It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Creationists - Explain this please

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 03:28 PM
reply to post by alkali

Lol, same to to you..

I am glad that i went back and finished the thread though. It seems to me that both sides of this debate are too close minded for our Ideas. I will be releasing a thread in a week or two, when I'm finished, that talks about this very concept. Of merging the two I mean...

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 03:36 PM
Its obvious that both creationism and evolution are inadequate to explain this world completely. If matter is just a state of energy and time is yet to be completely understood, evolution cannot explain the origin, whilst the theory depends upon a firm concept of time and matter (biological organisms are subject to one and made of the other).

What happens to the theory of evolution when the both the observer and the observed no longer exist within this quantum state and the measurements are made in a different quantum state, where both time and matter are slightly different.

Actually the theory of evolution is quite "low brow". At least creationism keeps everything simple. Come to think of it., the creationist probably has more correct answers across quantum states.

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 03:51 PM
reply to post by redshirt0202

most living things here were created

for example these guys created the dinosaurs...

and used them to scare off other aliens a few times

this audio will tell you how it all started..

this video series will also show you the story...

[edit on 11-6-2008 by Skipper1975]

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 04:19 PM
reply to post by redshirt0202

I have asked that question many times to southern baptist etc and the response I get back is that the Devil put them there to confuse us. lol If the Devil is not governed by God's morals not to interfer they why doesnt the Devil just pop in and promise everyone a million dollars to follow him. Its upseting to me to see so many ppl brainwashed by a philosiphy that has been going around for thousands of years, ideas that were formed when man didnt even know what dinasoar bones were but everyone is supposed to be a free thinker, so I think its only a matter of time before ppl really see the light. Remember the catholic church just recently renounced purgatory. hehe

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 04:28 PM
Why does there need to be a separation of evolution and the existence of "God"? The THEORY of evolution and the laws of physics cannot explain everything, in fact have, until recently, difficulties explaining black holes, and until a few years ago it was impossible for a bumble bee to fly. Evolution, (adaptation), is part of creationism. When science can fully explain what caused the Big Bang, and prove that theory then Creationism has to be considered. To exclude either Evolution or Creationism boils down to simple ignorance. Those that hold the earth has only been here for 4000 years choose to ignore the part of the bible that states ' A day is but a thousand years".

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 04:30 PM
reply to post by Lasheic

What your problem is with this is that your preaching to the choir. Anyone who is a fee thinker and has some type of education can understand and see the points that you are making but on the other hand christians are going to say "God can do Anything" God helped the other species survive, god hid the effects of the flood, god fed the animals, god made the animals docile so they wouldnt eat each other. So, on to my point. The amount of time you point into your presentation in my opinion is time completled wasted for someone of your standing, at least in knowledge. Please put your knowledge to better use. Its a well known fact that kool-aid drinkers are not your best students. lol

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 04:31 PM
Right off the bat, you're asking for a "logical explanation" of Creationism, which is going to be awkward because Creationism encompasses both logic and illogic, just as God encompasses both logic and illogic. As far as we know, "logic" only exists in the mind of humankind, and it may be a defect. As far as we know, logic may exist nowhere else in the cosmos.

But I'll try to demonstrate for you the fact that Creationists can be completely open to Evolution. Only the closed-minded think in terms of Creationism vs Evolution...

Evolution is certainly as much a "fact" as anything else we consider fact — you need but look at a developing human fetus as it “evolves” throughout a pregnancy. Go to any library and pick up a comprehensive textbook on human biology. Flip through the photos. As you will observe, human beings pass through what is obviously an accelerated “evolution” from single-cell to multi-cellular organism, from an invertebrate jellyfish to a vertebrate amphibian with gills, from a reptile-like fetus with a long tail to what is a recognizable primate, and from there to a whole human. All within 9 months.

While you’re at the library, try looking up another book on human biological anomalies — therein you’ll see many examples of deformed humans born with GILLS... with TAILS... with SCALES... or covered with FUR.

Tell me something, why would GILLS and TAILS and SCALES and full-body FUR be embedded in our genetic makeup? Why is it there? Did God “accidentally” stick it in there? How is that possible? This isn’t conspiracy theory; rather, it’s the hardest evidence of our evolution from lower life forms. Evolution is written into our human genetic blueprint.

Just for the record, I am not an atheist. But I'm also smart enough and open enough to recognize the Truth when it is so abundantly evident.

How can I accept Evolution and also believe in God? Simple... Because I believe in God, I accept the fact that God is capable of anything, including Evolution. It is humankind that, in its arrogance, attempts to define God in "logical" terms, tries to impose limits on God, presumes to manipulate the words and intentions of God.

But the ways of God are not the ways of Man, and the thoughts of God are not the thoughts of Man. Who is to say that God cannot engineer one creature from another? And why not?

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 04:50 PM
Excellent question, OP. You see, fossils are very, very rare (let's ignore the fact there are billions of them at the moment). Fossilization is a very rare process that must take place under the most precise of circumstances. Therefore, humans and more complex creatures might not exist in certain layers of strata but I assure you, being the master scientist I declare myself to be, that they existed during those periods.

Of course my answer will make no sense to you whatsoever but that is the answer I often receive when I ask about the disproportionate amount of [dubious] transitionals in relation to the billions of fossils that have been discovered.

So, if such an answer is deemed a suitable from an evolutionary perspective when faced with the predicament about the lack of fossils, surely I can get away with nonsense as well.

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 05:10 PM

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 05:11 PM
reply to post by sir_chancealot

Well, the fact that life came out of nowhere at the precambrian explosion can be explained. Usually, evolution is slow and steady (Gradualism.) But occasionally, rapid changes in an organism's DNA occur (Punctuated Equilibrium.) It is possible that a great burst of Punctuated Equilibrium among a wide swathe of organisms, caused life to come crawling out of primordial soup.

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 05:24 PM

Originally posted by sobek52
Well, the fact that life came out of nowhere at the precambrian explosion can be explained. Usually, evolution is slow and steady (Gradualism.) But occasionally, rapid changes in an organism's DNA occur (Punctuated Equilibrium.) It is possible that a great burst of Punctuated Equilibrium among a wide swathe of organisms, caused life to come crawling out of primordial soup.

And yet nothing that you just said explains where Life originated. Evolution is but a description of Life processes, given that Life already exists. Nothing in Evolution theory can even begin to explain how Life originated. Again, Creationism can encompass Evolution, but Evolution can never encompass (nor explain) Creation.

[edit on 6/11/2008 by Doc Velocity]

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 06:27 PM

Originally posted by melatonin
True, we wouldn't expect 100% certainty in all our scientific endeavours. But it is a tried and tested method, a successful method. And evolutionary theory is one of the most tried and tested out there.

Yes, of course. While there is not 100% certainty, it is 100% logical given the premise. But this is purely subjective, everyones logic varies. Because of this, something like the fossil record could be missing a huge part of the equation, or be completely false in the first place. In my first example. The person applying "postdestination" to hypothesize what happened in the room with the cat, gave no mention of an earthquake. The earthquake is what caused all of the events in the room to happen. However, because the persons logic seems reasonable. We have no reason, and he/she has no reason to doubt his/her assertions that the cat is responsible and that the events unfolded the way he/she has postulated.

However, we are in a way comparing the methods of testing reality by empirical scientific methodology and much of what is really theological revelation. Not even a competition.

Absolutely, my argument holds no weight against anything because of its intangible nature. The only thing my "hypothesis" can serve to do, is to open someones mind to the prospect of alternative logic and the possibility that a sequence of events, or myriads of data can still work and fully function even when missing an integral piece. Even more extreme, non congruent data retrieved can be falsely attributed and combined to form cohesive and logical theories.

You did help to prime an interesting 'hypothesis'* that some IDers have proposed to explain the evidence, allowing for their god disembodied telic entity.

I'll wait and see if someone else fronts up and loads it in the chamber.

yes, you're following.
but it won't be me.

*I say 'hypothesis', but I really mean potentially unfalsifiable metaphysics.

exactly what i like to work with

[edit on 6/11/2008 by JPhish]

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 06:27 PM
agrees with the above, creationism can envelope and embrace evolution but evolution cannot embrace creationism.

nothing. you cannot describe it as vast nothing or empty nothing, becuase that would imply there was otherness.


universe created, deuterium allows the creation of hydrogen the most abundant element in the universe, and after a period of dramatic universe creating expansion, the early proto universe began to cool and form regions, in which formed stars, which decayed and exploded, creating a surplus of elements which are used to create planets.

god creates dna from carbon in collapsing stars, or allows dna to be created from the stars...and each creature according to its kind then evolves, according to its kind. we are made in his likeness.
we are dna. star stuff. carbon. the elements of the physical universe experiencing itself in a concsious manner, possessed of freewill to do good or evil.


posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 06:29 PM
One word Coalacanths. Fossils supposedily millions of years old prove this fish hasnt changed a bit according to current biology of fish found. either that or the dating systems is missing data. Adaptation not evolution.

Love peace hope and patience to all

[edit on 11-6-2008 by daemonicsoul]

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 06:55 PM
Gos time is different form mans time, god created the earth in 6 days in his time.. so In our time its was probably billions of years in our time, so yeah there were deffinatley dinosaurs.God's time and man's time is completely diffrent.

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 06:56 PM

Originally posted by daemonicsoul
One word Coalacanths. Fossils supposedily millions of years old prove this fish hasnt changed a bit according to current biology of fish found.

The fossils are not even the same genus as the living species (Latimeria; of which two distinct species exist now).

There's over a dozen different genera of coelecanths which are extinct, none are Latimeria. Indeed, Latimeria haven't yet been found in the fossil record, before or since the extinction of the other genera.

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 07:38 PM
reply to post by melatonin

first of all to answer the question posed at the start of the thread you will first have to prove to me the methods used to date these time periods are accurate and true,so far noone has proved to me the carbon dating and so on are accurate.....please provide this proof before you ask a question like this.not to debate anybody thats not what im trying to do....sorry i cannot answer the question without your proof first....peace

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 07:44 PM
reply to post by pureevil81

actually maybe i can answer the question,at least give my OPINION on it....i dont think its proven by christians that they can trace the genealogy back to adam and eve,so i dont necassarily think that the earth is only 7,000 years old,i think the earth is older than that,but i also dont think the earth is 4.5 billion years old either,so my answer would be that man and dinsaur lived at the same time,or to sum it up really man has existed along with any other creature at any time,can this be proven wrong?..............remember this is my opinion

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 07:49 PM

How many of these evolution vs. creationism threads are we going to have to endure? It's always the same rhetoric back and forth between the same people. Yeah, I could just bypass these threads when I see them on the board, but why waste the space in the first place?

I thought ATS was for stuff that know...above top secret. What's "top secret" about this? People have their ideas and theories that they subscribe to, and each argument presented here could be shredded by evidence - both for and against each side. The truth is that it's an unknown. It comes down to in what you perceive as evidence. (I'm sure I'll get some joe-blow who misses the point of this by posting some link to a fossil and stating that it's not "faith", it's real-life-honest-to-goodness-evidence. Well, if you do that, you're completely missing what I'm saying.

I'm begging you!! Let this debate die. Enough of the Christian bashing. Enough of the Darwin demonizing. There's nothing anyone can add to the countless threads on this topic that is worth its weight in pixels.

Whew. Sorry - had to get that out. It's okay, everybody. I feel better now.

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 08:03 PM

Originally posted by williebear

How many of these evolution vs. creationism threads are we going to have to endure?

As many as it takes for us all to die of boredom?

The best solution is just to kill the subforum, IMHO.

Originally posted by pureevil81
first of all

I posted a link to a piece on radiometric dating by a christian physicist earlier. Shoot him an e-mail, he'll help you out, I'm sure.

[edit on 11-6-2008 by melatonin]

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in