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.

 

Man didn't evolve from fish or monkeys

page: 48
13
<< 45  46  47    49  50  51 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 06:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Noinden

Well hes obviously referring to Genesis...

And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Which is technically correct... but it has little scientific basis, nor was it meant to be a scientific statement

Sure the core of our physical body is made of "star dust"... though im sure the people who actually wrote that meant the dirt on the ground





posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 07:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

My genesis is a bit rusty, so I must have missed it
I prefer the Tain or perhaps the Hávamál for some mythology myself.

So basically genesis can get it right (sort of) but creationists can not ?



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 07:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Noinden

It really depends on the flavor of the creationist...

Even myself... i personally believe God created everything.... billions of years ago. Can't prove it, and i have no reason to want to...

There are fundy Christians who believe the world was created 6k some odd years ago... they're mostly clueless, mainly because that whole theory isn't even biblical so they literally have nothing to stand on...

Then theres those who associate their beliefs with Ken Ham, and his ilk of clowns from the "answers in Genesis" site... those are the completely lost

As for the OP... i think hes just trolling his own thread... He doesn't read the answers hes asking for, and generally mocks everyone that disagrees with him... or just makes up his own ideas out of thin air claiming his opponent hates something... be it God, or science which he doesn't even understand...

I don't really understand how this thread got to 48 pages... it should have a label on it...

(don't feed the troll)


edit on 4-4-2016 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 07:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

See (as I've stated else where in this thread) I believe in many divine beings myself. I also can not prove it. Nor do I try too. That is the wonder of faith, and gnosis, you should not have to "prove" it. You either believe or you do not.

I've seen some threads on here that are ridiculous for longevity. My two favorites are

(a) Language of Vampyre (in secret societies)
and
(b) Are Australia and New Zealand out of place on the map? (Can't remember where).

Both are totally pointless threads (the later really so) but they get some thread necromancy from time to time.

In this case? It seems to be some hard core creationists wanting to beat the "evolutionists". If you follow these threads, they are usually the ones who ignore the evidence, and demand repeatedly for evidence.

The premise of the thread is silly too. That "Evolutionists" (scientists people SCIENTISTS) hate when people say we came from fish and monkeys. Who the hell says that? Sure some creationists say that evolution says we came from monkeys. They misread the term "common ancestor" and think Chimpanzee is a monkey



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 07:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Noinden

I tend to steer clear of evolution debates but i follow along... Far better for someone that knows a thing or two about the subject to give their two cents then i...

Funny thing is the OP shot himself in the foot the very moment he wrote the title...

We didn't evolve from fish or monkeys... Though we certainly didn't evolve from dirt either




posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 07:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

so what did we evolve from if its not dirt and water

Scientificaly speaking of course

and just for you
noinden
prove this is wrong if you you can

answersingenesis.org...



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 07:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

Ever since I went back to University to do I bioinformatics post grad qualification, I decided to follow the philosophy of "the truth against the world" (an fhírinne a insint). It is sort of part of my spiritual path after all
But yes I get into the weeds here over this, and some other topics.

This entire thread is not really a discussion point, or a question, and certainly NOT a conspiracy. So it should have been strangled at birth...



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 07:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

Ahh and again you willfully confuse evolution (the changes between species) with abiogenisis/proteogenesis (first life). They are separate things. Thus your unwillingness to acknowledge this, makes every argument you make, seem as if you are just being petulant. Almost Pee Wee Herman levels of "I know what you are, but what am I".



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 07:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Akragon

so what did we evolve from if its not dirt and water

Scientificaly speaking of course

and just for you
noinden
prove this is wrong if you you can

answersingenesis.org...


Well... thanks for clearing one thing up...

you're a Ken Ham Creationist... that explains a few things...

Why would you listen to anything that silly twat has to say?

in any case, it wasn't dirt... at the very least it would have to be something alive... bacterial in nature i'd assume

Though again, this is not my field of debate... and clearly it isn't yours either




posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 11:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Barcs


A better analogy would be comparing it to computer code.


So glad you said it, and not me. What makes computer code? Does computer code self-generate? Or is there always a programmer involved with computer code? Did Uber program itself? Did facebook program itself? There is always intelligence involved with computer programming. The genetic code is no exception.


"Do you think its a coincidence that the earth remains in a consistent orbit? It is like a golfball perpetually twirling around the ring of the cup."

No, it's not even close to that. This isn't surprising coming from somebody that constantly lies to promote his faith as fact, and doesn't understand the basics of science.


It is exactly that. Gravity is acceleration. The sun is by far the most dominant gravitational force in our solar system and should be pulling the planets closer to it with each and every passing second. Einstein's relativity relates it to an apple (earth) being spun around a tablecloth with a loaf of bread in the middle (sun). The bending of spacetime, caused by the sun (bread loaf), causes the earth (apple) to remain in constant orbit. Yet, people don't understand the incredible unlikelihood of the perfect equilibrium in which the earth does not collapse into the sun, or float away. It is at a perfect distance. You are stuck in Newtonian physics, and take perfection for granted.

Einstein Gravity

"its not even close to that"

You have literally no idea what you are talking about. You never do. You resort to insult and claim you have science as your consort, yet all logical reasoning defies everything that you type. You are part of the clone army that serves no purpose but the persistent lethargy of our species. I honestly thought that all people were salvageable, but you and others prove time and time again that there are people who are so hard-hearted that they will take ignorance to the grave as long as it doesnt involve them admitting to ignorance.



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 11:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Akragon


Well... thanks for clearing one thing up...

you're a Ken Ham Creationist... that explains a few things...

Why would you listen to anything that silly twat has to say?

in any case, it wasn't dirt... at the very least it would have to be something alive... bacterial in nature i'd assume

Though again, this is not my field of debate... and clearly it isn't yours either



Now what do they call it when you attack the person and not the comments, it eludes me?

Twat hey, thats mighty nice of you, does he scare you?
Listening to people who call others a twat isnt one of my strong points, funny what I think of people who call others twats,
funny because I am inclined to think in kind


I didnt even look at the author, just thought I would post some random internet link and get some random person to answer it, noinden and his/her random link is as irrelevant to me.

I noticed noinden has stayed away after asking for a rebuttal, noticed you tried the ad hominem as well, side step around answering my question, not surprised

As for bacteria ak, where did it come from, where did life come from, thats the question from the first post

Now just a simple clear note
This whole thread is not and was never intended to be about evolution (though I do consider abiogenesis evolution)
This thread was about what atheists and those like yourself I assume, believe in relation to origins of life

Bacteria, thats very silly, very silly indeed, care to have another swing

As for Ken Ham, I think he is good, now what are you going to do, cry in your corn flakes? Run him down some more, big note yourself by running others down.
You know what I think of that?



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 11:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Barcs


A better analogy would be comparing it to computer code.


So glad you said it, and not me. What makes computer code? Does computer code self-generate? Or is there always a programmer involved with computer code? Did Uber program itself? Did facebook program itself? There is always intelligence involved with computer programming. The genetic code is no exception.


"Do you think its a coincidence that the earth remains in a consistent orbit? It is like a golfball perpetually twirling around the ring of the cup."

No, it's not even close to that. This isn't surprising coming from somebody that constantly lies to promote his faith as fact, and doesn't understand the basics of science.


It is exactly that. Gravity is acceleration. The sun is by far the most dominant gravitational force in our solar system and should be pulling the planets closer to it with each and every passing second. Einstein's relativity relates it to an apple (earth) being spun around a tablecloth with a loaf of bread in the middle (sun). The bending of spacetime, caused by the sun (bread loaf), causes the earth (apple) to remain in constant orbit. Yet, people don't understand the incredible unlikelihood of the perfect equilibrium in which the earth does not collapse into the sun, or float away. It is at a perfect distance. You are stuck in Newtonian physics, and take perfection for granted.

Einstein Gravity

"its not even close to that"

You have literally no idea what you are talking about. You never do. You resort to insult and claim you have science as your consort, yet all logical reasoning defies everything that you type. You are part of the clone army that serves no purpose but the persistent lethargy of our species. I honestly thought that all people were salvageable, but you and others prove time and time again that there are people who are so hard-hearted that they will take ignorance to the grave as long as it doesnt involve them admitting to ignorance.


So what you are saying
Is that the world, sun are perfectly balanced in gravity, kind of like its not random at all.

Evidently I am one of the stupidest people around here and I see the logic in that, the perfect equilibrium

what does that make of the rest who dont see the obvious I wonder.

Finely tuned and balanced, what are the mathematical chances of that I wonder?

And that codes are written transferred and decoded, with a common language. That surely couldnt be possible.
Almost like a code writer existed.
Thats very complex, tricky.
That sounds like amazing design in my opinion, mathematical chances?

With thoughts like that I find it hard to think we magiky magiky evolved by chance from dirt and water



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 11:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: Raggedyman

Ahh and again you willfully confuse evolution (the changes between species) with abiogenisis/proteogenesis (first life). They are separate things. Thus your unwillingness to acknowledge this, makes every argument you make, seem as if you are just being petulant. Almost Pee Wee Herman levels of "I know what you are, but what am I".


No they are not, I was talking how life evolved, keep up with the thread noinden

Try this fairytale story that is a religious belief
www.newscientist.com...

Even newscientist call it evolution
Its not fun having to baby some people



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 12:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman


Now what do they call it when you attack the person and not the comments, it eludes me?


It really shouldn't... you do it on the regular, and have been called on it several times in this thread alone

And i didn't attack you in the least... i did attack Ken Ham... because hes exactly what i called him


Twat hey, thats mighty nice of you, does he scare you?


Lol... hardly... hes an embarrassment even to Christian standards


Listening to people who call others a twat isnt one of my strong points, funny what I think of people who call others twats,
funny because I am inclined to think in kind


Not normally my style of conduct... but when you see a twat, its hard not to point it out... would you prefer twit... moron perhaps?


As for bacteria ak, where did it come from, where did life come from, thats the question from the first post


Funny i didn't see that in the OP... i read a blanket statement... life evolved from dirt... which it did not...

Whether or not it started with Bacteria, or a single celled organism i don't know... im not a scientist... and i don't study the origins of life


Now just a simple clear note
This whole thread is not and was never intended to be about evolution (though I do consider abiogenesis evolution)
This thread was about what atheists and those like yourself I assume, believe in relation to origins of life


Shows what assuming will get you... i am far from an Athiest

And i don't care about how life got here... its here, thats pretty much my view on the subject


Bacteria, thats very silly, very silly indeed, care to have another swing


Makes more sense then dirt... at least lol


As for Ken Ham, I think he is good, now what are you going to do, cry in your corn flakes? Run him down some more, big note yourself by running others down.
You know what I think of that?


Im sure you do think hes great... likely one of your heros...

The same guy who has a "museum" that contains dinosaurs with saddles on them

LMAO!!

Did you also know your "good" guy is also a felon... had to move from his homeland because he was indited for fraud and stealing from his company?

Said company had a settlement after a few years of lawsuits... and now theres two groups of fundy nut jobs spreading their nonsense to people who don't know any better but want to believe in their bible

Oh... and i really don't care what you think of that



edit on 5-4-2016 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 12:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman

So what you are saying
Is that the world, sun are perfectly balanced in gravity, kind of like its not random at all.

Evidently I am one of the stupidest people around here and I see the logic in that, the perfect equilibrium

what does that make of the rest who dont see the obvious I wonder.

Finely tuned and balanced, what are the mathematical chances of that I wonder?

And that codes are written transferred and decoded, with a common language. That surely couldnt be possible.
Almost like a code writer existed.
Thats very complex, tricky.
That sounds like amazing design in my opinion, mathematical chances?

With thoughts like that I find it hard to think we magiky magiky evolved by chance from dirt and water


Yeah that sums it up pretty well



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 12:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: Noinden

We didn't evolve from fish or monkeys...


The tree of life insists that our ancestry was at one time a unicellular organism. The human consciousness is so powerful that it can surmise fabricated creation scenarios in which our ancestors were unconscious unicellular organisms.

Can some evolutionist step to the plate and explain to me how consciousness derives from unconsciousness?



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 12:28 AM
link   
a reply to: cooperton

Sorry man...

thats out of my scope of knowledge on the topic...

And anything put forward would only be theoretical...

We don't know how consciousness happened...




posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 12:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
You suggest you cant, arnt allowed to form an opinion with out scientists first forming it for you
That sounds a little scary you know, not for me, for you.
You have surrendered your mind to scientists opinions.
The Germans did that in ww2, accepted what the scientists taught them about the Jews


I don't blindly follow scientist's opinions. I agree with peer reviewed research that anybody can duplicate and verify. If I don't know the answer to something, the only honest way to answer is "I don't know". Some people need to have an answer to everything. I don't. I can be patient and let science do it's thing and eventually we'll figure out the origin of life and if god exists instead of having to guess.


Now why admit it you ask, you don't have a choice, you don't believe in the supernatural so you have no other options
Dirt and water, star dirt star water


How do you know that I don't believe in anything supernatural? I have beliefs, I just understand that they are beliefs and not fact. The issue here is the terminology you use to describe abiogenesis. "Dirt and water, star dirt star water" doesn't represent any theory or hypothesis I have ever heard of. Do you see my issue yet?


In fact star dirt and star water is the issue this thread is dealing with, abiogenesis, it's evolution in my opinion, not yours evidently


Abiogenesis is not biological evolution. You could describe it as chemical evolution, or even RNA evolution but it's certainly not the same thing nor the same process as the theory of evolution describes. That's why you are throwing so many people off. You are using mostly layman terms to describe science. It's killing the thread and impeding any progress.


Not evolution, abiogenesis, beginning of life, the fact that you have absolutely no other options as an atheist to believe like magicy, magicy, life evolved from star dirt and star water


Atheists believe in numerous things. I know many that believe in a soul and afterlife. Some believe reincarnation, some believe strict materialism. There is no set belief system for atheism, the only thing that matters is that you lack a belief in god / deities.
edit on 4 5 16 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 12:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Barcs

originally posted by: Raggedyman
You suggest you cant, arnt allowed to form an opinion with out scientists first forming it for you
That sounds a little scary you know, not for me, for you.
You have surrendered your mind to scientists opinions.
The Germans did that in ww2, accepted what the scientists taught them about the Jews


I don't blindly follow scientist's opinions. I agree with peer reviewed research that anybody can duplicate and verify. If I don't know the answer to something, the only honest way to answer is "I don't know". Some people need to have an answer to everything. I don't. I can be patient and let science do it's thing and eventually we'll figure out the origin of life and if god exists instead of having to guess.


Now why admit it you ask, you don't have a choice, you don't believe in the supernatural so you have no other options
Dirt and water, star dirt star water


How do you know that I don't believe in anything supernatural? I have beliefs, I just understand that they are beliefs and not fact. The issue here is the terminology you use to describe abiogenesis. "Dirt and water, star dirt star water" doesn't represent any theory or hypothesis I have ever heard of. Do you see my issue yet?


In fact star dirt and star water is the issue this thread is dealing with, abiogenesis, it's evolution in my opinion, not yours evidently


Abiogenesis is not biological evolution. You could describe it as chemical evolution, or even RNA evolution but it's certainly not the same thing nor the same process as the theory of evolution describes. That's why you are throwing so many people off. You are using mostly layman terms to describe science. It's killing the thread and impeding any progress.


Not evolution, abiogenesis, beginning of life, the fact that you have absolutely no other options as an atheist to believe like magicy, magicy, life evolved from star dirt and star water


Atheists believe in numerous things. I know many that believe in a soul and afterlife. Some believe reincarnation, some believe strict materialism. There is no set belief system for atheism, the only thing that matters is that you lack a belief in god / deities.


I agree and disagree as usual

Abiogenesis is evolution, see the above link by new scientists

Atheists dont believe in God, though they can believe in the force? Aliens who crated us? what ever isnt God evidently?
Thats just soft reasoning, you just push the question back, where did the force come from, aliens, whatever you want to believe.

So Barcs, you believe that a supernatural entity, identity created life.

I can accept that, intelligent design, good for you

Unless you dont believe that and lack the courage to actually tell the truth, are scared to say "I dont know"

Science, the hiding place for those who need to hide?



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 12:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman


Science, the hiding place for those who need to hide?


What are they hiding?

IF you don't mind me asking?


edit on 5-4-2016 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 45  46  47    49  50  51 >>

log in

join