It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A question from a Christian

page: 5
10
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 14 2014 @ 11:42 PM
link   
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Bart Ehrman is agnostic... Not an atheist

Just so you know





posted on Jun, 14 2014 @ 11:53 PM
link   
"What credentials in the scientific world would allow you the ability to decide if it is good or bad evidence? Not really challenging you, just curious. I am public school educated, with a lot of degrees in the College of Hard Knocks, and I am an expert in nothing. "

Its not the credentials I want to know about. I am not going to take people at the word but form my own opinion based on their evidence and experiments. I hear people say Macro-evolution is fact all the time. If it is fact surely one person could find information on a genetic pathway for which a Mesonychid could turn into a whale. As whale evolution is one of peoples favorite things to talk about on the origins thread.

I am not an expert in anything and everything. Nor have I claimed to be. However, i do have the ability to read and research, which allows me to form educated opinions on evidence or experiments and to understand their concepts.



posted on Jun, 14 2014 @ 11:58 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm


Have any examples of self sacrifice by animals???

I'm rather surprised that you have to ask. Haven't we all heard about dogs sacrificing themselves for their masters?

Anyway,


Beyond the physical exertions that in some species mothers and in some species fathers undertake to protect their young, extreme examples of sacrifice may occur. One example is matriphagy (the consumption of the mother by her offspring) in the spider Stegodyphus; another example is a male spider allowing a female fertilized by him to eat him. Hamilton's rule describes the benefit of such altruism in terms of Wright's coefficient of relationship to the beneficiary and the benefit granted to the beneficiary minus the cost to the sacrificer. Should this sum be greater than zero a fitness gain will result from the sacrifice. Source



posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 12:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Astyanax

Well, that's kinda why I asked. I've heard of dogs who put themselves in harms way for their masters and then die as a result, but I wasn't considering that to be a sacrifice exactly. To me a self sacrifice means knowing that death will be the result for action. I couldn't off hand think of anything that would qualify.

Now that you mention your example I can think of a couple similar types of examples I guess. Although even that is somewhat debatable depending on who you ask. Many people don't consider animals or any creature other than humans to be self aware enough to qualify for such actions. I personally would disagree when it comes to the higher developed animals like Elephants, Dolphins or even Dogs. Insects probably not so much as I'd attribute to instinctual rather than mental, but it's not exactly something I'm gonna worry about debating in this case. I was just kinda curious more than anything....



posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 12:53 AM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

Actually were finding out animals are smarter then we thought. It's debate able right now if dogs, octopie or dolphins are self aware. It turns out other human intelligence isn't all that unique. You can really see the progression of intelligence along the way looking At other creatures.



posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 01:01 AM
link   
a reply to: ArtemisE

Oh yah, I totally agree. I'm an animal lover myself and dog owner so I know full well that some animals have much higher forms of thinking than what they're given credit for.

The strange animal pair bonding is one of my favorite. Now that it seems everything is being recorded and placed online is also a cool recent development that shows how much more animals interact with animals, nature and even humans in way in which most people don't realize.

Anyway, don't want to derail this so I'll end here and say "God" something something......ya...



posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 01:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Margana

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb

originally posted by: Margana
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb


originally posted by: puzzlesphere
In science there is no differentiation between macro and micro-evolution... they are the same thing.

If you admit that "microevolution" happens, then, end of argument.
______________________

There are examples of bacteria and some larger scale organisms that have specifically changed genus through 1000's of generations. This is what creationists call microevolution... they are wrong... they ask for an example of one species "changing" into another, and it has been shown multiple times with multiple species up to some small insects... then the goalposts get moved and they ask for "bigger" (macro) examples.

If recorded history keeps going for another few thousand years, then larger examples will be shown in time, in a natural progression that has been under analysis for hundreds of years already, which is why evolution is the only theory to hold water to date (god did it isn't scientific)... basically ever more examples will be shown as time affords us the ability to see long span generational changes across increasingly long lived and complex creatures... including humans.

As such, the definitions of micro and macro-evolution keep sliding... which is why there is no differentiation in science, because inaccurate definitions can't be relied upon.

Evolution happens... accept it, or remain ignorant.


I agree with this user and would like to see you & OptimusSubprime address it. Contrary to claims by creationists, macro and microevolution describe fundamentally identical processes on different time scales

Watch BBC: Planet Earth. You can see how different animals have evolved to be able to survive in their environment.


Show me a genetic pathway then? You are speculating. There is no evidence that shows variance within species over long periods of time will produce a new organism entirely. If you have some of that evidence please share it.


I don't know why I'm doing the research for you, guess it's the only way you'd ever look at any articles like this.

The evolution of molecular genetic pathways and networks.

The evolutionary dynamics of evolvability in a gene network model.

Long-term evolution is surprisingly predictable in lattice proteins.

Evolution of microbes and viruses: a paradigm shift in evolutionary biology?


so you believe that stuff?
just asking, why.

have you seen all that in action?

i think servantofthelamb is correct.

a pinto has more in common with a ferrari than a cessna.



posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 01:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: tsingtao
so you believe that stuff? just asking, why.

Now there's a REAL question for you.

Defending an argument with a bunch of links that all end with .gov...

Of course the gubmint' has NEVER lied to us before...



posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 01:35 AM
link   
That wasn't a question. Christians don't ask questions - they demand others accept their answers.

Yours was a thinly veiled such example.



posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 01:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: BasementWarriorKryptonite
That wasn't a question. Christians don't ask questions - they demand others accept their answers.

Yours was a thinly veiled such example.


I could just turn that statement around. Seeing as how you don't know me nor my.character why don't you stick to facts?



posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 02:22 AM
link   
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Good point...

Perhaps because there ARE no facts.

Whats that leave you with?

Personal attacks, hate, ridicule, and denial.

They can't dispute the obvious truth, so instead they attack the person in order to discredit and mislead others.

When faced with evidence or facts they can't refute, word games and denial to try to obfuscate the issue is all that's left.



posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 06:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb

originally posted by: BasementWarriorKryptonite
That wasn't a question. Christians don't ask questions - they demand others accept their answers.

Yours was a thinly veiled such example.


I could just turn that statement around. Seeing as how you don't know me nor my.character why don't you stick to facts?


I stick to my belief that religion is the scourge of humanity. There's a fact for you.



posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 06:57 AM
link   
a reply to: tsingtao

Good example of an Argument from Personal Incredulity.

"I don't believe it therefore it's wrong"

Luckily the universe is not bound by your limited scope.



posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 09:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: tsingtao

Good example of an Argument from Personal Incredulity.

"I don't believe it therefore it's wrong"

Luckily the universe is not bound by your limited scope.



seems like murgatroid was correct.
"
Perhaps because there ARE no facts.

Whats that leave you with?

Personal attacks, hate, ridicule, and denial.

They can't dispute the obvious truth, so instead they attack the person in order to discredit and mislead others.

When faced with evidence or facts they can't refute, word games and denial to try to obfuscate the issue is all that's left."



posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 10:05 AM
link   
a reply to: tsingtao

Talk about a persecution complex. Someone posted evidence, you dismissed it out of hand. That's an argument from personal incredulity. Get over it.



posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 10:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: tsingtao

originally posted by: Margana

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb

originally posted by: Margana
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb


originally posted by: puzzlesphere
In science there is no differentiation between macro and micro-evolution... they are the same thing.

If you admit that "microevolution" happens, then, end of argument.
______________________

There are examples of bacteria and some larger scale organisms that have specifically changed genus through 1000's of generations. This is what creationists call microevolution... they are wrong... they ask for an example of one species "changing" into another, and it has been shown multiple times with multiple species up to some small insects... then the goalposts get moved and they ask for "bigger" (macro) examples.

If recorded history keeps going for another few thousand years, then larger examples will be shown in time, in a natural progression that has been under analysis for hundreds of years already, which is why evolution is the only theory to hold water to date (god did it isn't scientific)... basically ever more examples will be shown as time affords us the ability to see long span generational changes across increasingly long lived and complex creatures... including humans.

As such, the definitions of micro and macro-evolution keep sliding... which is why there is no differentiation in science, because inaccurate definitions can't be relied upon.

Evolution happens... accept it, or remain ignorant.


I agree with this user and would like to see you & OptimusSubprime address it. Contrary to claims by creationists, macro and microevolution describe fundamentally identical processes on different time scales

Watch BBC: Planet Earth. You can see how different animals have evolved to be able to survive in their environment.


Show me a genetic pathway then? You are speculating. There is no evidence that shows variance within species over long periods of time will produce a new organism entirely. If you have some of that evidence please share it.


I don't know why I'm doing the research for you, guess it's the only way you'd ever look at any articles like this.

The evolution of molecular genetic pathways and networks.

The evolutionary dynamics of evolvability in a gene network model.

Long-term evolution is surprisingly predictable in lattice proteins.

Evolution of microbes and viruses: a paradigm shift in evolutionary biology?


so you believe that stuff?
just asking, why.

have you seen all that in action?

i think servantofthelamb is correct.

a pinto has more in common with a ferrari than a cessna.




Here is an idea.

If you don't believe it then go falsify it. That is the beauty of scientific discoveries you don't have to believe. If you disagree or doubt any of it all you need is the motivation and willpower to verify or falsify it yourself.

Don't just blame the government source or complain that it doesn't sound right. Go educate yourself and do something about it. If you can falsify it then write a paper on it and you will be celebrated.

Fath/belief is not required unlike religion. So go tare it up.

So the real question is, if you don't believe it why are people just siting on their arses complaining why aren't they doing something about it. The complainers and doubters sound like a bunch of lazy bumb's to me.
edit on 15-6-2014 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 11:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: NoRulesAllowed

originally posted by: AfterInfinity
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

so you feel that all of the graphs and charts we have compiled illustrating the evolutionary progress of many of today's species dating back millions of years are complete nonsense?


If someone believes in creation 10,000 something years ago, doesn't it necessarily imply to deny and reject all other evidence? You cannot reconcile creationism and evolution, so of course he MUST say it's nonsense, false, erroneous, whatever. His belief doesn't give him the choice : )


On the contrary, there are many people who are somehow able to reconcile evolution and creation. It has the benefit of not looking like an ignoramus while still enjoying all the perks of believing there's another world waiting for you after this one. One more example of how religion resembles nothing so much as a giant Lego set.
edit on 15-6-2014 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 11:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi
Go educate yourself and do something about it. Fath/belief is not required unlike religion.

Education = indoctrination

Science = religion

Credibility = zero


As another man without a high school diploma, I discovered many years ago that the "educated" class is generally not educated at all, it is mis-educated. The whole purpose of American (perhaps all "western") "higher education" is obviously to bring minds into lock step with "The Agenda." As a general rule, the less official American education a person has been exposed to, the greater his/her ration of common sense.

"Education" is Spiritual Suicide

"...the Illuminati eventually controlled the science departments in all colleges and institutions of higher learning. The plan was to stifle scientific knowledge and then twist what was left to fit the science they wanted the people to believe.

Science - The Illuminati Religion and Mind Control Tool for the Masses



posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 11:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: BasementWarriorKryptonite
I stick to my belief that religion is the scourge of humanity. There's a fact for you.

100% correct...

Science - The Illuminati Religion and Mind Control Tool for the Masses



posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 12:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Murgatroid

originally posted by: BasementWarriorKryptonite
I stick to my belief that religion is the scourge of humanity. There's a fact for you.

100% correct...

Science - The Illuminati Religion and Mind Control Tool for the Masses


Quoting obscure websites that exist independently from scientific investigative methods and rely heavily on extrapolation and confirmation bias is not a constructive approach to meaningful debate. Then again, you're not here to debate...
edit on 15-6-2014 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
10
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join