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: 6
10
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 12:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb

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? they may be incomplete but they are grounded in facts that are even now tested and examined in the interest of professional and scientific accuracy.


Lets not be so broad with our replies. how about you show me one chart of one organism, and let me decide if it is good or bad evidence for macro-evolution.


I have a better proposition. How about I show you one chart illustrating the evolutionary trail of one organism, and we let the general members of ATS decide whether it constitutes valid evidence or not. I'm not leaving it up to your judgment, and I'm not leaving it up to mine either. Let the forum tell us what it thinks.

Actually, I'm going to post more than one. As you can see, the focus is humans and their ancestry:









They aren't as detailed as I would like, but they certainly do for a start. Now, let's leave it up to the denizens of ATS to determine the merit of these charts. If need be, they can fact check it.
edit on 15-6-2014 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 12:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: AfterInfinity
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...

Obviously neither are you.

Quoting mainstream Science fundamentalism is ALSO not a constructive approach to meaningful debate.

You are sounding just as naive as the the State Farm girl:

(Substitute Science for "The Internet")


Where did you hear that?
The Internet.
And you believed it?
Yeah. They can't put anything on the Internet that isn't true.
Where did you hear that?
The Internet.



posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 01:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Murgatroid

You don't need to take anything at face value in science. You are more than welcome to independently validate any claim you choose and publish your results in an academic journal of you manage to refute any of them. That you are too lazy and ignorant to do so is not the fault of science, it is the fault of you.



posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 01:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Murgatroid

originally posted by: AfterInfinity
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...

Obviously neither are you.

Quoting mainstream Science fundamentalism is ALSO not a constructive approach to meaningful debate.

You are sounding just as naive as the the State Farm girl:

(Substitute Science for "The Internet")


Where did you hear that?
The Internet.
And you believed it?
Yeah. They can't put anything on the Internet that isn't true.
Where did you hear that?
The Internet.



The irony is strong with this one. Btw, stop talking to me. I have no interest in your asinine opinions, given where you take them from (geddit?).
edit on 15-6-2014 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 01:27 PM
link   
a reply to: GetHyped

Once again when faced with evidence or facts they can't refute, they attack the person in order to discredit and mislead.

From my viewpoint it really makes it REAL hard to take a person seriously when they say things like this.

Skyfloating touched on this and he is dead on the money IMHO:


Skyfloating
@OP: Its a nice OP, thanks. I create a plane, then there is a plane. It follows that things initially come into existence through creation. Makes perfect sense.

But you want to know what actually convinced me of the ID crowd? 10 years of seeing the completely spiteful, mocking and ignorant behavior of atheists/evolutionists on online forums, with their childish remarks on "you believe in the toothfairy, nanananana!"

Seeing such a stark contrast in mentality, decency, respect and kindness makes it pretty obvious which if these sides have refined and cultured minds and which are of more simple and coarse intelligence. www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 01:27 PM
link   
a reply to: GetHyped

Sounds like there are some people who do not like the scientific method some even seem to refuse learning what it is. They don't offer a better method they just complain. Even if they did come up with a better method they would need to use the scientific method to prove it.

Instead they just say god dun it.

Computers and combustion engines must seem like magic to them. Laser pointers must drive them nutz.



posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 02:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Murgatroid


Once again when faced with evidence or facts they can't refute, they attack the person in order to discredit and mislead.

From my viewpoint it really makes it REAL hard to take a person seriously when they say things like this.


It's also hard to take someone seriously when they are only interested in what they themselves think. Unless, of course, someone else thinks the same thing they do. In which case, they are very interested in hearing what they think from someone else's mouth.


Also, the irony continues in that you were responding to a post I posted in response to your attacking me instead of my argument. Shall I demonstrate? Of course.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

^^^ so what were you saying about attacking the person rather than refuting evidence and facts? I can't hear you over your hypocrisy.

Now let's get off the subject of each other and get back to the topic.
edit on 15-6-2014 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 10:43 PM
link   
Servant of the Lamb

Why have you not responded to my post on p.3 of the thread? I referred you to a text that provides exactly what you have asked for. Why don't you read it, instead of continuing to ask a question that has already been answered? The book is freely available in shops and libraries.

I'll tell you why. It's because the last thing on Earth you want is to have your question answered. You are here for one reason and one reason only: to shout down your own doubts. How are you doing with that?



posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 11:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Astyanax

That is obviously the reason the "devote" get upset at science and others who question Christianity . It's because obvious who is streaching things. It's obvious which side doesn't really add up. So they attack anything that makes them doubt...



posted on Jun, 16 2014 @ 12:26 AM
link   
a reply to: AfterInfinity

Not sure how this constitutes as evidence for anything. I mean anyone could make a chart like the one you posted. The majority of the pictures are artist renderings ...no hard evidence in that chart for macro evolution at all



posted on Jun, 16 2014 @ 12:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Astyanax
Servant of the Lamb

Why have you not responded to my post on p.3 of the thread? I referred you to a text that provides exactly what you have asked for. Why don't you read it, instead of continuing to ask a question that has already been answered? The book is freely available in shops and libraries.

I'll tell you why. It's because the last thing on Earth you want is to have your question answered. You are here for one reason and one reason only: to shout down your own doubts. How are you doing with that?


Why would I respond to such a ridiculous post. I am not going to spend the time to refute an entire book.



posted on Jun, 16 2014 @ 12:38 AM
link   
Kit was of otherworldly influence to make intelligence of this earth. Not God or Mary etc but Aliens with synical motives...



posted on Jun, 16 2014 @ 12:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb

originally posted by: Astyanax
Servant of the Lamb

Why have you not responded to my post on p.3 of the thread? I referred you to a text that provides exactly what you have asked for. Why don't you read it, instead of continuing to ask a question that has already been answered? The book is freely available in shops and libraries.

I'll tell you why. It's because the last thing on Earth you want is to have your question answered. You are here for one reason and one reason only: to shout down your own doubts. How are you doing with that?


Why would I respond to such a ridiculous post. I am not going to spend the time to refute an entire book.


I will: The christian bible is a load of horse manure.

There, now - not so hard, was it?

You have a go.



posted on Jun, 16 2014 @ 12:44 AM
link   
I read your user name, the thread title, and your post history, and all I have to say is...


originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
I do not argue against evolution because of my religious views, but simply because I do not believe it happens.


Lol, YEAH RIGHT!

Do you scrutinize every scientific theory so fervently?


edit on 16-6-2014 by Tearman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2014 @ 01:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Tearman
I read your user name, the thread title, and your post history, and all I have to say is...


originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
I do not argue against evolution because of my religious views, but simply because I do not believe it happens.


Lol, YEAH RIGHT!

Do you scrutinize every scientific theory so fervently?



Nope. Just the ones I feel aren't fact. So are you saying that because I believe in god I am some how void of the ability to disagree with a theory based on scientific reasons? None of my post have been God did it so evolution can't be true. The fact is even if macroevolution was true it wouldn't mean the Christian god doesn't exist. So there is no religious reason for me to dispute it.



posted on Jun, 16 2014 @ 01:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: BasementWarriorKryptonite

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb

originally posted by: Astyanax
Servant of the Lamb

Why have you not responded to my post on p.3 of the thread? I referred you to a text that provides exactly what you have asked for. Why don't you read it, instead of continuing to ask a question that has already been answered? The book is freely available in shops and libraries.

I'll tell you why. It's because the last thing on Earth you want is to have your question answered. You are here for one reason and one reason only: to shout down your own doubts. How are you doing with that?


Why would I respond to such a ridiculous post. I am not going to spend the time to refute an entire book.


I will: The christian bible is a load of horse manure.

There, now - not so hard, was it?

You have a go.


Your post are so enlightening. The ancestors tell was written for money and therefore incredibly bias and untrue.

So let's start with the first questions isthe idea of a creator horse manure or just the bible and its god?



posted on Jun, 16 2014 @ 01:14 AM
link   
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Just the bible - I'm sure there are some snippets of truth in it, but it's a corrupted piece of work, serving only religious politics.

I am certain there is a creator. Too many things around us and us ourselves cannot be accidents. My certainty is not other's certainty of something else, though.



posted on Jun, 16 2014 @ 01:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb

originally posted by: Tearman
I read your user name, the thread title, and your post history, and all I have to say is...


originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
I do not argue against evolution because of my religious views, but simply because I do not believe it happens.


Lol, YEAH RIGHT!

Do you scrutinize every scientific theory so fervently?



Nope. Just the ones I feel aren't fact. So are you saying that because I believe in god I am some how void of the ability to disagree with a theory based on scientific reasons? ...
I'm saying as far as I can tell every single thread and post you've made has been religiously motivated. So ask yourself honestly when you first sought the truth about evolution? Did you even have any interest in science before someone told you evolution was a lie?

Name one other scientific theory you've examined in such detail. For fun, let's exclude topics having to do with global warming or vaccines.
edit on 16-6-2014 by Tearman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2014 @ 01:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Tearman

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb

originally posted by: Tearman
I read your user name, the thread title, and your post history, and all I have to say is...


originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
I do not argue against evolution because of my religious views, but simply because I do not believe it happens.


Lol, YEAH RIGHT!

Do you scrutinize every scientific theory so fervently?



Nope. Just the ones I feel aren't fact. So are you saying that because I believe in god I am some how void of the ability to disagree with a theory based on scientific reasons? ...
I'm saying as far as I can tell every single thread and post you've made has been religiously motivated. So ask yourself honestly when you first sought the truth about evolution? Did you even have any interest in science before someone told you evolution was a lie?

Name one other scientific theory you've examined in such detail. For fun, let's exclude topics having to do with global warming or vaccines.


Big bang theory. Certain parts of quantum theory. My interest lie in the origins of life. The origins of morality . the origins of the universe. I mean what makes you think its true? Science knows of no known genetic pathway for which evolution to operate within nor does it have any evidence that implies the types of morphological changes said to occur are even possible so why call it fact?



posted on Jun, 16 2014 @ 01:41 AM
link   
how do you thing neanderthals died off ?

Did they really die off?



Good chance that the pre-human fossils are yeti-bigfoot-sasquatch bones.

Good reason why modern anthrology would deny these claims.
Because that would make humans an invasive species.
But believe it or not, Those arn't my ancestors bones.




top topics



 
10
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join