It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Cosmic911
a reply to: Cosmic911
The ‘molecules-to-man’ theory of evolution can be problematic to creationists, not all evolution.
This is the theory that rejects any participation by God; and it is this theory that is incompatible with Christianity.
This is one of the absolutes that prevents one theory from disseminating with the other to form a more scientifically-palatable theory for proponents of creationism.
originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: MrConspiracy
They aren't necessarily but hard for them to coexist.
Especially from a strictly scientific point since you want to remove the idea of actions of the supernatural.
And those clowns are the same ones that brought you, RELIGION.
originally posted by: GBP/JPY
Cool, Darwin himself said any evidence of reverse evolution will falsify it's science.
Why, if species have descended from other species by insensibly fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms? Why is not all nature in confusion instead of the species being, as we see them, well defined?… But, as by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?… Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory. (Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species, pp. 172, 280)
Charles Darwin made the case a little differently when he said, "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down. But I can find out no such case. "
that happened when muscle tissue reversed in certain species....
also he said no way on the eye.....
no explaining the eye he said..........
“To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.”
“Yet reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist; if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly, and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; and if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real.”
originally posted by: Cosmic911
November 25, 2015 | by Robin Andrews
-African Americans are less likely than are whites to say that evolution has taken place. I find this statistic interesting. I easily understand the differences in opinion between ages, that's apparent to me, however, the differences between races I do not readily understand. I wonder if this figure coincides with similar differences between blacks and whites in regards to those who are religious versus those who are agnostic? I probably shouldn't ASSume, but I'm going to be presumptuous here.
Ah yes, Millennials. The self-absorbed victims of the dumbing down of the US public education system.
originally posted by: sociolpath
hmmm maybe because all depictions of the "missing links" resemble black people?
evolution of man as portrayed through history is racist towards africans.
originally posted by: Flesh699
It'd blow our feeble minds if "creation" of any sort didn't exist.
I'm not religious and see it for what it is, and I doubt evolution because it's just a theory, as is religious myth.
I think evolution is a simple, human-created, way of explaining the unfathomable; as religion is a simple, human-created, way of explaining the unfathomable
We know nothing of space, though allot of us delusion ourselves to thinking we do, the same surety religious people believe in god with the same delusion.
There's no real explanation as to why planets (organic spaceships, in reality) are floating around empty space for no reason at all—no explanation our weird brain could begin to conceive, anyway.
The only thing humans know, and will only know for a very long time, are theories created by our brains to explain that which it doesn't understand. And if the brain isn't creating theories, it's writing wild stories that future generations take entirely too seriously.