Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

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

page: 2
5
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Conspiriology
 

the problem i have with the belief in god is NOT that it might be true...it is how men of faith use it. when a person of faith believes their god has INFINITE KNOWLEDGE, that no human can possibly understand, that's when i want those people to just go and live on an island and leave the rest of us alone. and why do i say this? because those people of that type of faith have already decided who is right (them) and who is wrong (us). i know this is rather a simplistic way of looking at it, but i can see it in the way they talk to non-believers and the ways they treat them, as poor stupid people who need to come into the comforting folds of religious faith. and if that doesn't happen...well that's when the place of "hell" starts getting thrown around in the conversation. and if that doesn't work either...there is a period of time in our not-too-distant past called the dark ages, where people were simply killed if they did not believe in god.




posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Clearskies
That and the fact that there is evidence for a World-wide flood in the sedimentary layer which runs through the whole earth.


I'm not too sure the other stuff is so relevant for you, so I'll overlook that for now.

What I would like you to do is explain where the sedimentary layer for the flood is? That wiki is pretty free of real explanation. I like the idea of Everest just springing out of the ground in one go.



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Conspiriology
Oh now now, I just left a thread by the athesist was more like a trap lol. That's the point though Mel,, we dis eachother. Now you know, when we first became aware of eachother? We or,, I really didn't like you at all.


You don't have to like me if you don't want to. I'm not sure I do remember though.


I have seen you mmm I guess "evolve" into a much better writer with much more patience and less sarcasm then ,, say mad is. I have a lot of respect for you AND Major.


It really depends. Sometimes I have time for nice and lengthy replies, sometimes I can be quite terse. I always like to add a bit of humour of some sort of I can, but if I use sarcasm it is to make a point.

But I actually tend to be more terse recently. I think long winded posts have little impact. I want people to read my responses and for them to make a mark. Longer posts take much more time and research effort, usually for little effect. I can be patient if people are willing to honestly discuss stuff, and will also spend more time responding to some people.

What gets me about these discussions is the readiness with which we turn to discussing supposed weaknesses of evolution. The OPer wants to see evidence of creationism, we already have a 50 page thread for some people to show their lacking knowledge of biology, heh.


These debates will go on even after the 911 truthers finally have all been sent to belleview .


I'm quite sure they will. The evidence is not really the issue here methinks.

[edit on 30-12-2007 by melatonin]



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 06:52 PM
link   
Erm, just a question, what is the appendix for exactly, more specifically the Vermiform appendix to give it's proper name. This item seems to show evolution over creationism to MY mind more then anything else.

Vermiform appendix

A "good" mutation, Domestic dogs, ( although this can also be used to show proof of past genetic manipulation ) Origins of Dogs

thanks for reading



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Conspiriology
hehe umm that isn't too far off.


Well, as long as you know that Occam removes such a process for many people, that's cool.


Ok,, now so I don't waste time hearing that over and over what IS evidence ,, or what do you think creationism is about?

I am NOT going to prove GOD exists if that's what you meant.


I'm not too sure. It's not my thread. I think creationism comes in all sorts of shapes and colours. I would tend to think clearskies is going for the genesis blowing life into dust in the garden of eden 6000 years ago type.

I might be wrong, of course...

ABE: In which case, real-world evidence for the Genesis account would be relevant.


[edit on 30-12-2007 by melatonin]



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 07:18 PM
link   
Well, here's something on sedimentary layers

here's another one That
I like. Scroll on down to mountains....

[edit on 30-12-2007 by Clearskies]



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by thedigirati
 


The Appendix
is part of your immune system.
Read further down and you'll see where 20% of people whose appendix was removed that it grew back.



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Clearskies
Well, here's something on sedimentary layers


It doesn't really say much about the evidence supporting that the sedimentary layers are due to a biblical flood. It just appears to say, 'science says x, but we say y'.

For example, what I'm sorta asking is where is the flood layer? Or where is the preflood layer? The latter is the more interesting issue.

We have tonnes of evidence for full ecological habitats throughout geological layers (even meteor craters), so unless the flood stopped for a million years or so to allow swamps etc to develop, and then start again, the idea of a flood accounting for the geologic layers is fantasy.

Also, I suppose this is where you have found stuff about the coelacanth. This doesn't really mean anything, the species found alive today is not the same as those in the fossil record.



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by OzWeatherman
 


If organisms produce more offspring than can survive then this would suggest something is in the our programming to do so.
This should be proof enough that creationism is valid because who did the programming?



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 08:24 PM
link   
Or would that just show the DNA's strive for survival ADAPTING and EVOLVING to external forces (in this case, high mortality rates) and accommodate to increase the odds of genetic survival?



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 08:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Clearskies
 


it also says



Given the appendix's propensity to cause death via infection, and the seeming perfect health of those who have had their appendix removed, the biological purpose of the appendix has mystified scientists for some time. There have been cases of people who have been found, usually on laparoscopy or laparotomy, to have a congenital absence of an appendix. There have been no reports of impaired immune or gastrointestinal function in these people.


so....Hmmmmm



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by jimmyx
 


I feel your pain but you must not blame God on the actions of His/Its believers!



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 08:43 PM
link   
Cockroaches have been around longer than humans or so it is thought because of finding fossils. That is the preceived fact as it is known. Next comes out that it must be evolution doing that, and the DNA of a cockroach changes -- that is the next usual phrase presented by a person in the field of study. That is opinion then.
First comes a fact -- a what looks to be a footprint from a human is found in Egypt and is two million years old. Next the opinion -- humans must have been around and on the Earth -- two million years ago.

Sorry, but there is no evidence really supporting anything but theory and a guess as to what is known -- without actually being there in that time period.

Same way with either Creation or Evolution -- it is just opinion because no one was around to prove it as being real or true or not.

Any one person challenging the thought is usually some other people who work in the same field or usually someone else -- either of whom as a person knows about as much as anyone else except to state an opinion.
Creation could have happened by having Natural Laws that defined Evolution as a useful tool according to some Grand Scheme of a Design or the Devil being allowed to exist according to some Grand Scheme of a Design according to God being Good, while the Devil is Evil.

Exact Uncertainty was proved mathematically just in 2004 except due to that Hiesenberg Principle, others may think that it is just some Natural Law after that but as yet unknown or it becomes religious because it is Humans that are dumb and do not know or have any real knowledge about what it is that a stubborn attitude is including as an opinion.

A scientist can support the theory of Evolution better than Creation because of certain facts that seem to come out while doing the field of study, but even they can not state that it was not Creation in the first place that led to the rest of it, only another opinion.

Perhaps someday there will be different words used than those two words used as of nowadays.

Either a person has Faith or a person dismisses it, because the human really wants to control, when it is clear that the human really does not have any reason to think that it can control, except to be Adversarial in the end.

I wonder if just some people are praying to the Devil instead of praying to God, and claiming the opposite because of a stubborn attitude and an opinion.



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 10:54 PM
link   

The point of this thread is that you should be presenting evidence for creationism,


Ok,, now so I don't waste time hearing that over and over what IS evidence ,, or what do you think creationism is about?

I am NOT going to prove GOD exists if that's what you meant.

so if that is what it is about Ill pass.

don't play stupid - it is quite well known what I mean about evidence - and throughout this whole thread - not one reasonable point of evidence has been shown! doesnt that say something?!
so I am still waiting for irrefutable evidence that creationism exists.
And no i'm not asking you to prove god exists - coz that is something else you cannot do.
PLEASE EVIDENCE OF CREATIONISM - NOT JUST RAMBLING!













[edit on 30-12-2007 by Conspiriology]



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 03:47 AM
link   
reply to post by GT100FV
 


You want a mutation that is good for a species?

How about rats? How many different poisons have people tried to kill them with, which a few rats can survive. Sure you kill 99% of them, but the rest survive since they are immune.



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 05:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Alxandro
 


It would actually suggest the opposite, that the process is based on some random factors - including environmental and genetic. A guiding hand, on the other, well, hand, would tweak these organisms to perfection so that such a mechanism would not be needed, resulting in stable populations that don't overpopulate - a very different model from the actual rise and fall population systems that actually exist.



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 09:59 AM
link   
It's really quite obvious that all life as it is now exists through evolution. There are very few species that have remained unchanged through millions of years of existence.
However, it is incredibly difficult to reconcile existence itself without coming back to some form of ultimate creator 'God'. Now, whether or not this 'God' is directly responsible for putting the building blocks of life on Earth that would then evolve I don't know, but it is obvious, again, that 'He' didn't just say "hey let there be life" and pow! here we are! (and don't give me any of that "it's a metaphor" crap). I think Christians need to take a step back and see how irrational their absolute belief in Genesis is. It's not really the word of God, people! It's just what someone thought at the time of writing was the most rational explanation for the world around them. Many other views seemed rational at the time (e.g Earth being the centre of the universe) but have since been proven false, yet we don't still cling to them! I know it's about faith but what makes your beliefs right and another's beliefs wrong? They have faith too! Just not in the same things as you! They have as much proof (not much) as you do in the existence of 'God' but what makes you right?

Sorry, don't mean to rant, but I was raised Catholic and have questioned this stuff since I was a child.



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 10:54 AM
link   
I just do not take The Bible as literal. It is like a history book mainly through folklore and handing down of what was preceived as known. A story as it were like Genesis and in the Old Testament. I think that some old movies referred to different terms back then in like the '80's in some sci-fi movies and such. The term used in one movie (actually about a form of spacealien like a vampire) was "Lifeforce".

You see, there is a "Lifeforce" also to the Universe, and as yet it can not be explained. Evolution is usually is a term used with a form of life changing over million of years. Part of it may just be that any "lifeforce" has mechanisms that change for 'survival'. Now some parts of Religion or Faith come along and state that a 'lifeforce' does not really have to think about that (or that phrase - only the strong survive) but religion and faith is used to mean -- helping out those who are less fortunate perhaps because they will not survive as strongly as others. It is an attitude of mind, and unless you practice and seek out that attitude of mind (which some is proved by psychology and techniques of obtaining a different attitude ) most people do not really want to think about. It makes a what is considered to be a normal person feel nervous, less sure, and many other emotions. But the relaxation techniques and practicing and knowing that the attitude can be changed is perhaps a great gift from such a term not well understand that comes out to be "The Lifeforce" inherent as it seems in this Universe.

I mean there really is no reason to think either way on whether life would come about (and only can be due to certain factors that led to it existing) and having no life in a Universe. There seems to be something else then, that exists that as yet, humans can only equate to as being a Natural "Lifeforce" to this Universe. A clump of gaseous elements mainly still hydrogen - the simplest atom - makes it changing to heavier elements like helium and even heavier elements building carbon, oxygen, and other gases that allow a "lifeforce' to exist and come into Being in the first place is well -- pretty far-fetched. What it is can not only be explained by 'Evolution". I really just do not think that most scientist or any other person can conclude that 'evolution' could handle all of that. It may have an influence and become a theory, but in the end:
"Something or somehow something else had to create a lifeforce to come into Being in this Universe". What that something else usually is equated to is a "God" or Intelligent Being that is a Supreme Presence and knows all - in the end.

The invisible wave of the hand as it was and is and will be. The lifeforce will continue to exist but what shape it becomes in the far, far future, may not even include human beings but some other form of life that is intelligent. Because of Exact Uncertainty and because of not Understanding Fully the process that involves the "Lifeforce" people immediately want to get stubborn and state that it is all in "The Bible". I really think that some humans should be more rational in that thought process and not pronounce that those type of people can explain it so easily and explain it away because a human may develop a headache.

A cold virus if it did not die in three days when you get one, would kill you, and that has been brought out also in the last few years. It wants to survive as much as any "lifeforce" of anything that is considered to be alive in the Universe in the first place.

In the end, humans perhaps should be more Humble and not pronounce that to them it is such an easy concept. I guess then there would be nothing else to consider and that really does not seem to be the case in any form.

If there is an Intelligent Being that is called God - then also - He wants to Survive also as much as any "Lifeforce" would want to survive or at least try to for as long as the thought of there being Life in this Universe exists.



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 11:05 AM
link   
There also is the funny part of life also. Like in Stargate SG-1 ninth or tenth season, where Valla is met and they do not trust her, but she binds Daniel Jackson to her for riches she is wanting to find (and right here on Planet Earth) where she is a different species and still human mostly where she has these two Goa'uld bracelets where if they get too far apart - both of them will die until they can find a way to take off those bracelets and the effect wears off. So in one part she states a line like:

Let's make Babies!

It is very funny during that particular show.



(she has no intentions of making babies as of yet.)



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 11:17 AM
link   


it also says

so....Hmmmmm



Sorry for the confusion!!!!.....
I have three active boys under 10
and various jobs...... one is taking care of an alzheimer's patient.

Also, I don't read as much as I used to. (My 2 year old won't let me!)

Here's a better one, but it is wiki.. here

[edit on 31-12-2007 by Clearskies]

[edit on 31-12-2007 by Clearskies]





new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join