Mars-sized object collided with the earth. Collisions of this magnitude could result in some planets rotating in an opposite direction. There is no evidence whatever that this could not have happened.
At least 6 moons revolve backwards around the larger planets. More than likely they are captured asteroids, and the direction of revolution would depend on which side of the planet was approached by the asteroid when it was captured into orbit. Three planets rotate backwards Venus, Uranus, and Pluto. The rotation period of Venus is almost the same as its period of revolution around the sun. The axis of Uranus is tilted 98 degrees; if it were not tilted to more than 90 degrees, it would not be rotating backwards. Pluto's axis is tilted 120 degrees! It is possible that Pluto may have once been a moon of Neptune.[/quote7b22d82c5b]
Source http//chem.tufts.edu/science/FrankSteiger/questions.htm
[quote7b22d82c5b="jordan90"]A lot of the things you were saying had already been said. Check around in the thread and you'll see what I mean. And if you say my statements have fallacies, please, point them out. I already disproved your whale "limbs" and human embryo with gill slits.[/quote7b22d82c5b]
Wait, what? You just said that the bones were there to support muscle. I'd rather believe the myriad of other scientists than your empty claim. You didn't disprove that. Oh and I didn't even bring up the gill slits.
Also, like I said earlier, I'm not surprised that there are overlapping responses. Whatever. I just wish you could address some of my stuff more specifically. As for fallacies, I'd rather not go back through your posts and find them. I know it sounds like I'm just trying to avoid it because I won't find any but trust me, it's not like that. I really don't feel like doing it. I don't think I'd have to go through your posts and point them out to prove it. I'm sure other members have already seen plenty of them.
Let me just say this, none of us on here are experts on the matter so if we can't answer some of these things then I'm sorry. It's easy for Creationists because they can simply fall back and say "God did it."
Anyway, since I spent some time trying to answer your questions, try answering these without resorting to the supernatural -
#1 - The Genesis flood Where did all that water come from? Where did it go?
#2 - How could the Genesis flood form the Grand Canyon?
#3 - How do you explain the universally consistent radioactive dating results obtained with different radioactive elements, and the consistent correlation with objects of known age? more radioactive dating information
#4 - What scientifically factual information can you supply to support your contention that the universe is only a few thousand years old?
#5 - How do you explain the astronomical evidence that the universe is billions of years old, without resorting to the preposterous assumption that the speed of light was millions of times faster in the past than it is now?
#6 - What mathematical proof can you supply, based on the known equations of thermodynamics, that order can not spontaneously arise from disorder?
#7 - If your claim that thermodynamics will not permit the evolution of complex living structures is true, then how do you explain, without resorting to make-believe special mechanisms that have no basis in thermodynamics, the development of a chick in an egg?
#8 - If creationism is scientifically valid, then why is it necessary to emphasize that the sectarian religous dogma of the Book of Genesis is the ultimate scientific authority?
#9 - If you believe that God can override nature to create living things as described in the Book of Genesis, then what reasons do you have, other than your religious beliefs, that God could not have created living things through a process of evolution?
#10 - The standard creationist explanation for the distribution of fossils in geological strata, with most primitive life forms in the lower strata, and mammals and humans in the upper strata, is that clever mankind was smart enough to climb to higher ground to escape the rising flood waters. How do you explain the fact that thousands of persons drowned in the recent Central America floods, in an area contiguous to higher ground? How do you explain the position of the fossils in the geologic layers, with small fossils below large fossils, which is contrary to hydraulic sorting in which large objects settle deeper than small objects?
This is from a quick Google search. Here's the original link - http//www.fsteiger.com/questions-for-creationists.html
Also, look at this quick 4 minute video ---
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXdQRvSdLAs&mode=related&search=
Looks like God was being tricky with chromosome 2 to test our faith.
tpkenter
05-07-2007 13:11:53
[quoteb5e50db49c="tylerc"]I'll settle this now.
You cannot prove, beyond all reasonable doubt, that there is, or is not, a god. There is evidence that backs both evolution and creationism[/quoteb5e50db49c]
I agree with you. I don't understand why so many people do not want the scientific facts of creationism to be taught in schools. If there is evidence that backs both theories, why can't they both be taught in schools? I am NOT talking about teaching from the Bible, only teaching the scientific facts and theories.
I also find it interesting that creationism is ahead in the polls, when only evolution is taught in schools.
KeithA
05-07-2007 13:23:27
[quoted2b8ca5d3d="tpkenter"][quoted2b8ca5d3d="tylerc"]I'll settle this now.
You cannot prove, beyond all reasonable doubt, that there is, or is not, a god. There is evidence that backs both evolution and creationism[/quoted2b8ca5d3d]
I agree with you. I don't understand why so many people do not want the scientific facts of creationism to be taught in schools.[/quoted2b8ca5d3d]
There are no such things as "scientific facts of creationism." My facts and theories do not masquerade as religious, so let's stop your myths from masquerading as factual or scientific.
By the way, I was taught a great deal about creationism and religion at both of the Jesuit schools I attended. These ideas [id2b8ca5d3d]are[/id2b8ca5d3d] taught in schools, just not the ones that are funded by taxpayer dollars.
If you revisit my earlier post, you will be reminded of the fact that just because something cannot be [id2b8ca5d3d]disproved[/id2b8ca5d3d] by science does not justify its teaching in a science class.
Science does not treat "truth" the way an American court of justice treats innocence. It is quite the opposite we don't believe you until you persuade us otherwise.
J4320
05-07-2007 13:23:55
[quotefad737a2bf="tpkenter"][quotefad737a2bf="tylerc"]I'll settle this now.
You cannot prove, beyond all reasonable doubt, that there is, or is not, a god. There is evidence that backs both evolution and creationism[/quotefad737a2bf]
I agree with you. I don't understand why so many people do not want the scientific facts of creationism to be taught in schools. If there is evidence that backs both theories, why can't they both be taught in schools? I am NOT talking about teaching from the Bible, only teaching the scientific facts and theories.
I also find it interesting that creationism is ahead in the polls, when only evolution is taught in schools.[/quotefad737a2bf]
The problem is there aren't "scientific facts" of creationism. Most of it is faith-based and it contradicts science. Look, most of creationist claims can't be tested. It's faith based and that is not science. Science is built on proof and knowledge, not on faith.
Also, the Creationist ideas that can be tested have been tested and they have been proven false. They are merely religious beliefs and they shouldn't be shown as scientific. People are so sadly misinformed about this that they believe that creationism actually has as much evidence as evolution, therefore both belong in the classroom. However, this isn't true at all. Why take time out to teach about the origins of the Judaic/Christian/Islamic beginnings without considering the origins of the Indian/Chinese/Norse/etc beginnings? These [bfad737a2bf]beliefs[/bfad737a2bf] belong in a philosophical or sociological classroom, not a science classroom.
[quotefad737a2bf="tpkenter"]I also find it interesting that creationism is ahead in the polls, when only evolution is taught in schools.[/quotefad737a2bf]
I don't find it interesting; I find it sad. It just shows how misinformed the general public is about these things.
lieditli
Nice post, Keith. Exactly how I feel. )
KeithA
05-07-2007 13:29:04
By the way, I would also like to remind everyone that the theory of evolution is not a theory about the origin of life or the universe.
J4320
05-07-2007 13:31:49
[quote19342c268d="KeithA"]By the way, I would also like to remind everyone that the theory of evolution is not a theory about the origin of life or the universe.[/quote19342c268d]
Exactly, that's what I've been trying to say. Like I said earlier --
"What we do know is that we have a robust, solid theory of Evolution that can be tested and confirmed. It explains the development of the species here on this earth. Now there are further theories on how life began, but just because we don't have die-hard evidence of life coming from non-existing life doesn't mean that it didn't happen and it doesn't prove that a greater being created everything."
ShaneK
08-07-2007 04:52:59
I am sure this has already been posted, but its worth it again.
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmvlZQZzFts
this also on the family guy bible theme http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXCNJlh4dcQ
ShaneK
12-07-2007 15:15:38
[quote1c1b54c1ce]Yeah, and you also [i1c1b54c1ce]think[/i1c1b54c1ce] that organized religion is a danger to society. And some people [i1c1b54c1ce]think[/i1c1b54c1ce] that a big bang happened, and some people [i1c1b54c1ce]think[/i1c1b54c1ce] that a higher power created us. [b1c1b54c1ce]The truth is they haven't found water.[/b1c1b54c1ce][/quote1c1b54c1ce]
http//www.esa.int/esaCP/SEMBDZI2O3F_index_0.html
Pwnt?
No, I know it isn't water in the form you want it to be, but hey, in the 40 whatever years we have seriously been exploring space, I say the chances are good rock planets have water on them, wouldn't ya think?
Is this thread dead? Sorry if anyone gets pissed because of the bump.
zr2152
12-07-2007 15:21:36
[quote7f82d3e52b="ShaneK"][quote7f82d3e52b]Yeah, and you also [i7f82d3e52b]think[/i7f82d3e52b] that organized religion is a danger to society. And some people [i7f82d3e52b]think[/i7f82d3e52b] that a big bang happened, and some people [i7f82d3e52b]think[/i7f82d3e52b] that a higher power created us. [b7f82d3e52b]The truth is they haven't found water.[/b7f82d3e52b][/quote7f82d3e52b]
http//www.esa.int/esaCP/SEMBDZI2O3F_index_0.html
Pwnt?
No, I know it isn't water in the form you want it to be, but hey, in the 40 whatever years we have seriously been exploring space, I say the chances are good rock planets have water on them, wouldn't ya think?
Is this thread dead? Sorry if anyone gets pissed because of the bump.[/quote7f82d3e52b]
I love the bump and this thread will never die because the debate will never either.
J4320
12-07-2007 16:59:24
I'm still waiting for jordan90 to respond to my big post up north.
Also -- who says life needs water?
jordan90
13-07-2007 06:48:47
[quotee635bae783]http//www.esa.int/esaCP/SEMBDZI2O3F_index_0.html [/quotee635bae783]
They think it's water because they can't explain what else it might be (read the article if you don't believe me). Kind of like when I say God created everything because I can't explain or comprehend what else might have happened.
[quotee635bae783]I'm still waiting for jordan90 to respond to my big post up north. [/quotee635bae783]
Actually I picked up a few books from the library and reading through them, which is why I haven't taken any time to post in this thread. "Language of God" that zr2152 recommended is actually pretty good.
mcgrom
13-07-2007 08:27:57
My mom always said there is two kind of conversations you don't want to start or be in and that is religion and politics. So... I won't even put my 2 cents in.
jordan90
13-07-2007 09:55:29
[quote882889e658="mcgrom"]My mom always said there is two kind of conversations you don't want to start or be in and that is religion and politics. So... I won't even put my 2 cents in.[/quote882889e658]
True, but you gotta know what you stand for and why. I like debating it mainly for the education. I've come up in a very stand-firm on the Bible only family and school, so I have only heard certain arguments for and against evolution. Through a discussion like this I get to hear what everyone thinks and believes, even if I don't agree with it.
ShaneK
13-07-2007 09:59:11
Kudos to you for that jordan. I like how this thread hasn't reached the "shut the fuck up you jackass" end that most discussions on the internet about religion end up as.
J4320
17-07-2007 13:52:02
[quote9f8560f59a="jordan90"][quote9f8560f59a]http//www.esa.int/esaCP/SEMBDZI2O3F_index_0.html [/quote9f8560f59a]
They think it's water because they can't explain what else it might be (read the article if you don't believe me). Kind of like when I say God created everything because I can't explain or comprehend what else might have happened.
[quote9f8560f59a]I'm still waiting for jordan90 to respond to my big post up north. [/quote9f8560f59a]
Actually I picked up a few books from the library and reading through them, which is why I haven't taken any time to post in this thread. "Language of God" that zr2152 recommended is actually pretty good.[/quote9f8560f59a]
Hopefully that book talks some more sense into you. Taking the Bible literally just doesn't work.
Watch this video
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=5mPPnN1c0jk
(only 7 mins)
ShaneK
18-07-2007 06:26:32
Oh. My. God.
Jordan, your credibility flew out the window when I watched this video I found on digg.com "100 Reasons why Evolution is so stupid."
http//video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-6814048597272982882&q=genre%3ARELIGIOUS+duration%3Along[]http//video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-6814048597272982882&q=genre%3ARELIGIOUS+duration%3Along All of your "points" come from this movie, and that really really discredits anything you have previously said. Did you just rent the Kent Hovind movie and retype everything you heard on there? This dude is a fraud, actually he is serving a 10 year stay in prison right now.
You talked to us about the prize for anyone who proves evolution? It is this guys freaking contest, and its scam at that
(from wikipedia) Critics view this offer to be spurious because of the conditions which Hovind imposes. The winner would have to convince Hovind that not only is evolution real but that it "is the only possible way the observed phenomena could have come into existence" [5], in other words, he/she would have to think up every other possible theoretical scenario in the universe for the existence of everything in the universe and then disprove it -- leaving only evolution standing at the end for Hovind to accept it as true. Hovind also insists that evolution equates to atheism[6]even though the belief in God is arguably unrelated to evolution and the two are not mutually exclusive.
So you base your entire life on a unoriginal book and a convicted felons words? Yikes.
![]("c34a3b0137)
http//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/09/Kent_Hovind_Booking_Photo.jpg[" alt=""/imgc34a3b0137]
Mug shot FTW.
zdub08
18-07-2007 06:30:29
I remember him from an Ali G interview. Why exactly is he in jail?
jordan90
18-07-2007 09:01:14
[quote3e9b0892b7="zdub08"]I remember him from an Ali G interview. Why exactly is he in jail?[/quote3e9b0892b7]
Tax evasion. If Shane would read my posts he would realize I already said Kent Hovind ain't got a bright light bulb. The guy's pretty dumb.
And Shane, keep in mind that Kent Hovind isn't the first guy to think of arguments and facts against evolution. So why, I ask you, does my credibility fly out the window? Actually I've never even watched that movie by Kent Hovind. I have watched one by him called "Lies in the Textbooks," but that's it.
[quote3e9b0892b7]
So you base your entire life on a unoriginal book and a convicted felons words? Yikes. [/quote3e9b0892b7]
That statement is subject to your perspective and not actual fact. And I don't base it on convicted felons. Nice attempt at a personal attack though.
Again, I'm still reading a couple of books. I already read most of "The Language of God," and I just started to read "The Face that Demonstrates the Farce of Evolution." I figured I'd read one for evolution, and then one against and see who wins.
zdub08
18-07-2007 09:39:16
heres the vid I was talking about http//youtube.com/watch?v=p4rvsFpEJKQ
D
ShaneK
18-07-2007 11:07:05
My bad for getting on your Jordan, but I was watching this video, and it was like I could checkoff everything he said with everything you said in this thread, just found it a little odd. Like you creationists have a handbook to follow or something.
zdub, ali g is amazing, hillarious interview!
tylerc
18-07-2007 11:13:11
Jordan90-
Not sure how you mean one for evolution, since farce is defined as
1. a light, humorous play in which the plot depends upon a skillfully exploited situation rather than upon the development of character.
2. humor of the type displayed in such works.
3. foolish show; mockery; a ridiculous sham.
And Amazon's description of the second book you are reading writes
[quote73eaaef5c9]Book Description
Looking into the face of our alleged ape ancestor, popular Christian apologist Hank Hanegraaff dissects and debunks the astonishingly weak arguments for the evolutionary theory, revealing it as nothing more than a "fairy tale for grown-ups." The author uses his own Memory Dynamics to make it easy for Christians to speak intelligently about evolution and speak persuasively about the Creator.[/quote73eaaef5c9]
wasabe
18-07-2007 11:48:38
jordan90
18-07-2007 12:01:47
[quoted6370bb9f2="zdub08"]heres the vid I was talking about http//youtube.com/watch?v=p4rvsFpEJKQ
D[/quoted6370bb9f2]
lol nice vid.
[quoted6370bb9f2]My bad for getting on your Jordan, but I was watching this video, and it was like I could checkoff everything he said with everything you said in this thread, just found it a little odd. Like you creationists have a handbook to follow or something. [/quoted6370bb9f2]
Actually Kent Hovind pretty much used other people arguments without coming up with much stuff on his own. But like I said before, I've been raised in a very stand firm on the Bible home, which is why I have the same arguments as other similar creationists.
[quoted6370bb9f2]
Not sure how you mean one for evolution, since farce is defined as [/quoted6370bb9f2]
The first book, "The Language of God," is actually for evolution. Just not from an atheistic point of view. That's what I meant by one for evolution and one against. I should have pointed that out.
tylerc
18-07-2007 12:04:00
[quotea89971da0c]From Publishers Weekly
Collins, a pioneering medical geneticist who once headed the Human Genome Project, adapts his title from President Clinton's remarks announcing completion of the first phase of the project in 2000 "Today we are learning the language in which God created life." Collins explains that as a Christian believer, "the experience of sequencing the human genome, and uncovering this most remarkable of all texts, was both a stunning scientific achievement and an occasion of worship." This marvelous book combines a personal account of Collins's faith and experiences as a genetics researcher with discussions of more general topics of science and spirituality, especially centering around evolution. Following the lead of C.S. Lewis, whose Mere Christianity was influential in Collins's conversion from atheism, the book argues that belief in a transcendent, personal God—and even the possibility of an occasional miracle—can and should coexist with a scientific picture of the world that includes evolution...[/quotea89971da0c]
Not what I would call FOR evolution.
J4320
18-07-2007 13:20:07
Any comments on this video, jordan90?
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=5mPPnN1c0jk
<('.'<) <('.'<) <('.'<) <('.'<) <('.'<)
Here's another one to enjoy -
http//youtube.com/watch?v=bV4_lVTVa6k&mode=related&search=
![[img32e30fb53a]http/" alt=""/img263.imageshack.us/img="263/5205/haeckel9ik.th.jpg[" alt=""/img32e30fb53a][=http//img="263.imageshack.us/my.php?image=haeckel9ik.jpg][img32e30fb53a]http/" alt=""/img263.imageshack.us/img="263/5205/haeckel9ik.th.jpg[" alt=""/img32e30fb53a]](=http//img="263.imageshack.us/my.php?image=haeckel9ik.jpg){kind=link}
![[imgcfc7a640f8]http/" alt=""/img148.imageshack.us/img="148/5135/tutscan2zoom0wm.th.jpg[" alt=""/imgcfc7a640f8][=http//img="148.imageshack.us/my.php?image=tutscan2zoom0wm.jpg][imgcfc7a640f8]http/" alt=""/img148.imageshack.us/img="148/5135/tutscan2zoom0wm.th.jpg[" alt=""/imgcfc7a640f8]](=http//img="148.imageshack.us/my.php?image=tutscan2zoom0wm.jpg){kind=link}
![[img236b8a5d83]http/" alt=""/img109.imageshack.us/img="109/2771/ex08003a14jt.th.jpg[" alt=""/img236b8a5d83][=http//img="109.imageshack.us/my.php?image=ex08003a14jt.jpg][img236b8a5d83]http/" alt=""/img109.imageshack.us/img="109/2771/ex08003a14jt.th.jpg[" alt=""/img236b8a5d83]](=http//img="109.imageshack.us/my.php?image=ex08003a14jt.jpg){kind=link}