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 the most insane of species

page: 2
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 16 2019 @ 11:55 AM
link   
I look at the rest of our beautiful natural world,see the balance-evidence of mother natures plan.
Its all working a treat,birds-doing their function.Insects doing it.
Trees doing it.
Fish doing it.

Call it Mother Nature,God if you want,but there is a force beyond our own will which directs us to behave in a certain manner.
Just as Bees do their thing,just as dolphins do their thing.
So i am thinking all the craziness we do is part of the plan.
We are just doing our thing.

Carrying out our program to the best os our ability.

When I see an ant or wasp or mantis-I wonder,does this insect have a form of consciousness like I do?
Or is the whole thing just a badly designed computer game?
Is our universe in an alien test tube?

What is this thing we call our reality?

Yes,I admit I have a problem with how it is defined.

I don't think we are even close yet
At our definition of reality.


Maybe I just need to see a shrink?




posted on May, 16 2019 @ 12:20 PM
link   
Humans are the only species capable of insanity, because the concept of sanity is a human invention.

Animals are neither sane nor insane...they just *are*.

And the concept of God has nothing to do with human behavior--unless it is used as an excuse for action.

Cheers



posted on May, 16 2019 @ 02:57 PM
link   
Oh look.
Still more trendy misanthropy.......

Tell you what.
If you have such a view of your own species and thus yourself.
Why don't you follow the courage of your claimed convictions to their natural conclusion in the example of yourself?
If you will not, all your doing is shallow signaling of virtue you do not actually have.
edit on 16-5-2019 by HarbingerOfShadows because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2019 @ 03:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lightsurgeon
Man is the most insane species. He worships an invisible God and destroys a visible nature. Unaware that the nature he is destroying is this God that he is worshipping - discuss

Eh. We're all right. The best thing we could do is live in harmony and balance with the forces and resources of the Earth. We're not there yet, but we at least recognize the value of it, and are working toward it.

Unlike those crazy termites!



posted on May, 16 2019 @ 04:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Silcone Synapse

Crows are savages I once saw a gang of crows murder an injured crow.



posted on May, 16 2019 @ 05:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: ManyMasks
a reply to: Silcone Synapse

Crows are savages I once saw a gang of crows murder an injured crow.
Perhaps that's why they call a group of crows a murder?



posted on May, 17 2019 @ 02:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: ManyMasks
a reply to: Silcone Synapse

Crows are savages I once saw a gang of crows murder an injured crow.


Crows are a highly intelligent gang.
They operate as a Tight miltsry unit,scouts,re con,proximity patrols,

They can recognise individual humans

Humans can develop a workable relstionship with these clever sky masters.

We have done so before.



posted on May, 17 2019 @ 03:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Silcone Synapse

I do respect them and know their intelligence, I believe they were murdering the weak one because it was weak...... Maybe they are too intelligent!



posted on May, 18 2019 @ 11:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lightsurgeon
Man is the most insane species.

There are even those who think that nature is God (and/or the creator of everything in nature).

Many use the word “nature” to refer to the source of the design of living things. For example, in its issue of March 2003, the journal Scientific American stated: “Of all the body coverings nature has designed, feathers are the most various and the most mysterious.” Although that writer may think of nature as a mere force, he says that nature “designed” feathers. Can a force design things?

To “design” means to “plan (something) with a specific purpose or intention in mind.” (The New Oxford Dictionary of English) Only a person can design and invent. Just as inventors have names, the Creator has a name.

Psalm 83:18

18 May people know that you, whose name is Jehovah,

You alone are the Most High over all the earth.


Consider one day giving credit where credit is due...

Revelation 4:11

11 “You are worthy, Jehovah our God, to receive the glory and the honor and the power, because you created all things, and because of your will they came into existence and were created.”

And for those who care about our environment, remember, God will not allow humans to ruin the earth completely by pollution, warfare, or any other means. Rather, he will “bring to ruin those ruining the earth.” (Revelation 11:18) So best not become one of “those ruining the earth.” And if you think you might be one of those, best change your ways “for Jehovah will make an accounting on the earth, concluding it and cutting it short.” (Romans 9:28) “And there is not a creation that is hidden from his sight, but all things are naked and openly exposed to the eyes of the one to whom we must give an account.” (Hebrews 4:13)

Since the subject came up earlier as evidence for design and a wise Creator who knows what he's doing (rather than an impersonal force such as the way the word “nature” is used by some people and erronuously associated with the ability to design):

Feathers—A Marvel of Design: Awake!—2007

...
“A Little Too Perfect”

Safe airplanes are the product of painstaking design, engineering, and craftsmanship. What about birds and feathers? In the absence of fossil evidence, controversy rages among evolutionists over how feathers originated. “Fundamentalist fervor,” “vitriolic name-calling,” and “paleontological passion” pervade the debate, states the magazine Science News. One evolutionary biologist, who organized a symposium on feather evolution, confessed: “I never dreamed that any scientific matter could possibly generate such bad personal behavior and such bitterness.” If feathers clearly evolved, why should discussions of the process become so vitriolic?

“Feathers are a little too perfect​—that’s the problem,” notes Yale University’s Manual of Ornithology—​Avian Structure and Function. Feathers give no indication that they ever needed improvement. In fact, the “earliest known fossil feather is so modern-looking as to be indistinguishable from the feathers of birds flying today.”* Yet, evolutionary theory teaches that feathers must be the result of gradual, cumulative change in earlier skin outgrowths. Moreover, “feathers could not have evolved without some plausible adaptive value in all of the intermediate steps,” says the Manual.

To put it simply, even in theory, evolution could not produce a feather unless each step in a long series of random, inheritable changes in feather structure significantly improved the animal’s chances for survival. Even many evolutionists find it a stretch of the imagination that something as complex and functionally perfect as a feather could arise in such a way.

Further, if feathers developed progressively over a long period of time, the fossil record should contain intermediate forms. But none have ever been found, only traces of fully formed feathers. “Unfortunately for evolutionary theory, feathers are very complicated,” states the Manual.

*: The fossil feather is from archaeopteryx, an extinct creature sometimes presented as a “missing link” in the line of descent to modern birds. Most paleontologists, however, no longer consider it an ancestor of modern birds.

Avian Flight Demands More Than Feathers

The perfection of feathers is just one problem for evolutionists, for practically every part of a bird is designed for flight. For instance, a bird has light, hollow bones as well as an unusually efficient respiratory system and specialized muscles to flap and control its wings. It even has a number of muscles to control the position of individual feathers. And it has nerves that connect each muscle to the bird’s tiny but amazing brain, which is preprogrammed to control all these systems simultaneously, automatically, and precisely. Yes, this whole, incredibly complex package is necessary for flight, not just the feathers.

Keep in mind, too, that every bird develops from a tiny cell that contains the complete instructions for its growth and instincts, so that one day it can take to the sky. Could all this arise from a long string of advantageous accidents? Or is the simplest explanation also the most reasonable and scientific one​—that birds and their feathers bear the marks of a supremely intelligent Maker? The evidence speaks for itself.​—Romans 1:20.

Romans 1:20:

For his invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable.

Some fossil “evidence” that was once loudly hailed as proof that birds evolved from other creatures has since been shown to have been forged. In 1999, for instance, National Geographic magazine featured an article about a fossil of a feathered creature with a tail like a dinosaur’s. The magazine declared the creature to be “a true missing link in the complex chain that connects dinosaurs to birds.” The fossil, however, turned out to be a forgery, a composite of the fossils of two different animals. In fact, no such “missing link” has ever been found.
edit on 19-5-2019 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 07:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: whereislogic

Feathers—A Marvel of Design: Awake!—2007

...
To put it simply, even in theory, evolution could not produce a feather unless each step in a long series of random, inheritable changes in feather structure significantly improved the animal’s chances for survival. Even many evolutionists find it a stretch of the imagination that something as complex and functionally perfect as a feather could arise in such a way.

Another way of phrasing that first part could be:

To put it simply, even in theory, evolution (nature) could not produce (design) a feather unless each step in a long series of random, inheritable changes in feather structure significantly improved the animal’s chances for survival.

Since that is basically what the claim I quoted in my previous comment from the journal Scientific American regarding feathers being designed by nature boils down to. It's the same concept or idea: 'evolution did it', 'nature did it', 'evolution produced it', 'nature designed it' (exclusively referring to the forces of nature, or sometimes referred to as natural processes, i.e. natural causes or causation, as described in philosophical naturalism).



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join