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.

 

Why do people laugh at creationists?

page: 5
6
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 12:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox

Because evolution is the process by which populations of a species diverge into new species. This is acheived by genetic drift (breeding) and natural selection (competition). For breeding or competition, you need at the very least, two organisms. For one population to diverge from another population, there need to be two populations to start with.


You forgot mutation.




posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 02:29 AM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


Well, mutation is assumed with genetic drift. By itself, mutation is common and unimportant - we're all "mutants" - but if one of us is able to breed enough or has enough successful descendants, our particular mutations will become more common through the population.

It bears mention that most mutations have vero impact on an organism or the population, other than serving as generational markers (such as how we can tell roughly 1% of the earth's population is descended from men of Genghis Khan's lineage, through Y chromosome mutations)



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 02:30 AM
link   
Savagedriver, I laugh at you.

Mainly because you bring up arguments from a site based on apologetics. By their very nature apologetics twist science using strawman arguments so that an unsignificant belief becomes better.

creastion.org or what ever the site is, is an apologetics website and doesn't stand up to science.

You have made a number of errors and misrepresented science, but to respond will start an argument thats better for other threads.

In fact, why don't you go start a thread, "Why creationism is good" and those of us who actually deny ignorance will shred creationism there, aye.



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 02:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by savagediver
reply to post by schrodingers dog
 


Ok back on topic.There are differing views of creation among creationist and the non-creationist lumps them all into one category without any open minded intellictual thought to the matter.I believe they laugh because it is easier for them to do then to try and educate themselves on the differing views of creationists.I believe they are way to close minded to even attempt to learn of any other view then what they have been exsposed to by either their parents,schools or click of friends.


I hate to be a B**, but i almost hurts my eyes or brain in some way, why you do not put a space after a period in a sentance.

And to not be a one liner, i really like what this thread has sparked, asides from the petty stuff... I've seen some honestly good agruements by both parts and some people drawing back to the OP which is about literal creationism, as in what is said the bible.



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 02:34 AM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


I noticed that you made an error earlier on. Evolution doesn't kick in when the second organism is on the scene because early life would be asexual. Asexual organisms evolve too, just about a third as fast. Sex just accelerates evolution and makes species adapt faster.


SR

posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 03:00 AM
link   
Good Wolf has summed it up pretty damn well, You've got to laugh or you'd cry, The very nature of apologetics it's self just goes to prove creationism is obsolete but the defenders of the faith will never admit to it.

You've got this supposedly 'perfect' and 'absolute' truth yet these people find themselves having to constantly defend it and invent or that dreaded word 'evolve' new ways of doing so to keep it relevant i mean how does that work out.

The very nature that creationism is being evolved more and more into intelligent design by it's followers again is another ironic stickler.



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 03:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Good Wolf
 


Asexual organism still reproduce, through cell division. There would still need to be multiple organisms to evolution to have any meaning, regardless if they got there from asexual reproduction, sexual reproduction, or separate generations.



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 03:13 AM
link   
Sometimes I think that God himself could come out of the sky, slap the silly creationists across the face and say "You jillots! I made the universe so that life would spring forth. Evolution was part of that!"

And they'd say no you didn't, you created everything in 6 days 6500 years ago, we know this, so you must be satan!


It's no wonder God sent Hovind to prison. To stop poisoning the minds of gullible christians.



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 03:21 AM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


Well I spose. But evolution by that logic won't kick in till much after. I sent an email to Aron Ra to ask him how does speciation occur in asexual organisms. He said for asexuals, speciation is defined by morphology.

So basically thousands of generations.


.. Although abiogenesis evokes images of ludicrously simple cells with barely any genetic information. In that primitive state, evolution could happen blindingly fast, I'd imagine mutations would for the most part be good for that kind of simple organism.



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 03:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Good Wolf
 


The speed of evolution is very variable, depending on time between generations, the nature of mutations, environmental concerns, and such. A fast-breeding species subject to high population pressures - disease, an unfavorable environment, etc - will speciate much faster than a slow-breeding one under little pressure. If the mutations involved are drastic, speciation will happen even faster.

And don't for a second believe that a mutation has to be beneficial to be successful. Even a directly harmful mutation can survive and define a species under the right pressures. One can only wonder at what sort of pressures the ancestors of the spotted hyena were under to make their reproduction so... unproductive.



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 03:53 AM
link   
Maybe "evolution" is "creation" all at the same time. I believe God is creating all of the time, not just at some point in the distant past.

Psalm 139:13 (New International Version)
New International Version (NIV)
Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society



13 For you created my inmost being;
you knit me together in my mother's womb.



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 04:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by molochrod
Maybe "evolution" is "creation" all at the same time. I believe God is creating all of the time, not just at some point in the distant past.

Psalm 139:13 (New International Version)
New International Version (NIV)
Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society



13 For you created my inmost being;
you knit me together in my mother's womb.



wait what?

so reproduction is actually sex then god deciding if he feels like putting an infant in there or not depending on if he can be bothered to make one?

either that or your saying evolution IS god creating at all times steering life in the direction he wants .... thats Intelegent design not evolution

dont worry we will only laugh at you for your wooly fluffy talk not your beliefs



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 11:45 AM
link   
HaHaHa

The funny and sad bit is that so many people with their own brain in their own head believe that the Bilble stories are literal truth. Most Christians (Catholics, Anglicans, Lutherans, Eastern Orthodox, and many more) are able to believe in Jesus and still understand the Biblical creation story as a symbolic myth.



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 12:49 PM
link   
I'm running dialup, and have been downloading the vids from youtube using getVideo. I've manages to download 14 of the vids. I can't wait to get broadband!



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by molochrod
 

Excellent words.

Horrid video.



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 

Actually probably the third.

Star anyway.

Edited to add, like Good Wolf said anyway: or one.

[edit on 20-9-2008 by Astyanax]



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Good Wolf
I'm running dialup, and have been downloading the vids from youtube using getVideo. I've manages to download 14 of the vids. I can't wait to get broadband!


your modems nearly as backwardly challenged as a creationists thinking



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 10:01 PM
link   
i dont laugh at creationists, i think it would be offensive. they arent entirely wrong in my viewpoint - it seems they are just a bit oblivious to some ideas that would make one aspect of their argument more sensical...that being, if we were 'created' by something, in my mind it could only be something outside of this earth..extraterrestral? perhaps they blindly view these extraterrestrials, who may have edited our genetic make up and essentially created a new race of beings(humans), as God (The one(s) who created us.)

Unfortunately, human beings as a whole need to realize one religion in specific is not an answer to their questions, each religion in itself is simply a few small pieces of this planets puzzle. There are many extremists who are frightened to think beyond what they 'know' to be true, these people are frightening to me because they are willing to fight for their idea, even if it is obviously wrong to others.



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 11:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Good Wolf
Savagedriver, I laugh at you.

Mainly because you bring up arguments from a site based on apologetics. By their very nature apologetics twist science using strawman arguments so that an unsignificant belief becomes better.

creastion.org or what ever the site is, is an apologetics website and doesn't stand up to science.

You have made a number of errors and misrepresented science, but to respond will start an argument thats better for other threads.

In fact, why don't you go start a thread, "Why creationism is good" and those of us who actually deny ignorance will shred creationism there, aye.


Hats off to you. I was only trying to point out how and why some folks believe in creation. As you state , scientifically I cant prove or disprove creation. Just trying to throw out something for you to ponder instead of blind ridicule. I just might take you up on the idea of a thread on why creationism is good , but if I do you will have to use your same logic and not try to bring science into a thread on creation as it is out of the realm of science.
Honestly , after the responses I have seen on here I would not try and start a thread of the topic. It seems some of the points I have brought up concerning RNA, DNA, protiens etc. will not actually be looked at in a serious manner so I will give up on this matter. Brings out way to much intolerance and bitterness on both sides of the issue. I just dont have any more energy for that. I appreciate and respect your opinions and views even in that they were condescending. It is all good to me my friend.



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 11:48 PM
link   
Ah dont be like that, savagedriver. Don't bottle up your disliking of me, I don't, you. And I was serious about those errors, some of them need to be seen to.







 
6
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join