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.
originally posted by: randyvs
As I said further. He is where science and the
supernatural combine to make us. It's actually quite logical even.
originally posted by: Raggedyman
Evolutionists get upset if a creationists suggests that evolutionists think man evolved from fish and monkeys
originally posted by: Raggedyman
The strangest thing is that evolutionist believe that humanity arose from as ghost explained, a non biological ancestor that was dirt and water.
originally posted by: Raggedyman
Well maybe they won't admit to believing that, sadly they have no other option than dirt and water turning into life
originally posted by: Raggedyman
Dirt and water that he assumes evolved into amino acids that evolved into a meteorite that may have ...
originally posted by: Raggedyman
Yeah, no thanks ghost, I was looking for science not a faith statement
originally posted by: Raggedyman
Here something funny ghost, I may say God did it, your answer is nature did it
originally posted by: Raggedyman
One day we should discuss the Devine fingerprint of the universe, the law of gravity, the other incredible laws that no random chance could ever produce.
originally posted by: Raggedyman
I imagine you think nature wonderful. Nature worship, paganism
originally posted by: Raggedyman
Evolution goes back many centuries, back to the Greeks and their religions, Darwin was late on the scene
originally posted by: Ghost147
So... what you're saying is.... you're a troll.... I think I'm about done here.
originally posted by: SLAYER69
...most of the time those who are doing the accusing are often the ones doing a poor attempt at trolling themselves...
At the risk of being accused of trolling, I'd like to suggest that everyone who spends their days on the digital playground of social media should henceforth cease invoking the facile, vacuous, imprecise, insipid term "trolling." The insinuation that the "troll" is insincere in her act of provocation — or that the act of provocation is motivated entirely by the desire for attention.
This is something that can almost never be demonstrated, and since it directs attention away from the provocation itself while impugning the inevitably concealed motives of the provocateur, it must invariably amount to an ad hominem attack. Accusing someone of trolling is more like calling him an a--hole than responding cleverly and insightfully to what he has to say.
My point is simply this: At its most basic level, trolling is what everyone is doing online every hour of every day, and what many others had done long before the internet era. And at its best, trolling is coterminous with thinking itself — which often involves and requires provocation as a goad to move the mind out of its well-worn grooves and easy pieties. So please, let's retire the term.
It's time to kill the word 'troll'
Evolutionists get upset if a creationists suggests that evolutionists think man evolved from fish and monkeys
originally posted by: Raggedyman
Creationists say God did it, he says nature did it, don't know how but nature and science will one day explain it all.
and I'm not the only person to state that, too:
originally posted by: rnaa
a reply to: Raggedyman
Science does not yet know exactly how life began (and may never do), but it is pretty sure that it did NOT begin with dirt and water.
5Now no shrub of the field was yet in the earth, and no plant of the field had yet sprouted, for the LORD God had not sent rain upon the earth, and there was no man to cultivate the ground. 6But a mist used to rise from the earth and water the whole surface of the ground. 7Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.
Evolutionists get upset if a creationists suggests that evolutionists think man evolved from fish and monkeys
originally posted by: Raggedyman
I am always amused how creationists suggest that they think mankind evolved from fish or monkeys
It really is silly if you think that, see evolution explains we come from a common ancestor
Something further down the tree of life, some animal that existed long ago and was not a fish, not sure what it was though, definetly not a monkey or a fish so they teach us what we must believe according to their assumptions
The truth of evolution is not a monkey or a fish, ultimately our common ancestor was dirt and water
They may complain that Creationists believe we evolved from monkeys and fish, though they have no qualms we have all, all life, evolved from dirt and water
Figure that out if you can
originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: rnaa
Well please elucidate
Big Bang?
Stardust and water?
Then life
I mean it's just a theory, like evolution make something up
We are discussing the belief that dirt and water are a non biological ancestor
Did the Big Bang happen to also create amino acids
Any kind of evidence, not evidence that is assumption, not evidence that fits into a theory but evidence that builds a theory
originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: TzarChasm
Primordial soup
Can I guess the ingredients, dirt and water
Where did those ingredients come from, any idea?
originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: rnaa
Well please elucidate
Big Bang?
Stardust and water?
Then life
I mean it's just a theory, like evolution make something up
We are discussing the belief that dirt and water are a non biological ancestor
Did the Big Bang happen to also create amino acids
Any kind of evidence, not evidence that is assumption, not evidence that fits into a theory but evidence that builds a theory
originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Barcs
There Barcs, there there, take a chill pill and just relax.
You sound aggrieved, it's all ok.
I am allowed to disagree with your beliefs, I am an adult. I get to question your faith and science.
Grab a bex and have a lay down, you don't sound very healthy at the moment
When you wake up from your stress relieving rest, provide some solid evidence, we can move on from there
originally posted by: Raggedyman
My argument is their science is very weak