Is There Evidence for Evolution? Show it to us.

a reply to: vethumanbeing

I'm all for classes in comparative religion. But don't pretend it's science.

OP, in your very first paragraph you say proof cannot be provided. In your second paragraph you ask someone to provide you with proof. Your first paragraph proves you are biased to any reply, your second paragraph is nothing more than an invitation to an argument you've already won in your own mind.

That makes this one tough conversation to contribute to.

Ah, what the heck.

I believe Earth is a planet that is geared towards evolution into sentient s. There were societies here before us who became sentient and learned and grew and then realized we were coming along so got out of our way. They hid themselves from us so we could grow in our own right and learn and prosper as a species. Yes, I believe the UFO's and other anomalies are a higher species who are native to this planet and regard us now as we regard ants.

Look at Monkeys. We know they use tools for food and just recently they have started hunting with spears. They can't build fire yet but give them a little time and they'll figure it out.

When the time is right we will disappear from this world and leave it to them to figure out the things we now know.

Earth is an incubator for sentients.

You see it every where around you.

If that isn't argument enough, nothing ever will be for you have a closed mind.

Love and light,

a reply to: vethumanbeing

What exactly would Creationism Class be teaching???

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: vethumanbeing

I'm all for classes in comparative religion. But don't pretend it's science.

This isn't about religious Dogmatic belief systems at all. I am not a fan. First book of the Torah (Genesis) regarding 'creation' is not relevant at all to this discussion. Creationism has come some distance from that antiquated (relevant to many) poetic metaphor for how this system came to be.

a reply to: vethumanbeing

Creationism has come some distance from that antiquated (relevant to some) metaphor.

You mean it isn't "God did it" any more?
Cool.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: vethumanbeing

Creationism has come some distance from that antiquated (relevant to some) metaphor.

You mean it isn't "God did it" any more?
Cool.

Of course not; lay the blame on the human's ingenuity (always) as Gods greatest metaphor for Itself; the human is the toe stubbing shill (god takes no blame) wink.

a reply to: vethumanbeing
I see you have transitioned, once again, to incomprehensibility mode.
Defensive response?

a reply to: vethumanbeing

I think maybe that is part of the problem too. It used to be that people believed everything was created by a whole bunch of gods. Gods were everywhere doing all kinds of things and interacting with the world.

Then that changed to just one supreme god, but still interacting and creating stuff and controlling stuff.

People used to think god was responsible for disease, storms, lighting, hurricanes, sun rising, crops growing, etc. Then we learned better and those all became science based.

God also used to be everywhere and interacting with people. Over time and with more knowledge we've filled in the holes where we put god and put in the correct causes for things and god has become silent and apparently now is said to be outside of time and space and the universe.

So you can see, little by little the goal posts keep being moved by those who insist there must be a god there. Now he's not even said to be there or here anymore but outside of reality. Well how interesting and convenient for those who claim there is a god.

If you look at the fact that god seems to get more and more aloof the more knowledge we obtain seems to show a trend. The trend being that the less superstitious people become and the more knowledge they obtain the more we find there wasn't ever a god responsible for anything at all other than as a myth to control people with.

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: vethumanbeing

What exactly would Creationism Class be teaching???

Incredibly delicate ecosystems that exist on this planet; the ocean environs and all specie that exist harmoniously within it (flora and fauna); the vast 1.5 million insect species (those only half of what are thought to have been discovered) and their purpose; specialized jobs. The Mammal, its creation and infinite forms expressing, failures success rates. The human seems to have been helped along unlike the simian ape.
The fact that earth is an engine that will always produce natural gas and oil; and still provides as a caretaker for the oddities that exist upon its surface. What could possibly describe this miracle; something that was specifically DESIGNED and put into place by another thing greater. Not just left to random chaos/chance or none of this would have happened. It hasn't happened anywhere else (this is a living library).

a reply to: vethumanbeing

Delicate ecosystems that exist on this planet; the ocean environs and all specie that exist harmoniously within it (flora and fauna); the vast 1.5 million insect species (those only half of what are thought to have been discovered) and their purpose; specialized jobs.

That's ecology, an actual science. Not "creationism." Ecology is about how biosystems evolved and function.

What could possibly describe this miracle; something that was specifically DESIGNED and put into place by something greater than just left to random chaos/chance.

That's "creationism". Not a science, Sunday school stuff.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: vethumanbeing

Delicate ecosystems that exist on this planet; the ocean environs and all specie that exist harmoniously within it (flora and fauna); the vast 1.5 million insect species (those only half of what are thought to have been discovered) and their purpose; specialized jobs.

That's ecology, an actual science. Not "creationism." Ecology is about how biosystems evolved and function.

What could possibly describe this miracle; something that was specifically DESIGNED and put into place by something greater than just left to random chaos/chance.

That's "creationism". Not a science, Sunday school stuff.

I defend no thing. You are saying ecosystems are a science but purely of an "accidental" occurrence? Sunday school is a negative? Never been because I tarred the locks of the school Saturday nights prior as to not have to attend.

a reply to: vethumanbeing

Sunday school is a negative?

Not necessarily, it would depend upon the teacher.

Never been because I tarred the locks of the school to not have to attend.

Sunday school is taught in churches.

Tonight is the first time I've visited this site in years and actually posted.

I see Phage is still here and not only not running the place but isn't even a mod yet...and I realized.

Yeppers, evolution must be bull hockey....

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: vethumanbeing

vhb: Sunday school is a negative? Never been because I tarred the locks of the school to not have to attend.

Phage: Sunday school is taught in churches.

Not if you grew up on Titan II missile bases; your church was the local elementary school and your teacher was an all-denominational "Chaplin" (I was a 9 year old child--come on).

a reply to: vethumanbeing

No wonder you're weird.
From here on, you will receive special considerations. Because, clearly, you are special.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: vethumanbeing
I see you have transitioned, once again, to incomprehensibility mode.
Defensive response?

What do you want to know (finally) that I cannot possibly answer because you are dead set upon offering a denial to any explanation I can offer.

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: vethumanbeing

I think maybe that is part of the problem too. It used to be that people believed everything was created by a whole bunch of gods. Gods were everywhere doing all kinds of things and interacting with the world.

Then that changed to just one supreme god, but still interacting and creating stuff and controlling stuff.

What was in charge of changing the perception of God by humans in the first place (switcheroos) in many of the different civilizations that existed then vanished POOF.

mOjOm: People used to think god was responsible for disease, storms, lighting, hurricanes, sun rising, crops growing, etc. Then we learned better and those all became science based.

What would one though DO then (without a Bible) or dogmatic systems in place to keep you in fear or tithing (taxed) to a King or representative of. Paganism or elemental medicine was all but destroyed. Believe in catastrophe as an act of a divine creator.

mOjOm: So you can see, little by little the goal posts keep being moved by those who insist there must be a god there. Now he's not even said to be there or here anymore but outside of reality. Well how interesting and convenient for those who claim there is a god.
If you look at the fact that god seems to get more and more aloof the more knowledge we obtain seems to show a trend. The trend being that the less superstitious people become and the more knowledge they obtain the more we find there wasn't ever a god responsible for anything at all other than as a myth to control people with.

Goal post movement is a great metaphor. The closer we corral its nature the further it removes itself from our vision. The myth is the dogma (others created as religion) attached to a God aspect that can ensnare and control; something everyone can access on their own. Why is this not common knowledge?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: vethumanbeing

No wonder you're weird.
From here on, you will receive special considerations. Because, clearly, you are special.

You do not need asbestos gloves as considerations; maybe a portable fallout shelter umbrella.

a reply to: vethumanbeing

Not if you grew up on Titan II missile bases; your church was the local elementary school and your teacher was an all-denominational "Chaplin" (I was a 9 year old child--come on).

Where were these Titan II missile bases you imply you grew up on? There were 4 wings: Missouri, Kansas, Arizona, and California. I grew up near the Arizona bases, in fact I lived closer to the silo sites west of Tucson than I did the wings headquarters at Davis-Monthan.

I guaran-bloody-tee that there were no children of any age anywhere near the silos. Of course there were kids on the base at D-M, but most families lived off base. Most families attended civilian churches and schools off base. I went to church and to school with some of the kids from the base - including one who became an internationally known pop singer and ended up killing himself in an experimental plane.

Conditions may have been different for the other 3 wings, I doubt it but its possible, but your location says you are in Arizona, and I lean to the opinion, pending correction, that you mean D-M. In fact, it doesn't matter which wing you claim your parents were associated with - I call bull@#$% on you entire post.

originally posted by: RealTruthSeeker

So let me get this straight. Basically your saying, it's ok to believe in evolution with no proof, but if someone believes in some form of God without proof then that person is some kind of loony toon?

There is a big difference between proof and evidence. I believe in evolution not because there is proof of it, but because there is evidence of it.

In the title of the thread you asked for evidence. But then that wasn't good enough; you changed your request to wanting proof.

And I don't think that people who believe in a god are loony toons. I just want them to understand there is no evidence whatsoever that their god exists. Unless I am wrong about that; if I am please show me evidence.