Scientists: We've found creator's tracks

In my view the scientist have not been able to prove very much thru the ages except for things like rocks are hard and water is wet

i also agree with the possibility of 'Intelligent Design' but i cannot and will not subscribe to any mass organised religous view of such events.

it would not suprise me if the universe turns out to be designed by intelligent creature/beings/entity. lots of calcultations done about the universe seem to point in that direction .

their is one fundamental problem with intelligent design being labeled as over all creator tho it has to do with time.. i post a link.


Problems with god and why god must exist outside of time

just because something exists outside of time as we know it doesnt make it all powerfull.

Anyway i digress slighlty ... intelligent design yes i can see that this find does not suprise me.

reply to post by alienib


When did fossil creation "stop"

Was that a serious question?

Anyways..

Just answer this:

Where is proof of creation?

When did the evolution of man developing from some other critter stop. I should see some evidence of that still going on with MAN, but no news of anyone washing up on shore or swinging down from a tree...when did that stop?????

Oh God lets not turn this into ANOTHER Evolution debate, lets just discuss the article!

Ok lets discuss the article. I believe that intelligent design is a viable suggestion since science is unable to prove or disprove evolution or creation. Still I standby my opinion of the evolution theory...it don't work!

reply to post by alienib


...But the article is saying that because there was "insufficient" evidence to support the evolution from nothingness that something must have created it..

Which is like saying because I can't see China from on top of my house, the world is flat and ends at the tree line.

There is absolutely 100% NO evidence for creationism, or intelligent design.. just "inconclusive" support for Evolution.. at least, for evolutions beginning as evolution it's self is apparent through the study of genetics.

Perhaps not in a time line sufficient for some... lol... doesn't happen over night.

They may need to double up on 4th grade science, some don't seem to understand it.

Wow, the title is incredibly misleading.

"I Found" is a very very very far cry from "I Believe"


So what? There are allot of religious scientists out there. He hasn't found anything, nor come to any actual conclusions. He believes in a creator.
That's his right to do so...

...but what's the point of making a news story about it?

Whooptydoo, someone believes in a creator. This isn't news.


Quite frankly, in my personal feelings on the matter, this scientist has simply given up on the search for knowledge.
Like so many other people who no longer want to tackle the hard questions... he has given up, turned their brain off, and said "Oh screw it, I'll say god did it."


It was at that moment, that he just lost all credibility as a scientist. Not because he believes in a god... but because he just gave a conclusion without any data or testing!
You NEVER give your beliefs or assumptions as a conclusion. EVER!

reply to post by Rockpuck


I hate when people discount the bible as any sort of proof. It is, perhaps not full, but partial proof of a Creator. Using your logic, 2,000 years from now we could say the same thing about "The Origin of Species". It's just a 2,000 year old book, there's nothing important about it!

There is absolutely 100% NO evidence for creationism, or intelligent design

well there is the same 100% for evolution. To say that man has evolved to his surroundings is adaptation...that 4th grade science I understand So I still opt for intelligent design...there is no proof of anything

I hate when people discount the bible as any sort of proof

The bible was written by man and for man. There is no proof of anything there either

It often amazes me how many different types of life forms exist on Earth.
It is nothing less than amazing. So many of these possess similar traits, like a brain, two eyes, nostrils, eliminations systems, and emotions.

If all creation came as a result of an evolutionary process beginning, possibly, at a singe starting point, then why did somethings evolve into men and others into dogs and others into whales?

I think what overshadows the great debate between evolution and creations is the idea that many cannot accept the belief that everything on the planet may have been intelligently ordained.

Why is it so impossible to believe that every form of life may have originated from one source who consciously imbued everything with specific behaviors, traits, and characteristics?

reply to post by InterestedObserver


It is a book of political accounts for the most part, parables for another part and a quasi somewhat accurate perhaps documentation of the political life of Christ.

Then again..

The Bible was written how many years after the events happened?

And the Old Testament can be related to so many other religions..

Sorry, it holds no truth for me

But then again, that is my right is it not?

All I asked for was a little tiny piece of evidence that creationism not only is possible but happened. And no, an old book does not count.

*coughs*

Listen just because one man doens't see how it happened doesn't mean that an intelligent being came along and created us. Maybe he's just frustrated at the lack of evidence, but lack of evidence doesn't prove it didn't happen. Oh wait that's the same arguement for god isn't it?

Listen i'm an agnostic, i think everyone could be right, i have no idea. Evolution howeever seems to be very sound to me, it has holes, but those holes are being slowly filled in.

reply to post by alienib


There is probable scientific evidence that supports evolution from genetics to fossil recovery.

Does it prove anything matter of factly? No.

But 1,000,000 pieces of evidence to support a theory is better then absolutely nothing to prove the hypothesis of creationism.

Evolution does work. We have an incredible over-abundance of evidence to support that.

The part that makes it a theory... is nobody has 100% proven HOW it works.


It's like watching an engine run for the first time in your life.
You know it's working... you just don't know how.

That's why it's still a theory.

Like the engine you've never seen before... you can start it, stop it, accelerate, hit the breaks, and steer it... but until you have the hood open and the engine torn apart... you can only theorize as to what makes it go.

[edit on 27-4-2008 by johnsky]

All I asked for was a little tiny piece of evidence that creationism not only is possible but happened

Why do you ask someone to do something that yourself cannot do? You cannot prove evolution

Originally posted by alienib
"For 50 years, the best scientific minds on the planet have tried to show where the first cells came from and we failed miserably to demonstrate that. … If you try hard for 50 years and fail to show something, that's pretty strong evidence - the old theory of a prebiotic soup now appears to be kaput."

Oh Ye of Little Faith!"


So after 50 years he's willing to give up the search? And he calls himself a Scientist!?


There is NO time limit on the Truth!


For how long did the early mariners, "scientists" , or at least, technologists, of their day seek a water route to China; thus Proof that the world was round, not flat?

Did they give up their search after fifty years?

And if they had, would that act have "proven" that the Earth was indeed flat?




Take care "Scientist", lest you prove yourself to be nothing more than a lazy grant-sucker!

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by alienib

 

Just re-create the "soup" and create life again. If it happened once, why not again. I suppose if you had the right mixture, maybe throw in some electricity you could create some very basic bacteria. If not, that theory is truly dead.

It's been done. The best they could get was the formations of protein and amino acid strands. Unfortunately we humans don't have the luxury of having an experiment lab for a billion years, or even a million year experiment. So time plays a significant role in this type of experiment.

But also note for you creationist..

He is not saying God made Humans, but rather, God made very very basic bacteria that over millions upon millions of years, became Humans.

He's doing good at trying to win over both crowds. I will remain an evolutionist until I see some real evidence to prove other wise, not just a lack of "enough" evidence for one side automatically means God made everything individually. Which is absurd.

I was a bit miffed because there were no scientific data in that article, no references, no citations, in short nothing that would give any sort of veracity to the author's claims.

If a bold claim like "We've found creator's tracks" is made, I want to see data. I want to see experimental data and replication.

Originally posted by alienib
When did the evolution of man developing from some other critter stop. I should see some evidence of that still going on with MAN, but no news of anyone washing up on shore or swinging down from a tree...when did that stop?????

This is why arguments start. ID proponents always bring up this "Where is the evidence now" as if evolution just happens in front of our eyes.

It's like saying finger nails dont grow, they are tacked on when you sleep, because I cant see them growing right this very second.

Evolution is just that, Evolution. It's not a microwave dinner.