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.

 

Evolution - Creation 'rabble rabble rabble'

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 03:34 AM
link   
To start off, i believe children are being brain-washed in our schools with evolutionary graphs and a so called 'scientific explaination'. And apparently science = . fullstop answers ?

The people who study such fields want answers and the only way they can do this is by observation and knowledge. Back in the early 1800's, you would see a theorist pondering how man became, he would observe a chimp and conclude: with a few minor biological alterations. a couple o' million years and 'evolving' into human form for what ever reason - man spawned from similar apearance creature.
- Ahhh, how sweet to answer lifes questions with an explaination children understand via pictures and 'milking' time periods.
Its like grabbing an orange and comparing it to a pear, "pears evolved from oranges" due to similar shape... end of discussion (no!)

Think of this:
*a massive number of million years ago, lets say a thousand (wow) - earth was twirled together from dust and etc.
*50 million years - bacteria grew into fish, fish started walking on land, for some reason they were forced by evolution to walk on fins and breath with their head in a bucket untill a few more million years saw fit to allow them lungs.
*25 million years - the fish flapping on land grew into dinosaurs via millions of years and a representation of how a fish might transform into a dinosaur.
*millions more years - a rich abundance of suprisingly lucky 20 foot tall creatures whos parents were fish, died via massive rock impact, darkness, death etc.
*a million years ago - MAN is spawned from similar appearance monkey, ape, chimp. Magically more fish roam from the sea to evolve becuase evolution wanted land creatures ready for the next sacrafice to the lord flying rock.
*The evolution equation of (1 day + environment + animal = slow change) really answers how earth is home to millions of species. Youd think after a million-gazillion years they would have evolved via meshing 2 species together to form emu-crocodiles and other exciting inbred spawn.

So what do we have?
- evolved creatures, given a long time, seem to seperate to form new species.. on a continuous loop, forever evolving, meshing together to form more species than you can throw an asteroid at.

My theory: At the change of evolution, a land-mass broke off from the real world and floated towards the bermuda triangle, here the only creature - ape, was evolved because the temperature was 5 degrees higher and the sun was now positioned in such a way that the apes argued for a million years, after which ape had pulled all his hair out, adopted an attitude and a minds choice, grew taller whilst punching each other in the spine, causing skeletal change.
- whilst all the magic is happening on fantasy island, all the worlds creatures continue their routine scripted 'bot-like' role, awaiting man to develop a keen interest in debunking God by exploiting the wonders of the world.

Evolution is a brief, ignorant, picture-able representation for ages 5-80 and mental capacity IQ20 - IQ85


My arguement for Creation.. or as i like to say 'that which is, but can only be answered minus the physical, verbal and visible representation'
That might sound a little ignorant and rather inconclusive a answer.
Imagine modern man, he is only a few thousand years in existance. You, born into a world of sin.. and by that i mean, man was born with free will, opinion, choices, ignorance, temptation and no rules to govern ones existance, other than law. You explore information, realise earth, the universe, plants and animals, color, smell, sound - all define life. You witness the world and wonder, that wonder leads you to science's answer for everything. If something isnt answered, its generally guessed.. (ie. space time can be folded like a leaf and unfolded once on the other side, hence travel long distances)
The idea of God is refered to as 'blind faith' or 'fools comfort'. - cont.




posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 03:48 AM
link   
please tell me you didn't just discount evolution with that wildly ignorant 'logic' of yours.

if you pay attention to the changes in one generation, parent to child, and apply that over hundreds of millions of years, it's quite clear that evolution is a viable process for the rise of humanity. furthermore, mutations in a species arise quit often - if the mutation is beneficial to survival, then that member of the species can breed more effectively as it lives longer, and pass its genes on to it's children. simple genetics is more than enough proff for the validity of evolution.

if you choose to think that some mystical Dungeon Master of a god rolled some dice and created the universe in a period of 7 days, that's your perogative, but please leave the teaching of our children to individuals who actually think outside of what they're told.



posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 04:21 AM
link   
Why is it so attractive of an idea to debunk God?
The idea of God, a creator is much more reasonable compared to evolution. The universe could simply be God, but given mans nature, we take that under our feet and judge 'if i can walk on it, talk about it, carry it, draw it, smell it, throw it, command it - then i am my own God for i conclude to myself'
To even think the answer is 'bang, spinning, sun-planets, chemicals, bacteria, growth, change, man' is to finish proudly having discovered after death is nothing, after man is pointless changes in the universe, and eventually it will cave in on itself leaving nothing behind.

Can you really say that man is evolution and basically the memory gives the illusion of individuals ability to recall, teach, dream, love, live, pass thru time?
God as a figure or God as laws of nature?

Im not religious, i dont sit nodding my head at scriptures handed down over such a lengthy period, which is likely altered by man to introduce hell and punishment.. Its written like the book of Law instead of the book of insight.

Conclusion: God may be real, dont ask me to draw a picture, post a photo, write an equation, debunk the field of science or on my last breath explain what heaven looks like..

Just work it out for yourself.. Why should anyone adopt anothers idea and live by it? All thats left is a drone-human, a 'broken record' preacher spitting the same sh*t we read in the news, promoting the same foolish answer that comes from a childs knowledge level.

rabble rabble rabble - topic always gets a few pages from me



posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 04:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by 25cents
please tell me you didn't just discount evolution with that wildly ignorant 'logic' of yours.

if you pay attention to the changes in one generation, parent to child, and apply that over hundreds of millions of years, it's quite clear that evolution is a viable process for the rise of humanity. furthermore, mutations in a species arise quit often - if the mutation is beneficial to survival, then that member of the species can breed more effectively as it lives longer, and pass its genes on to it's children. simple genetics is more than enough proff for the validity of evolution.

if you choose to think that some mystical Dungeon Master of a god rolled some dice and created the universe in a period of 7 days, that's your perogative, but please leave the teaching of our children to individuals who actually think outside of what they're told.


hmm good response. Evolution is possible, but not as likely as creation - simple.
I dont believe in some creation story that lines up next to those of indigenous australians
i accept the idea of God, but i dont follow a religion.

Your right, its easier to give children an answer that sinks in right away. Its harder to teach them they arent the center of the universe

Whats easier isnt always what is right



posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 04:47 AM
link   
that's the point though - human life is utterly irrelevant. there is absolutely nothin for you to conciously (or unconciously) because all of the matter in your body is eaten and disperesed to the rest of the earth. the afterlife is simply a creation based on a humans fear of death.

you're not making any sense. in no way did you make any kind of valid argument against evolution or for creation.



posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 05:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by 25cents
that's the point though - human life is utterly irrelevant. there is absolutely nothin for you to conciously (or unconciously) because all of the matter in your body is eaten and disperesed to the rest of the earth. the afterlife is simply a creation based on a humans fear of death.

you're not making any sense. in no way did you make any kind of valid argument against evolution or for creation.


Hmm, good point. Thats if you want to consider man as meat and brain/nervous system. Again, this is selective of what is easy to consider.

Im merely giving my opinion on the matter, i acknowledge aspects of evolution theory that are likely true, but i still think creation out-does evolution.

Just to clear things up in short:
I am 70% for creation
and 30% in favor of evolution



posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 05:27 AM
link   
so this edntire post is based entirely on your opinion without any actual evidence for or against?



posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 05:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by 25cents
so this edntire post is based entirely on your opinion without any actual evidence for or against?


Im willing to write out a fairly decent report.. Included would be ideas that are generally shrugged off without properly considering. Arguements constantly get pushed aside using brief facts that are never ellaborated on. The arguement against creation is constantly countering points being made with guess work, re-hashing the facts to fit each seperate arguement and those argueing fail to understand the points being made.

If i write this out will you keep an open mind and attempt to look past the boundaries of science? If string theory is correct, then you shouldnt have a problem



posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 05:52 AM
link   
I favour creation. But maybe evolution does occur to some degree. Maybe God uses evolution to change things around a bit and add variety for his own pleasure. But man evolving from a one-celled organism to a human is rather ridiculous.


Originally posted by 25cents
that's the point though - human life is utterly irrelevant. there is absolutely nothin for you to conciously (or unconciously) because all of the matter in your body is eaten and disperesed to the rest of the earth. the afterlife is simply a creation based on a humans fear of death.


I believe every person has a spririt and that's what there true self is. Our bodies are just vehicles for us to interact with the world. Without a spirit a body is dead, for that is what a dead body is, a body with no longer its spirit. The body is simply made from many cells. How can you explain consciousness, dreams and love if we are nothing more than a bunch of cells?



posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 06:03 AM
link   
simple. electromagnetic interactions resulting in what amounts to a self-replicating biological computer with amazingly complex and powerful, but far from perfect circuitry.

and fennek, if you're willing to provide actual proof rather than speculation, using the scientific method, then yes, i'll put aside the other factual information provided by testing methods and actual scientific observation.

science is science because it relies on research rather than speculation and ancient manuscripts.



posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 07:00 AM
link   
hmmm..........your good, your good. But this is only a theory, it hasnt been proven has it?

I guess this implies you dont believe in ghosts?



posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 07:00 AM
link   
Bible: The centerpiece of this debate. The Bible created religion, introduced creationism and taught ideals to its followers. We can proove as fact the Bible is true and its words are common place in todays society, are we forgetting this book created the growing free-world?
The bible is the word of God, Genesis 1 and 2 speak of the start and creation itself.
Evolution makes arguements that are indirect at attempting to disproove the word of God. The Bible is physical, it has a timeline, it has truth. Evolution cannot proove its own credibility as the theory's predate life capable of scripture, speech and text. This is where the Bible rules out evolution as total.

Assume too much: If i suggest evolution is correct, then i 'assume' without explaination that something went bang billions of years ago (fair game, high chance this occured) and every bit of matter and energy comes from somewhere
'unknown', but we still interpret these things with eye sight and use of math, which draws a conclusion but doesnt answer the question of origin.
You cant acknowledge an unknown origin object just because we see it? Lets pretend an object is red, the color is used to communicate and study the object.
Maybe this object is complex beyond sight but what we can see, we can measure and when the object reacts with another to form a differant color object - then we have science fact. Science explains how we (humans) can interpret the big and small and of differant make-up - what science cant explain is the origin of matter and energy beyond our primative senses (sight, hearing, taste etc.).
Assume its just there? Assume it works because we proove so with numbers? Assume we hold the highest sensory perception above all other creatures?
Consider this, in some cases your backyard animal can sense danger (earthquake, hurricane) hours and even days before a human (in some cases, not always). This suggests animals have a much higher sensory perception, which can rate wild/unintelligent creatures higher than humans (on the sensory scale).

'World based on what ya got' - Our world, this debate, is based on what we as humans have to measure our arguement and frankly, what we have is default and our world is built upon such, to consider things outside the common is judged wrong for a good reason, i know. But i also argue that is what seperates mankind, those who live their life, choosing to govern their life on a 'realist' or 'perception' based guidance are stuffed, religion speaks of Hell as a place visited when a person sins, Hell could simply be the downfall of ones life, well-being and result of sudden death. The guidelines are simple - in practice, they freed europe from Nazi's, they faught for vietnam, they introduced freedom to oppressed corners of the globe, they have ensured the freedom of millions of individuals. The principals i speak of, attract people from all over the globe regardless of nationality and define 'multi-cultural' as common-place.



posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 07:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by LancerJ1
hmmm..........your good, your good. But this is only a theory, it hasnt been proven has it?

I guess this implies you dont believe in ghosts?


in practice, everything is a theory. while something may be replicated millions of times in laboratory settings, there is always the chance that exceptions may exist. if you want to look at it that way, you'll end up looking at nihilism very closely.

and you're correct, i don't believe in ghosts. i do, however, believe in hallucinations and hard to explain natural phenomena.



posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 07:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by fennek77
Bible: The centerpiece of this debate. The Bible created religion, introduced creationism and taught ideals to its followers. We can proove as fact the Bible is true and its words are common place in todays society, are we forgetting this book created the growing free-world?
The bible is the word of God, Genesis 1 and 2 speak of the start and creation itself.
Evolution makes arguements that are indirect at attempting to disproove the word of God. The Bible is physical, it has a timeline, it has truth. Evolution cannot proove its own credibility as the theory's predate life capable of scripture, speech and text. This is where the Bible rules out evolution as total.

Assume too much: If i suggest evolution is correct, then i 'assume' without explaination that something went bang billions of years ago (fair game, high chance this occured) and every bit of matter and energy comes from somewhere
'unknown', but we still interpret these things with eye sight and use of math, which draws a conclusion but doesnt answer the question of origin.
You cant acknowledge an unknown origin object just because we see it? Lets pretend an object is red, the color is used to communicate and study the object.
Maybe this object is complex beyond sight but what we can see, we can measure and when the object reacts with another to form a differant color object - then we have science fact. Science explains how we (humans) can interpret the big and small and of differant make-up - what science cant explain is the origin of matter and energy beyond our primative senses (sight, hearing, taste etc.).
Assume its just there? Assume it works because we proove so with numbers? Assume we hold the highest sensory perception above all other creatures?
Consider this, in some cases your backyard animal can sense danger (earthquake, hurricane) hours and even days before a human (in some cases, not always). This suggests animals have a much higher sensory perception, which can rate wild/unintelligent creatures higher than humans (on the sensory scale).

'World based on what ya got' - Our world, this debate, is based on what we as humans have to measure our arguement and frankly, what we have is default and our world is built upon such, to consider things outside the common is judged wrong for a good reason, i know. But i also argue that is what seperates mankind, those who live their life, choosing to govern their life on a 'realist' or 'perception' based guidance are stuffed, religion speaks of Hell as a place visited when a person sins, Hell could simply be the downfall of ones life, well-being and result of sudden death. The guidelines are simple - in practice, they freed europe from Nazi's, they faught for vietnam, they introduced freedom to oppressed corners of the globe, they have ensured the freedom of millions of individuals. The principals i speak of, attract people from all over the globe regardless of nationality and define 'multi-cultural' as common-place.


so you'd rather make the assumption that some supreme being, which had NO origin, is a logical explanation to how the universe came into being?

if you become obsessed with origins, and base all of your opinion on them, you'll continue to go back until there is no answer, and again, you'll come to nihilism. the fact of the answer is that no cosmology will ever be proven, but evolution, the event of human appearance on earth, and the formation of the solar system, can be compared to observable phenomena. given a close comparison versus a convoluted and mistranslated book written by men thousands of years ago, men who took many of their idea from pagan religions and then cast those very religions into a melting pot with other 'sinners' to prosecute and kill them, i'll take the scientifically sound idea which puts power in absolutely nobody's hands, thank you.



posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 07:30 AM
link   
The word of God:
You can not debunk that which has created the world you live in. Even if God isnt real, the effect of such an idea is more powerful than any radical, evolutionist, satanist, terrorist or sadist. If creation cant be prooven, then i draw the conclusion that we dont need to know, if something works then dont question its affectivness.

Science:
The creations, animals are far too complex if we assume the 'shake and bake' theory of evolution. Such complexity, beauty, diversity has to result from influence regardless of our inability to measure and conclude it true.
*although, evolution theory is result of mans perception and smarts, such an idea is positive to include facts, some truth. Quiet possibly evolution is correct, there may still be a God, but we accept Evolution because God has created all and we should accept this. Therefore we would accept the world God has created.
* Disregarding all debate points. I say this, an unknown point in our perception of space time for unknown reasons began to exist at the bigbang and we perceive the elements of this now known in passed down knowledge. But regardless of any scientific debate, the universe does not apparent from nothing and the definition of energy, matter and time cannot be constantly present for unknown reasons - and thats the best answer evolution can provide.
*Measuring evolutions accuracy: Evolution has the ability to be accurate to 80% with God, and the probability of evolution being 100% correct is close to 0.0000012% (taking into account evolution itself, disregarding the bible, disgregarding God, mans complexity by luck etc.)

Closing statement:
For those who wish to run with evolution as a complete answer, you will get no where unless you adapt to creation to support your claims. Ignorance is hell

Quotes:
"Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods."

"Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts."

"Discoveries in Science can not occur untill we establish understanding with that we canot understand."



posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 07:34 AM
link   
What is Nihilism exactly?



posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 07:40 AM
link   
25cents

Your wearing me out.

BTW whats wrong with origins? The start of time is a pretty good place to look..
I dont care if i go back onto this over and over, becuase you cant answer that with your scientific guff.

Also, who cares if some peasants changed a few words in the bible? IT WORKS
Thats my whole point, it works, it established the world as we know it, i doubt evolution would have ever inspired civilisation to the point it is at now.

You cant argue against creationism unless you counter as to the origins of energy, matter, space, time etc. You sure know how to tell me about them and how youve read about the subject, what they do.. but i wana know what you think?
Science save the day please, explain to me what i already know about my surroundings.



posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 07:41 AM
link   
nihilism - the belief that nothing truly exists. a conundrum in and of itself, it's also self sustaining.

and it's not so difficult, really. a few molecules of several elements bonded in such a way as to self-replicate, and after a time some of those replications mutated, made life easier from themselves, and replaced the others. this continued for millions and millions of years, and is still continuing.

i think people hate science because it tells them that they're not all that special.



posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 07:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by fennek77
BTW whats wrong with origins? The start of time is a pretty good place to look..
I dont care if i go back onto this over and over, becuase you cant answer that with your scientific guff.

time is a dimension in our universe - before our universe was created, time as we know it did not exist. again, it's the entire problem with origins, which almost entirely negates this whole 'god' creation of yours - there is absolutely no frame of reference for us to know anything regarding what happened 'before' our universe.



Also, who cares if some peasants changed a few words in the bible? IT WORKS
Thats my whole point, it works, it established the world as we know it, i doubt evolution would have ever inspired civilisation to the point it is at now.

societal implications are NOT grounds for proof. whether or not the theory of evolution would have created the miserable society we have today is not the question being posed - the question being posed is which is theoretically more plausible. and as for 'who cares' - everyone should. if it's not the word of god, it's simply a fable, and that's all it's ever been. believers are fully deluding themselves.



You cant argue against creationism unless you counter as to the origins of energy, matter, space, time etc. You sure know how to tell me about them and how youve read about the subject, what they do.. but i wana know what you think?
Science save the day please, explain to me what i already know about my surroundings.


i have absolutely no idea what you're asking me here. are you asking my opinion? i think my replies have been pretty well laced with venom regarding creationism.



posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 07:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by 25cents
nihilism - the belief that nothing truly exists. a conundrum in and of itself, it's also self sustaining.

and it's not so difficult, really. a few molecules of several elements bonded in such a way as to self-replicate, and after a time some of those replications mutated, made life easier from themselves, and replaced the others. this continued for millions and millions of years, and is still continuing.

i think people hate science because it tells them that they're not all that special.


haha i think you are struggling to understand me because im far from nihilism.
see your speaking like that answers my question? That didnt answer anything, i already know this, its basic, but still doesnt proove evo. total.

I respect science, but it cant explain these things and real scientists stay clear debating it. The real problem is evolutionists pick up the slack and run around in their own ignorance, producing the same answers over and over. The only thing you can do from here is produce proper answers that dont repeat the same old sh*t i learnt in grade 10 chemistry. - no one cares about basics of chemistry and biology, start producing something solid



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join