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.

 

Creation v Evolution argument can end

page: 7
9
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 08:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: HoloShadow
Your source for creation is a book that was written and changed several times. How old is the Earth again? And how many times has the biography of Christ been written in countless religions BEFORE the advent of your book?


Now I have to ask, have you ever read the bible, as for the creation story in the bible it is from the Jewish faith (Jesus was a jew just so you know) and in the modern mass produced bible which is a collection of texts from the Hebrew faith these texts which make up the bulk of the bible are called the OLD testament, they predate the christian text's.

But to answer your question as to the Christian (Jesus) part of the bible called the NEW testament which builds upon the old testament but is in itself the source of the Christian faith, well we have partial fragment's that are from the first century, that is the from after 0AD to 99AD, The date of Jesus crucifixion is believed to have been in about 33ad at the age of 33 and his birth of course in the year 0 of the new calender's of the christian faith while for the Jewish faith (And for the Christian's if they want to calculate back) it is actually today the year 5776 of the jewish calender.

So you have first century fragment's of the new testament that are almost identical and instantly recognizable to bible scholar's, late first and early second century house church's in which the sign of the fish (A greek anagram of the Jesus name and even an early depiction of a cross, Roman insult's from the second century against a christian showing a goat on a cross and so many other thing's to bear in mind, the early christian scholars did not take libertys (that happened through misinterpretation during translation's but was always corrected later by re translation of the older Greek and Hebrew version's.

So how many time's has it been re-written, a lot less than you supposed but it has still been re-written and any changes are more down to translation error than deliberate.

This though may interest you,
www.dailymail.co.uk...
www.thenagain.info...

edit on 9-8-2016 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 09:07 PM
link   
How is the "Creation Vs. Evolution argument" supposed to end when people keep starting threads about it?



posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 10:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: oblivvious
a reply to: Raggedyman

I'm still confused if this is what you're asking or not... "Yes" or "No" ?



No not a super power, maybe growing husky like fur on people in the northern parts of the globe, that sort of thing



posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 10:15 PM
link   
a reply to: LABTECH767


over oxidization which though we would have no problem with that imagine the mosquito's (just for fun) for example during this pre vertebrate period the creatures that dominated were the insect's, arachnid's and other arthropods and they grew managed to grow to truly monstrous size, two foot and more wing span's for dragon flies for example, spiders the size of a human head that would lay snare's and even preyed on early vertebrate's and they may even possibly have grown larger, in an even earlier period scorpion's the size of a car and this as you know was in part due to the way that insect's and other non aquatic arthropod's metabolize oxygen from the atmosphere, they absorb it through there carapace and the higher oxygen level's during these epoch's made it possible for them to grow to such large size's, aquatic arthropod's also benefited as the ocean was also correspondingly more oxygenated.

Atmospheric Chemistry. Consider the hydrogen.

Here's a link to what I wrote recently in the climate change debate.
pthena
You wouldn't happen to be a biologist would you, or organic chemist?

Hydrogen#Natural_occurrence
Under ordinary conditions on Earth, elemental hydrogen exists as the diatomic gas, H2. However, hydrogen gas is very rare in the Earth's atmosphere (1 ppm by volume) because of its light weight, which enables it to escape from Earth's gravity more easily than heavier gases. However, hydrogen is the third most abundant element on the Earth's surface,[77] mostly in the form of chemical compounds such as hydrocarbons and water.[42] Hydrogen gas is produced by some bacteria and algae and is a natural component of flatus, as is methane, itself a hydrogen source of increasing importance.

The majority of Hydrocarbons found on Earth naturally occur in crude oil, where decomposed organic matter provides an abundance of carbon and hydrogen which, when bonded, can catenate to form seemingly limitless chains.



edit on 9-8-2016 by pthena because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 10:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: peter vlar


20 years ago, in NYC, after barely being seen, bed bugs made a rampant comeback and have proven to be MUCH harder to kill than the ones infesting NY apartments a half century earlier. They have developed chemical blockers for pyrethroids, a thicker, waxlike exoskeleton that repels insecticides and a faster metabolism that enables them to more quickly create their chemical defenses against all toxins used by pest control.

Cane Toads, when introduced to Australia to control the indigenous Cane Beetle, ended up being as big a nuisance as rabbits in Australia and ate everything in sight. Within just a couple of generations, these toads began to exhibit rapid mutations of the legs making them longer and much stronger which also granted them greater speed and endurance. This allowed them to vastly increase their range at unprecedented rates and increased their chances of mating.

Another recent example is the rootworm that became immune to the pesticides genetically bred into Monsanto's "pest resistant" corn.

And in a bit of irony, a fish in Mexico was evolving a resistance to religious practices(until the Mexican govt. banned the practices). Every year, the Zocque people of Southern Mexico, used to dump a toxic paste made from the root of the Barbasco plant into their local sulfur cave. It was part of a religious ceremony that was supposed to help them get rain to fall. The Paste is toxic to the Poecilia Mexicana, a small cave fish related to guppies. The fish die, the Zocque eat the fish and hopefully the rain comes. Some of the fish had developed a resistance to the toxin and some others were able to survive longer in the toxins presence. The ones that developed the immunity were able to pass those genes along to subsequent generations, increasing the number of fish in the population with the immunity with each subsequent generation. Comparison tests were done on members of the same species that did not live in the cave and the cave fish were developing a resistence while those outside the cave who were never exposed to the toxins had no immunities.



So a dark skinned person is evolving in a different direction than a lighter skinned person, what???

Bed bugs are bed bugs, toads are toads and fish are still fish

I am interested in how we can tell a whale was once a hippo, not adaptation, evolution.

Lot of talk about a change within a bed bug, toad and fish, but they are just still bed bugs, toads and fish

Not a dribble of empirical evidence, just assumption


originally posted by: Phage

Why must we assume that? In science assumptions are frowned upon and often found to be mistaken.



posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 10:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: sycomix
a reply to: Raggedyman

i.imgur.com...

Axolotl is a good example of a transition species.


What about a platypus, duck fish and a lizardy thing

Where is the empirical evidence, thats the question



posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 10:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

The people with ancestry in colder climates do have adaptations to retain heat.



posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 10:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman

I am interested in how we can tell a whale was once a hippo, not adaptation, evolution.

Whales share a relatively close relationship with hippos but were never hippos.



Lot of talk about a change within a bed bug, toad and fish, but they are just still bed bugs, toads and fish

Change within their physiology as a result of mutation/natural selection which are two main tenets of evolution.



Not a dribble of empirical evidence, just assumption

I don't think you understand what empirical evidence means, nor "assumption".

To me it seems that you just can't grasp scientific or logical concepts very well. Either that or you're just intentionally being ignorant.
edit on 9-8-2016 by logicsoda because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-8-2016 by logicsoda because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 10:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman

Where is the empirical evidence, thats the question

Is your real name Wendy Wright by any chance?



posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 11:04 PM
link   
a reply to: pthena

No sadly long ago I changed my course after studying biochemistry and physic's (most of which I have long since forgotten) to electronic engineering and as my misfortune would have it I then suffered serious head injury's when I decided to have a drink in the wrong public house and gained the unwanted attention of the local bully squad (Six of them VS me in an unprovoked attack) which meant that I then dropped out as I could not concentrate (probably delayed concussion related to the skull fracture) at all but that is the distant past for me now though I have long since recovered, mostly and worked in industry afterwards in a completely different field working in the plastic's injection industry, you could laughingly say the dirty end of of polymer chemistry.

You know there is a theory that the early solar system was full of Hydrocarbon compound's and that there may be non fossil deep crustal hydrocarbon reservoir's that could be tapped in the future (God forbid with all the damage we have already done) and of course the outer solar system such the moon titan for example has vast amount's of hydrocarbon to back this up.

The worst thing I have seen is this Fracking that the big oil company's and there owned politician's are forcing on the people's of the west claiming it to be the solution to there energy crisis (an energy crisis that is entirely created for the sake of making profit as there are so many clean and renewable energy sources available that it is actually tragic that they are allowed to get away with what is patently criminal behavior).



posted on Aug, 10 2016 @ 12:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
Where is the empirical evidence, thats the question


It's also a very clever question.
I can't empirically prove that you were born.

How can we find out if you were born?



posted on Aug, 10 2016 @ 12:08 AM
link   
a reply to: LABTECH767

Sorry about your misfortunes.


You know there is a theory that the early solar system was full of Hydrocarbon compound's and that there may be non fossil deep crustal hydrocarbon reservoir's that could be tapped in the future

The Wikipedia says Hydrogen is the most prevalent element in the universe, least on earth(H2). Most bound with oxygen in ocean as water, then bound to carbon as oil(hydrocarbon).


Titan_(moon)#Lakes
the northern hemisphere's Ligeia Mare was initially mapped to depths exceeding 8 m, the maximum discernable by the radar instrument and the analysis techniques of the time.[85] Later science analysis, released in 2014, more fully mapped the depths of Titan's three methane seas and showed depths of more than 200 meters (660 ft). Ligeia Mare averages from 20 to 40 m (66 to 131 ft) in depth, while other parts of Ligeia did not register any radar reflection at all, indicating a depth of more than 200 m (660 ft). While only the second largest of Titan's methane seas, Ligeia "contains enough liquid methane to fill three Lake Michigans.

The first time I heard about the lakes on Titan, I kind of thought that inorganic processes could produce hydrocarbons. General consensus is no but ... maybe.

Abiogenic_petroleum_origin#State_of_current_research
Within the mantle, carbon may exist as hydrocarbons—chiefly methane—and as elemental carbon, carbon dioxide, and carbonates.[15] The abiotic hypothesis is that the full suite of hydrocarbons found in petroleum can either be generated in the mantle by abiogenic processes,[15] or by biological processing of those abiogenic hydrocarbons, and that the source-hydrocarbons of abiogenic origin can migrate out of the mantle into the crust until they escape to the surface or are trapped by impermeable strata, forming petroleum reservoirs.

Getting late for me, maybe tomorrow.



posted on Aug, 10 2016 @ 12:55 AM
link   
Existence is about life and death. Reality is truth. Light is life. Death is dark. Jesus says he is the life, and truth and way. No one comes to the father except through him. Jesus is also the word(scripture). Evolution means nothing because it would have to be proven. There is proof that Jesus existed. Choose life forever or just awhile. The decision God gives you. When you close your eyes for the last time what do you want to believe?



posted on Aug, 10 2016 @ 12:57 AM
link   
All things are posible with God. All other things are possible without. a reply to: Richw007



posted on Aug, 10 2016 @ 01:08 AM
link   
this argument would have been long put to rest if our egos could entertain the idea of simply 'we dont know' and period.

the human mind is only able to keep asking answers. there will never be a day when we will know the absolute of anything, its statistically improbable. its also improbable that, our explanations are in fact, what is there. meaning, our observations on anything, religion god or science, is only based on the numskulls and senses and what we can observe.

so, no man (or woman) will ever have a definitive answer. its impossible, not improbable.

unfortunately, our brain cannot say, we dont know, and stop its query. biologically and physiologically, this is what keeps this question going, now and forever.



posted on Aug, 10 2016 @ 01:12 AM
link   
a reply to: odzeandennz

We may never know 100%, but we can learn.



posted on Aug, 10 2016 @ 03:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krahzeef_Ukhar

originally posted by: Raggedyman
Where is the empirical evidence, thats the question


It's also a very clever question.
I can't empirically prove that you were born.

How can we find out if you were born?


So, historical science is not repeatable, testable observable, its not a sciene

Creation v Evolution argument ended



posted on Aug, 10 2016 @ 03:13 AM
link   
a reply to: LABTECH767

Yes I have read the bible and found it to be rather insightful as a philosophical book. I could go on and recite the whole Religulous movie for reasons but choose not to, give it a fair watch sometime. As for the story of Christ not being authentic, a simple google search will reveal the truth, if you choose to seek it.

Creation is an idea, Evolution is scientific fact, plain and simple.



posted on Aug, 10 2016 @ 03:21 AM
link   
a reply to: logicsoda


Well why did someone tell me hippos were related to whales, why all this assumption being passed of as science

If scientists cant make up their minds how are laymen.

You are not Mr Squiggle by chance



posted on Aug, 10 2016 @ 03:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: HoloShadow
Creation is an idea, Evolution is scientific fact, plain and simple.


Well come up with the empirical evidence, simple



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join