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.

 

How does creationism explain....

page: 16
0
<< 13  14  15   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 4 2005 @ 08:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by resistance
No reasoning, no examples, just denial and insults.

I gave you examples, and you simply ignored them. Its not an insult to state that a person doesn't understand fully a scientific theory. Darwin thought about evolution for somethign like a decade, and worked it out in hundreds of letters and discussions with other researchers. Its not an insult, therefore, to note that you clearly don't understand it properly.

Now we all know this is true because Nygdon said it was.

No, you can check the references.

Nygdon says a dynosaur's forearm can transform itself into a wing and always at every moment look like a useful, non-blobby appendage. A caterpillar changes into a butterfly and if you cut open the pupa in the two weeks this is happening you would see a scrambled mess.

Again, this is perfectly illustrative of how you indeed don't understand evolution. You are talking about the metamorphisis of an individual. Evolution has nothing to do with that. Evolution doesn't happen to individuals, it happens to populations over time. The catepillar has nothing to do with how populations change over time.


But somehow Nygdon thinks that a dinosaur can transform into a bird and at all times it will be some kind of perfect creature that if you were to find it as a fossil it would look like just another creature, all done and finished.
Indeed, that is precisely what we find. And, agian, to illustrate that you have a very poor understanding of evolution, that is precisely what evolution via natural selection states we should find.

Nygdon says never at any time does a creature which is evolving from one kind of creature into another look like it's actually changing.

Actually I have. This is a repetition of your poor understanding of evolutionary theory. A changing population is allways going to be made up of well adapated 'fully formed' individuals, not a gelatinous mess like a pupating larvae or somesuch.


How does Nygdon know?

Because of the fossil examples that you were given and have ignored. Those organisms are 'transitional', and they are also well adapted to their environments. Their limbs are 'half wings', and yet are still fully functional and adaptive.




they will just laugh you to scorn without even trying to defend their position.

First off, you're reasoning isn't very good, your arguement isn't strong, and your evidence is insufficient, at best. But nevermind that, I haven't been rejecting your ideas by ridiculing them. I have been rejecting them because the evidence and logic doesn't support them.


They will even misrepresent the truth and claim they have offered proof, which they have not.

Excuse me sir, but I have not lied.




The thing that really breaks my heart the most is when I'm told that my opinions don't count and that I should not even be contributing to the discussion at all because I am a Christian.

I have said absolutely no such thing and if anyone who was a christian couldn't participate in the scientific investigation of biology and evolution then we wouldn't even have darwin, let alone the vast majority of researchers today who are christian.


So why does somebody want to be sent to a Christian ghetto?

Preposterous. You are a whiner and a drama queen.
Are you going to 'leave the board' again? And then return, and then leave, and then return? The truth seems to be that you simply don't know what you are talking about, and are so overly sensitive and baby-like that you view criticism and disagreement as ridicule.
This is a discussion board. People come here to discuss things. The board nor I have done nothing to prevent you from discussing things here, and infact have strongly encouraged you to discuss the evidences and logic and arguements relevant to the topic. After having a 'meltdown' and running away, you come back, to personally blast me, still not bothering to discuss the evidence.
Pointless.




posted on Nov, 4 2005 @ 08:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by resistance
It's quite obvious *SNIP*


Indeed it is, it's obvious that your assuming the mantle of a martyr; Nygdan can be Pontius Pilate and we can get Thomas Crown as Longinus. Heck, some cyber wood and cyber nails and we are one resurrection shy of the second coming.


A modicum of hubris is in order.

Dismissed.



posted on Nov, 4 2005 @ 01:09 PM
link   
Nygdon -- I changed the quote you put up about "misrepresentation" and had it changed last night -- long before you put up the quote. I hate the way you moderators jump on people's posts when they are still working on them, and then to put up a quote that I took down hours and hours ago is just -- well, typical. What can I say?

And you just prove my point. You don't discuss anything. You just assert I'm wrong and you're right. And you never claimed that fossil you brought forth was of something with a half-formed wing. This is something new. I thought you were using it to demonstrate a half-formed feather! Now it's a half-formed wing you're trying to illustrate? I don't THINK so.

Evolution does equal atheism. Only an evolutionist can claim to be a true atheist. An atheist just KNOWS there is no God and claims to be able to prove it (by evolution). An agnostic just says they don't know.

There is nobody, in my opinion, either willing or able to reason on this forum. What you guys are doing is NOT a discussion. It is NOT a debate. It would NOT win you any points in a debate, not one single point. I sense that I am holding a discussion with some very young and immature (and highly brainwashed public school kids).

Telling somebody they "just don't understand evolution" is NOT an answer.

I will not waste my time trying to discuss anything with any of you, either here or on any other thread. You are not reasonable and do not even attempt to explain your position or defend your position. What a waste.



posted on Nov, 4 2005 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by resistance
Nygdon -- I changed the quote you put up about "misrepresentation" and had it changed last night -- long before you put up the quote. I hate the way you moderators jump on people's posts when they are still working on them,

Let me explain something to you, because I've seen this idea put out before, perhaps by you. We cannot alter your posts as you are working on them. Its not even conceivably possible, when you are first composing the post, we can't 'edit' it or anything. You definitly didn't change that portion last night anyway, since I didn;t read or respond to it until this morning!


I will not waste my time trying to discuss anything with any of you, either here or on any other thread.

Don't post to the board that you won't be discussing something with someone, its undeed childish board drama. If you have something to discuss, post it, if you don't, then post nothing. This thread is for discussion of creationism and how it explains things, not a private space for you to bitch and moan, nor is any other forum on the board.



posted on Nov, 4 2005 @ 09:06 PM
link   
For crying out loud, his name is Nygdan, not Nygdon.


Originally posted by resistance
Evolution does equal atheism. Only an evolutionist can claim to be a true atheist. An atheist just KNOWS there is no God and claims to be able to prove it (by evolution). An agnostic just says they don't know.


There are two types of atheists - weak and strong atheists. Weak atheists passively do not believe in a God or Gods while strong atheists actively disbelieve in a God or Gods. It is a personal belief. Evolution is no means to "prove" anything philosophical in nature.

The agnostic position does not say "I don't know," it holds that it is impossible to know whether there is a God or not. There is a huge difference there. Many weak atheists observe the position of "just not knowing."

Your continued efforts to associate evolutionary theory with philosophical issues baffles me. Why can you not separate philosophy from science like most everyone else does?


Originally posted by resistance
I sense that I am holding a discussion with some very young and immature (and highly brainwashed public school kids).


If you can't say anything nice, then don't say anything at all.

Zip



posted on Dec, 12 2005 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phantom Chatter
Ok, first, Carbon dating has been proven inacurate, in tests it dated a piece of shell at having died 11,000,000 years ago.

Second, Dinosaurs (at least thats what people think is described there) are mentioned in the book of job.

Also, everything was created at the same time (some just on different days) Some just died out earlier then others. (triobite (cant spell it) fossils had been found next to fossilized footprints of humans wearing sandals. I have found out all this in books and of course the answers in genisis website.


i'd like a source for the first one

second, the book of job also states that someone "stopped the sun"

third, where are these fossil footprints in sandals? and do you understand how long the process of fossilization takes place?



posted on Dec, 13 2005 @ 03:29 AM
link   
Resistance.
Frankly I think that your posts have been repetitious. You keep demanding proof and then ignoring it when it is presented, making completely false statements about evolution (turnips and bumblebees was one statement I believe, which is so ludicrous that I choked on my vitally important first cup of coffee of the day
) and then wondering why your posts aren't believed. You just make the same statements, again and again, and again. You also seem to be suffering from a slight martyrs complex. Speaking as the son of two christians, they show more understanding of debate, enlightenment and above all, evolution, than you do.
As for linking atheism to evolution - you do know that Darwin believed in God, don't you?



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Slicky1313

Originally posted by The Big O
How does creationism explain items that are carbon dated older than the bible says the earth is?

Also, what is the religious take on dinosaurs? One big hoax?

How does creationism explain things that lived and died before man showed up?

I'm not being sarcastic, I'm being serious. I want to know the theory on the other side to counteract these items. You never hear the counter argument, just the "scientific one."

I'm a curious guy.


ok, being serious, uve been brainwashed with evolution so much u have made the assumtion evolution is correct before even considering yer questions, expecially the dino one.
Carbon dating is inaccurate, first off, to a certian point, it can always be dilluted.
"How does creationism explain things that lived and died before man showed up? " thats a dillution of evolution, son. according to the Bible creation, it would probably be safe to say that not one animal died untill AFTER man was placed on earth. in evolution, it states dino's became extinct, thus no man has ever seen a living dino. but, in the Bible, not true. In Genesis 3: 18-22, it states that Adam was brought before ALL the tame animals, wild animals, and flying animals. that includes dinosaurs. Adam named the dinosaurs, so according to the Bible Dino's were around at the time of man, cause Adam named them.
the Bible makes many mention of "dinosaurs" although technically it doesnt, cause Dinosaur the word wasnt invented before the 1800's. so the Bible says "dragons" and describes the dragon. many stories about them... their not just a myth.



"And ohhhh the disciples were on the trail to Nazareth..but the trail was blocked by a giant freakin t-rex with a splinter in his paw.And the disciples did run and scream 'Look lord there's a big freakin lizard',but Jesus was unaffraid..and he took the splinter from the dinosaurs paw and he became jesus' friend...and jesus took the dinosours to Scotland where he lived in a lake for oh so many years so he could entertain fat american tourist families with their fat freakin kids and their fat freakin dollar bills when they would visit..."

Genesis 2 2-8



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 12:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Slicky1313

ok, being serious, uve been brainwashed with evolution so much u have made the assumtion evolution is correct before even considering yer questions, expecially the dino one.
Carbon dating is inaccurate, first off, to a certian point, it can always be dilluted.
"How does creationism explain things that lived and died before man showed up? " thats a dillution of evolution, son. according to the Bible creation, it would probably be safe to say that not one animal died untill AFTER man was placed on earth. in evolution, it states dino's became extinct, thus no man has ever seen a living dino. but, in the Bible, not true. In Genesis 3: 18-22, it states that Adam was brought before ALL the tame animals, wild animals, and flying animals. that includes dinosaurs. Adam named the dinosaurs, so according to the Bible Dino's were around at the time of man, cause Adam named them.
the Bible makes many mention of "dinosaurs" although technically it doesnt, cause Dinosaur the word wasnt invented before the 1800's. so the Bible says "dragons" and describes the dragon. many stories about them... their not just a myth.


OH man. Are you serious? Scriptural evidence, PLEASE(of the dinosaurs). Dinosaurs DEFINITELY did NOT exist around 6000 years ago. If the Bible places creation around that time, "dragons" must've referred to something else because we know that dinosaurs existed waaaaaaaaaaaay before 4000 B.C.

Also, where does Noah's ark fall in with all of this?



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 08:25 AM
link   



"And ohhhh the disciples were on the trail to Nazareth..but the trail was blocked by a giant freakin t-rex with a splinter in his paw.And the disciples did run and scream 'Look lord there's a big freakin lizard',but Jesus was unaffraid..and he took the splinter from the dinosaurs paw and he became jesus' friend...and jesus took the dinosours to Scotland where he lived in a lake for oh so many years so he could entertain fat american tourist families with their fat freakin kids and their fat freakin dollar bills when they would visit..."

Genesis 2 2-8


Good to see some B Hicks quotes here, that man was a genious. (altho originaly Bill is talking about a brontosaurus, not a Trex
)


No Dad i'm not going back, they totaly missed the point, they are all wearing crosses, when they start wearing fishes i might return... Let's *mess with there heads* with them dad, lets burry some more fossils, hand me that brontosaurus-head



Have you ever noticed that people who tend to believe in creationism/ID look really unevolved ?
"I believe God created me in one day"
" Yeah, looks like he rushed it


Mod Edit: Profanity/Circumvention Of Censors – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 31-1-2008 by GAOTU789]



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by XyZeR
 


Man o man I was wondering if someone would recognize that.
Kudos.
I thought I'd get bashed for not giving him the original credit.
Bill hicks is awesome.



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 04:08 PM
link   
Gen 1:1 "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Gen 1:2 "The earth was without form and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the spirit of God was hovering over the waters."

I just want to throw this out there and please only reply if you have an actual reply and not wanting to bash someone only because they are a Christian.

Consider that since the Bible states that "a day unto God is as a thousand years unto man" (meaning that time is basically irrelevant to God) that the earth was hear for hundreds, dare I say thousands, of millions years ago. Perhaps, and I have heard this theory, that the word "was" in verse 2 could be translated into "became". That means it "was" something before it "became" what it was in the beginning of the Bible. Speculation that the earth was Lucifer's realm before the fall. Maybe we came along after all of the fighting went on on heaven?

If someone wants to believe that we came from monkeys and so on go right ahead, I'm not here to preach, but I would rather believe that there IS some greater being up there that is watching us, that loves us, and that maybe we DO have a purpose on this planet. Maybe after we die we do go on to a higher place, or lower place if you aren't a believer, rather that just fizzle out and that's it. If evolution is so believable, even though there is no definitive proof of that, it is faith based just as is Christianity (even though evolutionists will not admit in faith) why is it so hard to believe that God created us. Maybe we are a part of evolution and God himself set it into motion. Sometimes that completely blows my own mind.

Discussions like this are about as interesting as they get because we could argue until our heads explode AND GET NOWHERE!!.



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by TheVault40
 


"A day unto God is as a thousand years unto man"?
So, how do some Christians figure that Earth was created 6000 years ago? (This is a real question.)

It's all very comforting, isn't it? But the truth is greater than comfort, to some, and it is very interesting, brainstorming and experimenting with different things that could lead to truth. That's how I feel, at least.

Some of us just like to be a little more reasonable than faith. Some of us just like to keep an open mind. There is a difference between Christianity and the evolutionist faith you talk about. Evolution is an idea; a theory derived from some amount of evidence. There's more evidence supporting evolution(and other theories) than there is supporting the existence of God, or the truth that religion claims.

Personally, I see it unreasonable and ignorant to put faith in some things that can't be proven. Not just religion...but very much atheism and other things. For example, you talked about evolutionists. It's probably dumb to believe something that is clearly defined as a theory. It's a little more reasonable than some religion, but still, it doesn't make sense to believe a theory. It's just unreasonable to completely reject an idea because there's no, or little proof.

Call me agnostic. I don't doubt that there might be a God, but I question it. Maybe he DID set into motion everything in the universe. Maybe he did set into motion evolution. We might never know, in this world. Still, if there is a God, I don't believe it's the Christian one. He's not the kind I'd want to worship anyway. And it's degrading to put faith into something only out of fear.

"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use"
-Galileo Galilei

"I'm not any more skeptical about your religious beliefs than I am about every new scientific idea I hear about. But in my line of work, they're called hypotheses, not inspiration and not revelation."
-Carl Sagan

I hope you understand.

One last thing. These discussions don't exactly go nowhere. They're only redundant if the people in the discussion are close-minded. You see, the people we discuss with make a huge impact on our absorbance of knowledge. We can all learn SO much from eachother, but without an open-mind and calm, friendly, rational thoughts and feelings, we get nowhere, like you say.

Ignorant people like those that I describe are the ones who cripple the progress of our minds, our understanding, our knowledge and intelligence. Even our peace. If only we had more people WILLING to listen and willing to reason, the world might be a better place.



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 05:52 PM
link   
First of all please understand that in no way do I think I have the answers involving Christianity and the creation (once again the definition of faith I guess) it's just what I believe which could be different from another Christian. As long as we believe that there IS a God and He did create us is important enough. Look, if I allow myself to step outside of my Christian beliefs it would seem almost crazy, but that is the beauty of religion isn't it. My own brother claims to be agnostic so you can imagine how interesting religious debates get.

I do feel that I am completely open minded, I have no problem believing in aliens or any other weird ideas for that matter, which would raise the question of God's existence if a UFO landed on my lawn and a little green man walked out. Believe me, I would be confused (and a little excited honestly). By no means am I the type of Christian that is going to try to talk down to someone that doesn't share the same belief as me. God himself prefers humility and humbleness from His followers.

The great thing about humans is free will so what I think of as truth is something that you could think is completely insane or vice versa.

On the subject of God Himself, if you follow the Word, He is a jealous God and He wants us to fear Him, which confuses me to this day. When your parents tell you to do something when you are a child, no matter how crazy it may seem at the time, you do it because "that's just how it is". At the same time He is a loving God and will give you anything you ask for if you are a true believer. Sometimes I ask myself "how could God allow this?" when you hear about a young baby being thrown out of a moving car, or when parents outlive their own children; any terrible accident. Once again, you hear the saying that God works in mysterious ways, sometimes VERY mysterious, but it isn't my place to question God.

I respect everyone's personal belief and opinion, I appreciate it more when others actually respect my own because it does show human compassion even when it is compassion for a belief that one may think is unreasonable.

Side note: obviously I understand that these debates don't exactly get us nowhere because human interaction, whether it be on a personal level or through some internet message board, is necessary because we are always learning from each other.



posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Slicky1313
 

If adam named all the animals, why do we use names the names that have been given to them by the explorers who discovered them.



posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Because that list of animals is written nowhere.



posted on Oct, 26 2008 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Ikku
 


Just to clarify, carbon 14 dating can go back to 100,000 yrs or so if the sample is good. Anything after that potasium argon is used and that can go as far back as millions upon millions (and for those about to use the "apple off a tree carbon dating is false" analogy to try to prove it's an innacurate dating method, carbon dating is based on the relative decay of naturally occuring isotopes, ie the apple picked right off the tree hasn't decayed ergo it will of course give a false reading. Carbon dating wasn't meant to be used on "new" things and besides, why would you carbon date an apple you know is only a couple of minutes old?)



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 13  14  15   >>

log in

join