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.

 

creationism, where is the evidence???!!! i see none

page: 16
5
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by AshleyD
 


Ashly, 'Hon',

You're very adept at 'snipping' from other's posts in a way to 'spin' (notice that spin is an anagram of snip?) your circular reasoning.

Again, the OP asked for evidence of creationism and instead, we only hear how we must accept it as a 'belief'. In essence, although you didn't state it flatly, you made reference to the 'flood', so one can only assume that you, AshleyD, believe in the inerrant nature of the 'bible'. Your avatar speaks volumes in any case.

Nevertheless, in the face of decades of evidence that continue to bring to light corroboration of a larger scheme, a system where the biological diversity we see today (not to mention what had come before, only known now due to fossils) is Global, but also very specialized in certain regions.

So far the arguments have centered on the 'macro', that is, what you can see and touch and photograph when studying the biomass of Earth. Where creationism falls apart (or more correctly, needs to provide an alternative hypothesis, supported by valid evidence) is in the 'micro' world. The science of DNA analysis continues to show a deep, deep connection that is shared by all life on Earth.

This thread, Ashley, is not (IMO) intended to discount a 'creator'...it is meant to ask for proof of those claims that fly in the face of science and critical thinking.

My rant: If there is an 'instigator' of any sort behind everything we see in the Universe then it is, as I mentioned before, the height of hubris to assume we can know its mind. Rather than trying to figure out how Santa Claus can deliver all those presents in one night, I'd rather just open my gifts and enjoy them.




posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Again, the OP asked for evidence of creationism and instead, we only hear how we must accept it as a 'belief'.


Basically that is exactly what it all comes down to: belief. Again, I think this thread is a humorous spin off of this thread due to the similarity of titles as everyone knows we cannot prove a divine miracle that happened before mankind. However, I made this thread to throw out the question that perhaps evolution is evidence of creationism. I do not believe in macroevolution but how can any of us really say for certain until indisputable evidence comes to light? What if it is how God designed it? Doubtful, but why not?


In essence, although you didn't state it flatly, you made reference to the 'flood', so one can only assume that you, AshleyD, believe in the inerrant nature of the 'bible'.


You assume correctly.


Where creationism falls apart (or more correctly, needs to provide an alternative hypothesis, supported by valid evidence) is in the 'micro' world.


Does creationism actually fall apart? I don't think so. Who can say they are or are not mutually exclusive with certainty?


The science of DNA analysis continues to show a deep, deep connection that is shared by all life on Earth.


There has been some questions raised concerning this but I'm not going to get into it just yet. Basically, some have raised questions concerning genetic drift and DNA mutations. Some have noticed it is impossible for a certain strand to survive for the length of time required to result in a genetic change. So, nothing really is written in stone concerning this hypothesis. They're trying but it is not indisputable.



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 11:02 AM
link   
There is a video on Youtube I saw a while ago which basically explains evolution......

www.youtube.com...

If you didn't understand evolution before...well now you do so no complaints


So....this is evidence for evolution.....now for the evidence for creationism....evidence please.....

"Well....it's all a matter of faith....."

Hmmmmmm faith.....k so if I have faith that the Jesus was a women....does that make it true.....?

NO......we need PROOF....the fact of the matter is that no one has been able to supply any proof of creationism...and so.....

Check Mate......................



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by AshleyD

Originally posted by mamasita
yes the whale did evolve from a mammal from the wolf family. we know this because we have physical evidence of it ie bones - how can you refute that?!


I don't have to refute it. Evolutionists did it for me when they discovered their transitional fossils weren't what they thought they were. If this "physical evidence" has been retracted by the ones who presented it in the first place, I'm supposed to still believe it anyways? I don't have enough faith for that. And don't get me started on the blue whale transforming into the bat through natural selection.


here is a link from wikopedia that will explain to you the process of whale evolution as its scientifically accepted:

en.wikipedia.org...



where the evidence points to? you have been following this thread havent you? there is NO evidence to support creationism!


Hon, it might be you that hasn't been following this thread because I have stated several times there can be no evidence to support a divine act like creationism. Glad we agree.

yes "hun" you might recall that i quoted about where the evidence points to from you. your the one that states that you will follow where the evidence points to than you admit creationism has no evidence?! where is the logic in that?!


now where does the evidence point to? oh wait you need evidence in the first place for it to point somewhere!


The study of apologetics is the evidence I'm referring to. So, there may not be evidence for creation but there is evidence of God in other areas. Because He has validated Himself through other methods, I believe what He said in areas I cannot validate. Creationism is one of them.

oh evidence of god now - now what would this be? please enlighten me.


Again, I do believe in degenerative changes, mutations, and differences among similar species but I do not believe in macroevolution. Darwin predicted there would be hundreds of transitional fossils discovered in the fossil record that would unequivocally prove macroevolution. Only a few "transitional fossils" have been found and even evolutionary science cannot agree on them. They are considered questionable. I do not accept questions open to interpretation as science.

I hope we can agree to disagree.


theres something else that is considered questionable and open to interpretation - thats religion.
everyday we are making more and more discoveries supporting evidence. i just dont understand how you can believe in something so much with out any proof. no wonder why churches make so much money off faith.



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by AshleyD

Originally posted by weedwhacker
It is asking for EVIDENCE that creationism is real.


I believe this entire thread is a spin off of the thread "Evolution, where is the evidence? I see none." Might be wrong but I think so. Again, I say, no one can prove [or disprove for that matter] a divine act that no one witnessed. We accept it because evolutionary science is not as flawless as we are expected to believe and because God has validated Himself through other ways. Here's some good links to cast down on some evolutionary theories:


of course its a spin off from evolution, where is the evidence???!!! - its exactly the same title apart from one word.
so if you admit that you dont have any evidence to support your belief than why did i have to start this thread coz i was sick of all the threads about evolution having no proof?
god has not or eva validated himself to such a degree or so irrefutable that he is based as a factual figure. no he's still a belief so is religion so is creationism how eva evolution is world wide accepted as fact.



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by andre18
There is a video on Youtube I saw a while ago which basically explains evolution......

www.youtube.com...


I know this is a lot to ask and if you don't have the time or desire to I'll understand. But I cannot see videos on this computer. Is there any way you can sum it up for me? Thanks.



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by mamasita
your the one that states that you will follow where the evidence points to than you admit creationism has no evidence?! where is the logic in that?!


Because there is enough evidence to lend credence to the things that can be verified. There will always be things we cannot prove. So, since it has been true on other points even to the most minute detail, I accept on faith the things I cannot prove.


oh evidence of god now - now what would this be? please enlighten me.


As I told another poster, asking me to explain what evidence I base my belief on would be like asking someone to paraphrase all the information in a set of encyclopedias in a few paragraphs. Books that have been written on the study of Christian Apologetics (the study of Christian evidence) could fill a small library. However, I explained a lot of information as to why I believe (leaving out personal experiences and instead only focused on the facts) in this thread. If you really want to know, you can read my 20 or so novel-length comments as to why I believe although they were still very basic. I don't want to turn this thread into my personal pulpit so that will at least give you some idea even though I never discussed anything in depth.


theres something else that is considered questionable and open to interpretation - thats religion.
everyday we are making more and more discoveries supporting evidence. i just dont understand how you can believe in something so much with out any proof. no wonder why churches make so much money off faith.


There is more evidence (dare I say proof?) than one could realize. On top of actual evidence through the study of apologetics (verifiable evidence), unexplainable things happen every day. I'm not going to get miraculous or divine examples but there is still plenty information to at least offer the benefit of the doubt.

[edit on 1/15/2008 by AshleyD]



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 07:32 PM
link   
First of all, what does intelligent design state? That all animals appeared all at once and fully formed.
What does the fossil record clearly prove? That all animals appeared all at once and fully formed.
Therefore, it is proof of a designer.

This is obvious proof for creation. Don't try to argue that I am just debunking evolution, because, as you can see I didn't even mention evolution. If you do, you are ignorant of the fossils record.

Some of you will argue that evolution has indeed found some missing links or transitional fossils. This is a waste of time and a very poor argument because even if you had 25 transitional fossils/missing links, (which you don't, you have no more than 10 highly controversal finds, if that), the thousands of completed fully formed fossils is incredibly overwhelming. It's not even close. It's thousands vs. the tens column.

Think clearly here and realize that the fossil record proves that all animals appeared all at once and fully formed. Because if you can't realize this than you are either ignorant of paleontology or you just don't want admit there is even the possibility of a designer.



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by ppkjjkpp
 


I was just reading about this the other day. Some proposed the fossil record was created in one cataclysmic event (and possibly other scattered fossils here and there over time) and the sediments and creatures were distributed through the strata based on hydraulics, weight, and escaping internal gasses. I know the length of time it takes for fossils and strata to form has been in dispute for at least a century now (as in, not necessarily taking millions or billions of years) but this was new to me.

[edit on 1/15/2008 by AshleyD]



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by AshleyD
 


And I suppose there's no proof behind the cataclysmic event that occured? Seems like a gap filler in my opinion.

[edit on 15-1-2008 by ppkjjkpp]



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by AshleyD
 


One way to sum up that YouTube video is...you have to watch it for yourself to get educated.

DNA sequences...genetics...adaptations because of causal factors over many GENERATIONS of a specie's span on Earth...it's called 'The Big Picture'.

According to your signature, 'Hon', you'd rather believe that a '...tornado could create a B767 out of a junkyard...' (a completely silly analogy) before you'd even entertain the idea that knowledge, learning and discipline lead to understanding of the forces at work in nature over long timespans, and that the power of life, the diversity of life, stem from those forces. NO, not from some 'Intelligent' designer...

But, if you want to believe that your first ancestor was 'created' out of a bunch of dirt (or 'dust') then maybe that fits well with your tornado and airplane reference...

Will leave you with this thought to ponder...why do male mammals have nipples?



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 09:07 PM
link   
Ashley, YECers will dispute everything that doesn't fit with their storybook. Problem is, no-one in science really cares. If your religious beliefs compell you to deny reality, that's your perogative.

You lost the debate a hundred years ago and more.



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 09:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
One way to sum up that YouTube video is...you have to watch it for yourself to get educated.


Yes, I finally got to see it (well, the first five minutes or so) after switching computers. We have DNA similar to bananas. I get it. And how does this disprove a creator?


According to your signature, 'Hon', you'd rather believe that a '...tornado could create a B767 out of a junkyard...' (a completely silly analogy)


Honey Angel Baby Cakes, is it silly? At least the tornado could have supplied the original matter and not even the tornado could have given the aircraft intelligent life. The only advantage random evolution has over the analogy is time. I'm still not buying it.


NO, not from some 'Intelligent' designer...


You can't prove this so why claim it? We might eventually receive proof God exists (and of course I believe this will happen) but we can't ever prove He does not exist. So, do you think you are privy to some knowledge the rest of us don't have? Just curious. You claim to be so absolute in your knowledge that I figure this must be so.


But, if you want to believe that your first ancestor was 'created' out of a bunch of dirt (or 'dust')


Deal! And you believe our first ancestor was created out of primordial soup.


Will leave you with this thought to ponder...why do male mammals have nipples?


Did Adam and Eve have belly buttons?



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 09:17 PM
link   
reply to post by melatonin
 


melatonin,

Succinct, you are! Maybe a little harsh...tough love?

Seriously, good point. I am afraid, though, it is impolitic to demean another's 'faith'...even when they throw it in our faces. But, having said that, it is imperative that 'bad' science be challenged wherever and whenever we encounter it.

Check out another member's thread (sorry I do not know how to link)...about 100 terrible posts from Christian blogs, something like that.

Ya gotta read the one from the guy who insists the Earth is flat, because the bible says so...

Some of the quotes are outrageous, but one is particularly tragic, when you read the notes after each one...



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 09:23 PM
link   
I'm don't really care about their faith. They can pray to whatever they like.

When they make scientific claims, I will treat them like any other claim, just like I would a colleague of mine. Natural selection also appiles to science.

But if they want to to believe it, again, I don't really care. I'll even defend their right to believe pseudoscientific nonsense.



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 09:25 PM
link   
reply to post by AshleyD
 


You didn't answer my question...instead, typical confusion technique, bait and switch...you asked another question.

Oh, by the way...you are very clever, being able to [snip] selected sentences from my earlier post, and using them to [spin] to your liking. Remember earlier, about the anagram 'spin' vs. 'snip'???

'Hon' (remember, you used that condescending tone to me a few posts ago, so I come right back at you...) I am in NO WAY telling you how to live your life or how to believe or worship in any way you care to!!!

None of us are, for that matter. Back to the original point...where is evidence that supports creationism? You, Ashley, do not provide any, instead you are interrupting discourse by selective quotes and less than reasonable logic or argument to support your position.

adding...you asked if there were belly buttons in 'Adam and Eve'??? You must be joking...OK, I'm being punked! Where are the hidden cameras??
, ...OK, I'm better now...but seriously!

Sorry...I wish you the very best in your delusions, I really do......


[edit on 15-1-2008 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 09:26 PM
link   
I've only come across one example of evolution. When i was at the dentist i got talking about wisdom teeth cause i still have all of mine. The dentist told me that they are seeing in children now, that there born with out the wisdom teeth.

I thought that was cool cause i still don't know what to believe when it comes down to how we came to be. To me that proves evolution exsists, but doesn't prove exactly how we came to be.



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
You didn't answer my question...instead, typical confusion technique, bait and switch...you asked another question.


The bellybutton comment was supposed to be humorous but I forgot to take the target audience into consideration. As for male nipples, they form before the sex is determined in the womb. A weird fact: Some male nipples can even express milk at times. I'm a male nipple expert. What else would you like to know? Oops. I forgot- no humor, by George. Heaven forbid two humans joke with each other on an internet forum.


Oh, by the way...you are very clever, being able to [snip] selected sentences from my earlier post, and using them to [spin] to your liking. Remember earlier, about the anagram 'spin' vs. 'snip'???


I didn't realize there was a rule to reply to every single word and sentence another poster said. Please lead by example. I have a question- will you name all animals in existence by alphabetical order? No snipping now. Reply to everything. Even if it completely disinterests you or is irrelevant to the topic.


'Hon' (remember, you used that condescending tone to me a few posts ago, so I come right back at you...)


If you think that is condescending, that is your right. But I'm a mother and and a southerner, meaning I call everyone pet names without thinking. You can be insulted, I can apologize, and I will more than likely call you Hon again in five minutes. It's in my genetic code or something. Not my fault- I got it from the monkey's original DNA.


I am in NO WAY telling you how to live your life or how to believe or worship in any way you care to!!!


I'm not either. I'm trying to get you to laugh at how silly this whole discussion has become because I can tell you have a good heart but were probably getting a little flustered like I was before. The creation vs. evolution debate has been raging for 150 years. I don't think two, even well intentioned, members on an internet board can figure it out. Truthfully, at least you and I can come to the conclusion to disagree to disagree. I don't know why the hell bent scientists aren't at our level of enlightenment.



None of us are, for that matter. Back to the original point...where is evidence that supports creationism? You, Ashley, do not provide any, instead you are interrupting discourse by selective quotes and less than reasonable logic or argument to support your position.


No, I think I've stated quite clearly (probably about ten times now on this thread) and was honest enough to admit the answer: We cannot prove creationism. In fact, I think I'm the only one who has admitted to this on the entire thread. You cannot prove a divine act. We can provide evidence for other facts in Genesis but not a miraculous creation (at least in my opinion). Because I have pointed this out so many times, I finally decided to get silly when people kept asking me the same questions repeatedly or questions related to evolution when that isn't even what this post is about. Even after answering the question honestly and trying to bow out of the discussion, more questions would be targeted at me and I hate ignoring people.


adding...you asked if there were belly buttons in 'Adam and Eve'??? You must be joking...OK, I'm being punked! Where are the hidden cameras??
, ...OK, I'm better now...but seriously!


LOL! That is exactly what I was doing, sans hidden cameras. I was just asking a silly question in return as that is what your question about male nipples reminded me of. Since I've already answered the question of this post repeatedly, now I'm just having fun.


Sorry...I wish you the very best in your delusions, I really do......


And many blessings in return?

[edit on 1/15/2008 by AshleyD]



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 10:50 PM
link   
reply to post by AshleyD
 


OH...again, I do not 'snip, snip' as you, but one thing in your last jumped at me...your statments of "facts" in Genesis as proof...hmmm.

So, answer this: Why are there two Creations in Genesis? (notice I gave you the courtesy of capitals...)

Version A:

"In the beginning...yadda...creates the 'heavens and the earth'.

Version B:

"In 'the day' that...yadda...made the 'earth and the heavens'..."


Version A is from Genesis 1:1-2:3

Version B is from Genesis 2:4-25

At least scientific peer review will cause those in the studies to realize where they are wrong, if evidence comes to light to refute their pet theories...that is the nature of, no, that's the GLORY of science! That is what learning is all about...that's WHY we should use our evolved brains.

Instead of clinging to the past, why not embrace the future? Use your, dare I say it (?) ok...God-given potential! There, I said it, for your sake.



[edit on 15-1-2008 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 11:09 PM
link   
Most Christians have a difficult time with this topic, not because they're stupid, but because they believe this centers on "faith". Many of these same Christians hold to the belief that they can convince non-believers that God is real and then "lead them to Jesus".

No where in Scripture is anyone argued into becoming a Believer. God has pre-ordained Believers and non-believers, we have no choice in it. No one "chooses" Jesus but rather God calls those whom He has set aside for salvation. No where in Scripture does anyone "choose" Jesus, correct?

So why do many Christians seek to convince non-believers that God is real when the non-believers presuppositions will not allow them to believe? Their presuppositions state "there is no God, there is no metaphysical, no spiritual" so no matter what evidence a Christian sets forth they will never attribute it to God. The question to ask non-believers is how do they define the word "evidence" and how did they come to know the word "evidence"?

Being that non-believers are empiricists and they rely on empirical evidence then they should be able to tell us how they came to know the word "evidence" based on their senses. If knowledge comes through observation then which of the senses told them what the word "evidence" means? Did they smell it, taste it, touch it, see it or hear it?

The Believer presupposes that observation does not bring about knowledge but rather knowledge must be in place first and this knowledge comes "pre-programmed" (for lack of a better word at the moment) by God.




top topics



 
5
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join